LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:33 am In his first 8 years, Petro did great. In his final 12, not as great. What changed?

1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

Shot clock has really exposed weaknesses over the past few years, and contributed to blowout losses.

So if that timeline of 3 weeks is true - are we expecting the new HC to be hired without any on campus interaction? A hire made through Zoom?

dupe post, sry

FlyEaglesFly wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:38 pm So if that timeline of 3 weeks is true - are we expecting the new HC to be hired without any on campus interaction? A hire made through Zoom?

What other choice do they have? We have no idea when campuses will open up again—could be in June, could be in January. You can't risk waiting that long. These kids need a coach.

HopFan16 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:41 pm

FlyEaglesFly wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:38 pm So if that timeline of 3 weeks is true - are we expecting the new HC to be hired without any on campus interaction? A hire made through Zoom?

What other choice do they have? We have no idea when campuses will open up again—could be in June, could be in January. You can't risk waiting that long. These kids need a coach.

I’m not saying they have a choice - was just posing the question on if they’d stick to the 3 weeks? Seems like they would.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:33 am In his first 8 years, Petro did great. In his final 12, not as great. What changed?

I always felt from 09-13 he held on too much to the 00’s style of offense; slowed down, tons of midfield alley dodges, having your big, athletic midfielders run past dudes to initiate the offense. It worked amazing when there was Rabil, Harrison, Kimmel, and Peyser....but when those guys leave and the game is beginning to become more oriented towards X attackmen and having a guy down low who can orchestrate your offense, it becomes outdated. The defense remained great, but the offense floundered.

Then after ‘13 he shifted and the offense became a lot better....but then he totally lost the defense and goaltending, which aside from back end of 2015 and 2018 never got remotely close to being fixed.

He never seemed to be able to put together both sides cohesively in the back end, and then throw in early recruiting miscues that meant they didn’t quite have the same athletes as some of the other top teams and you get what you got.

FlyEaglesFly wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 1:38 pm So if that timeline of 3 weeks is true - are we expecting the new HC to be hired without any on campus interaction? A hire made through Zoom?

Hopkins did their mens basketball interviews via zoom three years ago when they eventually hired Josh Loeffler who has done a good job.

Plus, you can send some aerial photography. See? This is Homewood Field. Stands. Outdated Press Box.

And you can provide a virtual tour of the CLC.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Let me expand on points 2-4, and, in my mind, it has to do with velocity effects. That is, Hop's downward trend accelerated amid the confluence of joining the B1G, the maturity of early recruiting (i.e., the full effects of early recruiting reached a peak), and the introduction of the shot clock.

We can all chunk his record up into whatever time periods we want to fit any argument, so it is kind of arbitrary any way that any of us do it. But if I start looking at 2015 (B1G era) and that 5.5 year period (can call it 6, really), his record is: 49-38. The previous 6 years had his record at: 62-30.

What would we consider the "Early Recruiting Era"? 2011 to 2017? Or would you push that a little bit earlier? How common was it before 2011 to have to many players verbal as a freshman or sophomore? I've been trying to see using the old Google machine, and 2011 appears to be a year where a lot kids verbally committed as freshman (HS seniors in 2015).

The shot clock was introduced in 2019.

Petro had a losing season in 2010 but still made the NCAA tournament. Prior to 2010, he'd never had a team at Hop get bounced from the tournament in the first round. He did that year. Hop missed the tournament in 2013 despite a 9-5 record, which, I would guess, really informed Hop's decision to join the B1G 2 years later. That first year in the B1G, they finished 4-1 in conference and made a Final 4. Then the velocity of their downward trend increased. Early recruiting ended in 2017, leaving Petro with a roster that was filled with...if I read that Hop forum correctly...high skilled, smaller, and less athletic players than other elite programs. UNC, Maryland, OSU, Yale, Syracuse, increasingly PSU, and even programs like Towson were noticeably bigger and more athletic than Hop's teams as early recruiting reached its peak and then went away.

Add the shot clock in 2019, and Hop's lack of size and athleticism became a real problem, especially in the B1G. Other schools, even the Ivies, plugged more roster holes through transfers than did Hop.

So was it simply just joining the B1G that caused the downward trend? Or was it the interaction of recruiting misses in early recruiting without really plugging and playing with xfers combined with joining the B1G that sped up the decline? The shot clock made it all worse.

So that's my narrative. Am I sticking to it? Eh...if someone else has a better story to tell that conforms to data, I'm all ears.

i

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:46 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Let me expand on points 2-4, and, in my mind, it has to do with velocity effects. That is, Hop's downward trend accelerated amid the confluence of joining the B1G, the maturity of early recruiting (i.e., the full effects of early recruiting reached a peak), and the introduction of the shot clock.

We can all chunk his record up into whatever time periods we want to fit any argument, so it is kind of arbitrary any way that any of us do it. But if I start looking at 2015 (B1G era) and that 5.5 year period (can call it 6, really), his record is: 49-38. The previous 6 years had his record at: 62-30.

What would we consider the "Early Recruiting Era"? 2011 to 2017? Or would you push that a little bit earlier? How common was it before 2011 to have to many players verbal as a freshman or sophomore? I've been trying to see using the old Google machine, and 2011 appears to be a year where a lot kids verbally committed as freshman (HS seniors in 2015).

The shot clock was introduced in 2019.

Petro had a losing season in 2010 but still made the NCAA tournament. Prior to 2010, he'd never had a team at Hop get bounced from the tournament in the first round. He did that year. Hop missed the tournament in 2013 despite a 9-5 record, which, I would guess, really informed Hop's decision to join the B1G 2 years later. That first year in the B1G, they finished 4-1 in conference and made a Final 4. Then the velocity of their downward trend increased. Early recruiting ended in 2017, leaving Petro with a roster that was filled with...if I read that Hop forum correctly...high skilled, smaller, and less athletic players than other elite programs. UNC, Maryland, OSU, Yale, Syracuse, increasingly PSU, and even programs like Towson were noticeably bigger and more athletic than Hop's teams as early recruiting reached its peak and then went away.

Add the shot clock in 2019, and Hop's lack of size and athleticism became a real problem, especially in the B1G. Other schools, even the Ivies, plugged more roster holes through transfers than did Hop.

So was it simply just joining the B1G that caused the downward trend? Or was it the interaction of recruiting misses in early recruiting without really plugging and playing with xfers combined with joining the B1G that sped up the decline? The shot clock made it all worse.

So that's my narrative. Am I sticking to it? Eh...if someone else has a better story to tell that conforms to data, I'm all ears.

Pretty much whole classes of early recruits ( by that I mean fall commitments of players during their sophomore years of high school ) arrived in 2015 Spring (Tinney, Stanwick, Valis, Bruno etc). There were a couple of late stragglers in that class but it was virtually done in the late fall winter of 2011/12. The pace accelerated after that for everyone pretty much.

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:46 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Let me expand on points 2-4, and, in my mind, it has to do with velocity effects. That is, Hop's downward trend accelerated amid the confluence of joining the B1G, the maturity of early recruiting (i.e., the full effects of early recruiting reached a peak), and the introduction of the shot clock.
...
Petro had a losing season in 2010 but still made the NCAA tournament. Prior to 2010, he'd never had a team at Hop get bounced from the tournament in the first round. He did that year.
...

I still don’t see how that team had a losing record.
Too much talent.
Yes, the Potentially Transformative Class that wasn’t.
Things must have been going on behind the scenes.
Durkin, Wharton, the freshman, Gvozden, experience in the net.
Too much talent.

10stone5 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 6:23 pm

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:46 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Let me expand on points 2-4, and, in my mind, it has to do with velocity effects. That is, Hop's downward trend accelerated amid the confluence of joining the B1G, the maturity of early recruiting (i.e., the full effects of early recruiting reached a peak), and the introduction of the shot clock.
...
Petro had a losing season in 2010 but still made the NCAA tournament. Prior to 2010, he'd never had a team at Hop get bounced from the tournament in the first round. He did that year.
...

I still don’t see how that team had a losing record.
Too much talent.
Yes, the Potentially Transformative Class that wasn’t.
Things must have been going on behind the scenes.
Durkin, Wharton, the freshman, Gvozden, experience in the net.
Too much talent.

Chemistry?

tech37 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 7:21 pm

10stone5 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 6:23 pm

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:46 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Let me expand on points 2-4, and, in my mind, it has to do with velocity effects. That is, Hop's downward trend accelerated amid the confluence of joining the B1G, the maturity of early recruiting (i.e., the full effects of early recruiting reached a peak), and the introduction of the shot clock.
...
Petro had a losing season in 2010 but still made the NCAA tournament. Prior to 2010, he'd never had a team at Hop get bounced from the tournament in the first round. He did that year.
...

I still don’t see how that team had a losing record.
Too much talent.
Yes, the Potentially Transformative Class that wasn’t.
Things must have been going on behind the scenes.
Durkin, Wharton, the freshman, Gvozden, experience in the net.
Too much talent.

Chemistry?

I mean, they only had like 3 scoring threats on offense. Boyle, Kimmel, and Wharton were great but their 4th highest scorer was Palasek who had 20 points in 15 games; Palmer and Ranagan were both freshmen. No real depth either. The defense was very good, but they only scored 10 goals per game and in their losses they scored 10, 6, 7, 6, 7, 9, 8, and 5. 1-3 in 1 goal games too. Mediocre offense + a very tough schedule and you get a meh team.

So for 8 years, they have talent, on O and D. Top of the heap. And then seemingly over-night, for 12 years, the O or D or both are lacking. They qualify for the tourney but either lose after 1 or 2 games. For 12 years. What changed?!

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 11:01 am

Wheels wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:51 am 1) More programs. 2) Conference realignment and expansion. 3) Changes in recruiting. 4) Introduction of the shot clock.

JHU started under-performing in 2009.
1- Other programs improved (and JHU did not improve as much)... Makes sense.
2- JHU joined the B1G in 2015.
3- The biggest Recruiting Changes are a relatively recent phenomena: early recruiting. Besides this, I'm unsure what changed.
4- Shot clock is also a relatively recent phenomena.

Part of the problem here is you're really trying to explain not one discrete event, but a series of successive downturns over a long period of time.

To my mind there are really three distinct questions:

1. What caused the original downturn following the 2005 undefeated title run, from 2006-10?

2. Why did the Transformative Class era, which seemed to have so much promise, end as badly as it did?

3. Why was the initial slight rebound of 2014-15 not sustained, but instead turned into a terminal decline from 2016 onward?


My answer to #1 is mainly "normal cyclical variation." My answer to #3, as I've already tried to make clear, is "early recruiting corrupts, and absolute early recruiting corrupts absolutely."

#2 is the one that haunts me, the one I still don't have a really clear answer to, that seems like it might have been just dumb individual decisions, or just dumb bad luck.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:50 pm So for 8 years, they have talent, on O and D. Top of the heap. And then seemingly over-night, for 12 years, the O or D or both are lacking. They qualify for the tourney but either lose after 1 or 2 games. For 12 years. What changed?!

I mean, it wasn't really "over night." I think you're conflating the last 4 years or so with the entire 12 period and that's not really correct. From 09-13, they did see a downturn in offensive success and proficiency; in 2010 they were 24th in scoring offense, in 2012 they were 25th, and in 2013 they were T14th (not terrible, but with Stanwick, Benn, Ranagan, Brown, Palmer you'd expect better; albeit that was the bizarre rolling suspension year.) 2011 was the one year they did put it all together and were 10th. But largely they were still running the 2002-2008 offense w/ guys who weren't as well built for that as Rabil, Harrison, Kimmel, Peyser, etc. were. The defense though remained as stout as it was during the prime years.

But you're still talking about a 5 year period where the team went 51-25, made 4 NCAA Tournaments, 3 QF's, and was seeded 3rd and 2nd in 2011 and 2012. Turn one of those QF defeats in 11-12 to a win and things look a lot different. The issues is that the win % drops from 81% to 67% and there's no Final Fours after 6 previously.

Then you get the 3rd period starting in 2014, which you could frame as from 2014-2018, or 2014-present. In this period the offense improved dramatically, a Top 10 unit every year basically; they radically overhauled the system and framework and built it around the Stanwicks. However the defense begins to fall off; once Bassett graduates they never get a good goalie again. There's fleeting signs of a good defense, but with the game changing and defense not being played the same way, they fail to adapt.

Still, 2014-2018 is not an unsuccessful period in a vacuum. They're 50-31, win a double Big Ten title in 2015 and a tournament title in 2018, make 5 NCAA Tournaments, 1 Final Four, and 3 QF's. But you start to see some stagnant years creep in - 2016 and 2017 with blowout tournament defeats - and the winning % drops from 67% in 09-13 to 61%.

Then the last two years the bottom falls out. But it's not a massive decline, it's a gradual one that sees the program rarely look on the upswing but slowly and slowly more on the down swing. There's never a period before 19-20 that is bad on the surface, but they're worse than the ones that come before it.

To answer the question of "why?" It's essentially failing to keep up with the times progressively. As the game changed offensively in the early 10's from midfield and alley dodge driven to more behind the cage and run by dominant X attackmen, they stuck with their older ways. As defense changed in the mid-2010's with first the timer on and then the actual shot clock, they couldn't adapt to that and the defense got worse. They didn't take to early recruiting well and took too long to right the course. Gradually, over a period of 12 years, they were too resistant to change and adapting and while it didn't come all at once because they usually changed one thing successfully, they could never get it all together at once enough. And then in 2019 and 2020 it all just starts to finally fall off and a change is made.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Sun Apr 19, 2020 10:50 pm So for 8 years, they have talent, on O and D. Top of the heap

Boy, I disagree with that. You think that Hop had an attack that was on the same talent planet as Duke's in 2010?

There's a reason Duke dropped 18 on Hopkins in the first round this year. And to jog your memory, Duke dropped 17 on UNC the next round.

The issue was never that Hopkins didn't have good players during that span.

The issue was that other teams had better players. I don't understand how folks see it any other way.

The 8 years i'm speaking of was 2001-2009.

Gotcha. I misread your post, sorry.

jrn19 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 12:01 am But it's not a massive decline, it's a gradual one that sees the program rarely look on the upswing but slowly and slowly more on the down swing. There's never a period before 19-20 that is bad on the surface, but they're worse than the ones that come before it.

That's an excellent summary. (As is the whole post IMO).