Shellenberger has passed 300 points,
that is a great milestone.
Shellenberger has passed 300 points,
Having coached Connor for 3 years, I can definitely say his career points are both a function of his ability and his team’s ability.
I think it's more whether this team is built the same way in terms of being dominant at the specialist positions. In the 2019 and 2021 seasons -- even aside from the enormous talent on the roster -- the Hoos were well-constructed for a post-season run with a great "playoff goalie" in Rode and FOGO in LaSalla. Same true last year with #41 having a better year and still having LaSalla. Today was just one day but in today's game UVA goalies had a 31% save percentage and the Hoos were 40% at the faceoff X.
Why would UVA make the tournament, they suckThe Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:40 amI think it's more whether this team is built the same way in terms of being dominant at the specialist positions. In the 2019 and 2021 seasons -- even aside from the enormous talent on the roster -- the Hoos were well-constructed for a post-season run with a great "playoff goalie" in Rode and FOGO in LaSalla. Same true last year with #41 having a better year and still having LaSalla. Today was just one day but in today's game UVA goalies had a 31% save percentage and the Hoos were 40% at the faceoff X.
Still a very dangerous team, although not playing well (for them) right now.
I know you're probably trolling but in LaxReference's updated RPI after tonight's games, UVA is at #5. They are quite safely in. (There are four ACC teams in the top 5 in RPI: ND #1, Duke #2, Syracuse #4, UVA #5.)lorin wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:46 amWhy would UVA make the tournament, they suckThe Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:40 amI think it's more whether this team is built the same way in terms of being dominant at the specialist positions. In the 2019 and 2021 seasons -- even aside from the enormous talent on the roster -- the Hoos were well-constructed for a post-season run with a great "playoff goalie" in Rode and FOGO in LaSalla. Same true last year with #41 having a better year and still having LaSalla. Today was just one day but in today's game UVA goalies had a 31% save percentage and the Hoos were 40% at the faceoff X.
Still a very dangerous team, although not playing well (for them) right now.
trolling? and orfling's a yale alum. uva's entire resume numbers compare favorably to what would be a 9th team in just about any scenario. unless you have 9 teams in mind?
knee jerk reactions to one year (that likely don't impact selection) is what got the acc playing a 6 game season with 5 teams, essentially giving a hit to numbers with extra games for the 5th best team. hard pass.molo wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 9:04 am The shortcomings that were evident even when this team was beating less talented opponents were never ameliorated. Team beat one team that had a legitimate shot at beating them, and that win has lost luster as the Terps are suffering a similarly down season. This is the anti 2022 season. That year a couple of historically good teams failed to make the NCAAT while this year a couple of poorly performing traditionally good teams will not only make it but will have first round home games. If the ACC tournament doesn’t matter, get rid of it. Two ACC teams embarrassed themselves last night but will probably get home games while in the ILT a good team lost a competitive game and is likely done. Harsh but at least the games mattered.
ACC IS A joke besides ND all other teams can win or lose to any team in top 20, kiss my ass with the RPI, eye test tells me UVA is average at best,The Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:51 amI know you're probably trolling but in LaxReference's updated RPI after tonight's games, UVA is at #5. They are quite safely in. (There are four ACC teams in the top 5 in RPI: ND #1, Duke #2, Syracuse #4, UVA #5.)lorin wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:46 amWhy would UVA make the tournament, they suckThe Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:40 amI think it's more whether this team is built the same way in terms of being dominant at the specialist positions. In the 2019 and 2021 seasons -- even aside from the enormous talent on the roster -- the Hoos were well-constructed for a post-season run with a great "playoff goalie" in Rode and FOGO in LaSalla. Same true last year with #41 having a better year and still having LaSalla. Today was just one day but in today's game UVA goalies had a 31% save percentage and the Hoos were 40% at the faceoff X.
Still a very dangerous team, although not playing well (for them) right now.
In 2022 what I generally said, in response to the angst after selection, is that most years the RPI-based selection is great for the ACC. That was one year when it happened to not be great for the ACC (a couple of league teams with down years for them, ND not playing a lot of games and then not getting a big RPI boost for beating Duke twice, etc.) and it really worked out for the Ivies. And I was somewhat surprised by the 5th Ivy bid in 2022 and VERY surprised by the 6th bid going to Harvard that year and understood ND's frustration (although I thought the subset of misogynistic online attacks on the selection committee chair were not a great look).wgdsr wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 9:08 amtrolling? and orfling's a yale alum. uva's entire resume numbers compare favorably to what would be a 9th team in just about any scenario. unless you have 9 teams in mind?
and anyone that said that wasn't aware that duke and nd had a better rpi than 2 and 1 ivies.
i had 5 ivy bids without much sweat. didn't see harvard coming but their rationale on big wins made sense. but once they did all that, not putting nd in over tosu was about the most ridiculous thing i've ever seen them do. nd did get a v good rpi boost from duke twice (duke was #7). it was good to see them from one respect getting away from straight rpi, which they'd done for 4 years or so pre-covid. nd's problem was that the committee decided those 2 top 10 wins didn't count.The Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 10:22 amIn 2022 what I generally said, in response to the angst after selection, is that most years the RPI-based selection is great for the ACC. That was one year when it happened to not be great for the ACC (a couple of league teams with down years for them, ND not playing a lot of games and then not getting a big RPI boost for beating Duke twice, etc.) and it really worked out for the Ivies. And I was somewhat surprised by the 5th Ivy bid in 2022 and VERY surprised by the 6th bid going to Harvard that year and understood ND's frustration (although I thought the subset of misogynistic online attacks on the selection committee chair were not a great look).wgdsr wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 9:08 amtrolling? and orfling's a yale alum. uva's entire resume numbers compare favorably to what would be a 9th team in just about any scenario. unless you have 9 teams in mind?
and anyone that said that wasn't aware that duke and nd had a better rpi than 2 and 1 ivies.
But it's the system we have and the ACC had an impressive out of conference showing this year so they will reap the benefit this year. And I don't have a problem with that; it's a known system and teams/conferences have a sense of what they need to do. UVA is flawed compared to the recent run of fantastic Wahoo teams but they are still very good and with the #5 RPI as of last night, even with a little reshuffling I don't see any way they don't get a bid. And I think they should. Lorin is an experienced lacrosse watcher so when I referenced possible "trolling" re: his "why should UVA get into the tournament, they suck" post, it was from the perspective that I believe he knows that they'll in fact be in very safely. (And maybe he does think they "suck" but it's a relative term and I think any team drawing UVA in the tournament knows they are a dangerous team.)
I'm sorry the Bulldogs' run of NCAA bids will almost certainly come to an end in 2024 but that's what the numbers say, so I accept it (and they are just so banged up now that I can't see a path to them for tournament success without a healthy FOGO).
pretty coincidental as i'm hoping the hoos draw army. oh, wait!lorin wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 10:05 amACC IS A joke besides ND all other teams can win or lose to any team in top 20, kiss my ass with the RPI, eye test tells me UVA is average at best,The Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:51 amI know you're probably trolling but in LaxReference's updated RPI after tonight's games, UVA is at #5. They are quite safely in. (There are four ACC teams in the top 5 in RPI: ND #1, Duke #2, Syracuse #4, UVA #5.)lorin wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:46 amWhy would UVA make the tournament, they suckThe Orfling wrote: ↑Sat May 04, 2024 12:40 amI think it's more whether this team is built the same way in terms of being dominant at the specialist positions. In the 2019 and 2021 seasons -- even aside from the enormous talent on the roster -- the Hoos were well-constructed for a post-season run with a great "playoff goalie" in Rode and FOGO in LaSalla. Same true last year with #41 having a better year and still having LaSalla. Today was just one day but in today's game UVA goalies had a 31% save percentage and the Hoos were 40% at the faceoff X.
Still a very dangerous team, although not playing well (for them) right now.
their best win is Maryland who is 8 and 5 an offense is not good. they are 1 and 5 against top 10 teams. Army, Navy, Colgate have 1 win against top 10.