Rutgers vs Syracuse
Rutgers vs Syracuse
March 15, 2019
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalRutgers632314Syracuse433818
Splits
Syracuse SplitsPre Q4 8:31Post Q4 8:31Possessions436Off. Efficiency30.2%83.3%Shooting Pct27%62%Faceoff %74.2%80.0%Turnover%16%33%T.O.P.55%81%Possession Length39.864.0Time to First Shot32.163.0Shots/Possession1.141.33
I’ve heard this story before. With 8:31 left in Q4, Cuse was down 14-13. To that point, as you might expect, it had been a pretty even match-up. Cuse dominated faceoffs, but Rutgers was a bit better outside of x. The net result was a game where RU had been up, but could never really clamp down on the victory. But then the Dome happened (I can only ascribe it to some sort of Dome-magic at this point…).Over the final 8 and a half minutes, Cuse scored all the goals, they won even more faceoffs and their offense just picked Rutgers apart. Slowly.I say slowly because of the final 8 1/2 minutes, Syracuse had the ball for 6 minutes and 53 seconds. Oftentimes, when a team goes on a run like this, you notice that they picked up the pace, let the horses loose, etc. In this case, Syracuse decided to get extremely methodical. Over the last stretch, they waited 63 seconds before launching their first shot of the possession. I can’t emphasize how unusual this is; I tend to exhort coaches to let their offenses loose. But here, I’m thinking maybe Cuse needs to start playing some slow-it-down offense.
Splits
Rutgers SplitsPre Q4 8:31Post Q4 8:31Possessions362Off. Efficiency38.9%0.0%Shooting Pct41%0%Faceoff %25.8%20.0%Turnover%36%50%T.O.P.45%19%Possession Length39.546.0Time to First Shot30.823.5Shots/Possession0.941.50
For Rutgers, the final 8+ minutes are probably best forgotten. Even if they made all their shots, they still would have come up a goal short. Even more unfortunately, they connected on none of their three shots during the Cuse run.In reality, this comes down to faceoffs. Syracuse won 5 of 6 faceoffs over the last 8+ minutes. Rutgers only had 2 possessions.I go back and forth on the importance of faceoffs to overall winning percentage. I’ve seen some research that suggests that very few games are won that would have been lost if not for a dominant FOGO. Maybe it is not that black-and-white.Rutgers margin for error in the fourth quarter was basically zero because of their faceoff disadvantage. Syracuse performed better, even excluding faceoffs, but they were also able to really milk the clock, knowing they would probably get the next possession anyway. Tough tightrope for the Scarlet Knights to manage.
Let’s talk about Nate Solomon
Stats: Nate SolomonQ1Q2Q3Q4TotalGoals12014Assists00011Shots14128Shots on Goal12115Shooting Pct100%50%0%50%50%Groundballs10102Turnovers12003EGA0.562.170.211.674.61
For all the talk of #22 jerseys and newcomers off to a hot start, EGA (expected-goals-added) can be a useful way to cut through the narratives and focus on the players that are getting it done on the field.Nate Solomon is a guy that’s been around for a while, and as one of the veterans, probably felt the brunt of the pressure that this team has faced (cough cough Colgate). But in this one, he was the top star for the Cuse.His 4.61 EGA stat line came from 4 goals and an assist on 50% shooting. He even absorbed the negative EGA of 3 turnovers to post the top stat line for Syracuse.
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalRutgers632314Syracuse433818
Splits
Pre Q4 8:31Post Q4 8:31Possessions436Off. Efficiency30.2%83.3%Shooting Pct27%62%Faceoff %74.2%80.0%Turnover%16%33%T.O.P.55%81%Possession Length39.864.0Time to First Shot32.163.0Shots/Possession1.141.33
I’ve heard this story before. With 8:31 left in Q4, Cuse was down 14-13. To that point, as you might expect, it had been a pretty even match-up. Cuse dominated faceoffs, but Rutgers was a bit better outside of x. The net result was a game where RU had been up, but could never really clamp down on the victory. But then the Dome happened (I can only ascribe it to some sort of Dome-magic at this point…).Over the final 8 and a half minutes, Cuse scored all the goals, they won even more faceoffs and their offense just picked Rutgers apart. Slowly.I say slowly because of the final 8 1/2 minutes, Syracuse had the ball for 6 minutes and 53 seconds. Oftentimes, when a team goes on a run like this, you notice that they picked up the pace, let the horses loose, etc. In this case, Syracuse decided to get extremely methodical. Over the last stretch, they waited 63 seconds before launching their first shot of the possession. I can’t emphasize how unusual this is; I tend to exhort coaches to let their offenses loose. But here, I’m thinking maybe Cuse needs to start playing some slow-it-down offense.
Splits
Pre Q4 8:31Post Q4 8:31Possessions362Off. Efficiency38.9%0.0%Shooting Pct41%0%Faceoff %25.8%20.0%Turnover%36%50%T.O.P.45%19%Possession Length39.546.0Time to First Shot30.823.5Shots/Possession0.941.50
For Rutgers, the final 8+ minutes are probably best forgotten. Even if they made all their shots, they still would have come up a goal short. Even more unfortunately, they connected on none of their three shots during the Cuse run.In reality, this comes down to faceoffs. Syracuse won 5 of 6 faceoffs over the last 8+ minutes. Rutgers only had 2 possessions.I go back and forth on the importance of faceoffs to overall winning percentage. I’ve seen some research that suggests that very few games are won that would have been lost if not for a dominant FOGO. Maybe it is not that black-and-white.Rutgers margin for error in the fourth quarter was basically zero because of their faceoff disadvantage. Syracuse performed better, even excluding faceoffs, but they were also able to really milk the clock, knowing they would probably get the next possession anyway. Tough tightrope for the Scarlet Knights to manage.
Let’s talk about Nate Solomon
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalGoals12014Assists00011Shots14128Shots on Goal12115Shooting Pct100%50%0%50%50%Groundballs10102Turnovers12003EGA0.562.170.211.674.61
For all the talk of #22 jerseys and newcomers off to a hot start, EGA (expected-goals-added) can be a useful way to cut through the narratives and focus on the players that are getting it done on the field.Nate Solomon is a guy that’s been around for a while, and as one of the veterans, probably felt the brunt of the pressure that this team has faced (cough cough Colgate). But in this one, he was the top star for the Cuse.His 4.61 EGA stat line came from 4 goals and an assist on 50% shooting. He even absorbed the negative EGA of 3 turnovers to post the top stat line for Syracuse.