Lacrosse Analytics

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

This was originally published in the Mon Sep 25, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

In examining Notre Dame's 2023 performance against conference opponents and similarly ranked teams, several key statistical trends emerge. With a record of 10 - 6 in these 16 games, the team's performance was notably influenced by specific factors.

One of the most significant factors was the team's assist-to-turnover ratio. The Notre Dame offense performed significantly better in games where this ratio exceeded 0.40, boasting a 10 - 2 record and scoring on 34% of their possessions. In contrast, when the ratio fell below 0.40, the team failed to secure a win and had an efficiency of just 18%.

The performance of specific players also played a crucial role. Madison Ahern's involvement in the game, for instance, showed a clear correlation with team success. In the games where Ahern took 4 or more shots, the team went 10 - 2 and scored on 33% of their possessions. Conversely, the team lost all games where Ahern took less than 4 shots, with an efficiency of just 19%.

Similarly, the output of the attack unit and Kasey Choma was linked to the team's success. When the attack unit scored 5 or more goals, the team had a 10 - 2 record and scored on 33% of their possessions. On the other hand, when the attack unit scored fewer than 5 goals, the team lost all games and had an efficiency of 20%. Meanwhile, when Kasey Choma scored 3 or more goals, the team went 9 - 1 and scored on 34% of their possessions. When Choma scored fewer than 3 goals, the team won just one game and had an efficiency of 23%.

The overall shooting percentage also showed a correlation with the team's success. When the team's shooting percentage exceeded 55.2%, the team won all games and scored on 42% of their possessions. When the percentage fell below 55.2%, the team's record was evenly split at 6 - 6, scoring on 26% of their possessions.

In summary, Notre Dame's performance in the 2023 season was significantly influenced by their assist-to-turnover ratio, the number of shots taken by Madison Ahern, the number of goals scored by the attack unit and Kasey Choma, and their overall shooting percentage. These factors should be taken into consideration when preparing to face this team.


Get smarter about college lacrosse in 5 minutes per day. Sign up for Expected Goals today.

anytime a team shut down either Ahern or Choma they beat ND

I'm with you. There are such simple uncomplicated explanations for most of this analytics crap. 

Yah – when Notre Dame plays really good teams they lose. 

I need analytics to tell me that? Please. 

I detest what analytics has done to the world of sports. Taking all the human element and drama out of the game. Baseball is finally coming around to realize that analytics might help you over the long haul of a regular season, but they don't do jack to help you win in the post season.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Fri Oct 6, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The performance of the Howard offense showed minimal improvement from the 2022 season to 2023. Their offensive efficiency increased from 9.9% (118th nationally) to 10.4% (126th nationally). However, this improvement was not reflected in their shooting efficiency, shooting percentage, or turnover rate, which all remained relatively stagnant. Their shooting efficiency went from 31.9% (117th nationally) to 34.7% (125th nationally), shooting percentage went from 25.5% (118th nationally) to 27.9% (124th nationally), and turnover rate went from 52.1% (118th nationally) to 49.8% (126th nationally).

Similarly, the performance of the Howard defense saw minimal improvement from the 2022 season to 2023. Their defensive efficiency remained essentially unchanged at 45.4% (125th nationally) compared to 48.4% (118th nationally) in the previous year. The defense also did not see significant improvement in their defensive shooting percentage or defensive turnover rate. Defensive shooting percentage went from 58.3% (118th nationally) to 53.4% (124th nationally), and defensive turnover rate went from 16.2% (118th nationally) to 18.3% (122nd nationally). These numbers indicate that the defense struggled to disrupt the opponents' offense and limit their shooting efficiency.

The possession game for Howard also saw a decline in performance from the 2022 season to 2023. Their per-game possession margin worsened from -13.8 (117th nationally) to -16.5 (126th nationally). Despite a slight increase in draw-control win rate from 23.6% (118th nationally) to 24.3% (126th nationally), the team struggled to gain and maintain possession consistently.

Overall, the lack of significant improvement in key statistical areas for offense, defense, and possession game highlights the less-than-impressive season for Howard. The stagnant performance and overall national rankings demonstrate a lack of progress in these areas and underscore the challenges the team faced in competing at a higher level. There's not much to say here other than that 2024 will start with a blank slate.

If you want 5-10 minutes of team and player analysis in your inbox every morning, sign up for Expected Goals here.

[Lax101]

Would love to ban lacrosse analytics from this site. It is completely useless bs and is often misleading. We have hit a new low when we share a deep analytical dive into Howard lacrosse.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Would love to ban lacrosse analytics from this site. It is completely useless bs and is often misleading. We have hit a new low when we share a deep analytical dive into Howard lacrosse.

You and me both. Useless is spot on.

[Brownlax]

Would love to ban lacrosse analytics from this site. It is completely useless bs and is often misleading. We have hit a new low when we share a deep analytical dive into Howard lacrosse.

+1

[GratefulRed]

Statistical analysis on a sports chat forum? Heresy! And why doesn’t Howard deserve some love?

[lax]

Anyone else feel like "lacrosse analytics" are being crafted/written by AI like ChatGPT?

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Statistical analysis on a sports chat forum? Heresy! And why doesn’t Howard deserve some love?

Howard University deserves love. All day every day. Our issue is with analytics.

[laxreference]

Anyone else feel like "lacrosse analytics" are being crafted/written by AI like ChatGPT?

They are...sort of.

I've coded a script that takes the way that I would analyze a team if I were doing it manually and pulls out the main "findings" and then creates a sort of formulaic narrative based on what the findings were. Instead of simply publishing those, which I think would drive people nuts because of the repetitiveness, I then run it through an LLM so that it is closer to the tone and language that I would use myself and so that it has some variety in the prose. I then edit those outputs and that's what you see here.

Obviously, doing it this way allows me to cover way more teams and players (I'm just one guy), which is the whole idea. Much easier to edit a draft than to come up with something from scratch.

[LaxGnome22]

Statistical analysis on a sports chat forum? Heresy! And why doesn’t Howard deserve some love?

I would assume he is attacking that statistical analysis was done on the the worst team in lax and not the school. Would you have had a problem with the comment if it was FDU. Two spots up.

[GratefulRed]

Statistical analysis on a sports chat forum? Heresy! And why doesn’t Howard deserve some love?

I would assume he is attacking that statistical analysis was done on the the worst team in lax and not the school. Would you have had a problem with the comment if it was FDU. Two spots up.

Statistical analysis for D1 lax seems relevant, whether or not I'm personally interested. Unlike some of the 'content' splattered all over the site, this string is easily avoidable for those who don't want to read it. I don't understand the attacks.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Thu Oct 5, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The Northwestern defensive unit in 2023 was an understated part of their success, finishing the year as the sixth-ranked defensive unit in the country. Their overall defensive efficiency placed the Wildcats in the 89th percentile, and when adjusting for the strength of the opposing offenses, their defensive performance rose to the 92nd percentile. Among the key metrics that indicated their defensive strength, it was shooting-efficiency that stood out, ranking in the 94th percentile nationally; the Wildcats ended 2023 with an opponent shooting-efficiency of only 40.5%.

The performance of the Northwestern defense wasn't always linear throughout the season, revealing an intriguing pattern of highs and lows. The best (and well-timed) four-game stretch fell between May 14 and May 28, with impressive wins against Michigan, Loyola, Denver, and Boston College. Their adjusted defensive efficiency during this period was 10%. Their worst four-game stretch came between Feb 16 and Mar 4 and saw them go 4-0 against Notre Dame, Boston College, Marquette, Vanderbilt. Despite the unblemished record, this stretch did see a dip in form with an adjusted defensive efficiency of 34%, placing them in the 19th percentile. A detailed dive into the contributing factors revealed that shooting percentages allowed during these periods were decisive; the best stretch saw a shooting percentage of 32%, in contrast to a 46% during the latter period. And these numbers are calculated after stripping out garbage time stats, so it wasn't just a matter of letting up when games were already won.

The length of opposing possessions also played a significant role in Northwestern's defensive performance. The Wildcats performed above average in all possession segments, with their effectiveness highest in possessions lasting between 20 and 40 seconds, allowing goals in only 19.6% of these possessions; this is 15 percentage points better than the average DI defense. However, as possession time stretched, between 40 and 60 seconds, Northwestern's defenses were slightly more vulnerable, allowing goals in 34.5% of the possessions, which is just 3 percentage points better than the average. This suggests that longer possessions offered opposing offenses more opportunities to find gaps in the Wildcats' defenses.

Get smarter about college lacrosse in 5 minutes per day. Sign up for Expected Goals today.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Sat Oct 7, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

This analysis delves into the 2023 season key performance indicators for East Carolina with a special focus on their 14 games against conference foes and teams with similar LaxElo rankings. In these games, the team went 8-6 and our analysis shows a few crucial statistical thresholds that significantly influenced the team's outcomes.

To start, the offensive prowess of the team's attack unit emerges as a pivotal factor in their victories. In games where the attack unit recorded seven or more goals, East Carolina recorded a perfect 7-0 record, scoring on 44% of their possessions. However, this efficiency dwindled to 24% in games where the attack unit scored less than seven goals, leading to a 1-6 record with a lone victory over Old Dominion. In games where the attack unit was productive, they had a 20 percentage point gap in their adjusted efficiency.

Similarly, the team's shooting percentage also played a role in dictating their success. East Carolina won 7 out of 8 games when shooting over 42.4%, with a scoring efficiency of 43%. On the flip side, a shooting percentage below 42.4% saw the team go 1-4, with a reduced scoring efficiency of 22%. Not as severe a split as the attack unit's scoring, but still important. As a whole, when they shot well, they won. For some teams, it's more about avoiding turnovers, but for the Pirates, that wasn't the case.

From an individual player, perspective, Frances Kimel's assist-to-turnover ratio emerged as a significant factor. The team managed five victories against two losses when Kimel had a ratio greater than 0.33 (i.e. one assist for every three turnovers), with a scoring efficiency of 39%. However, in games where her ratio was less than 0.33, they finished 1-4.

Individual player scoring is sometimes a less useful indicator, at least in terms of scouting, but they are still interesting to note. The team was undefeated in the four games where Sophie Patton scored at least once, boasting a 46% scoring efficiency in those outings. They were 3-6 when she didn't score. Similar trend with Sophia Locicero. They were 7-3 when she scored and 1-3 when she didn't.

Overall, the data indicates a strong correlation between specific player performances, the team's shooting percentage, and the attack unit's goal tally with East Carolina's overall success. These statistics provide a snapshot of the team's strengths and vulnerabilities during the 2023 season.

If you want 5-10 minutes of team and player analysis in your inbox every morning, sign up for Expected Goals here.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Sun Oct 15, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

In evaluating UConn's 2023 season, the team's defense stands out as the most impressive unit. They significantly improved their defensive efficiency, with opponents' efficiency dropping from 29.5% in 2022 (58th nationally) to 26.6% in 2023 (35th). This improvement can largely be attributed to their enhanced defensive shooting-efficiency, which went from 47.3% to 42.9%. And shooting-efficiency was determining factor in the team's successes (and failures) within the season too. In their 12 wins, their opponents' shooting-efficiency was 39.8% versus 45.2% in their 7 losses. The defense's improvement in limiting opponents' scoring opportunities played a crucial role in their overall result.

On the offensive end, UConn experienced a slight decline in efficiency. Their shooting percentage dropped from 48.6% in 2022 (17th) to 44.6% in 2023 (32nd), while their shooting-efficiency decreased from 56.4% to 52.9%. This decline impacted their overall offensive efficiency, which fell from 35.7% (17th) to 34.3% (22nd). Kate Shaffer is an example of this; will still impressive, her shooting percentage dipped a bit, with her numbers dropping from 48.8% to 47.0%. While the offense's performance did not reach the same level as the previous season, it was still the team's best unit.

In terms of the possession game, UConn's draw-control win rate declined from 56.1% in 2022 to 52.1% in 2023. This drop influenced their per-game possession margin, which decreased from +3.2 to +0.6. The team's ability to win the draw-control battle diminished in their losses, with a win rate of 48.0%. However, in their wins, their win rate increased to 54.0%.

Looking at the overall picture, UConn's defensive improvement was particularly noteworthy. Their ability to limit opponents' shooting efficiency and percentage played a significant role in their success. Despite the slight declines in offensive efficiency and draw-control win rate, the team managed to excel defensively, showcasing their resilience and contributing to their overall result.

Get smarter about college lacrosse in 5 minutes per day. Sign up for Expected Goals today.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Wed Oct 25, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The 2023 season for Duke saw an overall record of 5 - 11 against conference opponents and teams with similar LaxElo rankings. This is a good sample to measure the team’s strength and weaknesses, as it strips out games against vastly superior or inferior opponents. The season saw a mix of results, with victories against East Carolina, Davidson, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Navy, and losses against teams such as North Carolina, Notre Dame, Syracuse, Virginia Tech, Boston College, Louisville, Virginia, Clemson, and Yale.

A deep dive into the team's performance reveals a clear trend. The key to Duke's success is heavily tied to their shot-taking. The team's performance improved significantly when they took more than 0.86 shots per possession. In such games, Duke went 4 - 0, scoring on 36% of their possessions. However, when their shot attempts were fewer than 0.86 per possession, their record dipped to 1 - 11, with an efficiency of only 25%. This trend underscores the importance of avoiding empty possessions on the team's offensive success. And to back up the ball security finding, they were 3-1 when their assist-to-turnover ratio was greater than 0.60 (so three assists for every five turnovers). When it was below that mark, they were 2-10. Given the importance of avoiding empty possessions, I think this says more about the importance of avoiding turnovers than it does about the importance of assists in their offensive strategy.

There is another related split, related to the volume of shots taken by the attack unit. They had the same 4-0 vs 1-11 record split when the attack took 21 shots or more, but the efficiency gap between above-the-line and below-the-line was smaller than with the shots-per-possession threshold. Obviously, this flows from the above; when they were turning the ball over, the attack wasn't able to get as involved in the offense and their efficiency suffered.

It wasn't all team metrics though. Lexi Schmalz's performance was another significant factor. When she scored 2 or more goals, the team went 5 - 2; when she had one or no goals, they lost all 9 games. If there was a single player that served as the bellwether for the Blue Devils' offense, it was Schmalz.

In conclusion, Duke's performance in the 2023 season reveals several key trends. High shot attempts per possession, aggressive play from the attack unit, individual contributions from star players like Lexi Schmalz, and a robust assist-to-turnover ratio were all integral to the team's victories. These trends offer valuable insights into the team's strengths and areas for improvement, providing a clear picture of their performance against conference opponents and similarly rated teams.

If you want 5-10 minutes of team and player analysis in your inbox every morning, sign up for Expected Goals here.

[laxdadpat]

I do respect the effort with this analytics thread and it's interesting to find winning trends.

I didn't notice a name mentioned about Duke's season. It all starts for Duke at the draw with Jenner, come on! I would give a +/- number that combines draws, turnover and ground balls. Then more free position shots usually point to a team's confidence and success on offense (except in the Cuse game).
The assist/turnover ratio is a very valid stat.

Duke was +9 in free position shots against Pitt. Shmaltz got 4 of her 5 goals on free position shots, that's what got her to the 2+ goals and the real stat about what led to the win.

Sometimes the better team just overcomes the key metrics because they have more talent on the field.

[laxreference]

I do respect the effort with this analytics thread and it's interesting to find winning trends.

I didn't notice a name mentioned about Duke's season. It all starts for Duke at the draw with Jenner, come on! I would give a +/- number that combines draws, turnover and ground balls. Then more free position shots usually point to a team's confidence and success on offense (except in the Cuse game).
The assist/turnover ratio is a very valid stat.

Duke was +9 in free position shots against Pitt. Shmaltz got 4 of her 5 goals on free position shots, that's what got her to the 2+ goals and the real stat about what led to the win.

Sometimes the better team just overcomes the key metrics because they have more talent on the field.

That's a great point about draws/Jenner. This analysis is looking at offensive efficiency as the metric that is used to determine which other metrics have the greatest impact. I have generally excluded possession-margin from this sort of analysis because it doesn't have an explicit impact on efficiency. But there is certainly an indirect impact (if you know you are going to have more possessions, your offense can play looser). My gut is that it wouldn't show up very often as a key in determining how well the offense played, but I bet there would be some teams that were much more efficient in games when they had a larger possession margin.

I'm also making a note on the free position shots point. It should matter to this analysis whether the goals are being scored on FPs or in the normal flow of the offense. I'll have to see if I can work that into the system somehow.

Thanks for the notes!

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Sun Oct 22, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The 2023 defensive unit for Loyola was an impressive force on the field, with statistical rankings that placed them among the top defensive teams in the country. After adjusting for the strength of the opposing offenses, their adjusted defensive efficiency rated a 96 out of 100 (it's a Madden-style scale). This placed the Greyhounds as the 4th ranked defensive unit in the country.

As is often the case when you are looking at a team that had such an impressive season in aggregate, it wasn't all smooth sailing for the Loyola defense. There were distinct peaks and valleys. The best 4-game stretch for Loyola's defense came between March 18 and April 1, during which they achieved a perfect 4-0 record against Lehigh, Boston U, American, and Holy Cross. Their adjusted defensive efficiency during this period was an outstanding 11%, which would be head and shoulders the top rate in the country if extended for a full season. On the other end of the spectrum, there was a less impressive stretch for the unit, from March 29 to April 12. They still managed to go 4-0 against American, Holy Cross, Colgate, and Princeton, but their adjusted defensive efficiency during this period was 34%, which was only in the 19th percentile. And this is just considering the parts of these games that were competitive; garbage time is excluded.

The disparity between these stretches can be traced to a single key metric: the shot-on-goal rate allowed. In Loyola's best stretch, they allowed a shot-on-goal rate of 66%, while in their worst, this number rose to 79%. No other metric saw such a significant gap between the two periods. When they let opponents get comfortable, the shot-on-goal rate spiked and that led to a increase in efficiency as well for their opponents.

Analyzing Loyola's performances against conference peers and similarly ranked LaxElo teams sheds further light on the team's defensive strengths and weaknesses. A key threshold in this analysis was the opponent's shooting percentage. In games where the opposing offense's shooting percentage exceeded 37.5%, Loyola's record was 1-3, with opponents scoring on 30% of their possessions. Conversely, in games where the opponent's shooting percentage was below this threshold, Loyola boasted an unblemished 11-0 record, with an opponent efficiency of only 17%. This is really the defining statistic of the season. When they were able to keep opponents uncomfortable, the quality of the shots they faced was lower and they were virtually unbeatable. And when the other team had some success, it was usually bad news for Loyola.

Considering the duration of opposing possessions also provides valuable insights into the Loyola defense. They were more effective in shorter possessions, particularly in the 20 to 40-second range. In these situations, they allowed goals on only 24.4% of possessions, which is 10.5 percentage points better than the average defensive team. However, as the possession lengthened past 60 seconds, their performance dropped slightly, but they still managed to remain 5.7 percentage points better than the average. This suggests that while they were solid throughout a possession, you were more likely to find a hole in the defense if you could probe patiently.

The 2023 Loyola defensive unit's rankings and statistical trends paint a clear picture of their strengths and weaknesses. While they were an exceptional defense overall, their performance was not uniform throughout the season. Maintaining a low shot-on-goal rate and limiting the opponent's shooting percentage were crucial factors in their success, and an area where they had some volatility.

Get smarter about college lacrosse in 5 minutes per day. Sign up for Expected Goals today.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Thu Oct 19, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The USC Trojans defense of 2023 was one of the best units in the country, but their raw statistics overstate the case slightly because they didn't play as tough a set of offenses as some of the other contenders. In terms of overall defensive efficiency, the Trojans stood tall in the 98th percentile, and after adjusting for the strength of the opposing offenses, they were still in the 96th percentile. This impressive performance saw them conclude the year as the 3rd best opponent-adjusted defensive unit in the nation.

Analyzing the highs and lows of the season, the Trojans' best four-game stretch took place from March 3 to March 12, boasting an adjusted defensive efficiency of 16%, placing them in the 99th percentile. During this period, they secured wins over High Point, Villanova, and Hofstra, with a lone loss to Princeton. However, even in their less successful periods, they still performed admirably. The worst four-game run occurred from March 17 to March 31, but they still ended up undefeated against Arizona State, Colorado, Oregon, and California, with an adjusted defensive efficiency of 24%, in the 80th percentile. The big difference here was turnover rate; they forced turnovers on 40% of their opponents' possessions during their best stretch versus just 26% during their worst stretch. When they let opposing offenses get comfortable, the defense wasn't as effective.

Reviewing the USC performance against conference peers and similarly ranked LaxElo teams, it's clear that the shooting percentage of the opposing offense also played a significant role in determining the Trojans' success. When opponents' shooting percentage was greater than 40.7%, the Trojans went 2-2. However, when the shooting percentage was less than 40.7%, the Trojans were undefeated, going 9-0. Clearly, this threshold was a notable factor in the Trojans' win-loss record. It's hard to say for sure whether this reinforces the turnovers point above; obviously an offense that is in disarray isn't going to shoot very well, but it's also possible that goalie play was the defining factor here.

If you want 5-10 minutes of team and player analysis in your inbox every morning, sign up for Expected Goals here.

[laxreference]

This was originally published in the Sat Oct 28, 2023 edition of Expected Goals, my daily newsletter.

The analysis covers the 19 games Boston College played during the 2023 season against conference opponents and teams with similar LaxElo rankings. The team's record in these games was impressive, with 15 wins and 4 losses. Our goal with these analyses is not to identify what the offense did well (or not well) overall; it's to figure out which facets of the game were most important to their success. Places where, when they were above a certain threshold, they were much more likely to win.

Key to Boston College's victories was the performance of the midfield unit. In games where this unit scored 5 or more goals, the team went 13-1 and had an opponent-adjusted offensive efficiency of 39%. However, when the midfield unit scored less than 5 goals, the team's efficiency dropped to 19% and their record slipped to 2-3, indicating a significant correlation between midfield performance and overall success. We aren't talking about a ton of goals here, but it was important to the effectiveness of the offense overall that their midfielders were a credible scoring threat.

Another crucial factor was the team's overall shooting percentage. When it exceeded 38.7%, Boston College was, again, 13-1 with a 38% efficiency mark (the lone loss was against Northwestern). But when the shooting percentage fell below this threshold, their efficiency dropped to 22%. Despite the fact that the records are the same in this and the above finding, I put more stock in the midfield scoring aspect because the gap in efficiency was so much larger (20 percentage points) compared to the shooting percentage split.

Courtney Weeks' assist-to-turnover ratio also appeared to have a bearing on the team's performance. When her ratio was greater than 1.00 (so as many or more assists than turnovers), Boston College was 6-0 and scored on 36% of their possessions. But when her ratio was less than 1.00, the team's efficiency declined to 24% and they won only two games out of five.

In fact, the assist-to-turnover ratio of the entire midfield unit also seemed to be a determinant of success. When the ratio exceeded 0.17 (a low bar, I know), the team was 13-1 games and scored on 38% of their possessions, but 2-3 when they were below that mark. When BC could get anything out of the midfield in terms of creating assists, they were much much better.

In summary, the statistical analysis suggests that Boston College's performance hinges largely on the involvement of the midfield, the overall shooting percentage, and the assist-to-turnover ratio of Courtney Weeks. Useful nuggets of information if you are preparing a defensive game plan against the Eagles.

Get smarter about college lacrosse in 5 minutes per day. Sign up for Expected Goals today.