Yes – she sure had plenty of fire left as well. I was surprised she retired from team USA afterward. I suppose that was to make room for the next generation.WLaxdad wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:13 amOuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 10:52 amTrue.Madlax59 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:56 amIn my experience with ratings they usually go with glitzy and obvious qualities and stats . They do not take into consideration intangible factors . If coaches are not volunteering that info the people that evaluate are not going to go past obvious stats.OuttaNowhereWregget wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 8:59 amScane's an obvious one, but what criteria do you have in mind for assessing a player's worth/value/whatever? How much does the eye test come into play with stats, strength of schedule, how the player does in big games/crunch time, etc?
I was asking user1020 as he was the one who suggested the topic.
Who would you choose for your best player at each position? I'm still pondering mine.
I think we can be a little more particular since it's just us here on the WD1 board. Always interesting to look at different players and how they are perceived outside the mainstream publications like IL Women and USA Lacrosse Magazine.
My vote to evaluate middies is the eye test. I'm basing this on watching Taylor Cummings at the world cup, she was just so dominate. I have no idea what the stats were but in the championship game she was everywhere dominating draws, scoring, transition. I think for middies this is the best way, sort of you'll know it when you see it.
Now that you bring that up however, perhaps midfielders should be divided into three categories: defensive midfielder, offensive midfielder and two-way midfielder. I don't know if that's reasonable or not. Just a thought.