2019 Tewaaraton Finalists

[Farfromgeneva]

Which is fine and I’m more like 75/25-80/20 on expectations of spencer (> 100 assists will be highlighted if it happens) but it’s a shame more kids don’t want to be Brodie Merrill, Greg guerenlian, Jon Reese, Matt Abbott.

[pcowlax]

Spencer is a historically great player. He would be wondering what the hell hit him when he was eviscerated by Brodie Merrill.

[pcowlax]

Same with Lyle, who is a more skilled player, though not necessarily more impactful than Spencer, he would do some insane ninja dodge and Merrill would send his stick 10 yards away.

[pcowlax]

Brody is now 38 or so, so they would take him in a live event but for anyone who saw him then, good lord, a 26 year old Merrill is an end to offense 1 v 1. And a good dude.

[Peter Brown]

Spencer is a historically great player. He would be wondering what the hell hit him when he was eviscerated by Brodie Merrill.

I know both guys. I've stood next to both guys. Pat Spencer is much larger physically and about 4-5 inches taller than Brodie, is my guess.

To date, there has been exactly one defender who sometimes (but not always) got the better of Pat through the years and that was Johnny Surdick of Army, who was one of the few defenders who was taller than Pat but (as important) very athletic.

[keno in reno]

Spencer is a historically great player. He would be wondering what the hell hit him when he was eviscerated by Brodie Merrill.

I know both guys. I've stood next to both guys. Pat Spencer is much larger physically and about 4-5 inches taller than Brodie, is my guess.

To date, there has been exactly one defender who sometimes (but not always) got the better of Pat through the years and that was Johnny Surdick of Army, who was one of the few defenders who was taller than Pat but (as important) very athletic.

If he's 4-5 inches taller than Brodie, that makes Pat Spencer 6 foot 8. Sarcasm aside, watching Brodie against Maryland was one of the most frustrating things as an opposing fan, but also mesmerizing to appreciate his greatness. His ability to pick the ball off the turf so smoothly and efficiently while 100% guaranteeing possession on an otherwise 50/50 ball was amazing. Just so different and superior to anyone on the field.

[pcowlax]

I wasn’t going to say it but yes, that would make Pat Spencer Zion Williamson. He is a wonderful player. But when you are talking about historically great defenders, there is a lot more to it than just size. Lax isn’t football, you can bully someone down all you want but you still need your hands free and your stick in your hand to shoot. I don’t want it at all to sound like I am disparaging Spencer so I will leave it at this. People who saw him are still talking in amazement about Merrill, I don’t think in 20 years anyone will remember who Johnny Surdick was.

[TheBigIguana]

Spencer is a historically great player. He would be wondering what the hell hit him when he was eviscerated by Brodie Merrill.

I know both guys. I've stood next to both guys. Pat Spencer is much larger physically and about 4-5 inches taller than Brodie, is my guess.

To date, there has been exactly one defender who sometimes (but not always) got the better of Pat through the years and that was Johnny Surdick of Army, who was one of the few defenders who was taller than Pat but (as important) very athletic.

He got the better of Pat once in 7 meetings. Other than the PL tournament game this year Spencer was averaging around 7 a game vs Army. It was domination.

[Farfromgeneva]

This is where the spencer talk is too much. He’s great, cool, but there’s a number of guys over the last 20yrs who separated from their cohort similarly (using this language to include guys who’d never even be considered for the award).

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike Manley would’ve beat him in submission let alone Merrill. Or anyone ever see Jake Reed or some Diogu play? And I hated playing those dirty umass teams.

I mean in separating from the positional peers, one could argue Josh hawkins was further out the curve from e median than spencer to other attackmen.

[Peter Brown]

I wasn’t going to say it but yes, that would make Pat Spencer Zion Williamson. He is a wonderful player. But when you are talking about historically great defenders, there is a lot more to it than just size. Lax isn’t football, you can bully someone down all you want but you still need your hands free and your stick in your hand to shoot. I don’t want it at all to sound like I am disparaging Spencer so I will leave it at this. People who saw him are still talking in amazement about Merrill, I don’t think in 20 years anyone will remember who Johnny Surdick was.

I am looking online and it says Brodie is 6'4", but I don't know...I mean, I've been next to him many times. He does not strike me as 6'4". Anyone else have an opinion here? I have always thought of him as being maybe 6'0".

[wgdsr]

6'4" with the afro.

[thatsmell]

Shook hands with Brodie this Spring.
He seemed closer to 6'2"-ish to me.

Guessing the Sports Information staff a G'town/Bayhawks added an additional 2" for the cleats and helmet and it stuck.

[TheBigIguana]

This is where the spencer talk is too much. He’s great, cool, but there’s a number of guys over the last 20yrs who separated from their cohort similarly (using this language to include guys who’d never even be considered for the award).

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike Manley would’ve beat him in submission let alone Merrill. Or anyone ever see Jake Reed or some Diogu play? And I hated playing those dirty umass teams.

I mean in separating from the positional peers, one could argue Josh hawkins was further out the curve from e median than spencer to other attackmen.

Do all the modern day long poles just stink? It's not like Spencer hasn't put up good or great days against some of the best current long poles including what he did last weekend against someone who is at worst the 6th best this season if you go by the media vote. Yeah he's dominated the PL but he also has had big games against all Americans.

[Farfromgeneva]

Let me ask you who you think is around today and/or more specifically who Spencer faced that is on Merrill or Reeds level?

And that isn’t even the point, acknowledging the award is basically attack and occasional middle, it was stated that spencer is the second best player in the last twenty years. What I’m saying is those two were so far above their peers and cohort that they’d, particularly merrill, is a better candidate for top two player in college. Though he’s further back than 20yrs. I think Matt Abbott could be discussed in this conversation as well. It’d take a lot of work to even get a decent level of support for spencer as #2, maybe it’s possible but certainly nothing to be declared definiticely

[New2lax]

This is where the spencer talk is too much. He’s great, cool, but there’s a number of guys over the last 20yrs who separated from their cohort similarly (using this language to include guys who’d never even be considered for the award).

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike Manley would’ve beat him in submission let alone Merrill. Or anyone ever see Jake Reed or some Diogu play? And I hated playing those dirty umass teams.

I mean in separating from the positional peers, one could argue Josh hawkins was further out the curve from e median than spencer to other attackmen.

My statement to you would be, if it’s too much then ignore it or get off the thread! Hate to break it to you, but the kids nowadays are only interested in what is in front of them at the moment. Next year it will be somebody else. I bet if you asked kids playing lacrosse now who Merrill or Manley or Hawkins were, they would look at you like you had 2 heads. Leave it alone and let Spencer enjoy the moment...he has certainly earned it!

[Peter Brown]

Let me ask you who you think is around today and/or more specifically who Spencer faced that is on Merrill or Reeds level?

And that isn’t even the point, acknowledging the award is basically attack and occasional middle, it was stated that spencer is the second best player in the last twenty years. What I’m saying is those two were so far above their peers and cohort that they’d, particularly merrill, is a better candidate for top two player in college. Though he’s further back than 20yrs. I think Matt Abbott could be discussed in this conversation as well. It’d take a lot of work to even get a decent level of support for spencer as #2, maybe it’s possible but certainly nothing to be declared definiticely

farfromgeneva, what I generally say to everyone now is how I truly feel about all sports including lacrosse (with one glaring exception, Michael Jordan to basketball): I don't think I could make most college lacrosse teams today if I was the same athlete now as I was 30 years ago. In 3 decades, skill levels evolve to something much much better. Kids everywhere now are simply better than 30 years ago. Skills are better, reactions better, IQ better.

I know we all think certain guys from yesteryear are as good or even better than today's, but that's just not so, 3 decades removed for sure, two decades mostly, one decade perhaps still relatively even but distance already occurring.

Look at the Gaits from the 80's; remarkable generational talent then, changed the nature of shooting (mine did anyway). But if you look at any film, this might be heresy to you especially if you're upstate NY, but honestly, their athleticism doesn't come close to most elite D1 players today. And the same thing will be said of Pat Spencer in 30 years too. Honest brokers in 30 years time will look at film of Pat and see that the game has only gotten faster and better; I bet the University of Florida will dominate the sport then, not Cuse Hopkins Maryland Yale PSU etc.

So is Brodie yet out of that generational equation...not really. He's only 37; he graduated Gtown in 2005, meaning the game has only evolved one decade. But in another decade, as great as he was, Brodie's yesteryear game will be more common. In 3 decades, he'll be remembered as a great, but his game won't be great compared to what the game becomes. btw, would I take him or Surdick rn? I don't think this question is as easy as some have posted here.

Everyone gets better, sports get better, skills get better. It's Darwinism 101. It sucks in some ways for us older guys, but at least our wives listen to our tales of glory....not. I for one applaud continual improvement.

(btw: the girl's game has evolved even faster than us guys...these women throw the ball now like rockets...far different than 3 decades ago...I thought Taylor Cummings was the best player ever, then I saw Kayla Traenor, and now Sam Apuzzo...each one is successively better than the last)

[DMac]

Agree with your point, PB, not only that, the sticks used in today's game have really made lacrosse a whole new game.
I wouldn't be so sure about the Gait brothers though, they were a couple of mighty gifted athletes who did indeed revolutionize the game but also made everyone on their team(s) MUCH better players. Beyond what they did personally on the field, that part was huge. You just did not see teams play the way they did prior to them....no one ever walked away from a Cuse game suggesting the game needs a shot clock, for example. I never missed a game while they were here and went to some of the away games as well, I was lucky enough to have seen them play a lot. You never hear any mention about how they were defensively either but I can assure you they were mighty good at that phase of the game too....also were on the wings for face offs for good reason. Those two were something else.
Check this out, it's pretty incredible:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Gait

Agree 100% with the wlax part. Anyone who is not tuning into that is missing some mighty pretty lacrosse played by superb athletes. They've come a looooong way, baby.

[Farfromgeneva]

This is where the spencer talk is too much. He’s great, cool, but there’s a number of guys over the last 20yrs who separated from their cohort similarly (using this language to include guys who’d never even be considered for the award).

I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike Manley would’ve beat him in submission let alone Merrill. Or anyone ever see Jake Reed or some Diogu play? And I hated playing those dirty umass teams.

I mean in separating from the positional peers, one could argue Josh hawkins was further out the curve from e median than spencer to other attackmen.

My statement to you would be, if it’s too much then ignore it or get off the thread! Hate to break it to you, but the kids nowadays are only interested in what is in front of them at the moment. Next year it will be somebody else. I bet if you asked kids playing lacrosse now who Merrill or Manley or Hawkins were, they would look at you like you had 2 heads. Leave it alone and let Spencer enjoy the moment...he has certainly earned it!

Yeah I’m so old and never thought your comments to someone else. I think the correct rebuttal would be that these boards aren’t inherently echo chambers. Hawkins isn’t that at back son.

Nobody’s trashing spencer, it’s the silly hyperbole in an attempt to bolster his case, which is most likely superfluous, that I’m suggesting should be mmoderaed or at least questioned.

And thanks for the lessons, it only is stayed like 50x per year going back to when laxpower broke down regularly in the early 2000s. The thing your missing is that the only way to compare different Generations is by comparing to their peer set, IN ANY SPORT, this isn’t unique to lacrosse.

Last point, what is one of the things often said about LeBron James and Michael jordan? They’re great students of the game. Same has been said of many of the best in every sport. Mike tyson. So I would completely reject the idea at kids are stupid, myopic and don’t care abo the past. That’s nonsense and most commonly the best in any sport knows a lot about the past players.

[Farfromgeneva]

Also, the person who stated spencer was second best to a guy who graduated not that far from merrill.... (and Kyle Harrison)

[DocBarrister]

Let me ask you who you think is around today and/or more specifically who Spencer faced that is on Merrill or Reeds level?

And that isn’t even the point, acknowledging the award is basically attack and occasional middle, it was stated that spencer is the second best player in the last twenty years. What I’m saying is those two were so far above their peers and cohort that they’d, particularly merrill, is a better candidate for top two player in college. Though he’s further back than 20yrs. I think Matt Abbott could be discussed in this conversation as well. It’d take a lot of work to even get a decent level of support for spencer as #2, maybe it’s possible but certainly nothing to be declared definiticely

farfromgeneva, what I generally say to everyone now is how I truly feel about all sports including lacrosse (with one glaring exception, Michael Jordan to basketball): I don't think I could make most college lacrosse teams today if I was the same athlete now as I was 30 years ago. In 3 decades, skill levels evolve to something much much better. Kids everywhere now are simply better than 30 years ago. Skills are better, reactions better, IQ better.

I know we all think certain guys from yesteryear are as good or even better than today's, but that's just not so, 3 decades removed for sure, two decades mostly, one decade perhaps still relatively even but distance already occurring.

Look at the Gaits from the 80's; remarkable generational talent then, changed the nature of shooting (mine did anyway). But if you look at any film, this might be heresy to you especially if you're upstate NY, but honestly, their athleticism doesn't come close to most elite D1 players today. And the same thing will be said of Pat Spencer in 30 years too. Honest brokers in 30 years time will look at film of Pat and see that the game has only gotten faster and better; I bet the University of Florida will dominate the sport then, not Cuse Hopkins Maryland Yale PSU etc.

So is Brodie yet out of that generational equation...not really. He's only 37; he graduated Gtown in 2005, meaning the game has only evolved one decade. But in another decade, as great as he was, Brodie's yesteryear game will be more common. In 3 decades, he'll be remembered as a great, but his game won't be great compared to what the game becomes. btw, would I take him or Surdick rn? I don't think this question is as easy as some have posted here.

Everyone gets better, sports get better, skills get better. It's Darwinism 101. It sucks in some ways for us older guys, but at least our wives listen to our tales of glory....not. I for one applaud continual improvement.

(btw: the girl's game has evolved even faster than us guys...these women throw the ball now like rockets...far different than 3 decades ago...I thought Taylor Cummings was the best player ever, then I saw Kayla Traenor, and now Sam Apuzzo...each one is successively better than the last)

I bet if you brought back Jim Brown in his prime, he could still teach today’s top lacrosse stars a thing or two. Can’t imagine what he could have done with today’s modern sticks.

DocBarrister