Like with the final UDM recap of the year, I’m not going into extreme detail on this game. I’ll have a bit more, since I was there to see it happen, but with a game months ago, it’s best to just recap for the sake of thoroughness and move along.
Tempo Free
From the official box score, a look at the tempo-free stats:
| Fairfield 2014 ECAC Tournament | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Michigan | Fairfield | ||
| Faceoff Wins | 7 | Faceoff Wins | 14 |
| Clearing | 16-18 | Clearing | 13-18 |
| Possessions | 30 | Possessions | 34 |
| Goals | 5 | Goals | 12 |
| Offensive Efficiency | .167 | Offensive Efficiency | .353 |
Michigan played pretty fast this year, and this was below their average. Through the first three quarters, it seemed like it would be well below average pace (40 possessions at that point), but the floodgates opened, and it turned into a lopsided, normal-paced game against a slow Fairfield team.
Notes
Brad Lott was up-and-down during the season. When he was good, he was very good. When he wasn’t, the faceoff unit as a whole naturally struggled. He was just OK on the clamp in this game, and with the other aspects of Michigan’s faceoff unit, that’s not good enough to see success. Most of Fairfield’s advantage was built up on the fourth-quarter run, but it’s a good faceoff man’s duty to help prevent those runs from happening, too. Michigan made up some of the possession deficit by being very strong on the ride, leveling things off a bit.
“We need to be consistent there,” said Michigan coach John Paul. “It’s everything, not just Brad. Our wings need to do a better job, we’re not doing a good job on 50/50 balls, and it’s something that will be a focus going into next year.”
Of course, U-M’s inability to score – and later, once the Stags got going, to prevent Fairfield from scoring – made the difference in this game. 20 of 33 shots went on goal for the Maize and Blue (nine in the second quarter, when Michigan could have captured a bit of momentum with better shot placement.
Ian King’s two goals paced the squad (one on the EMO). Brendan Gaughan’s shift to midfield at the end of the year finished well with a goal on five shots (four on goal). Goalie Robbie Zonino continued his late run of nice play with 15 saves and 12 goals allowed.
“This was Robbie’s best game of the year,” Paul said. “He didn’t change anything, and really they scored three empty-net goals [against the 10-man ride] at the end, so he actually had an amazing day. He stepped up when we needed him to step up.”
Fairfield’s run was the primary story in this one. It was anybody’s game through three quarters, with the Stags leading 5-3. Two quick goals to start the fourth set the tone, and though Michigan got one back, it seemed like that 7-3 lead would be too much to overcome, and it ballooned late when Michigan pressed a bit and couldn’t get faceoff wins.
“The gameplan coming in was only to 10-man when they won the faceoff back,” Paul said. “Then we got behind and started 10-manning, because we knew we’re not going to get a whole lot of possessions. Once the clock was ticking, we had to start manufacturing stuff.”
U-M learned that they could hang with talented teams, but that they were still a few steps from winning many of those games. The offseason should be the difference in adding the necessary talent and developing what’s already on the roster to take that next step.
Up Next
Michigan’s season ended with a suddenness over the second half of this game, but there’s no denying it was a solid step forward for the program as a whole. Making it into the postseason is a boost (and will be tougher next year in a loaded Big Ten), and U-M can grow from that.
“I think we take a lot,” Paul said. “Our guys didn’t really approach this any differently than any other game. They came in pretty confident, and I loved our attitude coming into this game. You have to feel confident and play that way, and we were and we did.”
Moving along, I’ll decompress the season and look into the future with a new offensive coordinator and yet another signing class under the team’s belt.