Johns Hopkins 2020

[steel_hop]

I think the discussion on Hopkins selling itself is off on the wrong tracks, at least with respect to H16's post.

He originally was stating that 2021 recruits were still signing up even though Petro doesn't have a contract. He wondered whether the recruits and their parents have been told something we don't know.

My point was simply that players certainly base their decisions on the fact Petro is there but their decisions are also based on the fact it being Hopkins. This is also to say some recruits have no interest in Hopkins for their own reasons.

This would be the same at any school. Starisa had no problems bring kids in to UVA when he was in his last year of his contract...and many of the key components of their title team this year committed to UVA when Starisa was the coach.

[51percentcorn]

Destination schools include at least Duke, VA, Yale, NC and possibly PSU and Cornell thought it takes time to for perception to catch reality.

Don't look now but destination schools have won 7 of the last 10 national championships. Personally, I think Ithaca is too cold to base a "destination" school. Penn State is fairly remote but with 40 K undergraduates (more than half women) and all the toys - football team 109K fanatics 6-7 times a year, Pegula Ice Center, basketball arena that hosts major concerts etc etc. Their lacrosse team is going to be fairly lethal that's for sure. Probably have to look at Columbus and Ann Arbor in the same light.

You can take issue with the IL rankings all you want, but it's a fact that Hopkins is landing more than its fair share of the most sought-after kids. Perhaps it's been a battle behind the scenes, I wouldn't know, but the end result is that Petro is getting many of his guys.

Well then is this is an indictment on Petro as a coach? If they are getting more than their fair share of the most sought after kids and many of his guys - Why the 62% winning percentage over the last 10 seasons, why 58% over the last 5? Why the first losing season since 1971 in 2010? Why the 3 worst losses in Hopkins playoff history (that includes the 2009 season)? Only Duke has owned Hopkins since 2010 amongst the "destination schools". Hopkins had a bad streak against Carolina but has won 2 of the last 3 so the 59 losses have not come on the backs of the destination schools per se.

[HopFan16]

Well then is this is an indictment on Petro as a coach? If they are getting more than their fair share of the most sought after kids and many of his guys - Why the 62% winning percentage over the last 10 seasons, why 58% over the last 5? Why the first losing season since 1971 in 2010? Why the 3 worst losses in Hopkins playoff history (that includes the 2009 season)?

I mean...yeah. Pretty much.

I've long been on record that I think most of the issues facing the team of late are personnel/development related. At this risk of sounding like a broken record, they had a 6'3'', 200 lb freaking gazelle at midfield who can shoot 100 mph and they refused to let him actually play offense at a position that was sorely lacking in the size, speed, and athleticism departments. This player was ranked #7 in the class and I've been told chose Hopkins over Virginia and several Ivies. We've had some of the worst goaltending in D1 lacrosse the last 5 years. It takes 10 seconds of Googling to find the article where Giacalone says he was also considering Maryland, UNC, and Penn State. Somehow he languishes on the bench for three years while other guys post sub-45% numbers? That's coaching, not recruiting. You got the player. Put him in, coach. Don't want to harp on DeSimone much longer because I think we've all discussed that plenty but he was a top 3 recruit—every single school in the country wanted him—he picked Hopkins, had a somewhat promising freshman year, then fell off a cliff. How does that happen? Again—not recruiting, IMO. Would the same thing have happened at UVA or Duke or Maryland? Maybe. Maybe not.

[a fan]

If they are getting more than their fair share of the most sought after kids and many of his guys - Why the 62% winning percentage over the last 10 seasons, why 58% over the last 5?

Same reason Desko disappeared from Final Fours. And Breschi. And Starsia. And Tierney the last two seasons, for that matter.

Other programs are getting better players. And I don't know anyone can watch a season of D1 games and not come to the same conclusion.

[HopFan16]

Like clockwork. Whisper "recruiting" three times in front of a mirror and a fan will appear.

No one has ever argued that Hopkins is getting better players than every single other school. Some schools have gotten better players in the last decade. Duke is certainly one of those teams.

The argument is that Hopkins should be performing better than they have been relative to the talent they have acquired through recruiting. Season-long results do not always precisely match the talent level of players. It's incredibly myopic to think that it always does, and that there are no other factors that might go into how seasons ultimately turn out.

It wasn't very long ago that Hopkins had a two-time Schmeisser Award winner for goodness sake. I don't have the data in front of me (though I'm pretty sure it's been posted in this thread before) but if you were to count the number of All-Americans per team since Hopkins last made a championship game in 2008, I believe the Jays would be in the top 5—certainly in the top 10. In 2011 they had 6, including two 1st teamers and two 2nd teamers. None of those guys ever made a final four. They had 16 from 2016-2019, a period that resulted in a single NCAA win (which was an OT miracle, at home, against a team with fewer All-Americans, that hadn't been to the NCAA tournament in a decade).

[Dip&Dunk]

So you asked for this given your multitude of other posts on basically this subject (stats don’t match reality): so what you are really saying is there is an unfounded bias towards Blue Jay player’s awards that does not reflect what matters most: championships?

[OCanada]

I am left wondering how Cornell won three titles in the 70s and lost a bid for a fourth in the finals with all that bsd weather.

[HopFan16]

so what you are really saying is there is an unfounded bias towards Blue Jay player’s awards

[DMac]

I am left wondering how Cornell won three titles in the 70s and lost a bid for a fourth in the finals with all that bsd weather.

For those not familiar with NY weather talk slang, that's bullschidt disgusting, it does get a little rough in these here parts.
One L would be entertained, OC.

[51percentcorn]

in the 70s

3 key words

I am not trying to insult Cornell - been there more than once. Drop dead gorgeous school and area and a sheepskin from there is obviously prized. Though they have played in a few final fours in more recent times their last Ship was 42 years ago. Not my fault they blew the 2009 game with bad coaching decisions. Just not sure it is a "destination" lacrosse school.

[DMac]

Yes it is.

[a fan]

The argument is that Hopkins should be performing better than they have been relative to the talent they have acquired through recruiting. Season-long results do not always precisely match the talent level of players.

So you can tell how they do just based on Inside Lacrosse ratings of their recruiting classes?

Great.

Then you can easily tell me where Hopkins should finish next year, because you already have the IL rankings, right?.

So how about it? Where will they finish?

....and don't forget to add in your "argument" about how Petro making the underperform.

In other words, tell us where Hop "should" finish.

Then tell us, based on how horrible Petro is at coaching, where Hop will actually finish.

[OCanada]

Under the weather theory Cornell should not have won three titles and lost in a fourth final. Doesn’t matter how long ago it was Weather is better, so to speak, than it was back then.

[jhu06]

Hopkins Struggles because of-development, recruiting, coaching, is the chicken or the egg convo of this board.

Xanders runs the rankings numbers-if he has it right Hop has as many top 100 jrs as the socon, patriot, america east, caa, maac and nec conferences combined. For some reason the words shared on this board aren't overshadowing a top 10 university education, top tradition, nationally televised weekly games, connections, amazing wolman cafeteria food, sweet jerseys, d level, grade inflation, amazing lacrosse facility, elite conference affiliation, excellent school band, and whatever else they pitch.

"The last few weeks have been awfully kind to the Blue Jays, as Dave Pietramala and his staff corralled three Top 25 recruits on the defensive side of the ball in just a 10-day span. "

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... bers/55477

Towson and loyola have put together really nice programs, not sure why they're not getting more kids.

[HopFan16]

Towson and loyola have put together really nice programs, not sure why they're not getting more kids.

Can never tell when you're being facetious but they're not in the same stratosphere academically. You know this

Though according to Petey B. the Wise, Loyola has the greatest recruiting class in history coming in this year so I guess we'll see.

In other words, tell us where Hop "should" finish.

Then tell us, based on how horrible Petro is at coaching, where Hop will actually finish.

Note I didn't say Petro is "horrible" at coaching—but to take your argument to its logical conclusion, apparently he is utterly infallible and bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for how his team performs. Coaching does not exist, it is a figment of the imagination. There is no such thing as strategy, X's and O's, player development, film, scouting, matchups, teaching, learning, improvement, motivation, personnel decisions. None of these things are real. Once players join a team, the entire season plays out in a simulation. Whatever the final rankings are, that's also exactly how cumulatively talented each team was. No team with more talent has ever lost to a team with less talent in the history of sport. If that happens, that means that the team that won in fact had more talent. It is thus impossible to lose a game with more talent.

[OCanada]

Is bing matters but the first ruke is you have to have the athletes. There are a larger number of schools that can compete but if all that matters is winning the title then it is still restricted to a small percentage of schools. The same as in other sports.

Which takes you back to who is on the roster and what variables can be controlled and which are beyond control. The game has changed dramatically over the last 20 years or so. So too have the advantages shifted for a number of reasons some unique to individual schools.

DP has proven he can coach at LC, Cornell where he restored the program and at Hopkins. The idea he can’t coach is hogwash. That is true of Desko and Tierney and Meade and others.

I don’t read anything from anyone who watches the practices everyday and knows the game well enough to draw valid conclusions.

More like denial and an incapacity to accept change and reality. Not unlike Navy a number of years ago.

Zinn needs to start right away. Why? Because IL. You don’t run a team based on IL player rankings. You run a team based on what occurs in practices, in film rooms, in conditioning etc etc. God forbid anyone should look at issues like injuries, suspensions, people in key positions who need to communicate loudly on the field but just can’t get there.

It’s like the Titanic and the iceberg. Most see less than 10% of the iceberg so really have no clue what it looks like. Not surprising because there is no way they could know. But they are perfectly willing to pretend they do. It’s what some % of fans do.

I haven’t seen or heard any evidence the team is upset with how it’s being run. There are always going to be a few individuals or parents that are annoyed.

One reason, maybe the primary one, is no other top program really wanted to deal with dad.

Speaking of which I don’t hear much talk about parents role in decision making. JHU had a first team AA whose younger brother wanted to play for JHU. His mother said no he was going to go to X. Parental influence is not always well make your decision and we will support whatever you decide

[Dip&Dunk]

Hopfan: well played.

[ohmilax34]

Towson and loyola have put together really nice programs, not sure why they're not getting more kids.

Can never tell when you're being facetious but they're not in the same stratosphere academically. You know this

Though according to Petey B. the Wise, Loyola has the greatest recruiting class in history coming in this year so I guess we'll see.

In other words, tell us where Hop "should" finish.

Then tell us, based on how horrible Petro is at coaching, where Hop will actually finish.

Note I didn't say Petro is "horrible" at coaching—but to take your argument to its logical conclusion, apparently he is utterly infallible and bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for how his team performs. Coaching does not exist, it is a figment of the imagination. There is no such thing as strategy, X's and O's, player development, film, scouting, matchups, teaching, learning, improvement, motivation, personnel decisions. None of these things are real. Once players join a team, the entire season plays out in a simulation. Whatever the final rankings are, that's also exactly how cumulatively talented each team was. No team with more talent has ever lost to a team with less talent in the history of sport. If that happens, that means that the team that won in fact had more talent. It is thus impossible to lose a game with more talent.

It's recruiting. JHU hasn't gotten Sowers, Spencer, Ament, Kraus, Bernhardt, Heningburg, Garnsey, Nanticoke, Fields, O'Keefe, Moore, Reeves, Morrill. Not only that, they still haven't recruited the next Matt Bocklet (they didn't recruit him either).

It's coaching. Look at Desimone regressing, Cole Williams not reaching his potential (still has one season), the experienced defense that can't defend. The JHU Stanwicks never were as good as Steele.

Obviously, it isn't just one thing, so if we can treat this like the complicated situation that it is, then we might have a better discussion. They are getting SOME great recruits, but they've missed out on some players who've really dominated in college (see list above). I think everyone would love to have Epstein on their team. Just because JHU won 2 titles, doesn't mean the current coaching staff is as good as the coaching staffs of their CURRENT competitors. Sure, they are good coaches, just like all NFL coaches are good coaches, but the Patriots still win every year. OCanada would probably bring up injuries to complicate things even more. Maybe that's a (S&C) coaching thing.

[Lenwood117]

Towson and loyola have put together really nice programs, not sure why they're not getting more kids.

Can never tell when you're being facetious but they're not in the same stratosphere academically. You know this

Though according to Petey B. the Wise, Loyola has the greatest recruiting class in history coming in this year so I guess we'll see.

In other words, tell us where Hop "should" finish.

Then tell us, based on how horrible Petro is at coaching, where Hop will actually finish.

Note I didn't say Petro is "horrible" at coaching—but to take your argument to its logical conclusion, apparently he is utterly infallible and bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for how his team performs. Coaching does not exist, it is a figment of the imagination. There is no such thing as strategy, X's and O's, player development, film, scouting, matchups, teaching, learning, improvement, motivation, personnel decisions. None of these things are real. Once players join a team, the entire season plays out in a simulation. Whatever the final rankings are, that's also exactly how cumulatively talented each team was. No team with more talent has ever lost to a team with less talent in the history of sport. If that happens, that means that the team that won in fact had more talent. It is thus impossible to lose a game with more talent.

It's recruiting. JHU hasn't gotten Sowers, Spencer, Ament, Kraus, Bernhardt, Heningburg, Garnsey, Nanticoke, Fields, O'Keefe, Moore, Reeves, Morrill. Not only that, they still haven't recruited the next Matt Bocklet (they didn't recruit him either).

It's coaching. Look at Desimone regressing, Cole Williams not reaching his potential (still has one season), the experienced defense that can't defend. The JHU Stanwicks never were as good as Steele.

Obviously, it isn't just one thing, so if we can treat this like the complicated situation that it is, then we might have a better discussion. They are getting SOME great recruits, but they've missed out on some players who've really dominated in college (see list above). I think everyone would love to have Epstein on their team. Just because JHU won 2 titles, doesn't mean the current coaching staff is as good as the coaching staffs of their CURRENT competitors. Sure, they are good coaches, just like all NFL coaches are good coaches, but the Patriots still win every year. OCanada would probably bring up injuries to complicate things even more. Maybe that's a (S&C) coaching thing.

So glad my kid is not playing for Hopkins, the way you put down kids on your own team is a disgrace.

[Catbird]

Towson and loyola have put together really nice programs, not sure why they're not getting more kids.

Can never tell when you're being facetious but they're not in the same stratosphere academically. You know this

Though according to Petey B. the Wise, Loyola has the greatest recruiting class in history coming in this year so I guess we'll see.

In other words, tell us where Hop "should" finish.

Then tell us, based on how horrible Petro is at coaching, where Hop will actually finish.

Note I didn't say Petro is "horrible" at coaching—but to take your argument to its logical conclusion, apparently he is utterly infallible and bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for how his team performs. Coaching does not exist, it is a figment of the imagination. There is no such thing as strategy, X's and O's, player development, film, scouting, matchups, teaching, learning, improvement, motivation, personnel decisions. None of these things are real. Once players join a team, the entire season plays out in a simulation. Whatever the final rankings are, that's also exactly how cumulatively talented each team was. No team with more talent has ever lost to a team with less talent in the history of sport. If that happens, that means that the team that won in fact had more talent. It is thus impossible to lose a game with more talent.

It's recruiting. JHU hasn't gotten Sowers, Spencer, Ament, Kraus, Bernhardt, Heningburg, Garnsey, Nanticoke, Fields, O'Keefe, Moore, Reeves, Morrill. Not only that, they still haven't recruited the next Matt Bocklet (they didn't recruit him either).

It's coaching. Look at Desimone regressing, Cole Williams not reaching his potential (still has one season), the experienced defense that can't defend. The JHU Stanwicks never were as good as Steele.

Obviously, it isn't just one thing, so if we can treat this like the complicated situation that it is, then we might have a better discussion. They are getting SOME great recruits, but they've missed out on some players who've really dominated in college (see list above). I think everyone would love to have Epstein on their team. Just because JHU won 2 titles, doesn't mean the current coaching staff is as good as the coaching staffs of their CURRENT competitors. Sure, they are good coaches, just like all NFL coaches are good coaches, but the Patriots still win every year. OCanada would probably bring up injuries to complicate things even more. Maybe that's a (S&C) coaching thing.

So glad my kid is not playing for Hopkins, the way you put down kids on your own team is a disgrace.

Guy isn't a Hopkins fan.