MLax: Cornell 16 @ Syracuse 15 (FINAL)

[Hillel Hoffmann]

Here's what I take away from the Syracuse game:

* Cornell's weakness at short-stick defensive midfield was exposed by Syracuse's deep and talented middies, as expected, even though Brooks seemed to be slowed by injury. There are few teams that will be able to do this as effectively as Syracuse did. That's why this win was so important: Cornell may have eliminated the team that was the Big Red's worst possible playoff opponent.

* Although the faceoff game continues to be a concern, Cornell's wing play has improved so much -- both in terms of picking up loose balls and swarming the other team's FOGO -- that this weak area has moved down to number three on the list of Yucky Stuff That Could Derail Us, replaced by...

* Penalties, penalties, penalties. How can you not love the newfound defensive aggression and the extension of Cornell's pressure defense all over the field? But there is an unpleasant side effect: an inevitable surge in penalties. More aggression causes more turnovers, but it also brings flags. Some players (Gradinger, for example) are having a hard time controlling their bodies and sticks. In the last three games, opponents have averaged about three more man-up opportunities per game than Cornell. That can't continue in the playoffs.

* John Glynn is GOLD. What a player. Three more goals agains Syracuse. In his first year as a starter, he already has 26 points in nine games and is leading the team in assists with 15. Compare that to last year's middie stars, Boulukos and Seibald, who ended up with 37 and 33 points respectively in 14 games. (True, Glynn doesn't get the pole nearly as often as Boulukos or Seibald did.)

* Cornell is the hardest riding team I've seen in decades. It's just too cool. (For all of David Mitchell's goals, he's even better on the ride -- and better still on ground balls.) Cornell's hard ride is more effective in this wimpy conservative modern era of lax because so few teams do it now, which means that opponents are less prepared. This could really help in the playoffs. An analogy: John Chaney's infamous match-up zone defense often helped Temple go deeper than they'd otherwise go in the basketball tournament because many opposing teams had never seen anything like it during the regular season.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote Hillel Hoffmann] Cornell may have eliminated the team that was the Big Red's worst possible playoff opponent.[/Q]or we may have just set it up so that if we both win out, we play them for our first game.


[Q]Although the faceoff game continues to be a concern, Cornell's wing play has improved so much -- both in terms of picking up loose balls and swarming the other team's FOGO -- that this weak area has moved down to number three on the list of Yucky Stuff That Could Derail Us, replaced by...*[/quote]I still think this is our number one concern. We can't give them the ball 60-70% of the time. While you can beat them with turnovers, I just don't think you could win out through the playoffs like that.

[redhair34]

[quote Hillel Hoffmann]Here's what I take away from the Syracuse game:

* Cornell's weakness at short-stick defensive midfield was exposed by Syracuse's deep and talented middies, as expected, even though Brooks seemed to be slowed by injury. There are few teams that will be able to do this as effectively as Syracuse did. That's why this win was so important: Cornell may have eliminated the team that was the Big Red's worst possible playoff opponent.

* Although the faceoff game continues to be a concern, Cornell's wing play has improved so much -- both in terms of picking up loose balls and swarming the other team's FOGO -- that this weak area has moved down to number three on the list of Yucky Stuff That Could Derail Us, replaced by...

* Penalties, penalties, penalties. How can you not love the newfound defensive aggression and the extension of Cornell's pressure defense all over the field? But there is an unpleasant side effect: an inevitable surge in penalties. More aggression causes more turnovers, but it also brings flags. Some players (Gradinger, for example) are having a hard time controlling their bodies and sticks. In the last three games, opponents have averaged about three more man-up opportunities per game than Cornell. That can't continue in the playoffs.

* John Glynn is GOLD. What a player. Three more goals agains Syracuse. In his first year as a starter, he already has 26 points in nine games and is leading the team in assists with 15. Compare that to last year's middie stars, Boulukos and Seibald, who ended up with 37 and 33 points respectively in 14 games. (True, Glynn doesn't get the pole nearly as often as Boulukos or Seibald did.)

* Cornell is the hardest riding team I've seen in decades. It's just too cool. (For all of David Mitchell's goals, he's even better on the ride -- and better still on ground balls.) Cornell's hard ride is more effective in this wimpy conservative modern era of lax because so few teams do it now, which means that opponents are less prepared. This could really help in the playoffs. An analogy: John Chaney's infamous match-up zone defense often helped Temple go deeper than they'd otherwise go in the basketball tournament because many opposing teams had never seen anything like it during the regular season.[/quote]

Thanks for the analysis.  I agree with pretty much all of it, but I just want to add a few of my own observations...

- It was a fantastic game.  #2 Cornell sporting event of the year so far (behind Harvard game at Lynah).  There was a pretty big Cornell contingent at the game--larger than any away hockey game the last two years.  

- Belisle has to be one of the most underrated defensemen in the country.  He absolutely owned Leveille all night long.

- I thought our shot selection and to some degree our decision making was very poor in the second half.    

- McMonagle, who is usually outstanding, had a pretty weak game. He didn't seem to come out and challenge the shooters and cut down angles as much as usually does.  I kept waiting for that one big save at the end of the game to seal it for us, but it never came.  He really should have saved Brooks game tying goal.

- The best thing about this team is that they never let up.  

I can't wait for the Princeton game.

[Hillel Hoffmann]

Good points, Jim. You're right, Syracuse could win out. But I think Cornell's win significantly reduced the chances that we'll face them in the playoffs.

Don't get me wrong, I still think faceoff may end up being Cornell's kryptonite. But I'm not nearly as concerned as I was last year. There are other reasons for that besides the ones I outlined above. First, Cornell's faceoff game, even without the greatly improved wing play, has improved a lot compared to last year. Also, with a couple of exceptions, many of the teams most likely to make the playoffs have equally weak (or even weaker) faceoff situations. Believe it or not, Cornell actually has one of the highest faceoff win percentages among the top-ranked teams (the highest in that group is Virginia, winning a feeble 54 percent -- Cornell is at 52 percent). Last year's playoff teams were loaded with killer faceoff men, such as Deane from Massachusetts, Snider from Denver, Tamberrino from Maryland, and G. Peyser from Johns Hopkins. Not so in 2007. This year, the guys above are gone and the best faceoff men, for the most part, are on teams that have tanked (Delaware, Harvard, Syracuse, and Yale, for example).

There is one big exception. Among the teams that are most likely to make the playoffs, one that I fear is Navy. Like Syracuse, they have the right weapons to prey on Cornell's weaknesses, including a great faceoff guy (Will Wallace).

[Hillel Hoffmann]

More excellent points, redhair34. I'm with you on everything. Indeed, McMonagle was weak; it was his second bad performance in the Carrier Dome. He was even worse in 2005. In two games at Syracuse, McMonagle gave up 29 goals and made only 17 saves. How ironic that he's the first Cornell goalie to win two road games against Syracuse since the Dome was built.

[JasonN95]

[quote Jim Hyla]or we may have just set it up so that if we both win out, we play them for our first game.
[/quote]

I have a conveyor belt of favorite lax teams after Cornell that just so happens to match Syracuse's remaining schedule. :-)  I want Syracuse out, because (a) I'm feeling spiteful (I have an unhealthy dislike of Syracuse --there, I said it), and (b) I don't want them to get a second chance at Cornell.

[scoop85]

[quote Jim Hyla][quote Hillel Hoffmann] Cornell may have eliminated the team that was the Big Red's worst possible playoff opponent.[/Q]or we may have just set it up so that if we both win out, we play them for our first game.

Hard to imagine that if we were to win out (not woofing, just speculating) that we wouldn't get the MAAC champion.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote scoop85][quote Jim Hyla][quote Hillel Hoffmann] Cornell may have eliminated the team that was the Big Red's worst possible playoff opponent.[/quote]or we may have just set it up so that if we both win out, we play them for our first game.[/quote]

Hard to imagine that if we were to win out (not woofing, just speculating) that we wouldn't get the MAAC champion.[/quote]

Actually, that's just not how it works in lacrosse. Only the top 8 teams are 'ranked' (1 to . The bottom 8 are all equal from the committee's perspective ('unranked'). So 9 = 10 = 11 ... = 16. The first round matchups are done, I believe, mainly geographically - hence the reason we could host the Orange.

[Hillel Hoffmann]

[quote DeltaOne81]Actually, that's just not how it works in lacrosse. Only the top 8 teams are 'ranked' (1 to . The bottom 8 are all equal from the committee's perspective ('unranked'). So 9 = 10 = 11 ... = 16. The first round matchups are done, I believe, mainly geographically - hence the reason we could host the Orange.[/quote]
Yup, Fred's right. That's why MAAC champs Providence ended up playing at third-seeded Hofstra last year instead of top-seeded Virginia or second-seeded Maryland. Only the top eight teams are seeded.

The geographic placement of unseeded tournament teams seldom works out neatly, especially when a team like Denver makes the tournament. The committee seems to do whatever it can to reduce air travel, and distant unseeded teams often seem to end up playing in locations where flights are cheap and plentiful (thus Denver at Maryland last year?).

Here's a scary thought. If Albany stumbles in the final weeks of the season, Cornell's reward for a top seed might be a first-round date with the Danes.

[JasonN95]

Didn't want to start a new thread for this...

Sunday's Syracuse-Rutgers game will be on SNY (625 on DirecTV); game starts at 1pm. Go Scarlet Knights!

[Josh '99]

[quote Hillel Hoffmann]Here's a scary thought. If Albany stumbles in the final weeks of the season, Cornell's reward for a top seed might be a first-round date with the Danes.[/quote]I have a hard time believing a hypothetical 13-1 Albany team wouldn't be a top 8 seed when *everyone* else has at least two losses.

[Beeeej]

[quote Josh '99][quote Hillel Hoffmann]Here's a scary thought. If Albany stumbles in the final weeks of the season, Cornell's reward for a top seed might be a first-round date with the Danes.[/quote]I have a hard time believing a hypothetical 13-1 Albany team wouldn't be a top 8 seed when *everyone* else has at least two losses.[/quote]

A hypothetical 13-1 Albany team doesn't sound much like stumbling in the final weeks of the season to me.  At this point, they could still go 11-4, thus justifying the lower half of the field as Hillel seemed to me to be suggesting.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote JasonN95]Didn't want to start a new thread for this...

Sunday's Syracuse-Rutgers game will be on SNY (625 on DirecTV); game starts at 1pm. Go Scarlet Knights![/quote]Well, it might be better for us if SU wins. But I know that can't overcome the dislike some have for SU.