LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Ament is an amazing player, and the highlight Assist against Cornell, behind-the-back on the run, was extremely impressive. Pat Spencer is also a tremendous athlete. While it is early for the discussion, since IL has it's publicity machine out, I guess it's not too early.

However Jeff Teat is recognized, it is interesting to note that what he does on the field is less "camera ready" for a broad audience. Pat Spencer doing a "jump shot" dive into the crease, or Grant Ament dramatically whipping the ball around are extremely compelling highlight reel stuff. Rob Pannell had the same advantage. Jeff Teat does things with his lacrosse stick that anyone who has ever held a lacrosse stick knows are really hard to do. Friends of mine who do not follow the program closely, and played lacrosse really well at Cornell, were back for the STREAK weekend. They raved about Jeff Teat's passing and shooting ability. So, hats off to all contenders who merit IL's attention. It will be interesting to see how this develops.

faircornell wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:19 pm Ament is an amazing player, and the highlight Assist against Cornell, behind-the-back on the run, was extremely impressive. Pat Spencer is also a tremendous athlete. While it is early for the discussion, since IL has it's publicity machine out, I guess it's not too early.

However Jeff Teat is recognized, it is interesting to note that what he does on the field is less "camera ready" for a broad audience. Pat Spencer doing a "jump shot" dive into the crease, or Grant Ament dramatically whipping the ball around are extremely compelling highlight reel stuff.

Right, Teat generally doesn't look flashy or spectacular. Watching JT51, it looks so easy to find the perfect pass for an assist, so easy to miss the goalie's stick. Ament was good as an underclassman, but he wasn't as flashy as now. Having seen them both in person several times, I'd prefer Jeff on my team. Have yet to see Spencer in person.

Lehigh came from behind to defeat Rutgers on the road 13-10. Thank you Mountain Hawks.

Lehigh Win looking better and better as they just beat Rutgers, at Rutgers. Want to stack up as many quality wins as possible. Also, Hobart is knocking on the top 20 door.

GOBIGRED
Joewillie78

I am by far no expert in lacrosse but I am an analytics guy.

Seems to me that we strongly neutralize face-off losses with offense efficiency.

Looking at this weekend's matchup, Yale has a 27.6% conversion rate, while we have a 44% conversion rate.
Doing some very basic math, in a game with 40 face-offs (which assumes we only win 4), and assuming equal turnovers, scoring efficiency comes across as more important than face-off wins. With a 90% face-off win percentage COMBINED with a 27.6% conversion rate, that means that we get the ball back after losing a face off and without giving up a goal 75% of the time.

Assuming both Yale and Cornell both maintain their season average shooting percentages, I would suggest that Cornell has the advantage. Thoughts?

Thank you, margolism, been saying that for years (am not a stats guy, have never done the math on it). Face offs are not all they're cracked up to be (face offs wins games!!!!!!!), possession proficiency (goals) is what matters most. Would rather win the face off than lose it, but it's just not as big a deal as many would lead you to believe. Cornell had a game in the not so distant past where they went some ridiculous number like 22 for 24 at the face off X and lost....tons of examples like that in the lacrosse world. In the Md-SU wlax game recently, Cuse went 8 for 18 on the draw and lost by one in OT. By the draws (in this case) wins games mentality, Cuse should have lost by a few in regulation.

Face offs certainly aren't the be all and end all and it would be interesting to correlate face off advantage with wins (i.e. do teams who win more face offs win more games than teams who don't [ likely a fairly easy stat to analyze] and compare that with how teams do with a higher offensive efficiency rating. No real dog in the fight and it woludn't surprise me to have offensive efficiency be more of a factor than FOGO %, but from an emotional standpoint I as a fan, and I would imagine Yale as a team feel more confident about the upcoming lacrosse-gameapalooza between Yale and Cornell having TD at the dot than I would otherwise ( a not too disguised good natured dig from a Yale fan at the expense of the Big Red) particularly knowing what a proficient offensive machine Cornell's team is. Can't wait for the game. Man the torpedos and statistics be damned !

faceoffs win games. just like ground balls win games.

what it means is, if you are better at them, now all you have to do is match your opponent at everything else in the cumulative, and you win. and sometimes, not even that.

and if you lose them, that is no longer a viable strategy. now, you have to be better than your opponent @ "everything else"... tied in some things, better than them in more than you're underperforming. it forces you to be the better team otherwise. sometimes the much better team. all of which is possible and has been done aplenty --- but doesn't change the fact that you're running uphill to begin with.

denver may be an example of a team that --- while you can't make a case other than subjective on it --- may have gotten a bit too complacent taking all those possessions for so long. and if/when they weren't there, they couldn't play the rest of the "categories" like they needed to.

Shooting percentage and save percentage are much more strongly correlated with winning the game than is faceoff win percentage:

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/article/ ... osse/22902

Nice legwork (or is it memory? ) CU77. Thanks. I still like the fact that TD is a Bulldog going into Saturday's love fest. Given the numbers you pointed out I am curious to see how the goalies perform. I imagine it will be Ierlan for CU, and know it will be Starr for Yale. You can count on one hand the number of +50% games Starr has had to date, but I will say he has shown a nice propensity for rising to the occasion in big games and meaningful moments. He's athletic and game savvy and usually makes good decisions., but as a fan I am prone to the disposition that becoming a brick wall would be preferable. Ierlan certainly is highly regarded though relatively untested.

This makes logical sense as winning a face off means little if you don't score on the possession associated with the face-off win.

Based on my simplistic math, I will gladly take 10% face-off wins combined with a 44% possession conversion any day of the week over a 90% face-off winning percentage combined with a 30% possession conversion. (The stats I haven't been able to find is scoring percentage based on possession - I am just seeing shot percentage. To me, that would be a bit more accurate.)

Not so many years back Loyola won the title. I think they won four face offs the entire Memorial Day week end. Held ND to five Gs in the semi final and Md to three in the final. Face off wins didn't help their opponents much in those games...would be interesting to see how many of the eight total goals scored against them came on the possession from a face off win too.

calourie wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:38 pm Nice legwork (or is it memory? ) CU77. Thanks. I still like the fact that TD is a Bulldog going into Saturday's love fest. Given the numbers you pointed out I am curious to see how the goalies perform. I imagine it will be Ierlan for CU, and know it will be Starr for Yale. You can count on one hand the number of +50% games Starr has had to date, but I will say he has shown a nice propensity for rising to the occasion in big games and meaningful moments. He's athletic and game savvy and usually makes good decisions., but as a fan I am prone to the disposition that becoming a brick wall would be preferable. Ierlan certainly is highly regarded though relatively untested.

Okay, now I get it. On the Cornell thread "Ierlan" means Chayse Ierlan, and if you mean TD, you say TD. Well done, calourie. Yes, for those of us partial to the older brother's university, it would be nice to see the Starr we saw against Loyola and Duke last May on a more regular basis. Here's hoping for an injury-free game this Saturday; and not to be too Orwellian, but may big brother know best.

margolism wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:48 pm This makes logical sense as winning a face off means little if you don't score on the possession associated with the face-off win.

not true. outside of goals scored as a result of the actual faceoff itself, possessions and how much you score on them (your team's conversion rate) are independent events to the faceoff.
not only would you be getting a possession before your opponent did, but you'd be getting your second before they did (2 to 1), your third before they did (3 to 2), etc., etc.. all else being equal on clearing, penalties, etc.

margolism wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:48 pm Based on my simplistic math, I will gladly take 10% face-off wins combined with a 44% possession conversion any day of the week over a 90% face-off winning percentage combined with a 30% possession conversion. (The stats I haven't been able to find is scoring percentage based on possession - I am just seeing shot percentage. To me, that would be a bit more accurate.)

1st --- you would have to be about 50% better than your opponent on offense that day, obviously.
2nd --- you would lose.

While Cornell's offensive efficiency can negate a negative face-off win/loss percentage, there is another important variable. That is, losing well over half the draws puts (far) more pressure on its defense...an area which, in Cornell's case, is not a team strength.
More offensive touches simply gives a team more opportunities to score. Additionally, more possession time for the Yale offense in Cornell's defensive zone creates another issue - the likelihood that the defense will get worn down over time. In fact, after the Penn State game...and going into the Towson game, I would not have been surprised if Cornell played some zone to provide a break of sorts for the D.
Can a team overcome losing the great majority of the face-offs? Without a doubt - Cornell came very close to beating both Albany (if memory serves me correct, Cornell "won" only one face-off vs. Albany and that was on a procedure call) and Yale in the regular season last year.

Match-ups for the close D may also be an issue. I assume Doria will match up against Gaudet. But who guards Morrill? He does not possess Ament's quickness and vision/passing ability, but he is extremely talented.

Bottom line - would I prefer to win or lose two-thirds to three-quarters of the face-offs against Yale? The latter creates a much smaller margin for error for Cornell. The Red will have to everything else on the field very well.

Possessions via faceoffs are obviously still important but new shot clock alters the equation since time limits on possessions (barring reset) lead to greater balance in # of possessions. . In past, a dominant fogo could really limit time an opposing offense is in action to great frustration and also wear down defenses disportionately. Now more possessions by each team somewhat mitigates face-off disparities and the strengths and weaknesses of others facets come more into play . Cornell can certainly beat Yale regardless of fogo results

FannOLax wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:41 pm

faircornell wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:19 pm Ament is an amazing player, and the highlight Assist against Cornell, behind-the-back on the run, was extremely impressive. Pat Spencer is also a tremendous athlete. While it is early for the discussion, since IL has it's publicity machine out, I guess it's not too early.

However Jeff Teat is recognized, it is interesting to note that what he does on the field is less "camera ready" for a broad audience. Pat Spencer doing a "jump shot" dive into the crease, or Grant Ament dramatically whipping the ball around are extremely compelling highlight reel stuff.

Right, Teat generally doesn't look flashy or spectacular. Watching JT51, it looks so easy to find the perfect pass for an assist, so easy to miss the goalie's stick. Ament was good as an underclassman, but he wasn't as flashy as now. Having seen them both in person several times, I'd prefer Jeff on my team. Have yet to see Spencer in person.

Teat though isn't as flashy as some guy, has a Lacrosse IQ that is through the roof, he creates so much offense by knowing the game and deserves to be in award discussions.

I have seen Yale play in person this season, but not Cornell.

I am looking forward to seeing Jeff Teat play live for the first time so that I can see how the total Yale D plays him and the rest of Cornell. Also, Teat versus Yale's Chris Fake (returning 1st team All American as a sophomore) should be a good match up!

Cornell versus Yale lacrosse connections (among others):

*The Ierlan brothers! Is Chayse Ierlan now the goalie starter?

*Chaminade high school: Cornell's Dom Doria versus Yale's Kuttin, Tigh and Renz

*Cornell's Canadian/U.S. offense versus Yale's U.S. D

What a game!

margolism wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:48 pm This makes logical sense as winning a face off means little if you don't score on the possession associated with the face-off win.

Based on my simplistic math, I will gladly take 10% face-off wins combined with a 44% possession conversion any day of the week over a 90% face-off winning percentage combined with a 30% possession conversion. (The stats I haven't been able to find is scoring percentage based on possession - I am just seeing shot percentage. To me, that would be a bit more accurate.)

You're not accounting for failed clears

nyclaxfan wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:40 pmIs Chayse Ierlan now the goalie starter?

Per Cornell's pre-game notes, yes:
https://cornellbigred.com/documents/201 ... f?id=14661