Maryland vs Notre Dame
Maryland vs Notre Dame
March 03, 2019
Q1Q2Q3Q4OTTotalMaryland4144013Notre Dame3442114
Tale of the Tape
Stat CategoryMarylandNotre DameGoals1314Shots3540Shots on Goal2421Possessions4339Groundballs1919Saves711Save%33%46%Shooting Pct37%35%Faceoffs2010Turnovers1412Turnover%33%31%
On the face of it, this was a really close game between two extremely evenly matched teams. We’ll talk a bit later about why that may be simplifying things, but for now, we can just revel in one of the best games of the young season so far.The narrative seems to be that Notre Dame saved their season, while the Terps lost a close one on the road and are no worse off than when they arrived in South Bend. More or less, I can buy that story.If we look at the basic stats, Maryland shot a bit better, turned the ball over a little more, and had a few extra possessions thanks to a FO advantage. Notre Dame played a bit better in goal and managed to pepper Maryland with a few more shots. A fairly balanced match-up.
Tale of the Tape
Stat CategoryMarylandNotre DameOff. Efficiency30.2%35.9%T.O.P.54%46%Possession Length44.441.1Time to First Shot44.727.7Shots/Possession0.811.03
Digging in to some of the advanced stats, a more nuanced picture starts to appear. We mention above how the Irish ended up with more shots than Maryland, despite having fewer possessions. That comes down to a big disparity in the number of shots taken per possession.Notre Dame got of 1.03 shots/possession, while Maryland had .81. And we can see that Notre Dame was more quicker to shoot, on average, than the Terps.The average possession length was about even, which indicates that Notre Dame was a bit more aggressive in getting shots off early and testing out the ND defenses. (It also means they did a good job backing those shots up.)Considering that Dolan saved 33% of the shots on net, Notre Dame may have been effective in making him uncomfortable, even though they ended up with fewer shots on net overall.But whether it was that or something else, the pace and style that Notre Dame went with produced a 35.9% efficiency mark for the offense, which was well above their season average. As others have mentioned, this was a game when the Irish offense broke out.
Let’s talk about Brendan Gleason
Stats: Brendan GleasonQ1Q2Q3Q4+OTTotalGoals10124Assists00101Shots20136Shots on Goal10124Shooting Pct50%N/A100%67%67%Groundballs10113Turnovers00022EGA0.910.001.692.374.98
And a big big part of that break-out was Brendan Gleason.He had easily his best showing of the season against the Terps D. He led the team with 4.98 EGA, besting his high-mark for the year, which he had set against UD Mercy.The interesting thing is that he did not do anything all that different from what he’s been doing all year.62% of his EGA contribution came from 3 unassisted goals. On the year, 58% of his contributions have come from unassisted goals. The difference in this one was volume. IL pointed out that Maryland really keyed on Costabile in this one, so Gleason was forced to step up, and step up he did.Having a strong second threat makes an offense exponentially harder to defend, and with ~60% of his value coming from unassisted goals, it’s clear that Gleason can be that for the Irish.
Splits
Notre Dame SplitsPre Q3 7:30Post Q3 7:30Possessions2514Off. Efficiency44.0%21.4%Shooting Pct42%21%Turnover%24%43%T.O.P.48%43%Possession Length43.141.6Time to First Shot27.927.2Shots/Possession1.041.00
I mentioned above how the back-and-forth nature of this game masked some variability in how both sides played. If we split the game into the first 2.5 quarters and the final 1.5 quarters, you can start to see the differences.Notre Dame’s offense was more than twice as efficient pre-split, when they scored 11 goals in their 27 possessions. And it was down to two factors: shooting % and turnover rate.Shooting percentage halved and turnover rate doubled. After the split, Notre Dame was much less effective in getting shots offs, and when they did, they were not quality shots. Since they were still getting off a full shot per possession, I can only imagine that a lot of it came down to the Terps defense buckling down after a shot backup.Whatever the reason, Notre Dame was much less effective in the final 30% of the game. Fortunately for them, Maryland was only able to tie the game and the randomness of overtime allowed the Irish to come away with the win.
Splits
Maryland SplitsPre Q3 7:30Post Q3 7:30Possessions2716Off. Efficiency25.9%37.5%Shooting Pct30%50%Turnover%30%38%T.O.P.52%57%Possession Length42.749.1Time to First Shot38.655.6Shots/Possession0.850.75
On the flip side of the ledger, the Maryland offense saw marked improvement post-split. Interestingly, it doesn’t appear that the improvement came from a bout of aggression. Oftentimes, we see efficiency improvement when an offense speeds up; probably because coaches let them loose.In this case however, the Terps offense became much more deliberate. As we often see, longer possessions mean more chances to cough up the ball, and indeed, Maryland’s turnover rate spiked from 30% to 38% as their possessions got longer. The upshot was that their shooting percentage spiked even more, from 30% to 50% post-split. As a result, despite turning the ball over more often and getting off fewer shots/possession, the increase in the quality of their shots resulted in a much more efficient Terps offense.Scoring 6 goals in 16 possessions is how you get yourself back into a game.
Q1Q2Q3Q4OTTotalMaryland4144013Notre Dame3442114
Tale of the Tape
MarylandNotre DameGoals1314Shots3540Shots on Goal2421Possessions4339Groundballs1919Saves711Save%33%46%Shooting Pct37%35%Faceoffs2010Turnovers1412Turnover%33%31%
On the face of it, this was a really close game between two extremely evenly matched teams. We’ll talk a bit later about why that may be simplifying things, but for now, we can just revel in one of the best games of the young season so far.The narrative seems to be that Notre Dame saved their season, while the Terps lost a close one on the road and are no worse off than when they arrived in South Bend. More or less, I can buy that story.If we look at the basic stats, Maryland shot a bit better, turned the ball over a little more, and had a few extra possessions thanks to a FO advantage. Notre Dame played a bit better in goal and managed to pepper Maryland with a few more shots. A fairly balanced match-up.
Tale of the Tape
MarylandNotre DameOff. Efficiency30.2%35.9%T.O.P.54%46%Possession Length44.441.1Time to First Shot44.727.7Shots/Possession0.811.03
Digging in to some of the advanced stats, a more nuanced picture starts to appear. We mention above how the Irish ended up with more shots than Maryland, despite having fewer possessions. That comes down to a big disparity in the number of shots taken per possession.Notre Dame got of 1.03 shots/possession, while Maryland had .81. And we can see that Notre Dame was more quicker to shoot, on average, than the Terps.The average possession length was about even, which indicates that Notre Dame was a bit more aggressive in getting shots off early and testing out the ND defenses. (It also means they did a good job backing those shots up.)Considering that Dolan saved 33% of the shots on net, Notre Dame may have been effective in making him uncomfortable, even though they ended up with fewer shots on net overall.But whether it was that or something else, the pace and style that Notre Dame went with produced a 35.9% efficiency mark for the offense, which was well above their season average. As others have mentioned, this was a game when the Irish offense broke out.
Let’s talk about Brendan Gleason
Q1Q2Q3Q4+OTTotalGoals10124Assists00101Shots20136Shots on Goal10124Shooting Pct50%N/A100%67%67%Groundballs10113Turnovers00022EGA0.910.001.692.374.98
And a big big part of that break-out was Brendan Gleason.He had easily his best showing of the season against the Terps D. He led the team with 4.98 EGA, besting his high-mark for the year, which he had set against UD Mercy.The interesting thing is that he did not do anything all that different from what he’s been doing all year.62% of his EGA contribution came from 3 unassisted goals. On the year, 58% of his contributions have come from unassisted goals. The difference in this one was volume. IL pointed out that Maryland really keyed on Costabile in this one, so Gleason was forced to step up, and step up he did.Having a strong second threat makes an offense exponentially harder to defend, and with ~60% of his value coming from unassisted goals, it’s clear that Gleason can be that for the Irish.
Splits
Pre Q3 7:30Post Q3 7:30Possessions2514Off. Efficiency44.0%21.4%Shooting Pct42%21%Turnover%24%43%T.O.P.48%43%Possession Length43.141.6Time to First Shot27.927.2Shots/Possession1.041.00
I mentioned above how the back-and-forth nature of this game masked some variability in how both sides played. If we split the game into the first 2.5 quarters and the final 1.5 quarters, you can start to see the differences.Notre Dame’s offense was more than twice as efficient pre-split, when they scored 11 goals in their 27 possessions. And it was down to two factors: shooting % and turnover rate.Shooting percentage halved and turnover rate doubled. After the split, Notre Dame was much less effective in getting shots offs, and when they did, they were not quality shots. Since they were still getting off a full shot per possession, I can only imagine that a lot of it came down to the Terps defense buckling down after a shot backup.Whatever the reason, Notre Dame was much less effective in the final 30% of the game. Fortunately for them, Maryland was only able to tie the game and the randomness of overtime allowed the Irish to come away with the win.
Splits
Pre Q3 7:30Post Q3 7:30Possessions2716Off. Efficiency25.9%37.5%Shooting Pct30%50%Turnover%30%38%T.O.P.52%57%Possession Length42.749.1Time to First Shot38.655.6Shots/Possession0.850.75
On the flip side of the ledger, the Maryland offense saw marked improvement post-split. Interestingly, it doesn’t appear that the improvement came from a bout of aggression. Oftentimes, we see efficiency improvement when an offense speeds up; probably because coaches let them loose.In this case however, the Terps offense became much more deliberate. As we often see, longer possessions mean more chances to cough up the ball, and indeed, Maryland’s turnover rate spiked from 30% to 38% as their possessions got longer. The upshot was that their shooting percentage spiked even more, from 30% to 50% post-split. As a result, despite turning the ball over more often and getting off fewer shots/possession, the increase in the quality of their shots resulted in a much more efficient Terps offense.Scoring 6 goals in 16 possessions is how you get yourself back into a game.