Middies Wins Championships

[Farfromgeneva]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

[Farfromgeneva]

SSDM Hawkins for Loyola was legit....that shooter was Eric Lusby, along with Sawyer and Ward. Was the games at Navy that day. Mark Matthews was my sons favorite player at the time, his final goal in that game was sexy as hell, when he caught it one handed up in the air, turned and punched it in.

Yes,

Lusby was unreal,
one of my favorite all-time tournament individual runs.

He was a sniper. Had around 55g that year .

[DMac]

Just had a four week sample size of this in the UA Women's Lacrosse League where new teams are chosen each week by team captains. Choosing from the best in the country (minus a few who have now retired) Ally Mastroianni, an absolute workhorse who is a force at both ends of the field and a darn good draw control girl too (a complete player) was chosen number one two out of the four weeks. Charolette North, strictly an offensive player and big threat to score who can also take draws (not dominating there though), was chosen number one two weeks too. The teams that chose Mastroianni first faired better than the teams that chose North first but there's a whole lot more going on there than just those two. Ultimately it was the GK, Moreno, who was crowned the champion though. A good GK is definitely high on the list when choosing a team.

I get, but you can''t compare men's lax to women's lax. They are two completely different sports.

UA women's lacrosse is very similar to mlax (some might see it as the most shining example of wlax's inexorable march to mlax ). 10 v 10, 6 v 6 at each end, 3 v 3 at the draw, no shooting space, no 3 seconds. Draws, possessions, GKs, TOs, CTOs, GBs, etc, equally as important in that game.

Watching my daughter play now as a child the draw is so different. Not to mention the whole not checking thing. She’s the smallest and youngest on her team and has argued with regard twice last spring for getting whistled for illegal checking. I told her it’s fine and she should keep manhandling her older brother int he backyard for practice .

Yes, the mechanics are completely different but the end result is the same in that it's all about who ends up with the ball and that's done after every goal just as in mlax, so there is no difference in that respect. What your daughter is playing and what these gals in UA women's lax play are two very different games. It's pretty physical at that level and the checks you see called at your daughter's level are not called at the pro level. As noted, much to the chagrin of the wlax purists, the pro game is very similar to mlax, all the same things matter in that game.

[Farfromgeneva]

Just had a four week sample size of this in the UA Women's Lacrosse League where new teams are chosen each week by team captains. Choosing from the best in the country (minus a few who have now retired) Ally Mastroianni, an absolute workhorse who is a force at both ends of the field and a darn good draw control girl too (a complete player) was chosen number one two out of the four weeks. Charolette North, strictly an offensive player and big threat to score who can also take draws (not dominating there though), was chosen number one two weeks too. The teams that chose Mastroianni first faired better than the teams that chose North first but there's a whole lot more going on there than just those two. Ultimately it was the GK, Moreno, who was crowned the champion though. A good GK is definitely high on the list when choosing a team.

I get, but you can''t compare men's lax to women's lax. They are two completely different sports.

UA women's lacrosse is very similar to mlax (some might see it as the most shining example of wlax's inexorable march to mlax ). 10 v 10, 6 v 6 at each end, 3 v 3 at the draw, no shooting space, no 3 seconds. Draws, possessions, GKs, TOs, CTOs, GBs, etc, equally as important in that game.

Watching my daughter play now as a child the draw is so different. Not to mention the whole not checking thing. She’s the smallest and youngest on her team and has argued with regard twice last spring for getting whistled for illegal checking. I told her it’s fine and she should keep manhandling her older brother int he backyard for practice .

Yes, the mechanics are completely different but the end result is the same in that it's all about who ends up with the ball and that's done after every goal just as in mlax, so there is no difference in that respect. What your daughter is playing and what these gals in UA women's lax play are two very different games. It's pretty physical at that level and the checks you see called at your daughter's level are not called at the pro level. As noted, much to the chagrin of the wlax purists, the pro game is very similar to mlax, all the same things matter in that game.

Can my daughter skip college and go straight to the pros? It’s funny because she’s tiny out there but o taught her that the ball is hers at all times and she takes her possessions very seriously. Just turned 8 in June..

[Typical Lax Dad]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

[Farfromgeneva]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

I know how good they were but you have to admit there’s an irony in calling for another position to be key and then also agreeing that Malloy going down was the reason they didn’t win a title (which I agree).

I took the question the way WG did more or less. There’s fewer elite or games changing FOGOs out there than Goalies or Attack (certainly the latter) so if building a team and that’s your choice of position to select is go FOGO first.

If adding an over the top piece, and I’m using middie to mean more offers I se maybe some two way but not SSDM, I’m going attack. To others points, great goalies stuck in front of bad defenses don’t do much. I need a reasonable D before I’d be focused on goalie.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

I know how good they were but you have to admit there’s an irony in calling for another position to be key and then also agreeing that Malloy going down was the reason they didn’t win a title (which I agree).

I took the question the way WG did more or less. There’s fewer elite or games changing FOGOs out there than Goalies or Attack (certainly the latter) so if building a team and that’s your choice of position to select is go FOGO first.

If adding an over the top piece, and I’m using middie to mean more offers I se maybe some two way but not SSDM, I’m going attack. To others points, great goalies stuck in front of bad defenses don’t do much. I need a reasonable D before I’d be focused on goalie.

How good would Hobart have been the last couple of seasons if they had had 1st team AA goalie and FOGO?

[HooDat]

I took the question to be what position would you prefer to build your team around.

If you have first pick of all players and an elite player at every position - which do you pick?

For me it is goalie.

You can make up for not having elite players at every other position through better team work. That includes FOGO (the next closest thing), because as long as he can tie up the opposing fogo and get to a 50/50 GB situation, your wings can make up for any shortcomings at FOGO. He doesn't have to be elite, just good enough...

I know people are going to say you can make up for an average goalie with great defensive play, but as a former defenseman, I don't think that is the same thing.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I took the question to be what position would you prefer to build your team around.

If you have first pick of all players and an elite player at every position - which do you pick?

For me it is goalie.

You can make up for not having elite players at every other position through better team work. That includes FOGO (the next closest thing), because as long as he can tie up the opposing fogo and get to a 50/50 GB situation, your wings can make up for any shortcomings at FOGO. He doesn't have to be elite, just good enough...

I know people are going to say you can make up for an average goalie with great defensive play, but as a former defenseman, I don't think that is the same thing.

You can't help a sieve no matter how good you are...

[Farfromgeneva]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

I know how good they were but you have to admit there’s an irony in calling for another position to be key and then also agreeing that Malloy going down was the reason they didn’t win a title (which I agree).

I took the question the way WG did more or less. There’s fewer elite or games changing FOGOs out there than Goalies or Attack (certainly the latter) so if building a team and that’s your choice of position to select is go FOGO first.

If adding an over the top piece, and I’m using middie to mean more offers I se maybe some two way but not SSDM, I’m going attack. To others points, great goalies stuck in front of bad defenses don’t do much. I need a reasonable D before I’d be focused on goalie.

How good would Hobart have been the last couple of seasons if they had had 1st team AA goalie and FOGO?

Hate to say it but with our SSDMs (and general health, way outside of average for injuries to a program) it wouldn’t have mattered. We had one who should’ve been an AA FOGO in 2019 (Pedicine-set the wins in a game record but didn’t get recognition he should've) and we still lost in the conf finals. Our FOGOs have been borderline AA level last five years though. Shea held his own just fine against Cole and Sisselberger this past season.

Goalie play might’ve gotten us into the first round but that’s it. 2020 team is a different animal but they had two 55%+ fogos, one who performed very well for OSU last year, perhaps the reason OSU got a bid because Ignacio was getting waxed by NDs FOGO early and he came in and performed very well (Drew Blanchard-a Pgi beta Kappa at Bart).

But were talking the difference between winning an AQ, maybe pulling a first round upset like Bryant did in 2014, but not winning a championship which is another level. Even that Bryant team had Kevin Massa (and also a AA goalie in Waldy and didn’t current NFL receiver Tom Kennedy play mid on that team?)

[HooDat]

I took the question to be what position would you prefer to build your team around.

If you have first pick of all players and an elite player at every position - which do you pick?

For me it is goalie.

You can make up for not having elite players at every other position through better team work. That includes FOGO (the next closest thing), because as long as he can tie up the opposing fogo and get to a 50/50 GB situation, your wings can make up for any shortcomings at FOGO. He doesn't have to be elite, just good enough...

I know people are going to say you can make up for an average goalie with great defensive play, but as a former defenseman, I don't think that is the same thing.

You can't help a sieve no matter how good you are...

and there is nothing more energizing to a defense than a goalie that can consistently bail you out. You were willing to die for those guys. It just makes everyone play better.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

I know how good they were but you have to admit there’s an irony in calling for another position to be key and then also agreeing that Malloy going down was the reason they didn’t win a title (which I agree).

I took the question the way WG did more or less. There’s fewer elite or games changing FOGOs out there than Goalies or Attack (certainly the latter) so if building a team and that’s your choice of position to select is go FOGO first.

If adding an over the top piece, and I’m using middie to mean more offers I se maybe some two way but not SSDM, I’m going attack. To others points, great goalies stuck in front of bad defenses don’t do much. I need a reasonable D before I’d be focused on goalie.

How good would Hobart have been the last couple of seasons if they had had 1st team AA goalie and FOGO?

Hate to say it but with our SSDMs (and general health, way outside of average for injuries to a program) it wouldn’t have mattered. We had one who should’ve been an AA FOGO in 2019 (Pedicine-set the wins in a game record but didn’t get recognition he should've) and we still lost in the conf finals. Our FOGOs have been borderline AA level last five years though. Shea held his own just fine against Cole and Sisselberger this past season.

Goalie play might’ve gotten us into the first round but that’s it. 2020 team is a different animal but they had two 55%+ fogos, one who performed very well for OSU last year, perhaps the reason OSU got a bid because Ignacio was getting waxed by NDs FOGO early and he came in and performed very well (Drew Blanchard-a Pgi beta Kappa at Bart).

But were talking the difference between winning an AQ, maybe pulling a first round upset like Bryant did in 2014, but not winning a championship which is another level. Even that Bryant team had Kevin Massa (and also a AA goalie in Waldy and didn’t current NFL receiver Tom Kennedy play mid on that team?)

Yes on Bryant. Back to the SSDMs. If you don’t have those guys, it’s hard to compete at a championship level.

[Farfromgeneva]

I will take a well-balanced team over anything. But for the sake of discussion-

A pretty good coach once told me that lacrosse is all about runs.
One goal doesn't break a team. 2 or 3 in a row does.
So always try to stop the bleeding with a ground ball or save and then a good offensive possession.
Give up less runs and smaller runs than the opponent and your team wins.

So gimme the best goalie in the nation and a pretty good fogo. A top goalie can save everything he should and a few he shouldn't stop. It gets an opponent thinking to themselves and doubting every shot. Possession also helps at limiting opponents. And it creates those runs. That goes a long way at accomplishing the mission.

Sounds like the 2016 Brown lacrosse team.

And tbh, I think they were one bum ankle (?) away from winning it all.

Yep. Gural and Kelly were the real difference makers and that defense was underrated….(it was a foot, technically).

They did have the T winner at Attack. The guy who’s the reason they lost wasn’t Gural or Kelly…

Yes. But all season long, Gural and Kelly got the ball back for Dylan.

I know how good they were but you have to admit there’s an irony in calling for another position to be key and then also agreeing that Malloy going down was the reason they didn’t win a title (which I agree).

I took the question the way WG did more or less. There’s fewer elite or games changing FOGOs out there than Goalies or Attack (certainly the latter) so if building a team and that’s your choice of position to select is go FOGO first.

If adding an over the top piece, and I’m using middie to mean more offers I se maybe some two way but not SSDM, I’m going attack. To others points, great goalies stuck in front of bad defenses don’t do much. I need a reasonable D before I’d be focused on goalie.

How good would Hobart have been the last couple of seasons if they had had 1st team AA goalie and FOGO?

Hate to say it but with our SSDMs (and general health, way outside of average for injuries to a program) it wouldn’t have mattered. We had one who should’ve been an AA FOGO in 2019 (Pedicine-set the wins in a game record but didn’t get recognition he should've) and we still lost in the conf finals. Our FOGOs have been borderline AA level last five years though. Shea held his own just fine against Cole and Sisselberger this past season.

Goalie play might’ve gotten us into the first round but that’s it. 2020 team is a different animal but they had two 55%+ fogos, one who performed very well for OSU last year, perhaps the reason OSU got a bid because Ignacio was getting waxed by NDs FOGO early and he came in and performed very well (Drew Blanchard-a Pgi beta Kappa at Bart).

But were talking the difference between winning an AQ, maybe pulling a first round upset like Bryant did in 2014, but not winning a championship which is another level. Even that Bryant team had Kevin Massa (and also a AA goalie in Waldy and didn’t current NFL receiver Tom Kennedy play mid on that team?)

Yes on Bryant. Back to the SSDMs. If you don’t have those guys, it’s hard to compete at a championship level.

Not a championship level discussion but the biggest drawback for Hobart finally being allowed to give athletic money (right when NIL is making it less relevant fo course..) is that we can’t have any players receive a dollar who also play football which is D3. Have had some good two sport, SSDMs and Close D men who were good football players as well over the D1 era (about 26yrs now) but they’d be eligible to earn some athletic aid for lacrosse which would exclude them from playing football. That would be one solution to the increasing importance of SSDM is recruit more two sport kids but that new money makes it harder.

For any who followed the college game about 20yrs ago this old teammate was an excellent FB and Lacrosse FOGO/stay on player who also played a little d mid at times as well:p

https://www.leagueathletics.com/Page.as ... h.lacrosse

[kramerica.inc]

At the end of the day, lacrosse is won on the field.

The great teams have great teams.

But if you have to break it down, great FO’s keep great middies off the field (and then the rules get changed), great goalies don’t care who is shooting, great attackers make middies jobs easier, great defenses slow down (don’t stop) great offenses.

The really great middies face-off and play both ways. Rare, but dominating.

Hate that slow-down, positional substitution. Anathema to the free-flowing game I played and loved.

Want that slow shite? Play fool(foot)ball and be done with it.

Was there honestly anyone better at that in the modern era than Jon Reese?

I'm a huge Jon Reese fan.
And there are a handful who were very good. Good enough to be a HM or second team AA.
But the only one I can think of that might have a claim is Ryan Wade:

[jersey shore lax]

I believe that champions are made in 3rd. grade by the parents that yell the loudest

[wgdsr]

At the end of the day, lacrosse is won on the field.

The great teams have great teams.

But if you have to break it down, great FO’s keep great middies off the field (and then the rules get changed), great goalies don’t care who is shooting, great attackers make middies jobs easier, great defenses slow down (don’t stop) great offenses.

The really great middies face-off and play both ways. Rare, but dominating.

Hate that slow-down, positional substitution. Anathema to the free-flowing game I played and loved.

Want that slow shite? Play fool(foot)ball and be done with it.

Was there honestly anyone better at that in the modern era than Jon Reese?

I'm a huge Jon Reese fan.
And there are a handful who were very good. Good enough to be a HM or second team AA.
But the only one I can think of that might have a claim is Ryan Wade:

c'mon kram. wade took a few faceoffs and scored a couple points a game.

reese had like a million and was better than peak gary one year, yale all-time points guy, starting middle linebacker, was all over 2 fields:
https://twitter.com/LaxFilmStudy/status ... 99hAg&s=19
and tough as nails:
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/03/ ... its-glory/

i'm biased and andy kraus was a reese wannabe, but as close as it comes. kyle harrison showed up as a throwback.

[MDlaxfan76]

I believe that champions are made in 3rd. grade by the parents that yell the loudest

[kramerica.inc]

At the end of the day, lacrosse is won on the field.

The great teams have great teams.

But if you have to break it down, great FO’s keep great middies off the field (and then the rules get changed), great goalies don’t care who is shooting, great attackers make middies jobs easier, great defenses slow down (don’t stop) great offenses.

The really great middies face-off and play both ways. Rare, but dominating.

Hate that slow-down, positional substitution. Anathema to the free-flowing game I played and loved.

Want that slow shite? Play fool(foot)ball and be done with it.

Was there honestly anyone better at that in the modern era than Jon Reese?

I'm a huge Jon Reese fan.
And there are a handful who were very good. Good enough to be a HM or second team AA.
But the only one I can think of that might have a claim is Ryan Wade:

c'mon kram. wade took a few faceoffs and scored a couple points a game.

reese had like a million and was better than peak gary one year, yale all-time points guy, starting middle linebacker, was all over 2 fields:
https://twitter.com/LaxFilmStudy/status ... 99hAg&s=19
and tough as nails:
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/03/ ... its-glory/

i'm biased and andy kraus was a reese wannabe, but as close as it comes. kyle harrison showed up as a throwback.

Tough as nails. Slightly goonish too.
Reese was not as talented of a faceoff guy as Wade. But certainly a more physical presence.
I was at the Loyola Semifinal. He came out flying and was trying to body kids left and right. And mostly accomplished it in the early going, against the smaller Hounds. Most of those highlight clips are from Reese's first few minutes in that game.
But I'm pretty sure Reese won that first face, leveled a few guys, then lost the next 2-3 faceoffs after Kroneberger scored 2-3 in a row.
Then even Wadvogel went to their other fogo to stop the bleeding.

[HooDat]

I believe that champions are made in 3rd. grade by the parents that yell the loudest

that certainly seems to be some people's impression....

[a fan]

At the end of the day, lacrosse is won on the field.

The great teams have great teams.

But if you have to break it down, great FO’s keep great middies off the field (and then the rules get changed), great goalies don’t care who is shooting, great attackers make middies jobs easier, great defenses slow down (don’t stop) great offenses.

The really great middies face-off and play both ways. Rare, but dominating.

Hate that slow-down, positional substitution. Anathema to the free-flowing game I played and loved.

Want that slow shite? Play fool(foot)ball and be done with it.

Was there honestly anyone better at that in the modern era than Jon Reese?

I'm a huge Jon Reese fan.
And there are a handful who were very good. Good enough to be a HM or second team AA.
But the only one I can think of that might have a claim is Ryan Wade:

c'mon kram. wade took a few faceoffs and scored a couple points a game.

reese had like a million and was better than peak gary one year, yale all-time points guy, starting middle linebacker, was all over 2 fields:
https://twitter.com/LaxFilmStudy/status ... 99hAg&s=19
and tough as nails:
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/03/ ... its-glory/

i'm biased and andy kraus was a reese wannabe, but as close as it comes. kyle harrison showed up as a throwback.

No mention of Kotz? Wasn't he (arguably) the best middle who faced off.... of all time?