Cornell vs Yale
Cornell vs Yale
March 16, 2019
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalCornell143311Yale374216
Season Comparison
Yale SeasonSeason-To-Datevs. CornellOff. Efficiency28.7%29.1%Shooting Pct28%35%Faceoff %77.2%80.0%Turnover%35%25%T.O.P.51%57%Possession Length22.637.2Time to First Shot37.630.4Shots/Possession1.060.84
Seems like there has been some hand-wringing over Yale’s start to the season. They lost a lot of talent from last year, and you never really know how a team is going to gel. This is why we have such a big adjustment back to the mean in our Lax-ELO model.I have no idea whether this is a harbinger of things to come for Yale, but we can certainly compare the stats for the Cornell win against their profile from their other games.The big thing that stands out is that the offense was a bit more aggressive in this one. They took a full 7 seconds less to launch their first shot than in their previous games. And it paid off: they shot 35% in this one vs 28% in their prior games. A more aggressive offense taking quicker, but better, shots feels like what happens when an offense starts to feel comfortable playing together.Digging into the pace stats is illuminating as well. On the year, Yale has been very inefficient on possessions lasting less than 30 seconds (19%). They were actually worse in this game (12%). On the year, they have been much much better in intermediate possessions (lasting between 30-60 seconds). Same story in this game (9/19 for 47% efficiency).The big difference for Yale is that they shifted a lot of their possessions from the quick bucket to the intermediate bucket. On the year, they were 53% quick and 26% intermediate. Against Cornell, they narrowed the gap to 46%/35%. That is a better profile for Yale given their efficiency stats.
Splits
Cornell SplitsPre Q3 15:00Post Q3 15:00Possessions2219Off. Efficiency22.7%31.6%Shooting Pct29%38%Faceoff %23.5%15.4%Turnover%41%32%T.O.P.44%43%Possession Length36.040.8Time to First Shot26.628.5Shots/Possession0.770.84
For Cornell, you are left picking up the pieces. A win here, after the win over Towson, would have really lit a fire under the Big Red season. As it stands, you’d have to favor Yale in a rematch during the Ivy League tournament.Still, Cornell should take heart with their performance in the second half, when they played Yale to a 6-6 draw. And it wasn’t just because Yale was trying to hang on to a lead; the Cornell offense was measurably better in the last two quarters. Their shooting percentage jumped from 29% to 38%. Their turnover rate dropped from 24% to 15%. And their overall offensive efficiency improved as a result.Not sure whether Cornell solved some combination of the Yale defense or Ierlan in net, but the second half is a much rosier story for Milliman’s bunch.
Tale of the Tape
Stat CategoryCornellYaleGoals1116Shots3346Shots on Goal2031Possessions4155Groundballs2822Saves159Save%48%45%Shooting Pct33%35%Faceoffs624Faceoff %20.0%80.0%Turnovers1514Turnover%37%25%
With that said, Cornell’s chances going forward would take a mighty leap forward if they could figure out their face-off issues. They dodged that bullet against Towson, but Yale’s 4-to-1 FO advantage in this one really reduced the Cornell margin for error.
Advanced Metrics
Stat CategoryCornellYaleOff. Efficiency26.8%29.1%T.O.P.43%57%Possession Length38.137.2Time to First Shot27.530.4Shots/Possession0.800.84
If they can’t, Cornell is faced with a dilemma. In general, offenses that slow down artificially for the sake of T.O.P. tend to see a drop-off in efficiency. But if their defense is going to have to be engaged 55 to 60% of their games, it’s going to be a long slog on that end. In this one, they faced a 43% to 57% possession disadvantage and a 41 to 55 possession margin. Hard to consistently come out ahead when you are starting so far behind.
Let’s talk about Matt Brandau
Stats: Matt BrandauQ1Q2Q3Q4TotalGoals12216Assists00112Shots143210Shots on Goal12328Shooting Pct100%50%67%50%60%Groundballs01012Turnovers02002EGA1.022.152.591.747.51
I don’t know Matt Brandau; haven’t talked to him. Haven’t heard any post-game comments from him. But I’m guessing he’s feeling pretty good today. The freshman from Baltimore just about doubled his season EGA total in this one game, thanks to 5 unassisted goals as part of an 8-point 2 GB stat line.On the year, he is only 7th on the team in play shares, but in this one, he was the top-dog. We said this many times, but an offense that has a lot of options is a much more difficult offense to contain than one that is focused on a single guy. If you add Brandau as a guy that can create his own offense (and 5 unassisted goals suggests that he can), Yale looks a lot scarier. That in itself was probably a big part of the “leap” that Yale seems to have taken.
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalCornell143311Yale374216
Season Comparison
Season-To-Datevs. CornellOff. Efficiency28.7%29.1%Shooting Pct28%35%Faceoff %77.2%80.0%Turnover%35%25%T.O.P.51%57%Possession Length22.637.2Time to First Shot37.630.4Shots/Possession1.060.84
Seems like there has been some hand-wringing over Yale’s start to the season. They lost a lot of talent from last year, and you never really know how a team is going to gel. This is why we have such a big adjustment back to the mean in our Lax-ELO model.I have no idea whether this is a harbinger of things to come for Yale, but we can certainly compare the stats for the Cornell win against their profile from their other games.The big thing that stands out is that the offense was a bit more aggressive in this one. They took a full 7 seconds less to launch their first shot than in their previous games. And it paid off: they shot 35% in this one vs 28% in their prior games. A more aggressive offense taking quicker, but better, shots feels like what happens when an offense starts to feel comfortable playing together.Digging into the pace stats is illuminating as well. On the year, Yale has been very inefficient on possessions lasting less than 30 seconds (19%). They were actually worse in this game (12%). On the year, they have been much much better in intermediate possessions (lasting between 30-60 seconds). Same story in this game (9/19 for 47% efficiency).The big difference for Yale is that they shifted a lot of their possessions from the quick bucket to the intermediate bucket. On the year, they were 53% quick and 26% intermediate. Against Cornell, they narrowed the gap to 46%/35%. That is a better profile for Yale given their efficiency stats.
Splits
Pre Q3 15:00Post Q3 15:00Possessions2219Off. Efficiency22.7%31.6%Shooting Pct29%38%Faceoff %23.5%15.4%Turnover%41%32%T.O.P.44%43%Possession Length36.040.8Time to First Shot26.628.5Shots/Possession0.770.84
For Cornell, you are left picking up the pieces. A win here, after the win over Towson, would have really lit a fire under the Big Red season. As it stands, you’d have to favor Yale in a rematch during the Ivy League tournament.Still, Cornell should take heart with their performance in the second half, when they played Yale to a 6-6 draw. And it wasn’t just because Yale was trying to hang on to a lead; the Cornell offense was measurably better in the last two quarters. Their shooting percentage jumped from 29% to 38%. Their turnover rate dropped from 24% to 15%. And their overall offensive efficiency improved as a result.Not sure whether Cornell solved some combination of the Yale defense or Ierlan in net, but the second half is a much rosier story for Milliman’s bunch.
Tale of the Tape
CornellYaleGoals1116Shots3346Shots on Goal2031Possessions4155Groundballs2822Saves159Save%48%45%Shooting Pct33%35%Faceoffs624Faceoff %20.0%80.0%Turnovers1514Turnover%37%25%
With that said, Cornell’s chances going forward would take a mighty leap forward if they could figure out their face-off issues. They dodged that bullet against Towson, but Yale’s 4-to-1 FO advantage in this one really reduced the Cornell margin for error.
Advanced metrics
CornellYaleOff. Efficiency26.8%29.1%T.O.P.43%57%Possession Length38.137.2Time to First Shot27.530.4Shots/Possession0.800.84
If they can’t, Cornell is faced with a dilemma. In general, offenses that slow down artificially for the sake of T.O.P. tend to see a drop-off in efficiency. But if their defense is going to have to be engaged 55 to 60% of their games, it’s going to be a long slog on that end. In this one, they faced a 43% to 57% possession disadvantage and a 41 to 55 possession margin. Hard to consistently come out ahead when you are starting so far behind.
Let’s talk about Matt Brandau
Q1Q2Q3Q4TotalGoals12216Assists00112Shots143210Shots on Goal12328Shooting Pct100%50%67%50%60%Groundballs01012Turnovers02002EGA1.022.152.591.747.51
I don’t know Matt Brandau; haven’t talked to him. Haven’t heard any post-game comments from him. But I’m guessing he’s feeling pretty good today. The freshman from Baltimore just about doubled his season EGA total in this one game, thanks to 5 unassisted goals as part of an 8-point 2 GB stat line.On the year, he is only 7th on the team in play shares, but in this one, he was the top-dog. We said this many times, but an offense that has a lot of options is a much more difficult offense to contain than one that is focused on a single guy. If you add Brandau as a guy that can create his own offense (and 5 unassisted goals suggests that he can), Yale looks a lot scarier. That in itself was probably a big part of the “leap” that Yale seems to have taken.