|
Forums20
Topics3,802
Posts400,033
Members2,638
| |
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
|
|
 Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season!
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season! I disagree. That's like saying the Jerry Rice should never have be considered for the MVP award in '87 because he only caught passes. He was the most dominant player at his position (ever) and there wasn't a close second. KO was the most dominant player at her position (ever) last season and there wasn't a close second.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season! I disagree. That's like saying the Jerry Rice should never have be considered for the MVP award in '87 because he only caught passes. He was the most dominant player at his position (ever) and there wasn't a close second. KO was the most dominant player at her position (ever) last season and there wasn't a close second. Nfl players only play one side of the ball. There is a reason Carmello Anthony will never be considered as good as Lebron or Michael. He can't play D! I disagree about KO being the most dominant player at her position. If you consider playing attack is only assists and goals you have an argument, but there are MANY other attackers who are great scorers and significantly better in the other areas of the game which are just as important. You can't just say it doesn't matter, because it does! as a low attacker who doesn't participate in the draw or help in the middle of the field, you are the beneficiary of fast breaks etc. The kid who brings the ball up and starts the break gets no credit.The Tawaaraton isn't for the most dominant player at their position, otherwise Baptiste would have won too. The 2 way middy in womens lacrosse is even more important than mens because they are on the field for most of if not all of the game. There are not many specialist in the womens game.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Kylie is a heck of an athlete. Should not hold it against her that she is "just plays attack". You can put her on midfield and she'd still be a beast on both sides of the field. Heck, put her on defense and she'd still be an All American. Also, we always have to read about SB's weak schedule. Yes, they have a few softer teams but they're against teams in their Conference. They played Florida, USC, NW, Hopkins, Towson, Jacksonville.....and Maryland. Only a handful of teams at the most can make an argument that their schedule is tougher. And we all agree they're aren't too many teams in the country that can ever sniff at the winning the title......SB is one of them and will certainty be in the mix next year. She should have won the award. Other girls are great.....but none had a better individual performance than Kylie. Not trying to make any SB/YJ hater into a lover. Go ahead and keep hating. But to think anybody other than Kylie should have won last night, is just a hater and will keep coming up with formulas and or slanders against a girl they pretend to know in order to make their case. She should have won it but we'll all get over it. Years from now fans will remember her not winning it rather than the girl that won it. Next year will be fun.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season! I disagree. That's like saying the Jerry Rice should never have be considered for the MVP award in '87 because he only caught passes. He was the most dominant player at his position (ever) and there wasn't a close second. KO was the most dominant player at her position (ever) last season and there wasn't a close second. I agree, there was a guy named Gretzky also, wasn't very good on the ride either, but had a few points in his day.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The thing EVERYONE is missing is out opinions mean nothing . The criteria or desires of the people picking this are all that matter. If they want a certain type player over another that's the criteria. I.e. Mid vs attck
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season! WRONG! DH is taking it way too far. They play about 1/18th of the game - only offense (1/2) and only bat 1/9th of the time. And if you want to eliminate attack, you have to take out defense and goalies too - guess you want to make the T the award for middie of the year?
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Any update on Michigan women's job? There has to be some rumors out there that are close?
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 886
Back of THE CAGE
|
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 886 |
Kylie is a heck of an athlete. Should not hold it against her that she is "just plays attack". You can put her on midfield and she'd still be a beast on both sides of the field. Heck, put her on defense and she'd still be an All American. Also, we always have to read about SB's weak schedule. Yes, they have a few softer teams but they're against teams in their Conference. They played Florida, USC, NW, Hopkins, Towson, Jacksonville.....and Maryland. Only a handful of teams at the most can make an argument that their schedule is tougher. And we all agree they're aren't too many teams in the country that can ever sniff at the winning the title......SB is one of them and will certainty be in the mix next year. She should have won the award. Other girls are great.....but none had a better individual performance than Kylie. Not trying to make any SB/YJ hater into a lover. Go ahead and keep hating. But to think anybody other than Kylie should have won last night, is just a hater and will keep coming up with formulas and or slanders against a girl they pretend to know in order to make their case. She should have won it but we'll all get over it. Years from now fans will remember her not winning it rather than the girl that won it. Next year will be fun. Curious question. Why doesn't she play middie?
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 886
Back of THE CAGE
|
|
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 886 |
Analysis prior to the selection from BigRedMachine, a fellow lacrosse fan....
Like most I'm sure the Tewaaraton award boils down to Stukenberg and Ohlmiller and for those dazzled by the towering offensive numbers produced by Ohlmiller (as am I by the way) let me give you a few objective reasons why it won't automatically go her way.
Schedule:
Stony Brook played only four matches versus top ten teams; Maryland, Florida, Colorado and USC (losing two of them) and three games versus the top twenty; Northwestern twice and Towson. The rest of the schedule is filled with a hodge podge of mostly mediocre to poor teams (Albany excepted). Now by my calculations Ohlmiller's production is 3 points less against ranked teams than non ranked teams (goals + assists). Maryland, by contrast, had the second highest strength of schedule in the nation (slightly less than Northwestern) playing ten games versus the top ten and 6 games against the top twenty. Reason would tell you had Ohlmiller played Maryland's schedule her point total would be quite a bit less, still very good but not one of historic proportions. Of course you have to play the teams on your schedule and while this projection wouldn't axiomatically play out there's no reason it shouldn't be a consideration in the selection of the Tewaaraton winner. After all if strength of schedule can be used as one of the factors in weighing unequal schedules for NCAA tournament seeding then there's no reason it can't be a consideration when measuring the relative performance of two players.
Performance:
What are each teams needs and how do the respective players perform to contribute to the success of the team? Stony Brooks offense runs through Kylie Ohlmiller, even more so when Courtney Murphy went down with a season ending injury. She's the engine that makes the team's offense click. As such she's performed faultlessly and in so doing broke Jen Adams long held single season points record. It doesn't get much better than that. Contrast that to how Maryland uses Zoe Stuckenberg. The Terp's have a plethora of offensive weapons, all of whom can find the back of the net with great consistency or feed teammates for the same. The top six scorers range from a high of eighty-seven points down to seventy points (Stukenberg 2nd with 84 points) and the seventh producing 43. So Stukenberg is not a critical component to Maryland's offense running at peak effeciency but rather another arrow in the quiver (Maryland still managed to score sixteen goals against BC while she was being face guarded). Because of this even handed sharing arrangement your not going to see gaudy offensive stats from any of the Terp regulars. But where Stukenberg is really counted on for production is in the other non-glamorous hustle categories and, as a two year captain, to be the coaches on field liaison. She was an excellent part of Maryland's highly rated defense, rarely taking a set off, and was also ranked in the top three of all Maryland non goalie team stats. It's difficult to quantify the relative importance of each of these players to their teams success but we do know the success of one team versus the other. Can that be the overriding factor? Maybe?
NCAA Tournament:
Yes the tournament is a big factor in the Tewaaraton selection. The goal of most teams is to qualify for the tournament with the ultimate prize winning the NCAA title. If that weren't the case the voting would occur at the end of the season prior to the tourney.
Ohlmiller: Three games, 6 1/3 points/game average, 1/3 ground ball/game, 1/3 draw control/game, 0 caused turnovers.
Stukenberg: Four games, 4 1/2 points/game, 1 1/5 ground balls/game, 3 1/4 draw controls/game, and 3/4 caused turnovers/game.
Results: Stony Brook loses to Maryland in the quarters and Maryland wins the NCAA title.
Intangibles:
Laxallnight refers to Stukenberg as the media darling but, for objectivity, go on to the Stony Brook website and read their write up of Ohlmiller. I don't know if I'd call Zoe Stukenberg a media darling but she is a very poised and thoughtful speaker. If you haven't done so already go to the post game interviews and listen to her moving tribute to her four years at Maryland. That aside she is the embodiment of the scholar athlete, one who evenly divides her time between those two callings and performs at peak efficiency in both. You cannot ask for or expect more from an individual.
I think both Ohlmiller and Stukenberg are deserving of the award and will have no problems whatsoever with the selection, whomever it may be. However, as TL has already mentioned, the real prize has already been won, this is just the icing.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Kylie is a heck of an athlete. Should not hold it against her that she is "just plays attack". You can put her on midfield and she'd still be a beast on both sides of the field. Heck, put her on defense and she'd still be an All American. Also, we always have to read about SB's weak schedule. Yes, they have a few softer teams but they're against teams in their Conference. They played Florida, USC, NW, Hopkins, Towson, Jacksonville.....and Maryland. Only a handful of teams at the most can make an argument that their schedule is tougher. And we all agree they're aren't too many teams in the country that can ever sniff at the winning the title......SB is one of them and will certainty be in the mix next year. She should have won the award. Other girls are great.....but none had a better individual performance than Kylie. Not trying to make any SB/YJ hater into a lover. Go ahead and keep hating. But to think anybody other than Kylie should have won last night, is just a hater and will keep coming up with formulas and or slanders against a girl they pretend to know in order to make their case. She should have won it but we'll all get over it. Years from now fans will remember her not winning it rather than the girl that won it. Next year will be fun. If you consider 20 teams with tougher schedules "a handful" then you are right. The reality is all but 4 top 20 teams had harder schedules. The ones that didn't were USC, Colorado, Umass Navy (although they of course weren't top 20 until their year end run). SB had the 21st hardest schedule. Elon had a tougher schedule. Harvard had a tougher schedule. Rutgers had a tougher schedule. You state the "tough games, and run out prety quickly. That's the point. Take a look at NU's schedule for example. I think you will find that some of the teams play a much harder schedule. And what gets a bit lost in that isn't just the opponents, but that you are playing on after the other with no let up. You don't have the cupcakes to take a breath. She should not have won it this year. Maybe next year. And maybe they will play a tougher schedule next year.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
.[/quote]
If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!!
Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game
[/quote]
Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable.[/quote]
finally some voices of reason.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game [/quote] Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable.[/quote] finally some voices of reason. Hmmmm....more like voices that agree with you [/quote]
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable. Spot on!
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. with all that said, you can blame JS for being such a pariah amongst the rest of the coaches. You can say they will not play SB because there scared, but in truth they don't have to play sb, sb needs to play them, and when you're a [lacrosse] to every coach and obnoxious like he is he hurts his team, and the same players he says he loves. 11 of the top 15 will not play SB as long as JS is like the way he is, thats his fault. Get used to it. No T award winner for you, stop blaming everyone els and blame the person responsible.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. with all that said, you can blame JS for being such a pariah amongst the rest of the coaches. You can say they will not play SB because there scared, but in truth they don't have to play sb, sb needs to play them, and when you're a [lacrosse] to every coach and obnoxious like he is he hurts his team, and the same players he says he loves. 11 of the top 15 will not play SB as long as JS is like the way he is, thats his fault. Get used to it. No T award winner for you, stop blaming everyone els and blame the person responsible. Please explain or give examples of what he does to other that makes him such a pariah.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season!
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable. Spot on! Traenor was a much better player than Cummings Cummings had a much better teams around her Fact ! Cathy Reese runs that committee and screwed Kayla. Maryland supporters all try to hide her manipulation of this award
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The thing EVERYONE is missing is out opinions mean nothing . The criteria or desires of the people picking this are all that matter. If they want a certain type player over another that's the criteria. I.e. Mid vs attck The opinions of CR you mean. Lolol. It's over let's turn the page
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great group of seniors at the North South game today in Maryland. Awesome weather and some great games. Sorry to everyone if this was a positive post
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
HAHA, add in a .85 MD factor and call it Fact, not an opinion..you my friend are an idiot. Time to get a life You aren't getting it. SB 10 hardest games extrapolated to 22 still wouldn't give them a Maryland strength of schedule. Guys like you have a tough time with statistics and facts. You like anecdotes and opinions. Fine. Here is a FACT. KO didn't win the Tewaaraton. Therefore, there is a committee of very knowledgable people that agreed that her all-time high point total was somehow not worthy of the award. There have been other very justifiable points made regarding her limited affect on other parts of the game, her poor ride (whoever said she would be a top defender is out of their mind) whatever. I chose to point out that very likely the committee was not as impressed were her point total given the very weak schedule she played, particularly given how strong her team is. The 4th ranked team in the country playing the 21st toughest schedule in a sport where after the top 15 or so teams there is a pretty big drop-off makes a difference. They played teams ranked so far down (UVM???) that it is almost embarrassing. And you will say that they are in their league, what are they supposed to do. I agree, but what you then do when you are evaluating her season-long performance, you adjust it to what it might look like if she played a schedule like other top 5 teams did. And that what was done here. And she doesn't win the Tewaaraton. Too bad. with all that said, you can blame JS for being such a pariah amongst the rest of the coaches. You can say they will not play SB because there scared, but in truth they don't have to play sb, sb needs to play them, and when you're a [lacrosse] to every coach and obnoxious like he is he hurts his team, and the same players he says he loves. 11 of the top 15 will not play SB as long as JS is like the way he is, thats his fault. Get used to it. No T award winner for you, stop blaming everyone els and blame the person responsible. Agree with this. Cocky attitude and sense of entitlement is the SB downfall. They act all blue collar and underdog, but in reality, JS thinks he is a God. Reality has hit. Take a clue and try a little humility SB
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If Trainer did not win it last year then no attacker ever should!!! Dominated the draw in first year taking them!!! And, was best offensive player in ACC the toughest conference in the game Now you are talking. Treanor is hands down better than KO. If someone wants to argue with that they have zero idea of what they are talking about. So you are correct, there is a biased towards the do-everything middie. I'm fine with that. I agree, a great attacker is fun to watch, the best middie in the game is usually more valuable.[/quote] finally some voices of reason. Hmmmm....more like voices that agree with you [/quote] [/quote] No not just him. Trainor was several levels better than KO. Not in the same atmosphere. And still got hosed for the Great comparison.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
if you think cr or js care what anyone thinks you are crazy. they get off on being loathed
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Women’s Tewaaraton Award Committee:
Feffie Barnhill, Chair
John Battaglino, University at Albany
Amy Bokker, Stanford University
Laura Brand-Sias, Rutgers University
Mike Faith, Franklin and Marshall College
Laura Field, Fairfield University
Ricky Fried, Georgetown University
Jenny Graap, Cornell University
Christine Halfpenny, University of Notre Dame
Heather Holt, Old Dominion University
Alex Kahoe, St. Joseph’s University
Kerstin Kimel, Duke University
Sonia Lamonica, Towson University
Meghan McNamara, LIU Post
Amanda O’Leary, University of Florida
Cathy Reese, University of Maryland
Liz Robertshaw, Boston University
Janine Tucker, Johns Hopkins University
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I guess KO should not have acted like a thug in the Hopkins game , zero chance they want that representing women's lax .
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season!
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great group of seniors at the North South game today in Maryland. Awesome weather and some great games. Sorry to everyone if this was a positive post Great way for these kids to end their collegiate careers and I must say the venue at uslacrosse is very impressive
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
How is going back to LaValle (Long Island) in the best interest of the women's game after playing at Gillete with the men? The men are playing at Gillette again. if you need to play solo play at Hofstra or Rutgers so you draw from tri state area and not at the east end of LI. the sport just doesn't want to expand the tent! Thoughts on a neutral site quarterfinal double header like they do in men's. think it would be great for women's lacrosse
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great group of seniors at the North South game today in Maryland. Awesome weather and some great games. Sorry to everyone if this was a positive post Great way for these kids to end their collegiate careers and I must say the venue at uslacrosse is very impressive The venue is nice but seating for under 500 seems a bit small. Yes there is some standing room space but still seems like it would be difficult to hold any significant games there.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great group of seniors at the North South game today in Maryland. Awesome weather and some great games. Sorry to everyone if this was a positive post Great way for these kids to end their collegiate careers and I must say the venue at uslacrosse is very impressive The venue is nice but seating for under 500 seems a bit small. Yes there is some standing room space but still seems like it would be difficult to hold any significant games there. I think this was designed to help some D3 D2 teams and has also provided a neutral site facility to host
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
I guess KO should not have acted like a thug in the Hopkins game , zero chance they want that representing women's lax . I saw some of the game not all. what did she do that was so offensive??
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Wow, how does dopey Thorn blow that game? Absolutely terrible coaching! And what was she even thinking putting an 8th grader in goal?? Terrible
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Wow, how does dopey Thorn blow that game? Absolutely terrible coaching! And what was she even thinking putting an 8th grader in goal?? Terrible why is this on a college thread?
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Great group of seniors at the North South game today in Maryland. Awesome weather and some great games. Sorry to everyone if this was a positive post Great way for these kids to end their collegiate careers and I must say the venue at uslacrosse is very impressive The venue is nice but seating for under 500 seems a bit small. Yes there is some standing room space but still seems like it would be difficult to hold any significant games there. I think this was designed to help some D3 D2 teams and has also provided a neutral site facility to host I agre the few division 1 games that have been there have been packed nearly to capacity think armospheres like that are better for the game. Like that being the site for the North South games
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
With the new rules coming in and recruiting season about to begin. What Is the consensus on the impact to the volume of coaches out on the trail this summer.
|
|
|
Re: 2016 Women's College Lacrosse Season
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Posted this on another thread. Probably belongs over here.
KO is a great player. The points totals are not the whole story though. Last year's 100 goal scorer proves that. I don't think anyone would argue that CM should have been in the "best player in the game" argument last year. Now KO is different. She IS one of the best players in the game. But the point totals put up against a decent, but not great, schedule, should not be the only determinant.
Here is a breakdown. and yes this matters:
Stony Brook played 22 games. 12 of the games were against weaker opponents. Many ranked well down in the rankings. In those 12 games KO had 46 goals and 57 assists = 103 points = 8.6 points/game.
In the 10 games against tough opponents (including Albany twice which is a stretch), KO had 31 goals and 29 assists. Still very, very good numbers, but the average drops to 6 points a game split evenly between goals and assists.
Now, if you compare the "tough games" by SB to a Maryland, UNC or NU schedule, for examples, the game quality still does not measure up. So there is still one more level of difficulty in schedule that KO still didn't play.
But extrapolating the 6 points a game for KO to a full schedule somewhat more representative of the #4 team in the country, KO still puts up an amazing 132 points. 68 goals and 64 assists. Fantastic numbers by anyone's account, but not record-breaking and now much more debatable relative to the Tewaaraton.
Add-in a Maryland schedule adjustment factor of say .85 to that final total to account for what is still a schedule difficulty disparity, and you end up at 112 points. 58 goals and 54 assists.
So there you have it, KO is a great player. she benefits statistically a great deal by playing a weaker schedule than top players on other teams. Fact, not opinion.
Great illustration. i will take it a step further. Before i start, let it be known that I think KO is a GREAT player. One of the best if not the best offensive player in the country. That being said, giving her the Tewaaraton to her is like giving a Designated hitter the MVP in MLB. It just isn't justified. If you take the previous post into account regarding the points, you also have to take into account that JS leaves his studs on in blow outs longer than any coach I have seen. This also contributes to the huge amount of points. In addition the philosophy that points should be the biggest factor determining this award is downright silly. There are many aspects of the game which contribute to a teams success. If you look at ZS and KO in the other facets of the game, it really isn't close. Therefore I think the right decision was made (from someone who has no love for Maryland Lax). KO had 15 gb's 3 DC's 7 ct's and 40 to's. Those numbers are not very good to say the least. Throw in the fact that she is not very good in the ride and the picture becomes more clear. as for ZS she had 84 pts. as a middie (very good) 74 DC's (she didn't take the draw), 27 CT's and only 21 TO's. She also was great in the clearing game and played great defense. In addition she did all of this against a much tougher schedule and her team WON. They both are great players but KO only effects one part of the game and ZS controls the whole game! Congrats to both ion a great season!
|
|
|
Moderated by A1Laxer, Abclax123, America's Game, Annoy., Anonymous 1, baldbear, Bearded_Kaos, BiggLax, BOTC_EVENTS, botc_ne, clax422, CP@BOTC, cp_botc, Gremelin, HammerOfJustice, hatimd80, JimSection1, Ladylaxer2609, lax516, Laxers412, LaxMomma, Liam Kassl, LILax15, MomOf6, Team BOTC, The Hop, TheBackOfTheCage, Thirdy@BOTC, TM@BOTC |
|
