Johns Hopkins 2025

D1 Mens Lacrosse
User avatar
HopFan16
Posts: 6049
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by HopFan16 »

steel_hop wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 12:49 pm
norcalhop wrote: Wed Jun 05, 2024 5:15 pm Vigue were mostly 4 stars.
I'm good friends with his dad. His dad was not only a freaking alum, played football and was an athletic trainer for the lax team. It was infathomable that Petro didn't even at least look at him. His dad told me Petro had no interest in him.

Same thing can be said of Marcus. No idea if the kid is/was interested but there should have been at least a phone call to gage interest.
It's clear that Petro largely botched goalie recruiting in the second half of his tenure. Pretty well documented at this point.

I'm sure there was communication from the new staff with Marcus, but from what I understand, most recruiters believe Lamitie is the better goalie (and he's higher ranked as the #2 goalie in that class, not that that's all that matters). It's not like they ignored Marcus for some nobody. Interesting that he wound up with Petro at UNC.

Plenty of Hopkins blood on the way with Colhoun this year and Kaestner coming in the fall. And McKee the FOGO transfer has a Hop connection as well. From convos I've had, the staff takes these bloodlines seriously. But they can't (and shouldn't) get everyone.
51percentcorn
Posts: 1557
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:54 am

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by 51percentcorn »

Two weeks before Vigue verballed to Richmond - Hopkins obatained a verbal from DiMarsico - 4* goalie from Pittsburgh area. Similar size - both from high schools not traditionally considered lacrosse powers (Shadyside Academy/Apex) both 4* in the recruiting pundits eyes. DiMarsico - of course - soon had the off field incident after arriving on campus that saw him leave Hopkins permanently. They were both late recruits (as the cradle robbing was in full force) with IL verifying their commitments in October of 2018 Contrast that with someone like Peshko in that class who committed in July of 2016. This leads me to believe Petro was looking elsewhere and lost out. Or he thought the 20 class was not as strong in the goalie position.
Gianforcaro was the only 5* goalie in the 2020 class - the other 4*s ranked in the Top 100 were Alvarez/Krieg/Craven/Staudt. Not typical of Petro to leave legacy stones unturned.
norcalhop
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 4:17 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by norcalhop »

51percentcorn wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 2:13 pm Two weeks before Vigue verballed to Richmond - Hopkins obatained a verbal from DiMarsico - 4* goalie from Pittsburgh area. Similar size - both from high schools not traditionally considered lacrosse powers (Shadyside Academy/Apex) both 4* in the recruiting pundits eyes. DiMarsico - of course - soon had the off field incident after arriving on campus that saw him leave Hopkins permanently. They were both late recruits (as the cradle robbing was in full force) with IL verifying their commitments in October of 2018 Contrast that with someone like Peshko in that class who committed in July of 2016. This leads me to believe Petro was looking elsewhere and lost out. Or he thought the 20 class was not as strong in the goalie position.
Gianforcaro was the only 5* goalie in the 2020 class - the other 4*s ranked in the Top 100 were Alvarez/Krieg/Craven/Staudt. Not typical of Petro to leave legacy stones unturned.
Vigue while definitely an upgrade over goalies at Hopkins at the time also didn't seem like that much of an obvious prospect? Did he have better options than Richmond?

His overall save percentage is impressive but less so against quality teams like Georgetown. St. Joseph's, and Duke. Not bad against UVa, however.

https://richmondspiders.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=6316
Sagittarius A*
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 7:38 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by Sagittarius A* »

HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 8:53 am
The underdiscussed part of this is wing play. Have to get better there. My hope is DiCicco/Eye and the Yale guys will help. The FO mediocrity was absolutely a drain on the offense. If we're winning 55% instead of 48%, something tells me there'd be less hand-wringing about the offense.
The other thing that really hurt was failed clears. This hurt us badly against UVA as the team wasn't winning face-offs. You can't afford to give away possessions in that situation. The shots on goal on 10 man rides were blocked so the team has to either improve their clearing or improve their shooting on 10-man rides because I would expect to see a lot of them in 2025. Clearly the team's Achilles heel.
jhu06
Posts: 2733
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:43 am

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by jhu06 »

Sagittarius A* wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 2:22 pm
HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 8:53 am
The underdiscussed part of this is wing play. Have to get better there. My hope is DiCicco/Eye and the Yale guys will help. The FO mediocrity was absolutely a drain on the offense. If we're winning 55% instead of 48%, something tells me there'd be less hand-wringing about the offense.
The other thing that really hurt was failed clears. This hurt us badly against UVA as the team wasn't winning face-offs. You can't afford to give away possessions in that situation. The shots on goal on 10 man rides were blocked so the team has to either improve their clearing or improve their shooting on 10-man rides because I would expect to see a lot of them in 2025. Clearly the team's Achilles heel.
On the positive side among the top issues 23 and for years before were the poor shooting/offensive turnovers leaving offensive players caught on d. They did a much better job this year not creating easy saves for goalies and turnovers that went the other way as transition opportunities. When they did face those situations-and it was maybe once or twice a game at most, the offensive players held up a lot better. It was usually me after the game, not the broadcasters in game or many of you who have a much more rational approach.

The clearing issues I didn't really get, nor the penalties that plagued them all season, or why they struggled so badly to replace hawley and mazzone when they had veterans at those positions. Jameson did a wonderful job when he came in after the dolente disaster against Denver in 2011 fixing the faceoffs so hopefully he can go into the lab and figure out the clears and wings.

One of the hardest and perhaps worst parts of being PM and JK has to be how they approach recruiting kids with program ties and handling those relationships. As newer coaches in their roles in a program like Hopkins where there are kids everywhere with connections whether its great grandparents or star parents or whatever, how they say no can't be fun. You add in the academics component they probably have to weigh and has to be hard.
User avatar
HopFan16
Posts: 6049
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by HopFan16 »

Clears were not a seasonlong issue. They were pretty good all year but fell apart at a very bad time against UVA in the quarters. To their credit, they threw the kitchen sink at us in the ride and it arguably won them the game. It wasn't the same ride we saw when we played them in March.

Taking care of the ball was a team strength all season. Hovered around the top 10 in turnover rate all year. I guess you're only as good as your last game but to imply it was some overall trend is absolutely false. The recipe this season was limiting turnovers, playing good defense, shooting well, making opportunistic plays. It got them within a fraction of an inch of the Final Four. All those things are repeatable too and now there's room to grow with faceoffs and offensive efficiency.
Sagittarius A*
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 7:38 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by Sagittarius A* »

HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 4:39 pm Clears were not a seasonlong issue. They were pretty good all year but fell apart at a very bad time against UVA in the quarters. To their credit, they threw the kitchen sink at us in the ride and it arguably won them the game. It wasn't the same ride we saw when we played them in March.

Taking care of the ball was a team strength all season. Hovered around the top 10 in turnover rate all year. I guess you're only as good as your last game but to imply it was some overall trend is absolutely false. The recipe this season was limiting turnovers, playing good defense, shooting well, making opportunistic plays. It got them within a fraction of an inch of the Final Four. All those things are repeatable too and now there's room to grow with faceoffs and offensive efficiency.
I'm thinking maybe the reason they brought in the Yale middies was to help out on clears, groundballs and face-off wings.
I think Hackler played wing on FOs and had like 30 gbs last season for Yale.
I will say this staff does seem to be in tune with what the team needs and able to go out and get it.
Beefing up the Face-off and Goalie rooms were priorities.
Degnon, Angelus, Ierlan, Szuluk, Peshko, and Martin were huge losses but the cupboard is not bare next year.
jhu06
Posts: 2733
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:43 am

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by jhu06 »

Sagittarius A* wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:32 am
HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 4:39 pm Clears were not a seasonlong issue. They were pretty good all year but fell apart at a very bad time against UVA in the quarters. To their credit, they threw the kitchen sink at us in the ride and it arguably won them the game. It wasn't the same ride we saw when we played them in March.

Taking care of the ball was a team strength all season. Hovered around the top 10 in turnover rate all year. I guess you're only as good as your last game but to imply it was some overall trend is absolutely false. The recipe this season was limiting turnovers, playing good defense, shooting well, making opportunistic plays. It got them within a fraction of an inch of the Final Four. All those things are repeatable too and now there's room to grow with faceoffs and offensive efficiency.
I'm thinking maybe the reason they brought in the Yale middies was to help out on clears, groundballs and face-off wings.
I think Hackler played wing on FOs and had like 30 gbs last season for Yale.
I will say this staff does seem to be in tune with what the team needs and able to go out and get it.
Beefing up the Face-off and Goalie rooms were priorities.
Degnon, Angelus, Ierlan, Szuluk, Peshko, and Martin were huge losses but the cupboard is not bare next year.
This is a good ppt about the yale guys. Martin/Aviles/Jaronski struck me as better cover guys than gb guys.
primitiveskills
Posts: 1329
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 12:57 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by primitiveskills »

jhu06 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:06 am
Sagittarius A* wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:32 am
HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 4:39 pm Clears were not a seasonlong issue. They were pretty good all year but fell apart at a very bad time against UVA in the quarters. To their credit, they threw the kitchen sink at us in the ride and it arguably won them the game. It wasn't the same ride we saw when we played them in March.

Taking care of the ball was a team strength all season. Hovered around the top 10 in turnover rate all year. I guess you're only as good as your last game but to imply it was some overall trend is absolutely false. The recipe this season was limiting turnovers, playing good defense, shooting well, making opportunistic plays. It got them within a fraction of an inch of the Final Four. All those things are repeatable too and now there's room to grow with faceoffs and offensive efficiency.
I'm thinking maybe the reason they brought in the Yale middies was to help out on clears, groundballs and face-off wings.
I think Hackler played wing on FOs and had like 30 gbs last season for Yale.
I will say this staff does seem to be in tune with what the team needs and able to go out and get it.
Beefing up the Face-off and Goalie rooms were priorities.
Degnon, Angelus, Ierlan, Szuluk, Peshko, and Martin were huge losses but the cupboard is not bare next year.
This is a good ppt about the yale guys. Martin/Aviles/Jaronski struck me as better cover guys than gb guys.
As a group last seasons' SSDMs were excellent on-ball and 2-man defenders (Martin especially). They were limited in terms of generating transition and early offense opportunities (not a criticism, just not their biggest strength). I think bringing Montfort and Hackler in is a nod to improving that element of the game.
User avatar
44WeWantMore
Posts: 1393
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 3:11 pm
Location: Too far from 21218

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by 44WeWantMore »

Nothing gets me out of my seat faster than the defense pushing transition, but I was more than content with 2024's ssdm play. They did job 1.
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
User avatar
HopFan16
Posts: 6049
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by HopFan16 »

primitiveskills wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:04 pm
jhu06 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:06 am
Sagittarius A* wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 7:32 am
HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 4:39 pm Clears were not a seasonlong issue. They were pretty good all year but fell apart at a very bad time against UVA in the quarters. To their credit, they threw the kitchen sink at us in the ride and it arguably won them the game. It wasn't the same ride we saw when we played them in March.

Taking care of the ball was a team strength all season. Hovered around the top 10 in turnover rate all year. I guess you're only as good as your last game but to imply it was some overall trend is absolutely false. The recipe this season was limiting turnovers, playing good defense, shooting well, making opportunistic plays. It got them within a fraction of an inch of the Final Four. All those things are repeatable too and now there's room to grow with faceoffs and offensive efficiency.
I'm thinking maybe the reason they brought in the Yale middies was to help out on clears, groundballs and face-off wings.
I think Hackler played wing on FOs and had like 30 gbs last season for Yale.
I will say this staff does seem to be in tune with what the team needs and able to go out and get it.
Beefing up the Face-off and Goalie rooms were priorities.
Degnon, Angelus, Ierlan, Szuluk, Peshko, and Martin were huge losses but the cupboard is not bare next year.
This is a good ppt about the yale guys. Martin/Aviles/Jaronski struck me as better cover guys than gb guys.
As a group last seasons' SSDMs were excellent on-ball and 2-man defenders (Martin especially). They were limited in terms of generating transition and early offense opportunities (not a criticism, just not their biggest strength). I think bringing Montfort and Hackler in is a nod to improving that element of the game.
Jaronski had some nice moments in transition. Martin seemed like he preferred to calm things down after crossing the mid-line. Aviles can get up and down in a hurry but couldn't hit the ocean from a boat and I feel like the coaches told him to chill after a few shots sailed into the ether.

At some point they need to unleash Kilrain in the transition game. That kid wants to GO. Between Smith and Kilrain they've got two defensemen who can really put the other team's transition D in a bind. And Deans had 5 pts in 10 games last year so we know he's capable too. Add in the Yale guys and there are definitely pieces to make some noise in transition. Whether or not the staff leans into that philosophically is another question.
nyjay
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:12 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by nyjay »

HopFan16 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:20 pm At some point they need to unleash Kilrain in the transition game. That kid wants to GO. Between Smith and Kilrain they've got two defensemen who can really put the other team's transition D in a bind. And Deans had 5 pts in 10 games last year so we know he's capable too. Add in the Yale guys and there are definitely pieces to make some noise in transition. Whether or not the staff leans into that philosophically is another question.
Agree on Kilrain and Deans. I'm not sure I want to really set Smith loose though. I have some questions about his ball security and decision making in transition. He had 14 TOs last year (the same as his number of CTOs), which was fifth on the team. I love him as a cover guy, but would probably prefer he stay home and let other guys do the running. For comparison, Kilrain had 5 TOs, Szuluk had 4, Jaronski and Martin had 2 each and Deans had one.
User avatar
HopFan16
Posts: 6049
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by HopFan16 »

nyjay wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 2:22 pm
HopFan16 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:20 pm At some point they need to unleash Kilrain in the transition game. That kid wants to GO. Between Smith and Kilrain they've got two defensemen who can really put the other team's transition D in a bind. And Deans had 5 pts in 10 games last year so we know he's capable too. Add in the Yale guys and there are definitely pieces to make some noise in transition. Whether or not the staff leans into that philosophically is another question.
Agree on Kilrain and Deans. I'm not sure I want to really set Smith loose though. I have some questions about his ball security and decision making in transition. He had 14 TOs last year (the same as his number of CTOs), which was fifth on the team. I love him as a cover guy, but would probably prefer he stay home and let other guys do the running. For comparison, Kilrain had 5 TOs, Szuluk had 4, Jaronski and Martin had 2 each and Deans had one.
Agree to an extent, he got himself into some trouble after clearing it himself. But part of that is because he cleared it himself so often. He's one of the few elite cover guys in the country who can *also* just run by people in the clearing game. I don't think you want to lose that aspect of his game entirely. And I feel like the majority of those turnovers weren't actually mid-transition attempt, but rather came after he crossed the midline and then didn't know what to do with it. The times when he's got a full steam ahead in more obvious transition opportunities, he rarely turned it over. But yeah maybe as the Yale guys come in and Kilrain gets more comfortable, there will be less of an onus on Smith to feel like he needs to do it himself.
nyjay
Posts: 1150
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 2:12 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by nyjay »

HopFan16 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 2:28 pm
nyjay wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 2:22 pm
HopFan16 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:20 pm At some point they need to unleash Kilrain in the transition game. That kid wants to GO. Between Smith and Kilrain they've got two defensemen who can really put the other team's transition D in a bind. And Deans had 5 pts in 10 games last year so we know he's capable too. Add in the Yale guys and there are definitely pieces to make some noise in transition. Whether or not the staff leans into that philosophically is another question.
Agree on Kilrain and Deans. I'm not sure I want to really set Smith loose though. I have some questions about his ball security and decision making in transition. He had 14 TOs last year (the same as his number of CTOs), which was fifth on the team. I love him as a cover guy, but would probably prefer he stay home and let other guys do the running. For comparison, Kilrain had 5 TOs, Szuluk had 4, Jaronski and Martin had 2 each and Deans had one.
Agree to an extent, he got himself into some trouble after clearing it himself. But part of that is because he cleared it himself so often. He's one of the few elite cover guys in the country who can *also* just run by people in the clearing game. I don't think you want to lose that aspect of his game entirely. And I feel like the majority of those turnovers weren't actually mid-transition attempt, but rather came after he crossed the midline and then didn't know what to do with it. The times when he's got a full steam ahead in more obvious transition opportunities, he rarely turned it over. But yeah maybe as the Yale guys come in and Kilrain gets more comfortable, there will be less of an onus on Smith to feel like he needs to do it himself.
Fair - I don't want him to loose the aggressiveness, but would like him to maybe be a little more cautious about running himself into double teams along the sidelines past the midline.
User avatar
HopFan16
Posts: 6049
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 1:22 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by HopFan16 »

Degnon is absolutely shredding his PLL debut — 4 goals in the first three quarters. Could have used one of those late against UVA, Garrett! :D
PotomacRiver
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 19, 2024 11:02 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by PotomacRiver »

51percentcorn wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 8:14 am Great post Potomac ... I would add a wrinkle to your conclusions. The observation that Hopkins was a slow tempo - deep in the shot clock team - not "hunting shots" as our UVA friend put it---- cannot be disputed. Therefore, it WAS a coaching philosophy decision. The observation is correct - what is 100% incorrect is that a simple decison to change dodging philosophy would have altered the trajectory of the season. What folks should focus on is the WHY it was that way - not just some snippy comment from QK - but explain why this might be so. I am NOT saying PM and JC are geniuses and obviously made all the right calls but there is clearly - clearly - justification for what transpired. Crawley's reputation as a player was that he never saw a shot he didn't like so I am not sure this is exactly how we wants the offense to look. I posted something to this effect before but again here are the reasons they chose the path they chose:
- The two most effective dodgers to be a threat to score and give out a dime from 2023 were almost unquestionably Melendez and English - one was hurt and lost for the year very early on - the other's production decreased by 50% (Melendez took 29 fewer shots - shot percentage went down by 10 points) despite starting every game on pretty much exactly the same team. Again, whether itwas injuries to his legs, quickness lost to strength training, loss of confidence or the pu pu combo platter - that's the you know what in the punch bowl - you had a starting attackman with 27 points.
- The rest of team were not great dodgers - that's a fact as you accurately assess in your detail
- They were not great at face-offs - what they were great at was 6v6 defense with finally a high quality goalie behind them. Long - minimally invasive possessions had the following benefits: Potential for tiring the opposing defense (hence maybe some of the 4th quarter rallies) and giving rest to your defense so they are fully prepared and not gasping for air and potentially avoiding runs where the opponent plays make it take it.
- They were also halfway decent at shooting - In the top 8 on the stat sheet - Grimes was the worst shot percentage at 28%. Cliches exist because sometimes they are true and Hopkins was clearly a team that looked for an optimal shot vs the first one. The longer you go into the shot clock a philosophy could be that the defense will make a mistake - the defender will be slow to get out on Degnon as he slips to his spot etc. etc.

So IMO - it is 100% accurate to say Hopkins was a very slow tempo team- call it minimially invasive if you will if you want to be a jerk and affirm whatever issue you have with the team you played for. What is ridiculous is to suggest that they simply had to decide to be different. As if all of us could decide to play in the NBA and it would be so. The coaches made a decision based on personnel to give the team the best chance ITO to succeed. They went 11-5 - lost to a semifinalist by 1 goal - lost to get to the semifinals by 1 goal in Double OT - Lost two other games by one goal (1 in OT and the other to a quarterfinalist) and had one clunker by 3 goals to an NCAA tournament team. This off 4-9 and 7-9 two and trhee seasons ago. Seems to me they judged it pretty well.
Oh - then there's this - another cliche that happens to be true but hindsight is 20/20 and Monday morning quarterbacking is never wrong in the eye of the beholder. I am as guilty as anyone byt very very few of us - maybe none - ever watched a practice - ever sat in a film session - ever attended a coaches meeting - so you know better about what the team should do?
100% agree with this assessment
PotomacRiver
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun May 19, 2024 11:02 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by PotomacRiver »

HopFan16 wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 1:20 pm
At some point they need to unleash Kilrain in the transition game. That kid wants to GO. Between Smith and Kilrain they've got two defensemen who can really put the other team's transition D in a bind. And Deans had 5 pts in 10 games last year so we know he's capable too. Add in the Yale guys and there are definitely pieces to make some noise in transition. Whether or not the staff leans into that philosophically is another question.
Kilrain one of the better longpoles off the ground and with ball in his stick I've seen at Hopkins in a while, and only going to get better. If he weren't so damn good at close defense, I'd love to see him play more LSM like earlier in the season because easier to get upfield after turnovers/saves playing up top.
DocBarrister
Posts: 6656
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:00 pm

Re: Johns Hopkins 2025

Post by DocBarrister »

HopFan16 wrote: Thu Jun 06, 2024 8:53 am Potomac is a hugely welcome presence on this forum and there are some good points being made here but I'm not sure why anyone is discussing this in good faith with Mr. Triple Team. Not worth it. Even with the guy on ignore I can tell he's derailing every attempt to talk about anything else simply by seeing the username pop up literally five times in a row.

norcal makes a good point about faceoffs — I'm of the opinion you can never have too many options in this era of lacrosse. Especially with the rules possibly changing again — who knows if that will affect certain guys' ability to win draws. Better to have options. If Ramsey's got a clean bill of health, his numbers are good and he's got two former teammates at Homewood already, it makes sense.

BUT I don't think it's necessary. Callahan is already a 50% guy. Ideally you'd like him above that — maybe he will be as he was his freshman year — it's a decent place to start at worst. You're already bringing in an experienced 60% guy from D3, will he stay at 60% in D1, probably not but there's reason to expect he can be a capable 1B. And then you bring in Hobot, our first UA/NB All-American faceoff guy in I don't know how long. You've got to assume he will contribute, perhaps in a major way. FO is one position where we've seen freshmen come in and immediately be The Guy.

The underdiscussed part of this is wing play. Have to get better there. My hope is DiCicco/Eye and the Yale guys will help. The FO mediocrity was absolutely a drain on the offense. If we're winning 55% instead of 48%, something tells me there'd be less hand-wringing about the offense.
Hey, at least Mr. Triple Team knew that one purpose of dodging was to draw a slide. You clearly didn’t know that, which was pretty shocking actually.

DocBarrister 8-)
@DocBarrister
DocBarrister
Posts: 6656
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:00 pm

Re: My Decade Long Campaign For An Aggressive Defense

Post by DocBarrister »

PotomacRiver wrote: Wed Jun 05, 2024 10:46 pm
DocBarrister wrote: Wed Jun 05, 2024 9:30 pm A lot of you folks are giving me a hard time about urging the Hopkins offense to get more aggressive. You say I’m delusional despite QK and other writers saying pretty much the same thing.

You give me a hard time about saying Collison should dodge more. But some of you (HopFan16) say Collison has first team AA potential (and I agree), but then don’t really say what that next step is.

Tell me, how many first team AA middies are out there who can’t dodge. I’m delusional because I think Collison can dodge? Something he did spectacularly from time to time. Some of you have some real issues with reality.

Fact is, Collison does have first team AA potential. Division I coaches see that. Frankly, I think that’s one reason he made third team AA this year (I think his play merited HM AA). But he is never going to achieve first team AA if he doesn’t dodge more frequently and aggressively. Being a cutter and setting picks isn’t going to make him a top Division I middie.

This reminds me of how much grief I got for pushing Petro to adopt a more aggressive takeaway defense that causes turnovers, prevents shots from even being taken, and pushes transition offense. It was a running joke around here.

And after more than a decade of pushing for an aggressive defense? Pretty much every top team plays aggressive defense, although styles can differ. Hopkins plays an aggressive defense now. Even Petro’s UNC defense causes turnovers at a pretty good clip.

I was right a decade ago and I got a lot of grief for it.

So … maybe I should have earned a bit of trust when I say (and Quint says) that the Blue Jays need a more aggressive offense. More early offense when opportunities arise (we saw a bit of that in the NCAA tournament). More aggressive dodging from the middies (saw a bit of that against Lehigh). I think Quint is right … Blue Jays need to be less conservative and more aggressive on O if they ever want to reach the Final Four again.

That’s not delusional. That’s just common sense.

I was right about aggressive defense. I’m pretty sure I’m right about the O and I’m not alone in my view.

Biggest win of 2024? Virginia, regular season, when the Hopkins middies went wild on the Cavaliers.

Case closed.

DocBarrister
Haven't looked at the forum in a few days but just glancing back at the last few pages of posts, things seem to have devolved a bit, everyone isn't as far apart on this as it seems. I don't think anyone would disagree that the Hopkins offense, particularly in the back half of the season, was lacking in its ability to reliably generate offense in 6v6 sets and this was largely because of a lack of effective dodging. Hence Quint's "minimally invasive" comments during gamecast. However, there is a disagreement over the cause of this problem: A) Hopkins was limited by its personnel vs B) the personnel was there but the coaches were holding them back. Let's get into specifics here...my general impressions player by player:

Angelus: Great feet, quick change of direction. Lacks straight line speed to consistently challenge D1 poles to score or draw a slide, but could occasionally sneak one in if defender out of position/caught napping. When switched onto a shortie, quick enough to be a scoring threat and looked to go to the goal more often this year when presented with that matchup. However, still more of an opportunistic passer/orchestrator of the offense; even when switched onto short stick, teams generally seemed to be inclined to let the matchup play out rather than send quick slide. Sometimes that would burn them, but preferable to early sliding that allows ball movement to an open Degnon.

Melendez: Not the same player as last year; sometimes would show flashes of quickness but looked a step slow. More than that though, mostly very passive with the ball in his stick. Interestingly in last UVA game, some of our early best offense was getting Melendez switched onto a SSDM; in those handful of matchups he was a real scoring threat, but we kind of moved away from that. Hard to know exactly what was going on with him this year (injury, confidence, both). But when healthy, a player who can pose a legitimate threat to go to goal against a pole, and a "red alarm" player for the defense against a short stick.

Degnon: Power shooter. Best with feet set on left wing sniping off of ball movement, but added wrinkle to his game sweeping to his left from up top with an on ball pick that could free up his hands for a couple seconds. Those plays looked spectacular when they worked, but if you watch possession-to-possession, he shot the ball straight into goalie stick on many of those. Another added wrinkle to his game was winding up for shot from the left wing, but faking and bringing stick across his body to get inside and then do a slick finish. Overall more a beneficiary of ball movement rather than sometime who initiates ball movement.

Bauer: Pretty fast and quick. Good passer and always dodges with head up. Not a huge threat to score 1v1 against a pole, but can run by shortsticks. I will say he often does seem to dodge to pass, rather than dodge to score but ready to pass the ball in event of a slide. Should be quite productive next year if he doesn't draw the pole.

Grimes: Strong shot, big but neither quick nor fast and mostly goes to his left. Was main dodger on 2nd midfield line, as he often drew shortstick. Despite his size, often easily pushed off balance. Struggled to beat shortsticks and defenses would just do a quick hedge slide+recover without anyone really rotating.

Peshko: Same as above but right handed. Slightly more pep in his step, so off ball movement could sometimes beat a shortie who wasn't broken down into proper defensive stance and go to goal.

Chauvette: Pure shooter, neither fast nor quick nor strong. But lightning fast release and can pick corners.

Collison: The tough one. Big, strong, and has a powerful left handed shot. Average straight line speed, below average quickness. Because of his size, doesn't need to outright beat his man to get a shot off. Really wants to get to his left hand. His freshman year, one of his most effective plays was dodging against shortstick from behind the goal and then getting above goal line extended for a question mark dodge back to his left hand for quick shot; teams are now ready for that and send a quick double to his back before he turns left. From up top, teams force him to his right hand down the alley and hedge from the crease + have a strong slide ready to his blind side in case he turns back left. Otherwise on lefty sweep dodges across the top, the SSDM would really overplay his left. Struggles dealing with double teams; either tries to do too much and runs into the double for turnover, or attempts hero pass rather than pass adjacent to allow quick ball movement. He absolutely can dodge, but a big area for improvement is passing out of doubles and better anticipation of where the slides are coming from (reflected in being 2nd on team in turnovers despite not being the main dodger). If he can improve in that area over the summer/fall ball, could absolutely have a 1st team AA-type season.

In short, I think there's an intermediate here. I mostly see a team of skilled players, but lacking in elite dodging threats...though for different reasons. The coaches don't want to sabotage the team, and they aren't stupid. I'd be shocked if they purposely are holding back an elite dodging threat just for giggles. The offense simply didn't have a lot of effective dodging threats this year, some due to just physical/talent limitations, and others because they need to grow a bit more as 6v6 lacrosse players. But again, I don't think it's controversial at all that for us to have success next year, Collison will have to play a bigger role as both initiator and scorer, just needs to improve a few things. I'm certainly rooting for him to do so.
Excellent perspective.

Look, part of my point is that you don’t need “elite” dodging to have effective dodging. Collision is not an “elite” dodger like Harrison or Rabil was, but he doesn’t have to be in order to be effective. You are right when you say he “absolutely can dodge.” Dodging needs to be a bigger part of his game, and the coaches need to work more on making Collison’s dodging a part of the offense. And not just Collison … the middies in general.

Collison and other middies don’t need to beat their man (or two or three or even four) in order to be effective dodgers. They just need to make the opposing D move … make them turn and take half a step … that’s often enough.

Here’s what I see as a typical Collison (or other Hopkins middie) HM AA play:

Take a pass while covered with a SSDM. Pass to a teammate who is covered by a long pole. Set a pick for teammate. Teammate dodges and draws a double team. Teammate throws back to Collison who catches the pass, shoots, and scores. Score enough like that … HM AA. A good role player. Truth be told, you don’t need a 6ft 4in 225 lb midfielder for that role.

Here’s a play that would make Collison a first team AA:

Take a pass on the high wing while covered by a SSDM. Initiate a hard wing dodge, drawing three defenders. Before they crush him, pass to a teammate high on the opposite wing. Teammate passes to another teammate who is free on the crease, who scores.

In that second play, Collison wouldn’t even get a point on the stat sheet, but he’s the one who basically generates the goal by initiating the dodge. THAT is a first team AA play. Don’t need elite speed for that. What he does need is to be enough of a proven dodging threat to get the opposing D’s immediate attention.

Collison doesn’t really merit that attention now. Opponents know he will not dodge most of the time. That’s by design.

As Potomac says, Collison “absolutely can dodge.” He can get better at moving the ball (or shooting) off the dodge, but he needs more reps (more dodges) in games to build those skills.

He’s not the only one who can do that. Pretty much all the middies can. Don’t need elite dodgers. Just need to have them dodge more frequently and more aggressively. Passing aimlessly on the perimeter won’t cut it. Tulip Ball won’t cut it.

DocBarrister
@DocBarrister
Sagittarius A*
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 7:38 pm

Re: My Decade Long Campaign For An Aggressive Defense

Post by Sagittarius A* »

DocBarrister wrote: Fri Jun 07, 2024 11:29 pm
Here’s a play that would make Collison a first team AA:

Take a pass on the high wing while covered by a SSDM. Initiate a hard wing dodge, drawing three defenders. Before they crush him, pass to a teammate high on the opposite wing. Teammate passes to another teammate who is free on the crease, who scores.

In that second play, Collison wouldn’t even get a point on the stat sheet, but he’s the one who basically generates the goal by initiating the dodge. THAT is a first team AA play. Don’t need elite speed for that. What he does need is to be enough of a proven dodging threat to get the opposing D’s immediate attention.

Collison doesn’t really merit that attention now. Opponents know he will not dodge most of the time. That’s by design.

As Potomac says, Collison “absolutely can dodge.” He can get better at moving the ball (or shooting) off the dodge, but he needs more reps (more dodges) in games to build those skills.

He’s not the only one who can do that. Pretty much all the middies can. Don’t need elite dodgers. Just need to have them dodge more frequently and more aggressively. Passing aimlessly on the perimeter won’t cut it. Tulip Ball won’t cut it.

DocBarrister
Collison was a clutch player this year. He came up big and scored the winning goal in a couple close games last year.
You have a lot of dodgers next year, English, Ayers, Bauer, and Melendez, you don't necessarily need Collison to do that.
While he's capable of generating his own shot, the thing he needs to do is move the ball before he get's doubled or tripled. This turns a potential turnover into a potential scoring opportunity.
Collison is capable of becoming a force, but he also needs to fit into the scheme of a motion offense especially with quick dodgers like English, Ayers, and Bauer who can get open and draw slides.
I would definitely like to see this group push transition next year especially with elite shooters like Melendez and H. Chauvette at attack who can can open looks.
Post Reply

Return to “D1 MENS LACROSSE”