LaxPower Back-Up Stick

The reason you see more time for the 1s relatively speaking is TOs for TV. I heard two top coaches comment at different times say there is no need to run as many middies as years ago because TV

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 1:04 pm Far, that's my question. So Hobart is running 5 As on offense. My question is... Why do we call them As? Why do we call the 6th O guy an M?

If the 6th guy is Zach Currier or Ryan Conrad, why not? Do you have a better term for capturing the range of things those players are asked to do vs. a Jordan Wolf or a Ryan Brown?

I think I'd lean less to eliminating the distinction between A and M than to talking in terms of A/M splits other than 3/3. Just like you can talk about various versions of nickel/dime in football rather than insisting that WILL and SS need to be considered the same position, etc.

Homer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:00 pm Do you have a better term for capturing the range of things those players are asked to do vs. a Jordan Wolf or a Ryan Brown?

Ryan Conrad is unique. He's a SSDM who stays on the offensive end and scores goals. For some players, they're harder to name. But, for the rest, why not just call all offensive players Offensive players.

ohmilax34 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:29 am This is interesting. Does anyone know of a team that gives different terms (than attack and midfield) to its offensive players based on their roles within the offense. I suppose it could change based on the offense they are running.

For instance a team that starts most of their offensive possessions with a high wing dodge from an offensive player being guarded by a shortstick. Does that offensive player's role have a name?

This is a good question. I don't specifically know if/how many teams use different terminology (like in soccer where you see positions referred to by numbers to represent where a player might be found or what role they might play instead of using position names), but you do hear coaches, even during interviews, referring to where players are on the field (i.e., GLE, at X, high wing, etc.) regardless of what the program might list that player's position. Since I follow the Terps more closely than other programs, I'm not sure if Tillman talks about Bubba Fairman as an A or M as much as he (and Bubba himself) talks about where Bubba is on the field based on the offensive set. The Terps did the same thing when Connor Kelly was listed as a midfielder but never left the field and would play pretty much all over the offensive half of the field given whatever set the Terps were in.

Pat Spencer was the same at Loyola in terms or positioning himself all over the offensive half of the field. Some of the Penn St players like this, too.

Interesting. A position being where the player works from on the field. If nothing else, that's more accurate than As and Ms.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:09 pm

Homer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:00 pm Do you have a better term for capturing the range of things those players are asked to do vs. a Jordan Wolf or a Ryan Brown?

Ryan Conrad is unique. He's a SSDM who stays on the offensive end and scores goals. For some players, they're harder to name. But, for the rest, why not just call all offensive players Offensive players.

ryan conrad played virtually zero defensive middie last year.

Understood. The point is that Conrad did everything. He was a middle. This is not the case for the vast majority of "middies".

Middies are responsible for getting back on defense in transition and preventing fast breaks, that's why they most often play up top on offense. This responsibility changes how they play the game in comparison to an attackman who does not have this responsibility. They are also responsible for clearing the ball and do a lot more work between the lines than an attackman or a defenseman does, even if they are primarily an offensive middie. The game of lacrosse is not just offense/defense. There is a whole third part of the game/field which is restraining line to restraining line.

Good point. Transition.

If you got away from A vs M labeling, perhaps those who are the Attack guys would go over the midfield and call Middie back just like the long pole they are chasing. I don’t understand why you let the guy have a free fast break at the midfield line. When I played if my guy cleared over the midfield line, I followed calling Middie back. All players need to be aware of what’s happening on the field and not just blindly heading towards the substitution box.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 10:06 am Why do we even have these two names any more? Why not just "O"? I understand that there are moments when a d-player wins the ball and becomes an O-player and 3 of the formerly O-players (who are now D-players) sprint back onto D and these are typically "middies" while the 3 other formerly O-players stay on O and these are typically "attackmen" and... Is that really why we differentiate between attackmen and middies? Where a player prefers to attack the cage, from in front of or behind the cage? Seems to me that calling Attackmen, attackmen and calling O middies, O middies is just a vestige from years long ago. At best, a reminder of what position the kid played in high school. (When middies are substantially more likely to play both ways. i.e. When middies actually play middy.) Lefty and Righty seems more meaningful than Attackman and Middie. And that's not very meaningful.

I think there’s still enough of a difference in roles so that the distinction is still useful and makes sense.

Nevertheless, when I see Joey Epstein occasionally following an opposing player into the defensive end, and a lot of converted attackmen playing middie, I agree things are getting blurred.

DocBarrister

I was an attack man back in the day (crease attack to be exact) If I played now my pronoun would be Attack, he or Him

wgdsr wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:31 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:09 pm

Homer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:00 pm Do you have a better term for capturing the range of things those players are asked to do vs. a Jordan Wolf or a Ryan Brown?

Ryan Conrad is unique. He's a SSDM who stays on the offensive end and scores goals. For some players, they're harder to name. But, for the rest, why not just call all offensive players Offensive players.

ryan conrad played virtually zero defensive middie last year.

Conrad would be tied for THIRD for CTO's (caused TO's ) if he were on a certain Charles st. defensive hasbeen. Just sayin..

Rhymes with Blue Jay

ABV 8.3% wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2019 4:33 pm

wgdsr wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:31 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:09 pm

Homer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 10, 2019 11:00 pm Do you have a better term for capturing the range of things those players are asked to do vs. a Jordan Wolf or a Ryan Brown?

Ryan Conrad is unique. He's a SSDM who stays on the offensive end and scores goals. For some players, they're harder to name. But, for the rest, why not just call all offensive players Offensive players.

ryan conrad played virtually zero defensive middie last year.

Conrad would be tied for THIRD for CTO's (caused TO's ) if he were on a certain Charles st. defensive hasbeen. Just sayin..

Rhymes with Blue Jay

Ryan created turnovers off of wing scrums. He didn't play much 6 v 6 defense. Terrific player.

You can also get a CTO on a ride. If Lax Fi were here, he would have stats at his fingertips, but my impression was that the shot clock seemed to give added incentive to riding.

jersey shore lax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2019 3:02 pm I was an attack man back in the day (crease attack to be exact) If I played now my pronoun would be Attack, he or Him

Low key amazing post!

rolldodge wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2019 9:47 am Middies are responsible for getting back on defense in transition and preventing fast breaks, that's why they most often play up top on offense. This responsibility changes how they play the game in comparison to an attackman who does not have this responsibility. They are also responsible for clearing the ball and do a lot more work between the lines than an attackman or a defenseman does, even if they are primarily an offensive middie. The game of lacrosse is not just offense/defense. There is a whole third part of the game/field which is restraining line to restraining line.

Coaches are obliged to prepare for the worst.

What happens if, when running your offense, there is a turnover that leads to a fast break?

Well, you need to have offensive players generally positioned closer to the midfield line who can sprint back and play D until the specialists get rotated in. This is the way to throttle transition goals.

Therefore, you look for offensive players who can attack from up top and ALSO can defend against a fast break the other way when you recruit. These are called "O-Middies".

Pure attackmen aren't expected to be any use at stopping a 4 (or 5) on (hopefully) 4 transition opportunity. They're recruited and deployed because of their ability to score goals and/or generate offense.

Maybe he's not big enough, or not fast enough, or not constitutionally inclined to race back and ride someone who is poised to shoot, but a guy who can't defend well on his defensive side of the field is labeled an attacker. If he's a guy who can sprint back to defend against a fast break now and then, he's an O-Middie.

I agree with the premise of this thread, that this definition has been blurred for a decade. As far as I can see, my explanation is the new definition.