Hobart 2024

[Farfromgeneva]

picking up pieces here and there. Sounds like middie is thinner this year than in the past so look for Herlihy coming out of the box this year and maybe Delano getting some runs there as well - maybe even Datellas (hopefully Greene too). There is a freshman attack making a big impact - dropped a few in the net in the first inter-squad last weekend.

Still believe at least one of Greenberg or Delaney will have a surprisingly strong senior year. Also like to think we have 1-2 more between Wimer, DiTomasso, Dino, Belle Walker (hurt last year, was on the U18 team and very athletic) and Peterkin, who got a ton of time last year so the coaches like). So if that come true we should be in good shape. Bach and Considine are locked in. Herlihy, Delano or Greene as third depending on who’s at attack. That leaves a full second line mix of middies, concerted attack and FR which would include:

Rosa (he can shoot from outside)
Delaney
Greenberg
Wimer
Belle Walker
Dino
Peterkin
Whoever ain’t at attack already established
Gullace
Cardianli
FR

Given how tight rotations get under Raymond by week 5-6 anyways we need 4-5 kids after the starters. We should have that.

Curious who’ll be at D. My best guess is Firth (Lock), Galiani and Comelia. But with a FR or Soph goalies that’s a pretty inexperienced crew.

[oldbartman]

Patterson (FR) is the x attackman which we never had. I suspect he will see the field quite a bit, might start. Stillwell (FR) is more of a slasher, can come out of the box. Looks like two different games but I saw them both score a few. And both made some nice passes. The offense looks very strong.

I'll echo FFG comments. You can throw in Ryan Archer and Tommy Mott who both had great field vision as well as scoring. After the 1st midfield, scoring looks to be an issue. Unless some attackman make the move to middie. Of course this screws up the idea of having real 2 way midfielders. Tim Evnin should be in the mix at attack. He is an ankle breaker who can pass and score.

The real issue is on the back end of the field. Replacing Christiansen and Synott on D won't be easy. Throw in the goalies situation, (which is a clusterf@ck after last sesaon), Who TF knows? After listening to the podcast, the goalie sitiuation is wide open. 2 freshmen seems to be in the mix to start

[man:down]

If Chad Bach is healthy and has the confidence we saw in those 1 or 2 break-out games of his last year (was it Dartmouth), he will carry the midfield. He is a beast when he decides to go to goal rather than peeling off and passing and he is deceptively fast - maybe one of the fastest on the roster- but unfortunately he has back issues that he has not been able to shake. A healthy Bach with Herlihy getting attention should free up Datellas, which is always ab good thing.

At D, don't overlook Duby and Turner. Duby is vert fast and smart (recall his back-up of a late game shot last year that gave Hobart a valuable possession?). He has been a man-down fixture but was also hurt a bunch last year. Turner is just nasty (and sort of mean) which is why he has done well on the faceoff unit.

[oldbartman]

If Chad Bach is healthy and has the confidence we saw in those 1 or 2 break-out games of his last year (was it Dartmouth), he will carry the midfield. He is a beast when he decides to go to goal rather than peeling off and passing and he is deceptively fast - maybe one of the fastest on the roster- but unfortunately he has back issues that he has not been able to shake. A healthy Bach with Herlihy getting attention should free up Datellas, which is always ab good thing.

At D, don't overlook Duby and Turner. Duby is vert fast and smart (recall his back-up of a late game shot last year that gave Hobart a valuable possession?). He has been a man-down fixture but was also hurt a bunch last year. Turner is just nasty (and sort of mean) which is why he has done well on the faceoff unit.

Few if any of us were aware of Bach's back issues. I certainly wasn't. Having healthy Bach, Herlihy and Datellas would create a lot of scoring opportunities and open up the offense to a lot more contributors. It would be great if Duby and Turner can step into starting roles. We seem to have a good amount of poles that can play. We just need a couple to make that next (big) step up.

[brodad]

2023 middie Colden Swisher from Burnt Hills is also an AA.

[Ketch]

I saw at one point that we were scheduled to scrimmage at Binghamton. Is that still on?

[Farfromgeneva]

I saw at one point that we were scheduled to scrimmage at Binghamton. Is that still on?

Raymond mentioned it on the podcast for 10/21. Drexel, Bing, Bart

[315lax]

@ Binghamton University 10/21
Drexel at 2 and Binghamton at 4

[FMUBart]

1/27 UVM scrimmage in the Poole dome

[315lax]

https://nilclub.com/hobart-college/mens-lacrosse

[Farfromgeneva]

https://nilclub.com/hobart-college/mens-lacrosse

So this isn’t ideal to ask anywhere let alone here and I literally just saw Pres Gearan and the Prof who runs the Mgt program but can these be isolated or is there a way to determine need individually or is it only pooled?

And is there any frictions between money in and money out? I have zero interest in paying into a system where a third party extracts any more than necessary operating costs to collect and distribute this dough. Of the colleges or program outsourced this to a third party business and the pull through is less than 85% that’s a challenge for me. And Ive seen the colleges outsource with poor results before.

Love the idea and appreciate it being shared here but those are the things id need to see before blindly throwing money in. For me particularly Id hate to see some silly rent extracting Andreeson Horowitz or Kleiner Perkins backed start up taking a big scrape and feeing it up with some overengineered product.

[Farfromgeneva]

Buddy shared this on some Bart interviews

https://www.instagram.com/p/CyS_kSpLUoC ... ZlMjE5YQ==

[Ketch]

@ Binghamton University 10/21
Drexel at 2 and Binghamton at 4

Just want to confirm these times with you. I have a habit of showing up at the wrong times for things and I definitely don't want to miss this!

[315lax]

@ Binghamton University 10/21
Drexel at 2 and Binghamton at 4

Just want to confirm these times with you. I have a habit of showing up at the wrong times for things and I definitely don't want to miss this!

As of yesterdays communication to the parents, this is still accurate.

[Farfromgeneva]

I’d love to believe it’s the most heralded class we’ve ever had but more likely how they changed the system.

So does IL realize if everyone not named a 4-5 star is three if they send a few bucks their way makes all 3 starts irrelevant and worthless as a signal?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiti ... rt/30/2024

Nice looking group but doesn’t exactly stand out yet compared with some from a few years back who graduated and/or transferred around 20-22.

[kramerica.inc]

I’d love to believe it’s the most heralded class we’ve ever had but more likely how they changed the system.

So does IL realize if everyone not named a 4-5 story is three if they send a few bucks their way makes all 3 starts irrelevant and worthless as a signal?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiti ... rt/30/2024

Nice looking group but doesn’t exactly stand out yet compared with some from a few years back who graduated and/or transferred around 20-22.

Yes and No. They do rank 3*s outside of the pay to evaluate. And there are pay to evaluates who have ranked higher than 3*.

It's been my experience, that If you end up as a 3*, you've probably played a lot of lax. And you probably love the sport. Which is a real good thing, if you want to play in college.

But 3*s are generally a kid who is pretty talented, but lack 1 or 2 things that the top programs are looking for:

Size, stick, athleticism, IQ, proven experience against top talent, leader for a top team.

You might play for a top team, but not be the leader.
You might be a leader, but not on a top team.
You might be an athletic freak, but cant pass a stickwork test.
You might be 6'5" and rangy on close defense, but have feet like cinderblocks on change of direction.
You might run the field well, but have no clue (IQ) what to do in transition. Or be lost in team defense.

You get the idea.

[Farfromgeneva]

I’d love to believe it’s the most heralded class we’ve ever had but more likely how they changed the system.

So does IL realize if everyone not named a 4-5 story is three if they send a few bucks their way makes all 3 starts irrelevant and worthless as a signal?

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/recruiti ... rt/30/2024

Nice looking group but doesn’t exactly stand out yet compared with some from a few years back who graduated and/or transferred around 20-22.

Yes and No. They do rank 3*s outside of the pay to evaluate. And there are pay to evaluates who have ranked higher than 3*.

It's been my experience, that If you end up as a 3*, you've probably played a lot of lax. And you probably love the sport. Which is a real good thing, if you want to play in college.

But 3*s are generally a kid who is pretty talented, but lack 1 or 2 things that the top programs are looking for:

Size, stick, athleticism, IQ, proven experience against top talent, leader for a top team.

You might play for a top team, but not be the leader.
You might be a leader, but not on a top team.
You might be an athletic freak, but cant pass a stickwork test.
You might be 6'5" and rangy on close defense, but have feet like cinderblocks on change of direction.
You might run the field well, but have no clue (IQ) what to do in transition. Or be lost in team defense.

You get the idea.

Yeah and some can transcend the perceived limitation or grow through it later in life (Scottie Pippen, the growth spurt part not his ability to create a football team by dancing at a club). So how to distinguish?

Some Syracuse fans think Desko didn’t care that much about Jamie Archers kid because he had another smaller similar attack man and there were plenty to choose from in CNY. Ryan did ok. Won’t cite kids that went the other way but they exist.

It seems like the tradeoff our staff has made when given the choice of approach/methodology skews towards 2-4 on the list more than 1&5. Though we’ve had some 2nd slide challenges last number of years as well.

BTW did you see my sisters comment on Berkeley? Figured you’d get a kick out of that.

[Ketch]

Took in the scrimmages yesterday. All three teams, Drexel, Binghamton, and Hobart, were pretty evenly matched. I don't know much about Drexel, but Binghamton is a much improved team from the past. I think that we may have outscored both teams slightly. The scoreboard was reset after each quarter, so I lost track. But anyway, this is what I took away from the lineup (315, I'm sure you were there, so please correct me if I'm wrong). Starters:
Attack-Barthelme, Dattelas, and Delano, with a healthy dose of #11 (don't know who he was).
Midfield-Herlihy, Bach, and Considine.
Defense-Firth, Comella, and Galliani (if he was the #43). Unfortunately, it appeared that #43 blew out his knee against Binghamton, so there's our first injury loss of the year.
Goal-Wilson.
Fogo-Shea.

Some others:
Second midfield-Rosa, Peterkin, and whoever was wearing #27 (Chad Bach is now #0). Also saw a lot of Michael Cardinali. I have to ask where he's been hiding, because he is a fantastic player.
SSMS-Gullace, Dino, Race, Wimer. Can't remember who else as a lot of players saw the field. Wimer really impressed.
Goal-Subbed a new goalie each quarter. Loukas was goalie #2 on the day, but I thought that the other two played a little better. That being said, Wilson is clearly the starter at this point.
LSM-Duby and Turner were both very good. Don't know who is behind them.
Fogo: Both Schofield (#26?) and the apparent freshman looked good. We're going to have some depth at Fogo this year.

Scrimmages are very difficult to judge because players are wearing different numbers and there are so many comings and goings, but I will say that the team as a whole played well. Offensively, we've got a lot of weapons, so I don't see scoring as a problem. Let's just keep our fingers crossed regarding injuries. Defensively, I thought we looked good, if not even better than in the past. I think that Wilson was very solid in goal, and Firth is just a great player. It's a shame that one of the starting defensemen went down with injury. He was obviously in a lot of pain out there so have to figure it's season-ending.

I sat with some old Hobart friends. Great to see them. They also were pleased with what they saw. Remarked that Hobart is still a relatively small team, but very fast. So we are what we've been. Still managed to match up with the beefiness of both Drexel and Binghamton. That bodes well since we'll see a lot of beef in the A10.

I'd be happy to answer any specific questions as best I can.

[Farfromgeneva]

Took in the scrimmages yesterday. All three teams, Drexel, Binghamton, and Hobart, were pretty evenly matched. I don't know much about Drexel, but Binghamton is a much improved team from the past. I think that we may have outscored both teams slightly. The scoreboard was reset after each quarter, so I lost track. But anyway, this is what I took away from the lineup (315, I'm sure you were there, so please correct me if I'm wrong). Starters:
Attack-Barthelme, Dattelas, and Delano, with a healthy dose of #11 (don't know who he was).
Midfield-Herlihy, Bach, and Considine.
Defense-Firth, Comella, and Galliani (if he was the #43). Unfortunately, it appeared that #43 blew out his knee against Binghamton, so there's our first injury loss of the year.
Goal-Wilson.
Fogo-Shea.

Some others:
Second midfield-Rosa, Peterkin, and whoever was wearing #27 (Chad Bach is now #0). Also saw a lot of Michael Cardinali. I have to ask where he's been hiding, because he is a fantastic player.
SSMS-Gullace, Dino, Race, Wimer. Can't remember who else as a lot of players saw the field. Wimer really impressed.
Goal-Subbed a new goalie each quarter. Loukas was goalie #2 on the day, but I thought that the other two played a little better. That being said, Wilson is clearly the starter at this point.
LSM-Duby and Turner were both very good. Don't know who is behind them.
Fogo: Both Schofield (#26?) and the apparent freshman looked good. We're going to have some depth at Fogo this year.

Scrimmages are very difficult to judge because players are wearing different numbers and there are so many comings and goings, but I will say that the team as a whole played well. Offensively, we've got a lot of weapons, so I don't see scoring as a problem. Let's just keep our fingers crossed regarding injuries. Defensively, I thought we looked good, if not even better than in the past. I think that Wilson was very solid in goal, and Firth is just a great player. It's a shame that one of the starting defensemen went down with injury. He was obviously in a lot of pain out there so have to figure it's season-ending.

I sat with some old Hobart friends. Great to see them. They also were pleased with what they saw. Remarked that Hobart is still a relatively small team, but very fast. So we are what we've been. Still managed to match up with the beefiness of both Drexel and Binghamton. That bodes well since we'll see a lot of beef in the A10.

I'd be happy to answer any specific questions as best I can.

Any bigger athletic kids look like they could be two way middies and contribute by seasons end like Wimer or Dino or others.

And how did Peterkin look when he had the rock? By season end last year he seemed to not be in the play when we had the ball on O and he was out there vs early in last season but clear the coaches like him.

[Bartfromboston]

I heard Binghamton looked much improved but we still had our way with them. I heard Bach looked good. I heard defense was pretty good as well. I heard a couple of freshman (11 and 12) scored. I also heard LSMs were solid. Sounded like a nice start.