BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) 2021-2022 Women's DI-III College Lacrosse Season

Final Four is set.... It will all come down to Goalie Play and Team Defense. Northwestern had a great year but they will not make it to the finals.

Where are the know nothing Maryland haters?

As for CN haters, She is a great player, is she The Best? The best at what? BC could win without her goal scoring but they could not win without a very good goalie, very good defenders, very good "draw team" all three players (CN contributes there as well) and very good two way midfielders and very good coaching. Its a team game and scoring goals is only a part of it.

As far as being a "Ball Hog", CN is not a ball hog, not even close. Ball hogs are selfish and will always hurt their team, in most cases they will hurt their team in the most competitive and important game.

As of today, CN has a YTD shooting percentage of .529 and she has a Shots on Goal percentage of .742 (career at BC .558 & .803) she takes good quality high percentage shots and she operates as a cog in her coaches offensive scheme.

As one of the above posts points out, the "Ball Hogs" will not have numbers anywhere near CN. Ball Hogs will score some goals but their shooting percentage will be low. Show me a player taking a lot of shots with a below .700 Shots on Goal percentage for their career and a below .400 shooting percentage and I will show you a selfish player (Ball Hog) who will most certainly hurt their team. Selfish players do not make the players around them better, they do not help their teammates and they ultimately hurt their team. Good coaches do not allow selfish play.

I would love to see a Goalie, Defender or two way midfielder win the T but I do not believe it will happen this year. My guess is it will go to an Attacker on the team that wins The National Championship (all of them are excellent). It's just very difficult to quantify the value that other players bring, much easier to count goals.

Good Luck to all.

Go Terps!!!

Apples and Oranges. Stony Brook plays a zone and Carolina plays man to man, you really cant compare the two. In general, coaches who choose to play man have a lot more confidence in their athletes and their ability. Stony Brooks team defense is very good but to try and diminish the Carolina D when they held SBU to 5 goals just make you sound foolish, Obviously the UNC D is excellent.

You need to get over yourself. The shots on goal percentage is the densest stat ever. Plenty of ball hogs will have a high shots on goal percentage. Would rather have a player who is trying to hit corners and misses than throwing into the goalies stick over and over. Your whole post is drivel but my favorite ones are " good coaches do not allow selfish play" and " Ball hogs are selfish and will always hurt their team"

Division I Women’s Lacrosse Players of the Week 5-17-22

Offensive Player of the Week

Livy Rosenzweig – Loyola University Maryland

Rosenzweig played a major role in No. 5 Loyola advancing to the quarterfinal round for the first time since 2015. She shared game-high honors in points for both games and led an offense that scored more goals on each of its opponents than any other team this season. She tallied her 11th hat-trick of the season against Mount St. Mary’s and stretched her point streak to 75 straight games against No. 10 James Madison. She also added six assists and a career-high 13 draw controls against JMU. Rosenzweig’s 13 draw controls breaks Loyola’s all-time career mark, and she now stands as the second player in Patriot League history (20th in NCAA history) to win 400 draws throughout their career. Loyola will face No. 3 Boston College in the NCAA Division I Quarterfinals this Thursday.

Defensive Player of the Week

Arielle Weissman – University of Michigan

Weissman notched a career-high 17 saves in a 17-11 first-round victory over No. 16 Notre Dame. Weissman tallied a .607 save percentage on 39 shots faced against the Irish. She now ranks seventh in the nation for her goals-against average (9.01) and sixth in the nation for her save percentage (.505). She later recorded nine saves and one ground ball against No. 6 Northwestern.

Division II Women’s Lacrosse Players of the Week 5-16-22

Offensive Player of the Week

Emily Mitarotonda – East Stroudsburg University

Mitarotonda established a new program record for goals in a season after registering five goals in No. 3 East Stroudsburg’s first-round win over Mercyhurst, 13-3. Sitting at 75 goals on the season, the sophomore followed with a dominating offensive performance in the Atlantic Region Championship, helping ESU take down rival No. 6 West Chester, 13-12, in an overtime thriller. Including the game-winner, Mitarotonda tallied seven goals to match her career and season-high, bumping her season total to 82. She scored six of ESU’s second-half goals and added eight draw controls to her stat line. As the top seed of the NCAA DII National Championship semifinals, the Warriors will face fourth-seeded Queens on Friday.

Defensive Player of the Week

Alex Walling – University of Tampa

Walling recorded 14 saves in the first-round matchup against No. 1 Queens of the NCAA Division II Tournament. Walling's 14 saves against the number one scoring offense in the country gave her eight games this season with double-figure saves. The sophomore tallied 10 saves in the first half, which allowed Tampa to reach an 8-7 lead during the contest. Walling also added five ground balls in the matchup as well.

Division III Women’s Lacrosse Players of the Week 5-17-22

Offensive Player of the Week

Jordan Basso - Gettysburg College

Basso notched the game-winning overtime goal to lift No. 4 Gettysburg to a thrilling 9-8 victory over Roanoke in the second round of the NCAA Division III Championship tournament. Basso's game-winning goal capped a comeback that saw the Bullets overcome a 7-3 second-half deficit. The sophomore finished the afternoon with three goals, two ground balls, and two caused turnovers. Gettysburg will face Denison in the NCAA Division III Round of 16 this Saturday.

Defensive Player of the Week

Lizzie Huesman – University of Chicago

Huesman helped the No. 20 Maroons keep the nation's top-scoring offense to six goals below their season average, defeating Capital 19-14 in the second round of the NCAA Division III Tournament. The midfielder recorded nine draw controls, four caused turnovers, and two ground balls in the matchup. UChicago will take on Middlebury College in the Round of 16 on Saturday.

Dangerous shots yes…. Not sure about the Ball Hog accusation…. Not everyone who goes to goal or takes a lot of shots is a Ball Hog… she is a great player.[/quote]

Good players, offensive players primarily attackers who take a lot of shots will put 70% and above of their shots on goal (the really good ones will be close to 80% SOG) and they will score on 50% or more of their shots (the really good ones will be close to 60%). When you see players taking a lot of shots and their Shots on goal is below .700 and their overall shooting percentage is below .500 they are probably a "Ball Hog" because they are taking shots that should not be taken. Drop below .400 and they should most likely should be moving the ball instead of going to the goal. CN is way up there at .803 and .591 for her career.[/quote]

Final Four is set.... It will all come down to Goalie Play and Team Defense. Northwestern had a great year but they will not make it to the finals.

Where are the know nothing Maryland haters?

As for CN haters, She is a great player, is she The Best? The best at what? BC could win without her goal scoring but they could not win without a very good goalie, very good defenders, very good "draw team" all three players (CN contributes there as well) and very good two way midfielders and very good coaching. Its a team game and scoring goals is only a part of it.

As far as being a "Ball Hog", CN is not a ball hog, not even close. Ball hogs are selfish and will always hurt their team, in most cases they will hurt their team in the most competitive and important game.

As of today, CN has a YTD shooting percentage of .529 and she has a Shots on Goal percentage of .742 (career at BC .558 & .803) she takes good quality high percentage shots and she operates as a cog in her coaches offensive scheme.

As one of the above posts points out, the "Ball Hogs" will not have numbers anywhere near CN. Ball Hogs will score some goals but their shooting percentage will be low. Show me a player taking a lot of shots with a below .700 Shots on Goal percentage for their career and a below .400 shooting percentage and I will show you a selfish player (Ball Hog) who will most certainly hurt their team. Selfish players do not make the players around them better, they do not help their teammates and they ultimately hurt their team. Good coaches do not allow selfish play.

I would love to see a Goalie, Defender or two way midfielder win the T but I do not believe it will happen this year. My guess is it will go to an Attacker on the team that wins The National Championship (all of them are excellent). It's just very difficult to quantify the value that other players bring, much easier to count goals.

Good Luck to all.

Go Terps!!![/quote]
You need to get over yourself. The shots on goal percentage is the densest stat ever. Plenty of ball hogs will have a high shots on goal percentage. Would rather have a player who is trying to hit corners and misses than throwing into the goalies stick over and over. Your whole post is drivel but my favorite ones are " good coaches do not allow selfish play" and " Ball hogs are selfish and will always hurt their team"[/quote]

Wow, it appears that he struck a nerve. While I would somewhat agree with you about shooting for corners if we were discussing Men's Lacrosse where guys are ripping it from 12 - 15 yards and beyond but in the women's game the guy is spot on. Good Attackers push .500 or better shooting percentage and they put close to .800 of their shots on goal maybe .775 or better. Selfish players absolutely hurt their team in more ways than one. Do you really believe that good coaches allow selfish play?

Wow, it appears that he struck a nerve. While I would somewhat agree with you about shooting for corners if we were discussing Men's Lacrosse where guys are ripping it from 12 - 15 yards and beyond but in the women's game the guy is spot on. Good Attackers push .500 or better shooting percentage and they put close to .800 of their shots on goal maybe .775 or better. Selfish players absolutely hurt their team in more ways than one. Do you really believe that good coaches allow selfish play?

Yes struck a nerve , when people post gibberish like your post it’s bothersome .Good coaches encourage players to be selfish all the time . Do you not think when Skane is playing Amonte does not encourage her to keep the ball and go the goal even when a teammate may be open , or do you not believe Levy has encouraged Ortega to be more selfish as she tends to not be that type of player but you want the ball in her stick more often than not .Spallina was telling Massera to keep shooting against UNC even thou she was 2 for 11 and taking some low percentage shots because she is their best player .
Shots on goal is a silly stat , any player can throw the ball into the goalies stick .

CN is a great player. Will she repeat, that is TBD. But one thing is for sure. The BC players have benefited greatly from her on the offensive end of the field. She is difficult to
Cover up 1v1 so the amount of 1st slides and 2nd slides she creates is huge for the offensive last year and this year. Many open players for easy shots as we saw v Loyola. It many times is a hockey asst which doesn’t show up in stats. Thursday night BS bought steak for her(joke). In watching game very few BC players were able to get around a shoulder to create a slide except CN.BCs fast break offense was the difference maker v loyola

Piscataway is near Rutgers isn’t it

Rules I would like to see enacted, changed and/or enforced...

1. 8m, if the defense is called for a false start or a foul, the nearest hash is left open. Additional hashes will be left open for any additional fouls until a successful 8m can be completed.

2. Call the dangerous shot and dangerous follow through. I see way too many follow throughs hitting defenders and far too many to the head. Also, way too many balls being shot over a defender's head.

3. You play with the stick you draw with unless it is altered during play to no longer meet the required specifications. More simply put, no longer allow draw specific sticks unless you are going to play with it afterwards. If you choose to go the FOGO route, you have to eat the play clock as you sub.

4. Offsides is a green card offense and a 1 minute girl down penalty.

5. No checks are allowed to the bottom 1/3 of the offensive players stick. The checking and pulling at the bottom of the stick needs to stop. Any repetitive violations will be subject to a green card and a 1 minute girl down penalty and successive fouls after the first green card are considered a misconduct foul and should be issued a yellow card.

6. The defense, depending on the referees, seemed to be allowed to poke check at offensive players with the ball. This should stop as well. Enforce the existing rules that no checks towards the body are allowed.

7. Call the 3 second violation. Too many zone defenses are violating this rule without consequences.

8. Consider dropping the initial shot clock down to 75 seconds. I see very few shot clock violations and this will continue to speed up play.

9. There is more flopping than I have seen in the past. I also see goggles flying off of heads more often, with/without an actual foul occurring. Seems to me the holding of the head to draw a phantom foul/yellow card has progressed into other scenarios. Not sure how to deal with both scenarios, but additional emphasis should be added to try and address the flopping. It was a point of emphasis this season, but that did not solve the issue. Perhaps a more rigid definition for a block vs. a charge and what will be considered flopping and consideration for a green card for flopping (tough to administer).

10. I see some teams running illegal off ball screens as their entire offensive. Additional clarification and emphasis on calling these fouls needs to occur. You are giving these teams a huge advantage by not calling these fouls.

11. Any others?

I agree with the majority of your very thoughtful and spot on. Great points except #2. Why don’t you think a shot should not go over a defenders head. If a girl is 6ft she can safely shoot over the head of a 5’4” girls head. Way too many bad calls on fake charges and dangerous follow through. Defenders should not be stepping into the path of the ball. Not a fan of that call

I love all of the above. Let’s add proper training of refs by the cash rich USA Lacrosse. A lot of what you are asking for is just enforcing existing rules which you have stated.

If they don’t a big injury is going to happen.

Same rules for High school and College.

11. Push/check in the back on the player w possession 1-min green card (like a 30 - sec push in mens). Flagrant cross check still remains a 2-min yellow. Too many teams appear to use this “foul” to slow offensive transition w no consequence.

(PS - Love No.1)

Appreciate the discussion. I pulled the below from the NCAA 2022 rule book. This is just the mandatory card foul section but gets at what we are discussing. In my view Section 21.c should apply if shooting over a players body. Now, by the letter of the rule, it is a judgement call by the referee. If a player is close to their defender and can shoot over them in a safe manner and without hitting them with their stick on a follow through (a different foul) than I agree with you. Once there is distance between the shooter and the defender, then it is dangerous in my view. By rule, it is up to the shooter to ensure a safe propel, the defender has none. In terms of a dangerous follow through, section 21.a and b apply and again, the shooter is responsible for control of their stick, the defender has none for how they move and position themselves (other than a shooting space call).

Mandatory Card Fouls
SECTION 21. The following fouls necessitate the issuance of a card:

a. Dangerous Contact: No player’s stick may hit or cause their opponent’s
stick to hit the opponent’s head or neck. No player may cross check an
opponent’s shoulders or back from the rear position.
b. Dangerous Follow-Through: Following through with their stick in a
dangerous or uncontrolled manner at any time. This foul is inapplicable if
the goalkeeper moves into the path of the follow-through.
c. Dangerous Propelling: Propelling the ball with their stick in a dangerous
or uncontrolled manner at any time. Any shot directed at or taken without
regard to the positioning of a field player is dangerous propelling. This foul
is inapplicable if the goalkeeper moves into the path of the ball.
d. Illegal Body Ball in Goal Circle (Red Card): If a player, excluding the
goalkeeper, blatantly attempts to stop a shot on goal by playing the ball off
of one’s body while inside the goal circle.
e. Misconduct: The following are misconduct fouls:
1. Excessively rough, dangerous or unsportsmanlike play.
2. Repeated, persistent or flagrant violation of the rules.
3. Deliberately endangering the safety of an opposing player.
4. Baiting or taunting that is intended or designed to embarrass, ridicule or
demean others.
5. Excessive dissent or abusive language.
6. Coach leaving their coaching area. See Rule 1-14.
7. Any deliberate attempt to impede the officials from obtaining the goalscorer’s stick.
8. Any type of behavior that, in the official’s opinion, amounts to
misconduct.
f. Slash: Swinging the stick at an opponent with deliberate viciousness or
recklessness.
g. Suspended Player Substitutes (yellow card is issued to the head coach, see
Rules 6-36 and 6-37):
1. If a player who receives two yellow cards enters the field of play.
2. If a player who receives a red card enters the field of play.

Congratulations to University of Indianapolis Division II champions.

Ok, will give it a shot


#1-OK. Problem is it will take more time to set up players. All fields should be properly lined in order for the girls to get in proper position quicker. The game is SOOOO slow with all the time it takes to position girls.

#2-There is enough subjective calls already

#3-Who cares about sticks. It typically doesnt slow down game and all teams have access to same equipment.

#4-1 minute penalty for stepping over line-Not needed. Although I do agree that teams will purposely go offsides to stop a fast break.

#5-Have refs enforce rules already in place although repeated violations can be assessed a green card.

#6-see #5

#7-Full agreement. Watch SBU. As usual SBU coach pushes boundaries and continues to get away with it and funny thing everyone knows it.

#8-Agree

#9-Agree-except we have bad refs making many judgement calls and this just adds to the number of bad calls that will occur. If refs are in agreement in some instances then call the flop.

#10-Just like in basketball the "cutter" setting "moving" screens is now the basis for many offensive schemes. Again.... do we want incompetent refs calling this. Agree with premise but dont see it as enforceable

Refs need to call offensive charges much more for the protection of offensive and defensive players. Way too much contact initiated by offensive players.

Most important and related to above.... stop rewarding bad plays such as running into double/triple teams and getting rewarded with 8m free position and calls against defensive players. Maybe use "common sense" when making these calls.

North Carolina held Stony Brook to 5 goals and you are trying to knock UNC and promote SBU who plays a Zone.... Stony Brooks zone is very good but if JS (or any coach for that matter) really had confidence in their athletes they would play man to man. One of the reasons the Stony Brook Zone works so well is because there is a lack of quality coaching in women's lacrosse. Good coaching and disciplined, high IQ players will beat a zone just about every time. Pretty sure Maryland, North Carolina, Northwestern and BC all play Man to Man Defense and I do not think anyone can argue that they are not the 4 best programs in the country. That said, I might mix things up vs UNC....

I agree with many of your rule suggestions. A couple of things I would like to see, unless a player actually has the ball in their stick they should not get an 8M shot. How many times do you see a terrible pass into the middle or a loose groundball and the ref calls a foul. Free shot?? Almost like basketball, you get a free throw when in the act of shooting. In this case you at least need to have the ball in your possession.

I also agree on the dangerous propellent and shooting over a players head. These young ladies are so athletic now and can make these shots. If you let the girls continue to shoot like that then you should also stop with some of the lame obstruction fouls.

Let me help you out.

Definition of "Selfish" - : concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others.

Your lack of understanding of the game is rivaled by your limited understanding of the meaning of words.

Doing what the coach wants is not selfish. Playing within a teams offensive set, scheme or specific play is not being selfish. Making the right play (including going to the goal and shooting) in settled situations, unsettled situations or transition is not selfish when the situation dictates it.

As for your obsession with "Shot's on Goal" being a silly stat it would suggest that you do not understand the simple fact that you can not score if the shot is not on goal. Your ignorance implies that you believe coaches would rather have players missing the cage with their shots. The reality is that good Attackers do what their coaches want, play as part of a team, help their teammates and make the players around them better all while taking high percentage quality shots that are on goal.

Career Shooting Percentage and Shots on Goal Percentage....

****Shooting % --- SOG %

North - .558 - .803

Ortega - .586 - .786

Cordingley - .481 - .791

Scane - .542 - .774

Tyrrell - .564 - .807

Hawryschuk - .499 - .782

Sears - .511 - .790

Rosenzwieg - .487 - .737

Masera - .536 - .791

Selfish players will not have numbers anywhere near the numbers that the above players have. Most likely they will put below .650% of their shots on goal and they will shoot below .400%. The really selfish ones will be below .375%.

Yes, in the end, selfish players always hurt their team. They get in the way of their teammates, they shoot when the should not, they hold the ball too long, they turn the ball over too often, they do not occupy their defender while others are dodging, they do not make the "one more" pass when they should, they hinder their teammates, they take foolish shots etc... they try to go to goal almost every time they get the ball, they have no situational awareness and a limited lacrosse IQ. The reason the selfish players numbers are low is because they take shots that should never be taken given the situation on the field at the time. Will they score some goals? Yes, but their selfish play will come back to hurt their team when it matters most in close and in meaningful games vs quality opponents i.e. Playoffs etc... Watch as they take an ill-advised shot and the goalie makes an easy save and the ball goes the other way for a goal. Watch as they run to the goal and shoot when their team is down a player instead of killing the penalty, watch as they try to force it when the right thing to do is move the ball.... The list goes on and on and it's ugly to watch, it's bad lacrosse and it does in fact hurt the team. No, good coaches do not encourage or allow selfish play.

I’m guessing you’re daughters aren’t defenders.

It does drive me nuts on the club level watching girls go 1 on 3, lose the ball and then get rewarded with the free position. Full disclosure, my daughter gets those as well.

Have multiple daughters who are defenders. OP's point is someone like Detweiler gets away with obvious illegal checks that are called on other defenders. (the latest qoute "she is a caused turnover machine") Officials are not consistent and even more disturbing knowledgeable of the rules. Defenders have toughest job in wlax. Stop rewarding: charges by offensive players, rewarding offensive players running into double/triple teams, rewarding free position for player who doesnt catch a pass, free position for players fighting for ground balls within the fan and of course the "head bob"/flop. If officials make calls as written in rule book offensive players wont continue to try and manipulate the rules. As far as SBU zone. STOP. Spallinas players are not within stick length and would be called for 3 seconds 10-20 times during a game if officiated correctly.

100 percent wrong on number 3 access to same sticks. Gait lacrosse only gave the Gait Draw stick 2 to Gait teams for the tournament. Great job US lacrosse approving anything as long as it comes with a check. On the flip side thanks for Gait trying to move womens game forward as the other brands do nothing.

How about if you ask for a stick check and it is deemed legal the other team gets possession.

Complete and long winded nonsense. I love your made up nonsense stats.

Now you really must be upset that she made 1st team All American. As a SOPHMORE!!!!!

The game of women's lacrosse has a lot of subjective rules for the refs to follow. The combination of the faster athletes, coaches bending the rules as much as possible and crazy parents make me believe the quality of officials will decline going forward. There is a huge need to attract young refs that understand the modern game, but it's a hard job. This may be the biggest issue facing the great game of women's lacrosse. Calling a the women's game is mostly based on enforcing safety. IMHO the games are not called correctly today with all the charges and dangerous shots being ignored. It's only getting worse and the coaching may lean closer to Spanilla's style going forward because it's too easy to bend the rules. Girls are flocking to the sport, but the rules need to be clarified or injuries will become a major issue.
The men's game is far more violent and faster, yet much easier to officiate. Just no head shots, blind checks or moving picks; I'm joking, but get those correct and you can basically ref a men's game.

"Spanilla's" Lmao, sorry about the the spelling for Joe Spallina. Spanilla sounds like a type of cookie or italian dinner.

You do realize that IL AA is not the real All American. The is only true AA honor that you get the official certificate for it’s called ISILA. Anything else is nice but you’re comparing apples and oranges

Just checked the career stats for Ortega, Tyrrell, Hawryschuk, Sears and Mesera and the numbers posted above are accurate, no reason to think that the others aren't accurate as well.

assessment above is a bit long winded but it is also a very accurate assessment of selfish players AKA Ball Hogs.

"Definition of "Selfish" - : concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others."

With respect to this discussion, "others" would be The Team.

LMAO. Thanks. Edit the post to read this:
Now you must really be upset that she made 1st team All American for IL. And as a Sophomore. Not the All American you get a certificate for. Some other one that every college is throwing out on their Instagram today.

Thanks again. BTW, didn’t compare them. You did.

I would say IL women definitely picked some of there favorites to this list. Clearly was not thought through based on Strength of schedules as some kids at top that were shown in tourney competition matters.

However knowing all these girls are very good, they all would trade in any of these awards to say your a Natty Champ.

I would rather have shots on goal and shooting percentage closer together. A higher shots on goal means those shots were saved and basically a turnover. If a team is coached correctly a missed shot, not on goal, will remain offensive teams possession with another chance for a scoring opportunity. Miss small keep the ball.

Of course we would all like to see Shooting Percentage and Shots on Goal Percentage closer together.... However, the Stats presented represent the best attackers in the game so I'm not sure what attackers you would choose over them. The ball has to be put on goal in order to score so if you want to miss the cage good luck with that. Good attackers score on 50% or more of their shots (or very close to 50%) you simply are not going to find volume shooters doing better than that.

This whole discussion started when someone pointed out that CN was not a Ball Hog (which she is not). As a few of the earlier post pointed out, good attackers take high quality, high percentage shots and they put their shots on goal upwards of 80% of the time. I don't think a lot of coaches out there would try to change the game of any of the players listed.

Selfish players / ball hogs simply do not have stats that are in line with good attackers because they try to force it, take shots that should not be taken, shoot into the goalies stick (turnover that doesn't show up in the stats) etc... Their style of play is ugly and hard to watch, it hurts the team in a multitude of ways and their low shooting percentage and low shots on goal percentage are the result of selfish play. Oh yeah, good coaches do not tolerate selfish players.

On the boys / men's side you will see that good attackmen have a lower Shots on Goal Percentage but they will also have a lower Shooting Percentage, I bet the differential is similar.

Wow you must be brutally long winded in person. If you don't think several of the above players are not selfish on the field then you simply do not know them. They all obviously want to win but many want the awards etc that go with scoring goals, its actually something that drives them. Part of the reason their shooting percentage is so high is they put up huge numbers against overmatched teams. CN shooting percentage probably way below your nonsensical " The really selfish ones will be below .375%." in her career against Morenno. I guess she is only selfish against the good goalies.

I don't think you know how to use "average" in statistics... The bottom line is if CN is such a selfish player hurting her team, her coach wouldn't play her day in and day out. You think you know better about coaching that the coach? Or do you just detest her style?

Obviously he doesn't know what selfish play looks like either. Love the way he moves the goal post, classic. Totally agree that selfish players hurt their teams in a lot of ways.

If you can't understand this, it might be time to stop commenting on shooting statistics. Obviously, you want a player to have the highest "shot percentage" as possible. But contrary to what some people on here seem to think, you want that coupled with the lowest possible "shot on goal" percentage. The vast majority of shots not on goal, go riffling out of bounds and every single good team will have that shot backed up with a defender, meaning they will get possession back. It is a harmless take. Shots on goal that do not end up as a score, are saves by the goalie, often in the stick, or knocked down and pounced on, or best case scenario, it gets reflected out to field players as a 50/50 ball. Think about this... you take any player shooting percentage at 50%, would you rather see a player shoot 100 shots, 100% on goal for 50 goals? or a player shoot 100 shots, 50% on goal with 50 goals (meaning every shot on goal went in)? Please recognize it is the latter. The very best players have always shot for just inside the post or cross bar. If you can't squeak it in, better to have it go out of bounds.