Cornell lacrosse 2018

[upprdeck]

had cornell shot better they are ahead 3-4 goals and much of the strategy goes out the window

[cu155]

There are a couple of reasons why teams don't faceguard.

1) In doing so it allows Cornell to open up the rest of the field more when effectivly playing 5x5 due to Teat being out of the action.  If a team has multiple scoring threats and the ability to pass well this makes it hard for the rest of the defenders to cover the ball and someone will get open/get off a good shot.  Cornell has multiple scoring threats and attackmen with good hands and shutting off Teat runs the risk of opening them up more.

2) It's really going to mainly be stud defenders who can stay in his face enough to actually remove him from the game.

[semsox]

There are a couple of reasons why teams don't faceguard.

1) In doing so it allows Cornell to open up the rest of the field more when effectivly playing 5x5 due to Teat being out of the action.  If a team has multiple scoring threats and the ability to pass well this makes it hard for the rest of the defenders to cover the ball and someone will get open/get off a good shot.  Cornell has multiple scoring threats and attackmen with good hands and shutting off Teat runs the risk of opening them up more.

2) It's really going to mainly be stud defenders who can stay in his face enough to actually remove him from the game.

Agreed on both points. And as one further disadvantage, face-guarding essentially is an entirely new defensive scheme that affects slide packages, etc. In the Syracuse post-game presser, Nick Mellon said that the defense was instituted that week leading up to the game as a way of explaining some of their defensive breakdowns. It's not a fun style of play for either the offense or defense.

[JasonN95]

Is Teat starting with the ball from a reset after a shot not a way to use his play strengths? It seems that you could fairly easily manufacture that by taking a deliberately high and wide shot where you first ensure you have the backup for it. Can the officials choose to not give the closest team the ball if they believe the shot was not intended to hit the net, akin to a deliberate offsides call in hockey?

[upprdeck]

Had Teat been able to take Mellon 1x1 a bit better then they give up trying it,  Most teams left have stud defenders but as SU notes said. they had breakdowns after a week to prepare.  It may happen this week but if we make it to the finals you have to wonder if that team with only a day to get ready tries it unless they have spent real time on it during the season.

that could explain why Yale did not try it

[Trotsky]

Is Teat starting with the ball from a reset after a shot not a way to use his play strengths? It seems that you could fairly easily manufacture that by taking a deliberately high and wide shot where you first ensure you have the backup for it. Can the officials choose to not give the closest team the ball if they believe the shot was not intended to hit the net, akin to a deliberate offsides call in hockey?

Gotta be some sort of gamesmanship penalty like that, right?  Otherwise, the possessing team could just continually drain the clock with their man running behind the defender to the out of bounds line, until the defense cut behind giving the guy a free run at the net.

I'm sure it's just my unfamiliarity with the sport but I've never understood what possession being granted to the nearest player gains for lax, as opposed to change of possession from the team that throws it out of bounds.  Was there a moment where that decision was made in the rules or is this just the organic development of the sport?

[mike1960]

Did you actually watch the Syracuse game? Is that what you saw happening?

I'm jumping in here because I want to understand this better. What I saw was Teat unable to participate (except for restarts) because Mellen followed him with every step.  What can Teat do to escape this?  I saw a video on v-cuts yesterday that looked promising, but also difficult to pull off as you need your teammates to get you the ball at exactly the right moment, and if you (and your teammates) haven't practiced that all season, it's hard to start doing it now.

I suspect Cornell started practicing them after the Princeton game. We may still see them.

I hope so. It's not rocket science. Once Teat gets the ball in his stick, it's just plain lacrosse again. The face guard is irrelevant. I understand that face guarding impedes the flow of passing that Cornell likes to play, but Cornell is better when Teat has the ball.

[Beeeej]

Is Teat starting with the ball from a reset after a shot not a way to use his play strengths? It seems that you could fairly easily manufacture that by taking a deliberately high and wide shot where you first ensure you have the backup for it. Can the officials choose to not give the closest team the ball if they believe the shot was not intended to hit the net, akin to a deliberate offsides call in hockey?

Gotta be some sort of gamesmanship penalty like that, right?  Otherwise, the possessing team could just continually drain the clock with their man running behind the defender to the out of bounds line, until the defense cut behind giving the guy a free run at the net.

I'm sure it's just my unfamiliarity with the sport but I've never understood what possession being granted to the nearest player gains for lax, as opposed to change of possession from the team that throws it out of bounds.  Was there a moment where that decision was made in the rules or is this just the organic development of the sport?

Not sure when the decision was made, but with no back wall to the field as in hockey, losing possession simply by missing a shot on goal massively disincentivizes shooting. Plus needing the nearest player to retain possession prevents too much bunching of offense around the crease.

[scoop85]

Great analysis on different strategies in defending Teat

[Swampy]

Is Teat starting with the ball from a reset after a shot not a way to use his play strengths? It seems that you could fairly easily manufacture that by taking a deliberately high and wide shot where you first ensure you have the backup for it. Can the officials choose to not give the closest team the ball if they believe the shot was not intended to hit the net, akin to a deliberate offsides call in hockey?

Gotta be some sort of gamesmanship penalty like that, right?  Otherwise, the possessing team could just continually drain the clock with their man running behind the defender to the out of bounds line, until the defense cut behind giving the guy a free run at the net.

I'm sure it's just my unfamiliarity with the sport but I've never understood what possession being granted to the nearest player gains for lax, as opposed to change of possession from the team that throws it out of bounds.  Was there a moment where that decision was made in the rules or is this just the organic development of the sport?

Not sure when the decision was made, but with no back wall to the field as in hockey, losing possession simply by missing a shot on goal massively disincentivizes shooting. Plus needing the nearest player to retain possession prevents too much bunching of offense around the crease.

Should also mention that it's only on shots that the nearest player wins. For passes, the last team that touched the ball loses possession. It's up to the ref to decide is a particular throw was a shot or pass.

[Swampy]

Is this one of those things where there are a handful of players good enough to shut Teat down like this?

Seems that way, otherwise you'd always just take your worst player and eliminate their best player, and they'd do the same, and so on...

Sounds like it makes the sport needlessly boring, like allowing a basketball defender to wrap his arms around the legs of LeBron and neutralize him for the entire game.  Why not just arrange the rules so gamesmanship of that type is simply deemed interference?  "Tradition!"?

Do you mean like basketball before the shot clock, when weaker teams would play keep-away to give themselves a chance?

[Swampy]

A few more comments. Teat is the best passer I've ever seen. But he's not particularly great as a dodger and not exceptionally fast. (Watch videos of him running after an opponent who's running to clear the ball.)

Also compare Rob Pannell's physique (5'9", 190lb) with Jeff Teat's (5'10", 165lb). Rob is an incredible dodger, partly because he's built low to the ground, with a low center of gravity, and yet big enough not to be knocked around easily. I recall seeing a picture of him doing chins, with his legs at a right angle and a huge boat-anchor chain draped across his chest. So obviously he is very strong for his size.

OTOH, Jeff is thinner and does not seem as strong. Obviously at this level, he's an elite athlete. But this time of year he's also going against elite athletes. I think Yale thought having Fake mark him on man-to-man would be sufficient, but apparently not.

I hope Milliman and Teat consult with the best sports trainers so that once the season is over, Jeff can do what's necessary: be in the weight room every day, run stairs every day (with a stick and ball cradled by his right hand), practice shielding the ball against an elite defender or two, and practice his dodging. The goal should be to make him much harder to face guard and much more dangerous when it's done.

If you remember, RP3 played on the 2009 team and made a strong impact, but he took his game to a completely higher level by the time he finished in 2013. He scored 67 points in 2009, 80 in 2010,  89 in 2011, was injured in 2012, and 102 points in 2013. By comparison, JT51 scored 72 points his freshman year (breaking RP3's Cornell freshman scoring record) and currently has 97 points.

By the time Jeff graduates, I want to see him set a pick for a 215 lb defender, and when the two collide it's the defender that falls down.

[upprdeck]

if teams couldnt face guard he is probably sitting around 110 pts this season.  crazy numbers

[nshapiro]

Is Teat starting with the ball from a reset after a shot not a way to use his play strengths? It seems that you could fairly easily manufacture that by taking a deliberately high and wide shot where you first ensure you have the backup for it. Can the officials choose to not give the closest team the ball if they believe the shot was not intended to hit the net, akin to a deliberate offsides call in hockey?

Gotta be some sort of gamesmanship penalty like that, right?  Otherwise, the possessing team could just continually drain the clock with their man running behind the defender to the out of bounds line, until the defense cut behind giving the guy a free run at the net.

I'm sure it's just my unfamiliarity with the sport but I've never understood what possession being granted to the nearest player gains for lax, as opposed to change of possession from the team that throws it out of bounds.  Was there a moment where that decision was made in the rules or is this just the organic development of the sport?

Not sure when the decision was made, but with no back wall to the field as in hockey, losing possession simply by missing a shot on goal massively disincentivizes shooting. Plus needing the nearest player to retain possession prevents too much bunching of offense around the crease.

Lacrosse historically was played without boundaries, so that when it was adapted to fit in a regulation field, the theory was that the person closest to the end line would have been able to chase down the ball and possess it.  Don't ask me why this only applies to shots.

If refs think a team is not seriously trying to score (taking bad shots that are backed up) they can put on the shot clock which requires a shot to be on goal or off the post.  Shots that miss do not reset the shot clock.

[Trotsky]

Lacrosse historically was played without boundaries, so that when it was adapted to fit in a regulation field, the theory was that the person closest to the end line would have been able to chase down the ball and possess it.  Don't ask me why this only applies to shots.

If refs think a team is not seriously trying to score (taking bad shots that are backed up) they can put on the shot clock which requires a shot to be on goal or off the post.  Shots that miss do not reset the shot clock.

That makes sense.  Thank you.

Now, personally, I think they should never have stopped using the skull of an enemy.