Washington Post All Met honors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting is that there are seven players on the full All-Met list that were on the Pride 2023 A team. KM & BS drove all but three of them away to other teams and the level of talent they had is evidence of how badly Pride botched their inaugural college recruiting class.

And it continues

I don't think Pride's HS program will ever recover from the 23 debacle. The pattern seems to be the top 40-50% of the Red team goes to CLC and Pride then brings up some girls from White and girls from other programs to fill out the new HS Black team. The new Black team will be competitive but is now playing in tournament groups that are nowhere near the top like they were in MS. I don't see this pattern changing anytime soon and it seems that KM is more accepting of this reality versus when her 25 team left in mass.

Some poor decision making took place by the 23s who thought they could be better off as a group instead of as individuals. That unfortunately had implications for many players and their future recruiting aspirations. Hard lesson was learned.

I disagree that they were better off as individuals. They were better off playing as a group but on a team who's director paid people a living wage and can keep a recruiting coordinator more than 1 year. Though to learn their job and develop the required relationships in a year.

The team had better success staying together, yes. Individually, you can't deny the better players on that team would have had better recruiting results had they broken from the pack and tried out / made Capital.

The blame can't be shouldered completely by club owners. Parents have to accept the lion's share. Choosing an unproven club with little / no history or recruiting track record over Capital was a group-think miscalculation. Some might call it hubris. Same results would have likely occurred had the recruiting director remained in place.

Calling it hubris would be incorrect given that the initial recruiting coordinator would have worked out well. After she left to go coach at AU, it was the second one, a conflict of interested AD from a Baltimore Girl's private that was the problem. And just how many slots would have been available on Capital, not a particularly fun group to belong to, with many girls being relegated to the Orange team that dissolved after a few years.

How was the second Pride 23 recruiting director from Baltimore conflicted?

She was the Athletic director at Garrison Forest, an all girls school. Her first priority would be to get the athletes at her primary employer placed with colleges and then whatever time or chits she had leftover would go the Pride girls. Other than tell the girls how terrible they were, and take a lot of money off of KM, she did nothing to get any of them recruited.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was all those original Dulles south dads for that pride 23 team that set the tone and looked down on everyone else with a “I’m better than you attitude”. The players were really nice and caring but those dads killed it.
Look where that got them with their daughters. So sad.

My kid's team played against that team. The dads were complete asshats.

Those dads taught the Dulles South teams (and Pride and PVI) to play beautiful lacrosse and sounds like your team couldn't keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is: would some of higher performing Pride 23s be heading to higher ranked / better academic programs if they had chosen not to stay together and instead try out for Capital?

You are assuming they all would have made the Blue team. With that many girls, some of the CLC blues would have been dropped down to orange and likely not gotten the same placement they had from blue and same for the incoming Pride girls.

Read the post: Would the “higher performing” Pride 23 players commit to higher programs if they tried out for Capital. Not all. It’s possible a few top Pride 23 players would have displaced some of the 23 Capital Blue players to Orange. But those Pride players would have had a higher platform to showcase themselves and commit to higher programs had they chosen that path. That’s the question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is: would some of higher performing Pride 23s be heading to higher ranked / better academic programs if they had chosen not to stay together and instead try out for Capital?

You are assuming they all would have made the Blue team. With that many girls, some of the CLC blues would have been dropped down to orange and likely not gotten the same placement they had from blue and same for the incoming Pride girls.

Read the post: Would the “higher performing” Pride 23 players commit to higher programs if they tried out for Capital. Not all. It’s possible a few top Pride 23 players would have displaced some of the 23 Capital Blue players to Orange. But those Pride players would have had a higher platform to showcase themselves and commit to higher programs had they chosen that path. That’s the question.

The answer is "yes"...some of those "higher performing" Pride 23 players would have made Blue, and that Capital team would have been (more) incredible.

[Anonymous]

Should have would have could have.
And don’t be dumb, no one is calling out the Dulles dads coaching, it’s their demeanor that labels them as$& hats

[Anonymous]

When coaches nominate their players for these awards and submit statistics, is there every any oversight to ensure those stats are accurate? Seems open for question if you have an enthusiastic coach who pumps up her/his team stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When coaches nominate their players for these awards and submit statistics, is there every any oversight to ensure those stats are accurate? Seems open for question if you have an enthusiastic coach who pumps up her/his team stats.

Great question. I know stat taking is often a volunteer activity done by high school students, teammates, or parents. It is greatly appreciated but I do believe there is a need to pass a quick test to ensure those taking stats really do understand the rules and are consistently recording the right data.

I did this several years ago for my DD team and listening to what other teams were recording as assists, ground balls, saves, etc was frustrating. If a players stats stand out way above the norm in areas like these there is a good chance those recording the numbers didn’t understand the rules. Draw controls and goals are easy to record and should be consistent.

Another challenge with stats is the need for more than the one person recording the stats helping to spot for stats. We had a minimum of two parents do this for high school games, so we were confident in what was being seen on the field and recorded as a stat.

[Anonymous]

I can tell you for a fact that there is no fact checking with stats for All-Met. As for other awards at least for public schools, it’s as good as the parents taking the stats. Which means, parents and or coaches can absolutely mess with the stats, to a point. You can add a couple goals and assists, GBs, etc.. but if you go overboard that will probably raise a red flag.

[Anonymous]

I’m still trying to figure out how the PVI girl was credited with 271 draw controls. That would be more than 15 per game. Do they credit the center with every DC, no matter if a player on the circle is actually responsible? Our H.S. center got credited for some amazing in air grabs by circle players, even with that, it’s hard to imagine a player with 271.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m still trying to figure out how the PVI girl was credited with 271 draw controls. That would be more than 15 per game. Do they credit the center with every DC, no matter if a player on the circle is actually responsible? Our H.S. center got credited for some amazing in air grabs by circle players, even with that, it’s hard to imagine a player with 271.

You are really over thinking this.

[Anonymous]

No kidding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can tell you for a fact that there is no fact checking with stats for All-Met. As for other awards at least for public schools, it’s as good as the parents taking the stats. Which means, parents and or coaches can absolutely mess with the stats, to a point. You can add a couple goals and assists, GBs, etc.. but if you go overboard that will probably raise a red flag.

Public vs private these are volunteers so there is no correlation to one being more accurate than another. Our school has two books with the stats being verified following each game. To the point of this thread it’s needed to maintain integrity and gain the trust of those who do have to make award selections. Stats for all players are published after each game and for the season to date, so padding stats would be a tall order. It would not surprise me to hear from those issuing awards say they know schools they can trust with the data. Additionally, for those who see stats all the time it would not be hard to recognize when numbers are out of whack.

[Anonymous]

FYI: USA Lacrosse All American selections should be posted Monday or Tuesday. Players are finding out through their coaches.

[Anonymous]

Ha! Talk about little accountability!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FYI: USA Lacrosse All American selections should be posted Monday or Tuesday. Players are finding out through their coaches.

I think those are voted on by all coaches in the area, so probably closest thing to a real All-met in that sense as it has actual geographical boundaries of the Potomac chapter.