OuttaNowhereWregget--Redux

[MDlaxfan76]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.

I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.

Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.

I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!

Outstanding post, MDlaxfan. Nice breath of fresh air perspective regarding Charlotte North. Greatly appreciate you weighing in.

I'm not in the camp of anointing North as the "best" at more than what she excels at doing...which is plenty darn special. Fun player to watch, that's for sure. It's terrific that youngsters get a thrill watching her, emulate her 'style'.

However, to be clear, I'd agree with those who prefer an attack who has their eyes up, who involves their teammates in getting the best shot on net. Especially true when the players are all elite and getting the full attack effort to be explosive is a matter of team chemistry, not reliance on individual efforts. Not doing so undermines the team chemistry when there are multiple 'alphas' on the field together...they expect to be involved and, as a coach, I want them all to be...a team with that kind of chemistry is way more explosive, reliably so, than a team with a dominant alpha who repeatedly doesn't involve others when there are opportunities to do so.

I'm much more familiar with the men's side players than the women, but the same dynamics apply.

I just don't think we fans need to assign any negatives about the person's character when it's pretty clear that they are simply doing their best at what they excel at doing...that they don't excel in another aspect is fair to critique as well.

[MDlaxfan76]

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Well said. I personally like the assisted goal, but your point is well taken.

Me too.

[Seacoaster(1)]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

Weeks, wide open, two meters from the cage. A good passer, with her eyes up, makes that play.

[Dr. Tact]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

Weeks, wide open, two meters from the cage. A good passer, with her eyes up, makes that play.

yep

[Wheels,Wheels!]

If I’m the defender I frustrated. You held her, or North holds herself, I a box. Played her topside tough, on both cuts to the center she is still hip to hip. Good defense on an island. Goalie should not move off the pipe. Never move off the pipe with a shooter in that position. Should have made North go far side. Better to force a shot to an offside high save.Also a far side shot brings North’s stick closer to defenders head for an easier dangerous repel call.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

[Can Opener]

The objective of a possession is to end it with a goal and that's what happens here, but that doesn't make this a good play in my book, it's a display of very selfish play that ends with a Hail Maryish shot that goes in.

Not criticizing you, but I couldn't help thinking about an exchange in one of the greatest motion pictures of all time.

Charlie: Unfortunately, the gamble worked. The MiG never got a clean shot... The encounter was a victory, but I think we’ve shown it as an example of what not to do.

Hollywood: Gutsiest move I ever saw, man.

[Madlax59]

Second cutter was very open and CN could have seen her on the next to last roll

maybe. by the time CN was eye to eye with her, the opening was gone. i think...

There's no maybe about it. Defender looks to North, leans in that direction with thoughts of going to double team her and that second cutter heads to the goal and is wide open. An Ortega would've made that pass, a North not so much.

Well, being a team player got her national championship, but not the Tewaaraton award which she should’ve gotten in my opionion . regardless I’m sure she’s happier winning the natty

[Madlax59]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.

I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.

Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.

I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!

I disagree ^ assists to goals and points are not as good as goals them selves . And the flashier the better just look at all the hoopla that is made with breaking goals records over total points records especially when it comes to social media and definitely judging committees.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

I'm planning to upload this entire play from when North receives the pass through the goal continuing through the announcer's comments after. Hoping to have that all done a bit after I get home from work later this afternoon.

As promised...

[Madlax59]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.

I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.

Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.

I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!

Outstanding post, MDlaxfan. Nice breath of fresh air perspective regarding Charlotte North. Greatly appreciate you weighing in.

I'm not in the camp of anointing North as the "best" at more than what she excels at doing...which is plenty darn special. Fun player to watch, that's for sure. It's terrific that youngsters get a thrill watching her, emulate her 'style'.

However, to be clear, I'd agree with those who prefer an attack who has their eyes up, who involves their teammates in getting the best shot on net. Especially true when the players are all elite and getting the full attack effort to be explosive is a matter of team chemistry, not reliance on individual efforts. Not doing so undermines the team chemistry when there are multiple 'alphas' on the field together...they expect to be involved and, as a coach, I want them all to be...a team with that kind of chemistry is way more explosive, reliably so, than a team with a dominant alpha who repeatedly doesn't involve others when there are opportunities to do so.

I'm much more familiar with the men's side players than the women, but the same dynamics apply.

I just don't think we fans need to assign any negatives about the person's character when it's pretty clear that they are simply doing their best at what they excel at doing...that they don't excel in another aspect is fair to critique as well.

LOL you won’t get a pat on the back from OWN on that post !

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.

I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.

Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.

I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!

Outstanding post, MDlaxfan. Nice breath of fresh air perspective regarding Charlotte North. Greatly appreciate you weighing in.

I'm not in the camp of anointing North as the "best" at more than what she excels at doing...which is plenty darn special. Fun player to watch, that's for sure. It's terrific that youngsters get a thrill watching her, emulate her 'style'.

However, to be clear, I'd agree with those who prefer an attack who has their eyes up, who involves their teammates in getting the best shot on net. Especially true when the players are all elite and getting the full attack effort to be explosive is a matter of team chemistry, not reliance on individual efforts. Not doing so undermines the team chemistry when there are multiple 'alphas' on the field together...they expect to be involved and, as a coach, I want them all to be...a team with that kind of chemistry is way more explosive, reliably so, than a team with a dominant alpha who repeatedly doesn't involve others when there are opportunities to do so.

I'm much more familiar with the men's side players than the women, but the same dynamics apply.

I just don't think we fans need to assign any negatives about the person's character when it's pretty clear that they are simply doing their best at what they excel at doing...that they don't excel in another aspect is fair to critique as well.

LOL you won’t get a par on the back from OWN on that post !

I don't find anything I disagree with in the above post by MDlaxfan.

[Madlax59]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

#12 is open, great cut. I don't think North sees her, most likely because she wasn't thinking feed, she was focused hard on getting her shot off.

I disagree with calling North "selfish" or "hoggish", I think she's simply much better at working to get her own shot than she is at setting up others. Her mindset needn't be characterized in a way that is demeaning...she's scoring for her team. An assist is worth just as much as a goal to the record books...but the goal scored is job #1. She's tremendous at doing Job #1.

Now, if one wants to argue that a player with a more balanced approach to scoring is more valuable to a team than one who excels at scoring on her own, that's a different matter.

I don't know any coach who doesn't work with a great scoring attack to have their eyes up when driving to the net, and for the other players to work really hard to be dangerous. Doing so also opens up the field for the driving attack, as it makes it much harder for defenders to 'help' if they're going to get lit up by a back side cut for a very high quality shot opportunity. Some are better at that aspect than others.

But as a coach I'd also encourage my alpha to play that alpha role, forcing opponents to have to defend. And I'd much prefer an error of commission, than omission...so, I'd encourage a full commitment to get one's own shot off. But keep eyes up as much as you can...

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to get hung up on who is "best"...I'd want any of these top gals on my squad!

Outstanding post, MDlaxfan. Nice breath of fresh air perspective regarding Charlotte North. Greatly appreciate you weighing in.

I'm not in the camp of anointing North as the "best" at more than what she excels at doing...which is plenty darn special. Fun player to watch, that's for sure. It's terrific that youngsters get a thrill watching her, emulate her 'style'.

However, to be clear, I'd agree with those who prefer an attack who has their eyes up, who involves their teammates in getting the best shot on net. Especially true when the players are all elite and getting the full attack effort to be explosive is a matter of team chemistry, not reliance on individual efforts. Not doing so undermines the team chemistry when there are multiple 'alphas' on the field together...they expect to be involved and, as a coach, I want them all to be...a team with that kind of chemistry is way more explosive, reliably so, than a team with a dominant alpha who repeatedly doesn't involve others when there are opportunities to do so.

I'm much more familiar with the men's side players than the women, but the same dynamics apply.

I just don't think we fans need to assign any negatives about the person's character when it's pretty clear that they are simply doing their best at what they excel at doing...that they don't excel in another aspect is fair to critique as well.

LOL you won’t get a par on the back from OWN on that post !

I don't find anything I disagree with in the above post by MDlaxfan.

Suurree….

[DMac]

...This play should have ended with a slam dunk from the doorstep goal with an assist coming from North...

I dunno. I don't see so many open players.

I'm planning to upload this entire play from when North receives the pass through the goal continuing through the announcer's comments after. Hoping to have that all done a bit after I get home from work later this afternoon.

As promised...

This changes nothing, stop that video at the 11 second mark and you see a wide open teammate right in front of the cage and it looks like CN is looking right at her. Had her mind made up she was going to shoot and she did.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

I don't find anything I disagree with in the above post by MDlaxfan.

Suurree….

[Dr. Tact]

This changes nothing, stop that video at the 11 second mark and you see a wide open teammate right in front of the cage and it looks like CN is looking right at her. Had her mind made up she was going to shoot and she did.

^^YES^^....I think MDLFAn had it right....if you are the alpha/lone wolf you don't even think about that look. I am not saying that is what I would coach, as the back side layup is a much easier goal than the shot she took.

I also agree that other players see and make that pass. They would know that the constant dodging would set up the back side cut very nicely and it did.

[Can Opener]

Second cutter was very open and CN could have seen her on the next to last roll

maybe. by the time CN was eye to eye with her, the opening was gone. i think...

There's no maybe about it. Defender looks to North, leans in that direction with thoughts of going to double team her and that second cutter heads to the goal and is wide open. An Ortega would've made that pass, a North not so much.

Well, being a team player got her national championship, but not the Tewaaraton award which she should’ve gotten in my opionion . regardless I’m sure she’s happier winning the natty

Nothing against Ortega, but objectively, North walked away from the collegiate game with more accolades. They each have one national championship and one Honda award, but North also has two Tewaaratons and an ACC Scholar Athlete of the Year award. North was also selected to the US national team and won a gold medal, leading the team in scoring.

I am always puzzled by those who question North winning the second Tewy, as if it was the result of a conspiracy or social media hype. (I realize you are not saying that specifically here, Madlax.) The committee has historically favored players who win the national championship in making the award, so for North to win it while her team lost the NC to Carolina is noteworthy. The Tewaaraton selection committee includes luminaries of the sport like Jen Adams, Chris Sailer, Amy Appelt, Jenny Graap, Lindsey Munday, and Hannah Nielsen. The committee also includes North's former Duke coach, Kerstin Kimel. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions about who should win the award, but I have never heard a reasoned explanation for why this group would believe in their hearts that Ortega should win the award, but were swayed by hype or a cabal meeting to give it to North instead.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Well, being a team player got her national championship, but not the Tewaaraton award which she should’ve gotten in my opionion . regardless I’m sure she’s happier winning the natty

Nothing against Ortega, but objectively, North walked away from the collegiate game with more accolades. They each have one national championship and one Honda award, but North also has two Tewaaratons and an ACC Scholar Athlete of the Year award. North was also selected to the US national team and won a gold medal, leading the team in scoring.

I am always puzzled by those who question North winning the second Tewy, as if it was the result of a conspiracy or social media hype. (I realize you are not saying that specifically here, Madlax.) The committee has historically favored players who win the national championship in making the award, so for North to win it while her team lost the NC to Carolina is noteworthy. The Tewaaraton selection committee includes luminaries of the sport like Jen Adams, Chris Sailer, Amy Appelt, Jenny Graap, Lindsey Munday, and Hannah Nielsen. The committee also includes North's former Duke coach, Kerstin Kimel. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions about who should win the award, but I have never heard a reasoned explanation for why this group would believe in their hearts that Ortega should win the award, but were swayed by hype or a cabal meeting to give it to North instead.