Inside Lacrosse Top 50

D1 Womens Lacrosse
Laxfan500
Posts: 1028
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 5:44 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Laxfan500 »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 2:11 pm ONW, I thought your promise to stick within your own thread, a self-imposed discipline, was a quite good idea given the rancor your many posts had repeatedly engendered. Laudable.

Indeed, it seemed that after that self-imposed discipline, you posted plenty on whatever topic you wished, but fellow posters could more easily avoid your posts if they wished, while other posters could directly engage...and did. Seemed to be going well...

I'm not a frequent participant on the women's side, as my nieces are beyond their playing years, but occasional reader every so often, and I find the renewed rancor unhelpful, uninteresting, and indeed off-putting.

I'm not surprised that others are experiencing that as well.

On the more general topic of discussing players, and addressing all posters/readers on here, I think analysis of stats, tactics, performances, etc is quite appropriate on a sports discussion site.

I'd contrast that with overly effusive praise, sometimes bordering (at least for this reader) on the creepy... just as is overly aggressive critique of a player's performances, particularly their motivations, 'effort', etc...emphasis on 'overly aggressive'...Expressing a view, with substance to support, is one thing, but grinding incessantly isn't helpful to discourse, much less a sense of community.

And I quite agree that some basic decency and sensitivity when discussing youth, HS or college players, young women or men, is appropriate. I feel the same way in the stands of a game when some boorish 'fan' is criticizing a player, saying really nasty things...I frequently tap them on the shoulder and point out that the player may have a parent or grandparent or sibling within earshot. Some don't care, but most decent folks realize they'd been overboard and reel it in.

I don't know about "growing the game" as a primary objective, but certainly one of the things that many of us 'old-timers' have appreciated about the sport has been the sense of community that we have enjoyed as players, coaches, parents, etc...I'd certainly hope that will be the case for future generations, with continued growth in the number of participants here in the US and around the world enjoying the community as well. Emphasizing the positives of that community can be helpful...just as challenging the impulses and actions that threaten that sense of community is important too. Both can be important; they're not mutually exclusive, IMO.
^^ Rational, thought provoking, dead-on correct. ^^
Sometimes one should stick with self-imposed disciplines but I fear the lure of debate and pontificating becomes hard to resist.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Laxfan500 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:23 am Sometimes one should stick with self-imposed disciplines but I fear the lure of debate and pontificating becomes hard to resist.


0:03 clip
Seacoaster(1)
Posts: 4373
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2022 6:49 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Seacoaster(1) »

He never disappoints, when it comes to disappointing.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Seacoaster(1) wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 9:49 am He never disappoints, when it comes to disappointing.


0:07 clip
DMac
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:02 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by DMac »

Laxfan500 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 8:23 am
Sometimes one should stick with self-imposed disciplines but I fear the lure of debate and pontificating becomes hard to resist.
A reasonable conclusion but more likely a need for attention. The reason for the self admitted provoker and instigator's very own thread is on full display right here. There he could be the straw that stirs the drink but that's not enough for the seeker of attention, he's just got to come out to stir the whole pot. What happens when you come out? Well....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95Rd84e1aK4
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

DMac wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 10:42 am A reasonable conclusion but more likely a need for attention. The reason for the self admitted provoker and instigator's very own thread is on full display right here. There he could be the straw that stirs the drink but that's not enough for the seeker of attention, he's just got to come out to stir the whole pot. What happens when you come out? Well....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95Rd84e1aK4


0:04 clip
DMac
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:02 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by DMac »

You waste your time with your rsmbat (really schidty matererial by annoying troll) clips, I don't watch any of them.
Those are for self entertainment, as in you getting your jollies off.
Justalaxdad
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2021 12:10 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Justalaxdad »

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 8:56 pm
Justalaxdad wrote: Tue Dec 06, 2022 1:20 pm
OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: Mon Dec 05, 2022 9:25 pm There are rules on this forum, established by the owners and custodians. There are no rules about critiquing a player, or her character for that matter. There are rules about attacking other posters.
Do you (not saying you in particular) really need a rule to keep from attacking a college player’s character? Hell, do you need a rule to keep from “attacking” them at all?

This is where the site breaks down. It’s one thing to critique someone’s play and another to attack it. Too many times here, people start attacking because of school or kid alliances. This tends to happen when people can be keyboard bullies. I’m betting 95% of what gets said here wouldn’t be said if we were all in a room talking face to face.

I shouldn’t speak for njbill but I think that was his point in this whole matter. If someone thinks MJ shouldn’t be top 10, that’s fine, but labeling her a quitter is the problem. Anyone who plays/played sports, knows that’s the worst thing you can call an athlete. All players have bad games from time to time, by no means does that make them quitters.
I was doing a little digging by searching a certain member and then narrowing the search with the word "ring" (looking for ring chasing) and went all the way back to your very first post. You are one of the participants on this forum who made a memorable entrance with their first post. You were the other person I alluded to way back when I was calling out inconsistency in calling out others. (Not that you are the one who's been inconsistent.) This may all sound vague but I am trying to be a little bit discreet. In any event, I agreed wholeheartedly with what you said way back then and applauded you for calling out the person who was presuming to know said player's motivation. I can see in a more defined light where you're coming from now. However--I differ from you in that particular category. I'm not a lax dad and I never have been. I see women's lacrosse as a sport--pure and simple--same way I see all the other sports. I don't change how I write about sports just because a player is in college. There are pro tennis players who are younger than college students. What is ultimately at issue here--their age or their academic status? A lot of rambling here from me. Just throwing out some thoughts.

One last observation—I know there are a lot of folks on here who are parents of lacrosse players, and I don’t say with this with any snarkiness, but this is first and foremost a public forum, not a place promising deference to parents of players or players themselves. The FanLax charter specifically reads that this place is for all lacrosse fans. I think it’s unfair to try to make everybody fall in step with commentary that is approved and acceptable and inoffensive to parents.
Just catching up on all of this (busy week). Here’s the thing ONW, you don’t need to be discreet, as long as you are telling the truth. Your comment was a bit rambling so I’m not 100% sure of your angle or point. Are you suggesting I was being hypocritical? If so, point it out and if I was, I’ll address it and we’ll move on. Since you’re so hell bent on researching every single thing a person says on the forum just to try and justify what you say, then have it. What you won’t find is me crapping on a particular player. Your analogy of young tennis PROS and collegiate athletes is weak. Either way, I don’t feel the need to pick on a young athlete whether they are a pro or an amateur. If you do, then have it and keeping hiding behind the Fanlax “charter”.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Justalaxdad wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 12:56 pm
Just catching up on all of this (busy week). Here’s the thing ONW, you don’t need to be discreet, as long as you are telling the truth. Your comment was a bit rambling so I’m not 100% sure of your angle or point. Are you suggesting I was being hypocritical? If so, point it out and if I was, I’ll address it and we’ll move on. Since you’re so hell bent on researching every single thing a person says on the forum just to try and justify what you say, then have it. What you won’t find is me crapping on a particular player. Your analogy of young tennis PROS and collegiate athletes is weak. Either way, I don’t feel the need to pick on a young athlete whether they are a pro or an amateur. If you do, then have it and keeping hiding behind the Fanlax “charter”.
This wasn't meant to be a knock against you, dad. Quite the opposite. I was commending you for what you did back then. As for the rest of it, at this point – it is all moot.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

DMac wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 12:16 pm You waste your time with your rsmbat (really schidty matererial by annoying troll) clips, I don't watch any of them.
Those are for self entertainment, as in you getting your jollies off.
One thing you're not taking into consideration – you're not the only one who reads posts on the forum.
DMac
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:02 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by DMac »

What I am taking into consideration is that really schidty material by annoying troll clip was/is directed at me. Wasting your time digging through your annoying toys chest on me.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

DMac wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 1:41 pm What I am taking into consideration is that really schidty material by annoying troll clip was/is directed at me. Wasting your time digging through your annoying toys chest on me.
Question – If you don't watch the clips, how can you know they are poor in quality? Further, how do you know they are of a trolling nature?
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25998
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

Watched enough to know the pattern...they seem more intended to annoy than to inform.
Last edited by MDlaxfan76 on Sun Dec 11, 2022 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 5:43 pm Watched enough to know the patter...they seem more intended to annoy than to inform.
Kleizaster
Posts: 560
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 9:54 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Kleizaster »

boy..did things escalate since my last visit here..i'll just say that i'm not the biggest CN fan. and i have pointed out her flaws many times. Anyone can see that she's one dimensional. Nonetheless, she's still a great player. What she does best, she does it so much better than everyone else in the sport that it elevates her to a level that offsets alot of said flaws. Alot of people here are underrating her importance to BC and how much they'll miss her. Initially i believed that her departure would lead to more free flowing lacrosse for BC. That may be true, but i think there will be alot of games and moments where things aren't going well, where in the past it would have been easy to go to CN who would rip a shot top corner and will them to victory. They don't have that anymore. The question is, do they struggle early then gel later in the year? or will they start hot and then struggle late when the absence of CN starts rearing it's ugly head? we shall see.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Kleizaster wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 1:55 am boy..did things escalate since my last visit here..i'll just say that i'm not the biggest CN fan. and i have pointed out her flaws many times. Anyone can see that she's one dimensional. Nonetheless, she's still a great player. What she does best, she does it so much better than everyone else in the sport that it elevates her to a level that offsets alot of said flaws. Alot of people here are underrating her importance to BC and how much they'll miss her. Initially i believed that her departure would lead to more free flowing lacrosse for BC. That may be true, but i think there will be alot of games and moments where things aren't going well, where in the past it would have been easy to go to CN who would rip a shot top corner and will them to victory. They don't have that anymore. The question is, do they struggle early then gel later in the year? or will they start hot and then struggle late when the absence of CN starts rearing it's ugly head? we shall see.
(Yep--escalation is what happens when one bucks Group Think/Herd Mentality. But we've spent far too much time on that already [or have we...?])

At this point Kleizaster, anyone can see that you're deliberately ignoring the whole body of work. The stats speak for themselves regarding Charlotte North. One Trick Pony's don't collect 75 assists, 55 GB’s 19 CT’s and 373 DC’s in their career, in addition to graduating as the NCAA's all time leading goal scorer. You really must let go of this misconception that Charlotte North was a One Trick Pony. There's simply not enough evidence to support it.

Image

Image

As to the other larger and intriguing and well written questions you raise about how the team will make up for her 90+ goals per season average at BC--those are good questions. North was also known for stepping up in the clutch. Will they find that in someone else, is another question to have an answer for.
Bart
Posts: 2291
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Bart »

OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 4:40 am
Kleizaster wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 1:55 am boy..did things escalate since my last visit here..i'll just say that i'm not the biggest CN fan. and i have pointed out her flaws many times. Anyone can see that she's one dimensional. Nonetheless, she's still a great player. What she does best, she does it so much better than everyone else in the sport that it elevates her to a level that offsets alot of said flaws. Alot of people here are underrating her importance to BC and how much they'll miss her. Initially i believed that her departure would lead to more free flowing lacrosse for BC. That may be true, but i think there will be alot of games and moments where things aren't going well, where in the past it would have been easy to go to CN who would rip a shot top corner and will them to victory. They don't have that anymore. The question is, do they struggle early then gel later in the year? or will they start hot and then struggle late when the absence of CN starts rearing it's ugly head? we shall see.
(Yep--escalation is what happens when one bucks Group Think/Herd Mentality. But we've spent far too much time on that already [or have we...?])
:roll:
At this point Kleizaster, anyone can see that you're deliberately ignoring the whole body of work. The stats speak for themselves regarding Charlotte North. One Trick Pony's don't collect 75 assists, 55 GB’s 19 CT’s and 373 DC’s in their career, in addition to graduating as the NCAA's all time leading goal scorer. You really must let go of this misconception that Charlotte North was a One Trick Pony. There's simply not enough evidence to support it.

Image

Image

As to the other larger and intriguing and well written questions you raise about how the team will make up for her 90+ goals per season average at BC--those are good questions. North was also known for stepping up in the clutch. Will they find that in someone else, is another question to have an answer for.
I can not speak for Kleizaster and I would not necessarily say Ms North is one dimensional but you seem to think, or appear to think according to your posts (please correct me if I am wrong here) that the make up of a multi dimensional player relates to only one or two facets of the game. To me, and I very may well be in the minority, to be a truly well rounded player you have to excel in at least three of what I would consider the four facets of the game. These would be Scoring (g & a), DC's, defense and gb's. Defense is hard to measure but it can be estimated by looking at CT's. I am using these two players to expand on this point.

IF you look at Ms Norths stat line she has a grand total (I am not including the partial 2020 season) of 52 gb and 18 CT's for her career. That is an average of 13 gb and 4.5 CT per year. Now her GB total went down when she went to BC so perhaps there was something in what her coach was preaching to her IDK. She excelled at scoring and Dc's.

Now if you look at a contemporary player, Ms Apuzzo, her final line is quite similar in some aspects but dissimilar in others. Despite playing in only 9 games her first year (I don't recall if she was hurt her first year but...Ms North played and started in all her games...kudos to her) she ended up with 397 pts (283 g/114 a) 458 DC's, 128 gbs and 93 cto's. That to me is a much more multidimensional stat line. Ms Appuzzo did play in 2 more total games but that is negligible, imo, to the overall stat line.

Now one could argue that I am comparing Ms North to one of the all time greats but if, as you have indicated, Ms North is the "great one" comparisons to those at the pointy end of the stick are appropriate. Now if I were to have a team I would gladly take either and I can enjoy what both bring to the field but to me Ms Appuzzo is the more rounded player per stats. So is Ms North one dimensional as Kleizaster indicates? That is up for debate but by the stats you point to she did not excel at either gb's or cto's two statistics that I would expect in a extreemly well rounded player. I will add a caveat, that we do not know what he BC coaches stressed to her during practice about gb's and cto's so I am only going by what the statistics you pointed out to indicate.

I personally would not call CN a one trick pony, she has at least two in her book that she was real good at but I also can see how some may think it.
User avatar
OuttaNowhereWregget
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 4:39 am

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by OuttaNowhereWregget »

Bart wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 8:01 am I can not speak for Kleizaster and I would not necessarily say Ms North is one dimensional but you seem to think, or appear to think according to your posts (please correct me if I am wrong here) that the make up of a multi dimensional player relates to only one or two facets of the game. To me, and I very may well be in the minority, to be a truly well rounded player you have to excel in at least three of what I would consider the four facets of the game. These would be Scoring (g & a), DC's, defense and gb's. Defense is hard to measure but it can be estimated by looking at CT's. I am using these two players to expand on this point.

IF you look at Ms Norths stat line she has a grand total (I am not including the partial 2020 season) of 52 gb and 18 CT's for her career. That is an average of 13 gb and 4.5 CT per year. Now her GB total went down when she went to BC so perhaps there was something in what her coach was preaching to her IDK. She excelled at scoring and Dc's.

Now if you look at a contemporary player, Ms Apuzzo, her final line is quite similar in some aspects but dissimilar in others. Despite playing in only 9 games her first year (I don't recall if she was hurt her first year but...Ms North played and started in all her games...kudos to her) she ended up with 397 pts (283 g/114 a) 458 DC's, 128 gbs and 93 cto's. That to me is a much more multidimensional stat line. Ms Appuzzo did play in 2 more total games but that is negligible, imo, to the overall stat line.

Now one could argue that I am comparing Ms North to one of the all time greats but if, as you have indicated, Ms North is the "great one" comparisons to those at the pointy end of the stick are appropriate. Now if I were to have a team I would gladly take either and I can enjoy what both bring to the field but to me Ms Appuzzo is the more rounded player per stats. So is Ms North one dimensional as Kleizaster indicates? That is up for debate but by the stats you point to she did not excel at either gb's or cto's two statistics that I would expect in a extreemly well rounded player. I will add a caveat, that we do not know what he BC coaches stressed to her during practice about gb's and cto's so I am only going by what the statistics you pointed out to indicate.

I personally would not call CN a one trick pony, she has at least two in her book that she was real good at but I also can see how some may think it.
I agree with everything you say here, Bart--except for who I would choose if I was building a team and I could have only one. I'd choose North over Apuzzo; not because I don't fully agree with you that Sam was indeed the (much) more well rounded player, I just happen to enjoy North more than Apuzzo for a number of reasons. I was also a huge fan of Apuzzo when she was romping and stomping for the Eagles.

The main point however, you and I are in complete agreement on--Charlotte North is no One Trick Pony.
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 25998
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

Why is this a topic at all in this thread?
Bart
Posts: 2291
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Inside Lacrosse Top 50

Post by Bart »

MDlaxfan76 wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 9:01 am Why is this a topic at all in this thread?
What does it matter to you?
The small number of topics/posts/posters result in things meandering in this forum.
Post Reply

Return to “D1 WOMENS LACROSSE”