LaxPower Back-Up Stick

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 1:51 pm

nyjay wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 1:21 pm No idea how this is going to play out, but having JK and Fernandez has to be an enormous benefit given the increased importance of wing play with the new rules. I also tend to think the type of f/o guy we have helps - both Prouty and Newreski are the more athletic type rather than the real bruisers. Would think that will be of benefit. New rules wouldn't have been great for the Hunter Morelands of the world. We just need one more wing guy (how good was Hawley? - don't think he was terrible, but can't say he really stuck out to me).

It was a small sample size and the bar is pretty low but statistically speaking Hawley was on his way to having the best season off the wing for any short stick since Tinney. 11 GBs through 4 games—that’s the equivalent of 41 over a 15-game season. And he came to Homewood as an attackman...theoretically there is an untapped higher potential ceiling as a wing/transition middie with more development.

Cody Ince might also help out on the wing. He’s not big and still kind of raw but he’s lightning fast and smooth off the ground. His 2019 McDonogh highlights are on YouTube.

I loved watching that Hawley kid play. He’s good.

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:46 am A person who supported Trump for president has no business judging me on anything, lacrosse or otherwise.

Let's try to keep politics out of the lacrosse forums.

admin wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:25 pm

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:46 am A person who supported Trump for president has no business judging me on anything, lacrosse or otherwise.

Let's try to keep politics out of the lacrosse forums.

Yeah, let’s do that.

DocBarrister

Hawley hustles and is scrappy. He definitely earned his spot on the wing regardless of who his uncle is. He contributed well.

nrthcrosslax wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:40 am Hawley hustles and is scrappy. He definitely earned his spot on the wing regardless of who his uncle is. He contributed well.

Makes ya wonder if there are others who are on the bench that didn’t have the benefit of an uncle on his way out determined to get the kid some time. Maybe some bigger athletic guys who look great getting off the team bus might be able to hustle and come up with a GB.

51percentcorn wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 2:27 pm The magic number of kids that plays in a competitive game is almost always 23-24. Trot out a 3rd face-off guy or an attackman gets a personal foul maybe 25.
Just break it down by position - in this day and age you likely NEED the following:
- 3 goalies
- 3 F/O
- 7 attack - probaby could get away with 6 and have one of your 3rd/4th line mids play scout if there's an injury but let's go with 7
- 3 LSMs
- 4 SSDMs
- 7 close defense - some can get runs in practice at scout LSMs
That's 27
Now add 12 middies - way more than you really need - and there you have 39

how many proven ncaa tournament quality players do we have on our roster right now that would fill out this list. The goalie, the lsm we got, murphy, prouty, a narewski, epstein, degnon w/the 2s. I thought we'd see more kids in and out by now. Some cleveland state ssdm who sleeps dreaming up strategies to grab gbs that got overlooked because he plays in ohio. Really not interested in another year of "development" for the colwells, reinsons, williams, zinn, desos.

Glad we're staying out of the politics. Not big on all the emails I'm getting from homewood, but that's for dms. They're picking sides.

jhu06 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:21 pm Really not interested in another year of "development" for the colwells, reinsons, williams, zinn, desos.

I'm sure the coaching staff will take your interest into account.

jhu06 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:21 pm They're picking sides.

Good.

flalax22 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:11 pm

nrthcrosslax wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:40 am Hawley hustles and is scrappy. He definitely earned his spot on the wing regardless of who his uncle is. He contributed well.

Makes ya wonder if there are others who are on the bench that didn’t have the benefit of an uncle on his way out determined to get the kid some time. Maybe some bigger athletic guys who look great getting off the team bus might be able to hustle and come up with a GB.

I get this sentiment but at the end of the day, Petro DID try to get more of these so-called "bigger athletic guys" into the mix this season. Lyne, Lilly, McManus, Degnon all qualify as big dudes who barely played prior to 2020 and were suddenly thrust into important roles this spring. Maybe they weren't the exact right guys, or maybe they weren't developed well (Degnon is a major exception), but there did appear to be an effort made. I agree though it does make you wonder a bit if a talent like Degnon was not being utilized, what other guys might surprise. Then again—Degnon also put the work in to get better.

jhu06 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:21 pm Really not interested in another year of "development" for the colwells, reinsons, williams, zinn, desos.

It did seem like both Zinn and DeSimone seemed to regress from their freshman years to their sophomore seasons and beyond.
Sophomore slumps, or too much pressure?
Maybe more afraid of making mistakes?
I guess we could speculate on this all day long but it will be interesting to see how the new staff utilizes or doesn't utilize these players.

Breaking: Concannon to Hofstra for a grad year.

Good leadership by JHU alums Quint Kessenich and Paul Rabil.

Quint: https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... -all/56503

Rabil: https://twitter.com/PaulRabil/status/12 ... 63778?s=20

JHUFan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:17 pm Breaking: Concannon to Hofstra for a grad year.

Good luck to the kid. Gets to play close to home. Hope he can stay healthy for them and contribute.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:58 pm

JHUFan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:17 pm Breaking: Concannon to Hofstra for a grad year.

Good luck to the kid. Gets to play close to home. Hope he can stay healthy for them and contribute.

Academically speaking- Concannon will now have an undergrad degree from Hopkins, along with 1 masters, as well as a masters from Hofstra correct?

houndace1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 9:02 am

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:58 pm

JHUFan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:17 pm Breaking: Concannon to Hofstra for a grad year.

Good luck to the kid. Gets to play close to home. Hope he can stay healthy for them and contribute.

Academically speaking- Concannon will now have an undergrad degree from Hopkins, along with 1 masters, as well as a masters from Hofstra correct?

Not sure why it really matters, but, no, I believe Concannon just graduated from JHU this spring.

They are starting to introduce the incoming class on Twitter and Instagram. Here's the first one: https://twitter.com/jhumenslacrosse/sta ... 3244481538

Also don't think this has been discussed here yet but Steele Stanwick is leaving the women's program. And before someone says it—no he's not switching to the men's team. Don't know where he's headed.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 11:46 am

houndace1 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 9:02 am

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:58 pm

JHUFan wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 9:17 pm Breaking: Concannon to Hofstra for a grad year.

Good luck to the kid. Gets to play close to home. Hope he can stay healthy for them and contribute.

Academically speaking- Concannon will now have an undergrad degree from Hopkins, along with 1 masters, as well as a masters from Hofstra correct?

Not sure why it really matters, but, no, I believe Concannon just graduated from JHU this spring.

They are starting to introduce the incoming class on Twitter and Instagram. Here's the first one: https://twitter.com/jhumenslacrosse/sta ... 3244481538

Also don't think this has been discussed here yet but Steele Stanwick is leaving the women's program. And before someone says it—no he's not switching to the men's team. Don't know where he's headed.

Don’t remember the previous regime introducing recruits on social media. Interesting change.

I heard SS is the new DOLO

The increased openness and use of social media is a very welcome change. Under the ancien regime, the roster would get posted when, January? Definitely gives us something to talk about and should make the team/program slightly more relevant and known within the school, Baltimore and lacrosse community as a whole. Probably helps with recruiting as well. Really happy to see it. A much more modern approach. So much for the Bellicheck influence.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:35 pm

jhu06 wrote: ↑Mon Jun 08, 2020 2:21 pm They're picking sides.

Good.

Bad.



Which is to say -- while I haven't seen the particular emails 06 is referring to -- universities should as a rule avoid identifying themselves with particular political positions or causes. It undermines public confidence in the neutrality and reliability of the university's scientific and scholarly output, and risks confusing students about the need to approach complex topics in an open-minded, exploratory spirit.

This is all the more true when the positions in question are ones supported by a majority of the university's stakeholders, as the added weight of an official institutional endorsement may tend to inhibit researchers from exploring less obvious alternatives or raising inconvenient questions -- precisely the role that we should especially want universities to fulfill.

The only email I've received was from Daniels (co-signed by the dean of the med school), via the Alumni Association, with the subject line "Johns Hopkins Stands in Solidarity Against Racism and Inequity." The body of the email was mostly platitudes you've heard before, with promises to open lines of dialogue, an announcement of some kind of symposium to continue discussing these issues, and a reminder to JHU students and staff of the resources available to them. There was no endorsement of any kind—nothing about specific protest tactics or political goals—beyond "let's not be racist."

If you think the university can't take the side of "racism is bad," you're completely lost. I wouldn't want to associate myself with any school that refused to do so out of some misguided, absolutist commitment to neutrality. Every leading school has come out with a comparable statement in the last few weeks. jhu06 is making it sound like Daniels is forcing students to sign up for Antifa 101.

I'm pretty sure the researchers are all still able to do their research.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 11:46 am
Also don't think this has been discussed here yet but Steele Stanwick is leaving the women's program. And before someone says it—no he's not switching to the men's team. Don't know where he's headed.

Future VMI head coach Steele Stanwick?!

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 1:41 pm The only email I've received was from Daniels (co-signed by the dean of the med school), via the Alumni Association, with the subject line "Johns Hopkins Stands in Solidarity Against Racism and Inequity." The body of the email was mostly platitudes you've heard before, with promises to open lines of dialogue, an announcement of some kind of symposium to continue discussing these issues, and a reminder to JHU students and staff of the resources available to them. There was no endorsement of any kind—nothing about specific protest tactics or political goals—beyond "let's not be racist."

I'll certainly believe you on that. Like I said, I did not see the email(s). If that's your position, though, I think the correct response to jhu06 would have been "No, what they're doing isn't taking sides in any meaningful sense." Not "They're taking sides and I'm glad for it," which is what I objected to.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 1:41 pm I'm pretty sure the researchers are all still able to do their research.

I think this last line rather misses the point. I would submit that you're lost along a slightly different path if you can't see the way researcher incentives to pursue a contrarian position on an ideologically charged issue might be affected by strong signals of formal or informal institutional support for a particular party line. Whether JHU's messaging crosses into that territory, or is as vacuous and noncommittal as you say, is a different question.

I'm happy to take this up further, though probably not a good topic to escalate on the public thread; feel free to PM me if you'd like.

Homer wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 2:26 pm

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 1:41 pm The only email I've received was from Daniels (co-signed by the dean of the med school), via the Alumni Association, with the subject line "Johns Hopkins Stands in Solidarity Against Racism and Inequity." The body of the email was mostly platitudes you've heard before, with promises to open lines of dialogue, an announcement of some kind of symposium to continue discussing these issues, and a reminder to JHU students and staff of the resources available to them. There was no endorsement of any kind—nothing about specific protest tactics or political goals—beyond "let's not be racist."

I'll certainly believe you on that. Like I said, I did not see the email(s). If that's your position, though, I think the correct response to jhu06 would have been "No, what they're doing isn't taking sides in any meaningful sense." Not "They're taking sides and I'm glad for it," which is what I objected to.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 09, 2020 1:41 pm I'm pretty sure the researchers are all still able to do their research.

I think this last line rather misses the point. I would submit that you're lost along a slightly different path if you can't see the way researcher incentives to pursue a contrarian position on an ideologically charged issue might be affected by strong signals of formal or informal institutional support for a particular party line. Whether JHU's messaging crosses into that territory, or is as vacuous and noncommittal as you say, is a different question.

I'm happy to take this up further, though probably not a good topic to escalate on the public thread; feel free to PM me if you'd like.

Big difference between 'picking sides' in some sort of partisan political sense and picking the "side" against racism and injustice, which is, IMO, fully consistent with a research University's and health system's mission. Saying clearly that "Black Lives Matter", not merely comfortable platitudes, in no way compromises research, including social science research, much less other types of research.

Yes, including "contrarian" research that threatens some sort of prevalent orthodoxy. Such "contrarian" research always faces challenge. That's what makes it "contrarian".

But how ANY institution positions itself in its moral universe is nevertheless important. Perhaps all the more important for the most prominent of such institutions.

Of course, we are all free to disagree!
That too is the mark of a great University.