I'm not in the camp of anointing North as the "best" at more than what she excels at doing...which is plenty darn special. Fun player to watch, that's for sure. It's terrific that youngsters get a thrill watching her, emulate her 'style'.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 1:04 pmOutstanding post, MDlaxfan. Nice breath of fresh air perspective regarding Charlotte North. Greatly appreciate you weighing in.MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 15, 2022 12:55 pm#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.
I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.
Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.
I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.
But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...
Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!
However, to be clear, I'd agree with those who prefer an attack who has their eyes up, who involves their teammates in getting the best shot on net. Especially true when the players are all elite and getting the full attack effort to be explosive is a matter of team chemistry, not reliance on individual efforts. Not doing so undermines the team chemistry when there are multiple 'alphas' on the field together...they expect to be involved and, as a coach, I want them all to be...a team with that kind of chemistry is way more explosive, reliably so, than a team with a dominant alpha who repeatedly doesn't involve others when there are opportunities to do so.
I'm much more familiar with the men's side players than the women, but the same dynamics apply.
I just don't think we fans need to assign any negatives about the person's character when it's pretty clear that they are simply doing their best at what they excel at doing...that they don't excel in another aspect is fair to critique as well.