Inside Lacrosse Top 50

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

That’s why draw controls and draw control specialists are overrated.

Well, then why did you use draw controls as a metric to determine that CN was/is better than JO? Now, suddenly draw controls are overrated?

No contradiction that I can see. My whole issue is with lazy broadcasters constantly parroting to me that if you win the draw you win the game. I never said winning draws isn't important. My contention is they don't guarantee a win if a team ends up with more at the end of the game. And no one would ever classify The Great One as a draw specialist. Maddie Jenner? Draw Specialist. Katelyn Mashewske? Draw Specialist. Charlotte North? Attacker who does well on draws.

Wow, you must make yourself dizzy talking in circles all the time. I’m thinking you should change your screen name from OuttaNowhereWregget to AlwaysMovingTheGoalPosts.

All a matter of perspective, dad. I have mine and you have yours. Or as my dear ol' dad used to put it--that's what makes me, me and you, you.

[njbill]

I honestly don’t remember a broadcaster saying winning the draw wins games.

You guys must be listening to Stugotz. That’s the only explanation I can think of.

[Justalaxdad]

Serious question ONW - if Maddie Jenner played for BC for the last 4 years, do you think they would have won more than a single championship out of four tries?

[njbill]

Wow, you must make yourself dizzy talking in circles all the time. I’m thinking you should change your screen name from OuttaNowhereWregget to AlwaysMovingTheGoalPosts.

Well, it is about time for a new screen name, now isn’t it?

[momlax24x7]

Again, in MHO the top 50 players in the college game should be reserved for the very, very best players. Draw specialists, who have marginal skills beyond the draw itself should not occupy a precious spot in the top 10. There are players ranked on this list in the teens and 20s who have blazing speed, can dodge, can feed, can score and can re-defend far, far better than M Jenner. Many should be ranked higher.

IL got it wrong.

Watch the games closely and you will see her quit in both the Maryland and ACC Notre Dame games on the circle when these critical games were on the line not when out of hand in the second half. One cannot simply look at the stats sheet.

Just because I played in college in the wooden crosse era (ha ha) doesn’t mean I don’t see what my eyes see on the field.

Happy holidays!

[njbill]

Watch the games closely and you will see her quit in both the Maryland and ACC Notre Dame games on the circle when these critical games were on the line not when out of hand in the second half. One cannot simply look at the stats sheet.

I watched both games. It is complete and utter baloney to say that she quit. That’s a really serious (and false) accusation to make about a player, but I guess that’s your cup of tea.

There’s pretty obviously an agenda going on here. I’m going to try to figure out what it is.

[Madlax59]

That’s why draw controls and draw control specialists are overrated.

Well, then why did you use draw controls as a metric to determine that CN was/is better than JO? Now, suddenly draw controls are overrated?

No contradiction that I can see. My whole issue is with lazy broadcasters constantly parroting to me that if you win the draw you win the game. I never said winning draws isn't important. My contention is they don't guarantee a win if a team ends up with more at the end of the game. Plus I demonstrated that when the chips were down against tough competition--Jenner didn't help Duke win in the least--so yes--draw specialists are overrated. And no one would ever classify The Great One as a draw specialist. Maddie Jenner? Draw Specialist. Katelyn Mashewske? Draw Specialist. Charlotte North? Attacker who does well on draws. The fact that North put up just as many points as JO and won draws makes her a more valuable player.

Not this past year. Not good enough to beat UNC...3 times & esp 2 biggest games ACCs and natty championship. You are always consumed with "as many points" it shouldn't just be a stats thing. The goal is to win not just put up stats.

[DMac]

Just because I played in college in the wooden crosse era (ha ha) doesn’t mean I don’t see what my eyes see on the field.

I'd be interested in hearing what you think about today's game as compared to the game you played.
Sticks and rules makes today's game a very, very different game from the one you played. The game
of yore was painful to watch for this fan, the new one is just fantastic. Given the choice, which game
would you rather play (have played)?

[momlax24x7]

Today’s women’s game is wonderful and magical. The finesse and speed is exhilarating indeed. It is something to see these strong, empowered women do the unthinkable with the new stick technology! I absolutely love the athleticism and physicality of these dedicated athletes. The growth of our game is superb. Thanks very much for asking.

[DMac]

You're welcome, and I'm taking that as a today's game answer.

[momlax24x7]

Yes, today’s game is exponentially better!!!

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Serious question ONW - if Maddie Jenner played for BC for the last 4 years, do you think they would have won more than a single championship out of four tries?

No, I don't think they would have won more than a single championship because they never lacked someone who was dominant on the draw. Apuzzo's draw stats were stellar as were North's. BC was outclassed and/or outcoached in their four losses. They just didn't have the talent to deliver in the clutch some years, or the coaching to deliver in others.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Again, in MHO the top 50 players in the college game should be reserved for the very, very best players. Draw specialists, who have marginal skills beyond the draw itself should not occupy a precious spot in the top 10. There are players ranked on this list in the teens and 20s who have blazing speed, can dodge, can feed, can score and can re-defend far, far better than M Jenner. Many should be ranked higher.

IL got it wrong.

Watch the games closely and you will see her quit in both the Maryland and ACC Notre Dame games on the circle when these critical games were on the line not when out of hand in the second half. One cannot simply look at the stats sheet.

Just because I played in college in the wooden crosse era (ha ha) doesn’t mean I don’t see what my eyes see on the field.

Happy holidays!

Well said, momlax--well said. Completely agree with you on this particular IL top 50 and all of these lists in general. They often get player rankings wrong. And you're right--sometimes one can't just look at the stat sheet. Sometimes the eyeball test is needed to clarify and define the stats. If you say that's what you saw regarding Jenner vs Maryland and Notre Dame, then I consider that your opinion which is just as valuable as anyone else's opinion. I'm glad you shared it.

I hope you continue to participate here. I appreciate your voice and perspective.

Happy holidays to you, too.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Watch the games closely and you will see her quit in both the Maryland and ACC Notre Dame games on the circle when these critical games were on the line not when out of hand in the second half. One cannot simply look at the stats sheet.

I watched both games. It is complete and utter baloney to say that she quit. That’s a really serious (and false) accusation to make about a player, but I guess that’s your cup of tea.

There’s pretty obviously an agenda going on here. I’m going to try to figure out what it is.

Folks are entitled to their opinions which can sometimes be tainted or biased. So what. Doc has good reason to harbor ongoing resentment against a certain team for reasons known to him which he may or may not have shared with others. I don't blame him for an instant. He has every right to have that bias. I applaud him for it. After all, and I've said this multiple times, we're only talking about sports, and athletes playing sports. If momlax has an agenda against a certain player, and I'm neither confirming nor denying that she does, then so be it. She wouldn't be the first person on these boards who held a different opinion about a certain player. You should know that better than anyone, Bill.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

That’s why draw controls and draw control specialists are overrated.

Well, then why did you use draw controls as a metric to determine that CN was/is better than JO? Now, suddenly draw controls are overrated?

No contradiction that I can see. My whole issue is with lazy broadcasters constantly parroting to me that if you win the draw you win the game. I never said winning draws isn't important. My contention is they don't guarantee a win if a team ends up with more at the end of the game. Plus I demonstrated that when the chips were down against tough competition--Jenner didn't help Duke win in the least--so yes--draw specialists are overrated. And no one would ever classify The Great One as a draw specialist. Maddie Jenner? Draw Specialist. Katelyn Mashewske? Draw Specialist. Charlotte North? Attacker who does well on draws. The fact that North put up just as many points as JO and won draws makes her a more valuable player.

Not this past year. Not good enough to beat UNC...3 times & esp 2 biggest games ACCs and natty championship. You are always consumed with "as many points" it shouldn't just be a stats thing. The goal is to win not just put up stats.

Correct--but it's also a team game. North's contribution wasn't lacking in games vs the Heels this past year. Nor were JO's vs BC. One can confidently affirm that Sam Geiersbach was largely responsible for the teams win over Northwestern in the semis. Could the same be said for JO this year over BC? And again--the Tewaaraton is awarded for the whole body of work of a given player over the course of a season. Both JO and North made it to the final. North had the better stats.

[Justalaxdad]

Serious question ONW - if Maddie Jenner played for BC for the last 4 years, do you think they would have won more than a single championship out of four tries?

No, I don't think they would have won more than a single championship because they never lacked someone who was dominant on the draw. Apuzzo's draw stats were stellar as were North's. BC was outclassed and/or outcoached in their four losses. They just didn't have the talent to deliver in the clutch some years, or the coaching to deliver in others.

Thank you for responding. I have to say, I’m surprised you don’t think having the most accomplished draw control specialist in the history of the women’s game would have made a difference in losses of 1, 1, and 2 goals. Obviously just opinions here but I tend to think just 2 or 3 extra possessions in such tight games would make the difference. Cheers!

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Serious question ONW - if Maddie Jenner played for BC for the last 4 years, do you think they would have won more than a single championship out of four tries?

No, I don't think they would have won more than a single championship because they never lacked someone who was dominant on the draw. Apuzzo's draw stats were stellar as were North's. BC was outclassed and/or outcoached in their four losses. They just didn't have the talent to deliver in the clutch some years, or the coaching to deliver in others.

Thank you for responding. I have to say, I’m surprised you don’t think having the most accomplished draw control specialist in the history of the women’s game would have made a difference in losses of 1, 1, and 2 goals. Obviously just opinions here but I tend to think just 2 or 3 extra possessions in such tight games would make the difference. Cheers!

Yeah—I can see the logic there.

[Dr. Tact]

Doc, I read your comment as saying you think she shouldn’t play attack, but only take the draw. I think that’s a fair point, one that certainly some (maybe many) college coaches might agree with. Of course, it depends on who you have on your team. If you have a better attacking middie, then play her on attack. If you don’t, then play Jenner.

yeah that was my point. Whether she transitions to Middie or Attack, doesnt matter to me. I think there are probably better players at those positions that are not on the field.

I agree with you...if she is in the best 3 at whatever position, she should play.

[Sunnylax]

Terribly said. Anybody who watches the game should know she does the draw and plays attack. She does not play defense. She is a Top 10 player with just her amazing draw skills. Anything you get on offense is a bonus.

She is so far from a top 10 player. I have watched her play in person and on tv. If the ball goes straight up on the draw, she will most likely get it, if it doesn't, she won't come up with it. She can't move! Also, so often when she does come up with the ball, she makes a terrible pass. Her offensive play is pretty nonexistent. you would think with that height she could stand in front of goal, catch and shoot but she cannot. So easy to defend her even with a much shorter player. Not on all if many coaches wish list.

[Dr. Tact]

Again, in MHO the top 50 players in the college game should be reserved for the very, very best players. Draw specialists, who have marginal skills beyond the draw itself should not occupy a precious spot in the top 10. There are players ranked on this list in the teens and 20s who have blazing speed, can dodge, can feed, can score and can re-defend far, far better than M Jenner. Many should be ranked higher.

IL got it wrong.

I strongly agree with you on the above..Can't comment on the quitting part as I don't recall seeing those games.

The Lax politics that continue to overrate (insert player here) starts in club ->High school and then to College. Many players play up to the hype and deserve that pedigree, but there are some that are just head scratchers. I dont know that this fully applies to MJ, but the hype has certainly been high for her since Club. Has she been one of the top Draw specialists in recent history, yes. Should she stay on the field, my opinion doesnt matter, but I lean to no.