Michigan 5, Delaware 12

It seems like every time Michigan shows the progress toward breaking through, they experience a major setback. Last time, they stayed very competitive (compared to expectations, at least) against Johns Hopkins, then laid a complete egg against Army. This time around, it was steady progress in the runup to a poor showing against Delaware.

Obviously, those are the signs of a young team and an inexperienced team. Still, it doesn’t look at this point like that breakthrough won’t be preceded by steady progress in other games: it will just happen. Unfortunately, the opportunities are dwindling for it to happen this year.

Tempo Free

From the official box score, a look at the tempo-free stats:

Delaware 2013
Michigan Delaware
Faceoff Wins 11 Faceoff Wins 9
Clearing 15-17 Clearing 22-23
Possessions 29 Possessions 34
Goals 5 Goals 12
Offensive Efficiency .172 Offensive Efficiency .353

If you had told me that Michigan was going to more-than hold their own on faceoffs in this game, I would have said they pull the upset. Delaware is a fairly poor team whose saving grace this year has been Tyler Barbarich.

However, despite a great performance in that phase of the game, the U-M offense once again didn’t show up, and the defense did the same, to a degree.

Notes

Starting with those faceoffs… what a performance by Brad Lott. I didn’t get a chance to watch the game (I was at the UDM-Manhattan contest), but the numbers speak for themselves: one of the best faceoff specialists in the country in Tyler Barbarich won just half his draws, and backups brought the total number to a Michigan advantage. That’s much better than expected against this Delaware team.

What went wrong then? Turnovers were a big part. In 29 possessions, the Wolverines committed 18 of them (.621 of the time). Offensive players were the major culprits. Sophomore attack Will Meter committed five turnovers himself, and class/linemate David McCormack had three. Fifth-year senior Thomas Paras committed two and freshman middie Mike Hernandez – who has been one of the big culprits this year – committed two as well.

As for the positives on offense, three of Michigan’s five goals were assisted. Mike Hernandez had a goal and an assist, while classmate Evan Glaser had the same. Mike Francia and Tom Sardelli both scored on their only shot of the game…

Which brings us to a transition into the volume-shooting issue. Perhaps one of the bigger problems for the Michigan offense this year (depending on how you look at it), a reversal from last year’s offense, which couldn’t find a shot, but scored on a huge percentage of the opportunities they did get. Kyle Jackson took six shots, missed cage with two (not a huge problem if there’s backup), and had four saved. Willie Steenland was also held scoreless on four shots of his own, only one on goal. While Hernandez and Paras did score one apiece, it came on five and four shots, respectively (Paras’ number really isn’t bad, just not great).

How do you fix that? Is it even an issue? The cure is to improve talent and experience, which like, you just have to wait. Over the course of this year, it hasn’t been getting better with experience in the offense necessarily, so the offseason to improve may be the bigger issue.

Defensively, the numbers are pretty poor. Michigan caused five turnovers on 34 Blue Hen possessions (.147) and UD only added two unforced. That led to 35 Delaware shots on 34 possessions, an unreal mark. Gerald Logan performed as well as we’ve come to expect, but he can only do so much when the defense in front of him isn’t doing him huge favors. He saved .556 of shots faced. It’s just that he faced so many shots, and the Michigan offense wasn’t getting things done the other way.

The game was actually not even as close as the final score or stats show. Through three quarters, Delaware had 11 goals on 28 possessions (.393) and Michigan had two goals on 22 possessions (.091). A 3-1 fourth quarter made the numbers look prettier than they should be. Is it a home/road thing? I’m not sure, but the last time this happened, it was at Army, so there are two data points. There are also five other away-game data points where it didn’t happen.

Delaware’s offensive load was not shared: Erick Smith, Nick Diachenko, and Danny Keane each netted three goals. Ian Robertson had a goal and two assists. Defensively, Conor Peaks had a great game between the pipes, allowing four goals and saving 12. Given how Michigan has played this year, I think that was more a U-M issue than a Delaware thing.

Elsewhere

The official boxscore. Michigan game recap. Delaware game recap.

Up Next

Although UDM will be disappointed to not finish the job against Jacksonville, the second-most winnable game on the schedule (behind last week’s tilt against VMI) is up next. Hosting Manhattan is a must-win, not just for keeping MAAC tournament hopes alive – a post about which coming later this week – but for the simple sake of pride. You don’t lose to Manhattan at home.

It should be a great day in the Motor City, with nice weather expected and a bunch happening on campus. A big win for the Titans will bring them one step closer to a solid end to the season.

This entry was posted in division 1 and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Michigan 5, Delaware 12

  1. DCLaxFan says:

    I’d be interested in observations on the UM game from someone who may have seen it. I have a feeling that UM’s one dimensional offense of dodges from middies and inverted attack is now easy to defend as teams have a lot of tape to see it and prepare for it. My guess is that this type of attack also leads to many missed shots or easy saves. Has anyone seen a quick-stick goal this year by UM? What’s really troubling me about this game is that the D allowed a fairly poor Delaware team to score 12 goals. So, if you saw the game, let us know why the D performed so poorly.

Comments are closed.