This was billed as one of the top mid-week games of the year, and it did not disappoint. Scarlet Knights and Mountain Hawks gave us a great one. Rutgers had control of this one…until they didn’t. With 3:47 left in Q3, the Scarlet Knights had an 85% win probability.
Over the last 18:47, Lehigh outscored Rutgers 8-2. Somehow, everything to better for the Mountain Hawks. Their FO % went from 44% to 82%. Their turnover rate dropped from 50% to 33%. They even shot better, improving from 29% to 50%.
Lehigh’s season may depend on how well they can play the rest of the way like they did in the last 19 minutes of this one.
Lehigh SplitsPre Q3 3:49Post Q3 3:49Possessions2821Off. Efficiency17.9%38.1%Shooting Pct29%50%Faceoff %43.8%81.8%Turnover%50%33%T.O.P.48%61%Possession Length43.229.7Time to First Shot36.827.3Shots/Possession0.610.76
This was a tale of 2 splits. Lehigh did not bring their A-game for the first 41:37 of this game. But then, a switch got flipped and they turned into a different team.They probably aren’t going to win 82% of their face offs the rest of the way.It does seem like this was a case of the team being a bit more loose during the comeback. They won 64% of the groundballs post-split compare to just 33% pre-split. They took less time on offense and put more emphasis on getting shots on net than on possession.I have said this many times, but it does seem that teams tend to perform better when they are unleashed.
Splits
Rutgers SplitsPre Q3 3:49Post Q3 3:49Possessions3212Off. Efficiency25.0%16.7%Shooting Pct22%22%Faceoff %56.2%18.2%Turnover%16%42%T.O.P.52%39%Possession Length41.633.2Time to First Shot30.627.5Shots/Possession1.120.75
I’ll keep it brief with the Rutgers side of the story.They faced a possession disadvantage during the Lehigh comeback, but they also got sloppy. Their turnover rate while they built the lead was 16%. During the Lehigh comeback, it was 42%.
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalLehigh324413Rutgers242210
This was billed as one of the top mid-week games of the year, and it did not disappoint. Scarlet Knights and Mountain Hawks gave us a great one. Rutgers had control of this one…until they didn’t. With 3:47 left in Q3, the Scarlet Knights had an 85% win probability.
Over the last 18:47, Lehigh outscored Rutgers 8-2. Somehow, everything to better for the Mountain Hawks. Their FO % went from 44% to 82%. Their turnover rate dropped from 50% to 33%. They even shot better, improving from 29% to 50%.
Lehigh’s season may depend on how well they can play the rest of the way like they did in the last 19 minutes of this one.
Pre Q3 3:49Post Q3 3:49Possessions2821Off. Efficiency17.9%38.1%Shooting Pct29%50%Faceoff %43.8%81.8%Turnover%50%33%T.O.P.48%61%Possession Length43.229.7Time to First Shot36.827.3Shots/Possession0.610.76
This was a tale of 2 splits. Lehigh did not bring their A-game for the first 41:37 of this game. But then, a switch got flipped and they turned into a different team.They probably aren’t going to win 82% of their face offs the rest of the way.It does seem like this was a case of the team being a bit more loose during the comeback. They won 64% of the groundballs post-split compare to just 33% pre-split. They took less time on offense and put more emphasis on getting shots on net than on possession.I have said this many times, but it does seem that teams tend to perform better when they are unleashed.
Splits
Pre Q3 3:49Post Q3 3:49Possessions3212Off. Efficiency25.0%16.7%Shooting Pct22%22%Faceoff %56.2%18.2%Turnover%16%42%T.O.P.52%39%Possession Length41.633.2Time to First Shot30.627.5Shots/Possession1.120.75
I’ll keep it brief with the Rutgers side of the story.They faced a possession disadvantage during the Lehigh comeback, but they also got sloppy. Their turnover rate while they built the lead was 16%. During the Lehigh comeback, it was 42%.
