College Scrimmage Roundup

A pair of Michigan Universities hosted scrimmages over the weekend, with D-1 Detroit facing a pair of D3 opponents (Kenyon and Carthage) in Pontiac, and the MCLA's Michigan taking on Division-1 Bellarmine Saturday night in Ann Arbor. I'm the first to admit I follow the Wolverines much more closely, so be prepared to read plenty about them.

Detroit

The Titans' website doesn't provide a ton of detail on their scrimmages, but UDM took down Kenyon 11-5 and Carthage 12-2 for a scrimmage sweep on the day. Neither team was particularly good in D3 last year (LaxPower rated them #84 and #128, respectively), so it's tough to draw too much information from the outcomes. Additionally, it sounds like Coach Holtz emptied the bench, as 12 different Titans scored, and all three goalies saw time in the net.

The Titans' pre-season is over, and they'll open their regular season on Saturday at #17 Delaware. Look for a preview on these pages in the coming days.

Michigan

The Wolverines took down Bellarmine 14-8 last preseason in a game that wasn't as close as the final score indicated, so most people - myself included - expected a Wolverine win, though perhaps more competitively than last year's contest. An 18-11 margin in favor of the Knights certainly didn't seem like the most likely outcome.

The Bad

So, uh, what went wrong? I can't say exactly, because I wasn't there, and there were no official stats recorded (or at least published) for the scrimmage. However, a number of players sat out with injury, including a few important ones:

• Sr D Harry Freid (1st-Tm AA 2009, 2010)



• Sr D Justin Burgin (3rd-Tm All-CCLA 2010)



• RSo D Jordan Bargas



• Fr D Jake Dockser



• Fr M Andrew Hayden



• Fr M George Sutherland



• Jr M Alex Vasileff



• Jr FO Specialist Edward Ernst

Maybe the three freshmen aren't a big part of Michigan's gameplan yet, but 3 of Michigan's top 5 defensemen missed the game, including the guy who will likely go down as one of the best defenders to wear a Michigan uniform.

On top of missing a huge contingent of defenders, a midfield that was already hit hard by graduation certainly wasn't helped by having three guys watch from the bench. Vasileff, the only non-freshman of that group, notched a 3-7--10 scoreline last year, playing in 12 games.

Finally, I've covered the importance of the faceoff specialist to Michigan's success over the past few years both at mgoblog and in more detail on these pages, so not having the top faceoff specialist available was a big hit. Indeed, the numbers started out pretty ugly:

Michigan only won five of 16 faceoffs in the first half but battled back in the second, winning 11 of 14.

Backup faceoff specialist Harrison Silver struggled, going 3/11, while Brian Greiner, who recently switched to faceoffs, did much better at 13/18. Without knowing whether Bellarmine also switched out their faceoff specialist (their official site has no mention of the scrimmage), it's hard to say whether Greiner did so much better because he was facing easier competition, or because he should be the #2 man. Based on his comment to the official site, it may be (at least partially) the latter:

“Coach didn’t feel comfortable letting me jump right in and start because I’ve been out for a year with a torn ACL and haven’t actually played in a college game in over a calendar year.

When Ernst comes back, faceoffs should return to being a strength, though probably not as much as they have been in the past.

The Good

Michigan got some pretty balanced scoring (partially because they want to play a deeper bench in a scrimmage situation), with goals scored by the following players:

• Matt Asperheim



• Ryan Dutton-O'Hara (2)



• Trevor Yealy



• Doug Bryant (3)



• Chad Carroll (2)

Two goals went unaccounted for in the recap, so your guess is as good as mine as far as who scored them. It's also great to see some newcomers score, as Yealy and Asperheim were the only players listed who were on the team last year. Even if both of the mystery goals were scored by returning players, that's seven out of eleven goals scored by new guys.

Without official stats, it's hard to evaluate how the keepers performed. I would guess Stone (5 saves, 12 goals against) faced much more pressure than Fowler (4 saves, 6 goals against). Either way, it's tough to assess their play other than saying Fowler had a much better save percentage.

Up Next

The Wolverines will face Division III Wittenberg Friday Night at 7:30 in Oosterbaan Fieldhouse. The Tigers finished 2010 rated 47th in D3 to Laxpower, and they went 10-5 on the season, winning the North Coast Conference with a 4-1 record.

University of Michigan Season Preview

...is up at The Mothership.

UMich Lacrosse 2010: Tempo-free

Lacrosse is a sport that's fairly new to the mainstream - if you even consider it to have arrived - and considering advanced statistics are a niche market for a sport as popular as basketball, it stands to reason that they're practically non-existent for "the fastest game on two feet."

Enter Syracuse blog Orange:44, which tried to establish a possession-based method of analysis for the sport. This is similar to tempo-free statistics in basketball, though the possessions aren't equal for each side, as faceoffs and the ride/clear game combine to mean teams won't each possess the ball the same number of times. The method is imperfect, and record-keeping in lacrosse isn't widespread (particularly at the club level, where I'm focusing in this post), but it's better than nothing, no?

Without further ado, the stats are derived like so:

• Possessions = Faceoff wins + clearing attempts + opponent failed clears.
• Efficiency = Goals/Possessions.

For discussion of why those equations are what they are, visit the above-linked Orange:44 post.

Arizona
Arizona		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	9	Faceoff Wins	15
Clearing	7-18	Clearing	18-26
Possessions	35	Possessions	52
Goals	5	Goals	15
Offensive Efficiency	.143	Offensive Efficiency	.288

In the opening game of the season, Michigan dominated possession (as we'll see, that will be a theme throughout the season), and also was more efficient in scoring goals on each of those possessions than were the Wildcats.

Arizona State
Arizona State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	4	Faceoff Wins	21
Clearing	18-36	Clearing	17-25
Possessions	48	Possessions	64
Goals	10	Goals	11
Offensive Efficiency	.208	Offensive Efficiency	.172

Another theme we'll see over the course of the season: Michigan is less efficient on a per-possession basis than the top-flight competition that they face.

BYU
BYU		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	8	Faceoff Wins	17
Clearing	13-21	Clearing	24-30
Possessions	35	Possessions	55
Goals	9	Goals	13
Offensive Efficiency	.257	Offensive Efficiency	.236

Again, the Wolverines were less efficient than the opponent on a goals-per-possession basis, but dominated possession in order to come away with a comfortable win.

Simon Fraser
Simon Fraser		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	10	Faceoff Wins	27
Clearing	16-33	Clearing	27-29
Possessions	45	Possessions	73
Goals	10	Goals	22
Offensive Efficiency	.222	Offensive Efficiency	.301

In the first home game of the year, Michigan dominated possession once more (look at that gaudy number on clears), and was also more efficient than the opponent.

Eastern Michigan
Eastern Michigan		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	8	Faceoff Wins	17
Clearing	8-25	Clearing	16-18
Possessions	35	Possessions	52
Goals	2	Goals	19
Offensive Efficiency	.057	Offensive Efficiency	.365

Eastern Michigan was terrible (as were most of Michigan's CCLA opponents), so this number isn't particularly meaningful going forward.

Oregon
Oregon		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	5	Faceoff Wins	7
Clearing	16-27	Clearing	21-30
Possessions	41	Possessions	48
Goals	4	Goals	5
Offensive Efficiency	.098	Offensive Efficiency	.104

This game took place on a horrible, windy, snowy day in Dallas, and both teams' offenses were unable to put the ball in the back of the net with any efficiency. The Wolverines won on an overtime goal.

Minnesota-Duluth
Minnesota-Duluth		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	11	Faceoff Wins	13
Clearing	12-22	Clearing	13-24
Possessions	44	Possessions	47
Goals	7	Goals	14
Offensive Efficiency	.159	Offensive Efficiency	.298

This was the closest any opponent came all year to Michigan in terms of sheer number of possessions, but the Wolverines were still able to come away with the win because they were much more efficient offensively.

Western Michigan
Western Michigan		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	12	Faceoff Wins	26
Clearing	14-26	Clearing	21-25
Possessions	42	Possessions	63
Goals	5	Goals	29
Offensive Efficiency	.119	Offensive Efficiency	.460

CCLA competition. Make mental adjustments accordingly.

Central Michigan
Central Michigan		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	2	Faceoff Wins	22
Clearing	8-20	Clearing	15-18
Possessions	25	Possessions	52
Goals	1	Goals	19
Offensive Efficiency	.040	Offensive Efficiency	.365

This was by far Michigan's best game of the year - though again, keep in mind that the level of competition was low - dominating possession and efficiency.

Colorado
Colorado		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	8	Faceoff Wins	18
Clearing	19-29	Clearing	20-27
Possessions	44	Possessions	55
Goals	12	Goals	10
Offensive Efficiency	.273	Offensive Efficiency	.182

In Michigan's lone loss of the year, they had a sizable advantage in possession, but were unable to put the ball in the net - mostly on account of a stellar day by Buffs goalie Bradley MacNee - whereas Colorado had one of the most efficient performances of any offense against Michigan's defense.

Colorado State
Colorado State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	5	Faceoff Wins	15
Clearing	18-31	Clearing	19-27
Possessions	44	Possessions	55
Goals	6	Goals	10
Offensive Efficiency	.136	Offensive Efficiency	.182

Michigan rebounded from their first loss in more than two years by sticking to their gameplan: dominate possession. They were also more efficient than the Rams on this day.

Purdue
Purdue		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	4	Faceoff Wins	30
Clearing	15-29	Clearing	22-24
Possessions	35	Possessions	68
Goals	2	Goals	28
Offensive Efficiency	.057	Offensive Efficiency	.412

Good day against bad competition.

Michigan State
Michigan State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	7	Faceoff Wins	15
Clearing	16-34	Clearing	18-22
Possessions	45	Possessions	55
Goals	8	Goals	11
Offensive Efficiency	.178	Offensive Efficiency	.200

In the first matchup between the in-state rivals, Michigan won the possession battle and was slightly more efficient than the opponent. That's a great recipe for success.

Miami OH
Miami OH		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	7	Faceoff Wins	24
Clearing	11-26	Clearing	14-18
Possessions	37	Possessions	57
Goals	5	Goals	23
Offensive Efficiency	.137	Offensive Efficiency	.404

CCLA Competition.

Michigan State
Michigan State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	9	Faceoff Wins	18
Clearing	14-19	Clearing	14-22
Possessions	36	Possessions	45
Goals	11	Goals	13
Offensive Efficiency	.306	Offensive Efficiency	.289

Michigan, per usual, won the possession battle - but they were actually less successful on their clears than were the Spartans. This game was won at the faceoff X, as Stats was slightly more efficient offensively, as well. State's great goalie, Dean Hall, had a hand in that.

Texas State
Texas State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	6	Faceoff Wins	20
Clearing	13-32	Clearing	23-24
Possessions	39	Possessions	63
Goals	3	Goals	19
Offensive Efficiency	.077	Offensive Efficiency	.302

The opening game of the MCLA National Tournament was a demonstration of the enormous gap between the #1 team and the #16 (ish) team in the country.

BYU
BYU		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	7	Faceoff Wins	24
Clearing	11-26	Clearing	14-18
Possessions	37	Possessions	57
Goals	5	Goals	23
Offensive Efficiency	.137	Offensive Efficiency	.404

Though BYU is a national power, and gave Michigan a (somewhat) competitive game earlier in the year, Michigan rode the Cougars into a horrible clearing percentage, owned faceoffs, and nearly tripled up the Cougars' efficiency mark en route to a dominant win.

Chapman
Chapman		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	11	Faceoff Wins	14
Clearing	9-19	Clearing	16-23
Possessions	37	Possessions	47
Goals	10	Goals	12
Offensive Efficiency	.270	Offensive Efficiency	.255

Michigan was less efficient than Chapman (unsurprising, given the wealth of offensive talent the Panthers had last year), and only had a slight edge on faceoffs. The riding game was the key to this win.

Arizona State
Arizona State		Michigan
Faceoff Wins	9	Faceoff Wins	17
Clearing	15-23	Clearing	15-16
Possessions	33	Possessions	41
Goals	11	Goals	12
Offensive Efficiency	.333	Offensive Efficiency	.293

The national championship game was an instant classic, as ASU scored with 34 seconds left to bring the game within a single mark. The Sun Devils were very efficient, but Michigan's typical advantage in possession helped them win the day.

So What Does it All Mean?

So, uh, we've seen Michigan's possession and efficiency numbers over the course of the year, so what conclusions can we draw from the numbers?

• The CCLA is bad. Outside of Michigan and Michigan State, the teams in the CCLA were very bad last year. There's been some conference reorganization, but don't expect the Wolverines to get many serious challenges in the league except from Michigan State.
• Michigan dominates on faceoffs and clears. The Wolverines won the battle at the center of the field in every single game, typically in dominating fashion, for a year-end win percentage over 70. They also had a better clear% in nearly every game (thanks in part to the trademark 10-man ride), to dominate possessions for the season.
• Against good competition, Michigan doesn't have an efficiency edge. Arizona State (twice), BYU, Colorado, Michigan State, and Chapman were all able to operate on a more efficient level than Michigan in individual games this year. However, only Colorado was able to get the win, as Michigan dominated possession.

So, now we know that, while the Wolverines had high and low moments in efficient offensive play, that's not how they won games. They also had high and low moments in defensive play, but again, that's not the driving force behind the 3-year run of 58-1. It's dominating in possession, both on the ride/clear game and on the faceoff.

Michigan Natives Playing D-1 Ball

I'll be following these guys over the course of the year. I'd love to cover all divisions (and even the MCLA), but there are only so many hours in the day.

Air Force

Freshman Attack Tommy McKee (Holt)

Bellarmine

Senior Midfield Ted Avendt (Brother Rice)

Senior Defenseman Patrick Ellis (UD Jesuit)

Junior Midfielder Andrew Bulgarelli (Troy Athens)

Junior Attack Devin Paurach (Brother Rice)

Detroit

Freshman Defenseman Nick Garippa (Notre Dame Prep)

Junior Defenseman Adam Nolan (AA Pioneer)

Junior Attack Scott Harris (Saline)

Freshman LSM Kevin DiSalle (Orchard Lake St. Mary's)

Freshman Midfield Matt Lining (Troy Athens)

Junior Midfielder John Nowicki (De La Salle)

Sophomore Midfielder Tyler Corcoran (South Lyon)

Sophomore Midfielder Stephen Mastracci (Auburn Hills Avondale)

Junior Midfielder Brad Janer (Detroit Catholic Central)

Freshman Midfielder Joe McLean (Country Day)

Senior LSM Tim Shoemaker (Rochester)

Junior Midfielder Adam Parrottino (De La Salle)

Sophomore Defenseman Jamie Hebden (Brother Rice)

Sophomore Attack Erek Bender (De La Salle)

Freshman Goalie Danny Kransberger (Forest Hills Central)

Senior Midfielder Matt Gregson (Flint Powers)

Junior Goalie Mike Brown (Troy Athens)

Redshirt Freshman Midfielder Nick Schesnuk (De La Salle)
Freshman Midfielder Tim Robertson (Notre Dame Prep)
Junior Midfielder Tim Lehto (North Farmington)
Sophomore Midfielder Brandon Davenport (Grosse Point North)
Freshman LSM Max Zwolan (Ann Arbor Pioneer)
Freshman Midfielder Thomas Sible (Forest Hills Central)
Sophomore Defenseman John Dwyer (Detroit Catholic Central)
Freshman Midfielder Drew Schupbach (Orchard Lake Saint Mary's)
Sophomore Attack Tyler Staruch (Brighton)
Sophomore Attack Chris Nemes (Detroit Catholic Central)

Hofstra

Sophomore Midfielder Michael Hamilton (Brother Rice)

Johns Hopkins

Junior Defenseman Andrew Cote (Brother Rice)

Maryland

Junior Midfielder Joe Fontanesi (Brother Rice)

Mercer

Freshman Midfielder Anthony Seling (Detroit Catholic Central)

Mount Saint Mary's

Junior Defenseman Brendan Rooney (UD Jesuit)

Sophomore Midfielder Jopnathan Marsalese (UD Jesuit)

Sophomore Midfielder Conor Carey (UD Jesuit)

Notre Dame

Senior Midfielder Jake Marmul (Detroit Catholic Central)

Ohio State

Senior Defenseman Conor David (Brother Rice)

Penn State

Sophomore Attack Nick Dolik (Brother Rice)

Sophomore Midfielder Danny Henneghan (Brother Rice)

Princeton

Senior Midfielder Tim Palmer (Birmingham Seaholm)

Quinnipiac

Senior Attack Mike Gast (Forest Hills Central)

Sophomore Goalie TJ Yost (Brother Rice)

Sacred Heart

Freshman Midfielder Tom Sardelli (ND Prep)

Stony Brook

Junior Attack Graham Adams (Brother Rice)

Villanova

Junior Midfielder Joe Payne (Brother Rice)

VMI

Freshman Midfielder Vince Reo (UD Jesuit)

Yale

Sophomore Midfielder Bryan Walker (Brother Rice)

Michigan Lacrosse

Welcome to Michigan Lacrosse, where I'll be covering men's lacrosse at all levels within the Great Lakes State. Starting with high schools, I'll also bring insights on the state's MCLA (virtual varsity) teams, in addition to the mitten's lone NCAA program, the University of Detroit-Mercy Titans.

Early in the life of the site, I'll focus on what I know best: University of Michigan lacrosse, with forays into the other areas. A lot of the other coverage may rely on news roundups with links to newspaper websites and other first-hand sources.

Who knows where the site's path may venture? I certainly don't, and I hope you'll stick with me to see it get there.