Ivy Lacrosse Tournament Preview: Pennsylvania-Yale

Every Division I tournament. Every team. College Crosse has it all on lockdown. Please send cookies and naptime. Today we're slashing to bits the Ivy League Tournament.

It's going to be a defensive battle in Ithaca. First team to 1.5 goals wins.

THE COMPUTING MACHINE SAYS

Log5: Pennsylvania (60.42%); Yale (39.58%) (I think the computing machine is a little drunk.)

DOSSIERS

THOUGHTS AND STUFF

Two pieces of incredibly important information about each team from my brain to your eyes via your Internet computing machine:

• Pennsylvania's defense is superb, arguably the strongest in the country, but it is going to meet a stiff test against the Elis: While Yale rolls out a fairly strong offensive unit, the Bulldogs creates a unique problem for the Quakers' defense: Yale chews up possessions. Dylan Levings is a possession-generating machine for the Bulldogs, winning draws at a rate that drives -- in major part -- the possession margin that the Elis have the luxury of playing with. The value of these opportunities is that they're functional possessions, impregnating the attack box and allowing Yale's offense to operate. In this first instance, the Quakers are facing an exposure issue -- having to play extra defensive possessions that they're not used to playing -- that is going to test Pennsylvania's strongest unit. Exacerbating this concern are three additional issues: (1) Yale's offense is fairly efficient (even though it doesn't shoot particularly well), and extra opportunities may merit additional goals against the Quakers' staunch defense; (2) Pennsylvania isn't a possession-generating machine, and while it is in a plus position on the season, the Bulldogs' ability could wash the Quakers under; and (3) Pennsylvania has had trouble controlling turnovers this season, and if Yale can force the Quakers into giveaways -- notably of the caused variety (although, Pennsylvania has a real problem with unforced turnovers) -- the Quakers' lost offensive opportunities combined with an overexposed defense could lead to Pennsylvania playing from behind and having to put extra pressure on its offense to get the job done. Pennsylvania has the defense to do amazing things, but where the Quakers go may be subject to the circumstances to which that defense must perform within.
• I love Yale's defense. Well, that's not totally true -- I love Yale's defense but have worries about Eric Natale in the net. Natale's performance this season aside, the Elis play a brand of defense that should be spoken of in ethereal tones: Yale does a nice job on its ride, killing about 17 percent of the clears they face; only two teams see their opponents turn the ball over more than what Yale has generated this season, getting incredible value in its pressure game (only three teams cause more turnovers than the Elis); even though the Bulldogs apply pressure, they're fundamentally sound and disciplined -- unlike many teams that generate lots of turnovers, Yale's defensive assist rate is right around the top 10 in the nation; when the ball is on the ground (often from Yale's doing), the Elis are doing a nice job at corralling loose balls; and the unit is killing so many defensive opportunities that it has driven the team's overall defensive efficiency among the national elite. The one issue with Yale's defensive performance is an accepted residue from applying pressure -- the Bulldogs are taking a lot of penalties and playing in man-down situations at a very high rate. It's systemic aggression, not unlike Villanova and Loyola, and it has paid dividends for the Elis this season.