Notre Dame Key StretchKey StretchOtherGoals011Possessions1234Off. Efficiency0.0%32.4%Shooting Pct0%41%Faceoff %83.3%50.0%Turnover%58%32%T.O.P.43%54%Possession Length42.337.7Time to First Shot64.227.9Shots/Possession0.330.79The stretch analyzed ran ~19 minutes from Q3 8:55 to Q4 5:02
So one second, I’m checking scores, and ND is up 5 goals. Ok I thought, they are building off the Denver win and really starting to maybe establish themselves as a top team in the country. Boy, that match-up with Duke is going to be fun.All of sudden, I check scores and they are losing. What the heck happened?Well, in the most basic terms, there was a stretch of about 19 minutes between the 3rd and 4th quarters where the Irish were outscored by UVA 7-0. That’s how you turn a 5-goal lead into a 2-goal deficit.
Key Stretch
Virginia Key StretchKey StretchOtherGoals76Possessions1232Off. Efficiency58.3%18.8%Shooting Pct37%22%Faceoff %16.7%50.0%Turnover%17%34%T.O.P.57%46%Possession Length56.534.2Time to First Shot41.337.7Shots/Possession1.580.84
Let’s dig a bit deeper and see if we can figure out what went wrong for Corrigan’s bunch. For starters, the game slowed down a bit. In the other 41 minutes, Notre Dame’s average possession lasted 38 seconds and UVA’s avg possession lasted 34 seconds. In the key stretch, the script flipped, and ND’s average possession lasted 42 seconds (not a huge slowdown) and UVA’s increased to 57 seconds (a huge increase). And that caused a big T.O.P. disparity; during the key stretch, UVA had the ball 57% of the time.The other big difference was turnovers. The Cavs cut their turnover rate to only 17% (vs 34% for the rest of the game). As a result, they got 1.58 shots per possession compared to .84 for the rest of the game. UVA shot a bit better during the comeback (37% vs 22%), but the big difference was that they unleashed way more shots. For whatever reason, the ND defense just wasn’t able to turn some of those missed shots into possessions.The one big surprising thing during the stretch was faceoffs. I figured that everything went wrong for the Irish, but in fact, faceoffs was a bright spot during the run. ND won 5 of 6 vs just 50% for the rest of the game. Turns out, it’s not all about possessions.
Tale of the Tape
Stat CategoryNotre DameVirginiaGoals1113Shots3146Shots on Goal1724Possessions4644Groundballs2531Saves116Save%46%35%Shooting Pct35%28%Faceoffs1511Faceoff %57.7%42.3%Turnovers1813Turnover%39%30%
Taking a step back and looking at this game in a more holistic way probably makes things sting a bit less for Irish fans. They shot better than UVA. They were almost even on GBs. They had a higher save %. They won more faceoffs.A shot disparity of 46 to 31 when they had more possessions than UVA is a bit of an anomaly. Generally, teams that take more shots per possession end up having higher turnover rates to boot (if you were taking a single shot per possession, it generally means you are scoring more goals). So the fact that UVA was getting so many shots per possession while turning it over so little seems like something that wouldn’t pop up in future Irish games. We shall see.
Advanced Metrics
Stat CategoryNotre DameVirginiaOff. Efficiency23.9%29.5%T.O.P.48%52%Possession Length35.840.3Time to First Shot34.238.9Shots/Possession0.671.05
I’ll reiterate one point. This game just felt a little fluky when I looked at the advanced stats. You won’t see many teams with a 1+ shots per possession number who also have a higher efficiency rating AND have a lower turnover rate.
Key StretchOtherGoals011Possessions1234Off. Efficiency0.0%32.4%Shooting Pct0%41%Faceoff %83.3%50.0%Turnover%58%32%T.O.P.43%54%Possession Length42.337.7Time to First Shot64.227.9Shots/Possession0.330.79The stretch analyzed ran ~19 minutes from Q3 8:55 to Q4 5:02
So one second, I’m checking scores, and ND is up 5 goals. Ok I thought, they are building off the Denver win and really starting to maybe establish themselves as a top team in the country. Boy, that match-up with Duke is going to be fun.All of sudden, I check scores and they are losing. What the heck happened?Well, in the most basic terms, there was a stretch of about 19 minutes between the 3rd and 4th quarters where the Irish were outscored by UVA 7-0. That’s how you turn a 5-goal lead into a 2-goal deficit.
Key Stretch
Key StretchOtherGoals76Possessions1232Off. Efficiency58.3%18.8%Shooting Pct37%22%Faceoff %16.7%50.0%Turnover%17%34%T.O.P.57%46%Possession Length56.534.2Time to First Shot41.337.7Shots/Possession1.580.84
Let’s dig a bit deeper and see if we can figure out what went wrong for Corrigan’s bunch. For starters, the game slowed down a bit. In the other 41 minutes, Notre Dame’s average possession lasted 38 seconds and UVA’s avg possession lasted 34 seconds. In the key stretch, the script flipped, and ND’s average possession lasted 42 seconds (not a huge slowdown) and UVA’s increased to 57 seconds (a huge increase). And that caused a big T.O.P. disparity; during the key stretch, UVA had the ball 57% of the time.The other big difference was turnovers. The Cavs cut their turnover rate to only 17% (vs 34% for the rest of the game). As a result, they got 1.58 shots per possession compared to .84 for the rest of the game. UVA shot a bit better during the comeback (37% vs 22%), but the big difference was that they unleashed way more shots. For whatever reason, the ND defense just wasn’t able to turn some of those missed shots into possessions.The one big surprising thing during the stretch was faceoffs. I figured that everything went wrong for the Irish, but in fact, faceoffs was a bright spot during the run. ND won 5 of 6 vs just 50% for the rest of the game. Turns out, it’s not all about possessions.
Tale of the Tape
Notre DameVirginiaGoals1113Shots3146Shots on Goal1724Possessions4644Groundballs2531Saves116Save%46%35%Shooting Pct35%28%Faceoffs1511Faceoff %57.7%42.3%Turnovers1813Turnover%39%30%
Taking a step back and looking at this game in a more holistic way probably makes things sting a bit less for Irish fans. They shot better than UVA. They were almost even on GBs. They had a higher save %. They won more faceoffs.A shot disparity of 46 to 31 when they had more possessions than UVA is a bit of an anomaly. Generally, teams that take more shots per possession end up having higher turnover rates to boot (if you were taking a single shot per possession, it generally means you are scoring more goals). So the fact that UVA was getting so many shots per possession while turning it over so little seems like something that wouldn’t pop up in future Irish games. We shall see.
Advanced metrics
Notre DameVirginiaOff. Efficiency23.9%29.5%T.O.P.48%52%Possession Length35.840.3Time to First Shot34.238.9Shots/Possession0.671.05
I’ll reiterate one point. This game just felt a little fluky when I looked at the advanced stats. You won’t see many teams with a 1+ shots per possession number who also have a higher efficiency rating AND have a lower turnover rate.
