Welcome to Beyond the Basics!

My name is Zack Capozzi, and I run LacrosseReference.com, which focuses on developing and sharing new statistics and models for the sport.

The folks at USA Lacrosse Magazine offered me a chance to share some of my observations in a weekly column, and I jumped at the chance. Come back every Tuesday to go beyond the box score in both men’s and women’s lacrosse.

Last week, I took a look at some of the teams that appeared to have made some important leaps early in the season. These were generally teams that had improved their ranking in either offensive efficiency, defensive efficiency or draw controls by a substantial amount over where they finished last season. This week, I want to do something similar, but for individual players.

When I think of player performance, I tend to ignore the totals stats like goals, points or assists. For one thing, these are overly influenced by the number of games played. They are also influenced by the pace at which a team plays (more possessions means more chances to score, after all). But perhaps most important, total stats reflect a player’s role within a team as much, if not more than, how they are actually playing.

That’s not to say that cumulative stats are completely unimportant. EGA (expected goals added) is my go-to for quantifying a player’s total contribution, and it’s a key part of my statistical universe. But as I mentioned, anything cumulative is partly a matter of circumstance. To get to an idea of which players are playing best, you need to look at their stats in the context of how many chances they are getting. That is, in essence, the concept of player efficiency. (If you’d like to dig into the concepts, see the glossary link at the end of this article.)

For today, what we care about is players who’ve stepped into a larger role and thrived with their new opportunity. That means that their A) play share has increased significantly from last year and B) they’ve improved their individual player efficiency ratings. With luck, we’ll surface some players who may not be household names yet, but who may be by year’s end. And with that, let’s dive into the five Division I men’s lacrosse players who’ve made their own leaps to start 2022.

ROSS SCOTT

The Rutgers offense is not what it was last year. It’s the defense and goalie play that has allowed the Scarlet Knights to reach the rarified heights of a top five national ranking. The offense is still No. 25 nationally after adjusting for the strength of the opponents they’ve faced, so it’s not as if it’s a bad unit. But it is a unit that is replacing more than most after losing several stars to graduation.

Ross Scott, Mitch Bartolo and Ronan Jacoby, along with veteran Shane Knobloch, have stepped up this year to take the reins of the offense. But of that bunch, Scott’s 2022 compares most favorably with his 2021 campaign. On a per-touch basis, he’s generating about as many assists as he did last season, but his shooting mark (34 percent compared to 28 percent last year) is much improved.

The intriguing thing about Scott is that despite a 92nd percentile efficiency rating, he’s got ample scope for a further leap. His ball security rating is just 36 (out of 100). As the top usage player in this offense, there is a direct line from that stat to the 36 percent adjusted turnover rate that Rutgers has put up so far. Who knows, if Scott’s able to tamp down the turnovers, maybe this offense will end up where it was last year.

EVAN MCGREEN

For his career, including this season, Evan McGreen has a shooting percentage that rates in just the 22nd percentile. Not great. But this is a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately world, and in this case, the answer is a great deal. McGreen’s shooting percentage bottomed-out in 2021, finishing the 10-game season with a 14-percent shooting mark. Through four games this year, a 39-percent shooting percentage puts him into the 76th percentile.

There’s an interesting debate to be had when a player improves his production upon stepping into a larger role. Is it because the larger role makes it easier to get into the flow of the game, which then leads to better outcomes? Or is it the extra year of experience? It’s true that, on average, a player’s usage-adjusted-EGA (player efficiency) tends to rise with more years of experience. But I’ve also heard many players and coaches talk about the importance of feeling comfortable. Maybe a research project for the future.

JP WARD

Who had Delaware’s offense being better this year after losing Charlie Kitchen to the pro ranks? Show of hands? Put your hands down. I don’t believe you.

But it’s true. The Blue Hens have been the 12th rated opponent-adjusted offense this year after clocking in at No. 17 last season. Part of that comes down to the evolution of Mike Robinson from sharpshooter-extraordinaire into an all-around player with impressive assist numbers. But the rise of JP Ward is a story in itself. In 2021, as a freshman, he was No. 15 in usage rate for Delaware. He was basically a footnote at the bottom of the depth chart.

He must have impressed over offseason workouts because he’s leaped over several returners to become the third-highest usage player on the roster this season. The big factor for Ward has been ball security. With his limited touches in 2021, he still managed a 98th percentile assist rate (this stat adjusts assists per game to account for a player’s usage rate). The issue was that he was turning the ball over enough that his ball security rating was 1 (out of 100).

His assist rate is down slightly in 2022, but his turnover rate is way down, and when you pair that with an improved shooting percentage, you start to see why he’s forced himself into a larger role this year.

PATRICK DALY

When Villanova lost Keegan Khan to the transfer portal, you figured the offense was going to take a step back, and to a degree, it has. It’s early, but on an opponent-adjusted basis, the offense currently ranks No. 14, down from No. 6 last year.

Luke Keating, who transferred from Franklin & Marshall, is the top usage player on the team through three games, but Patrick Daly is right behind him. It was a bit of a challenge to figure out how Daly’s efficiency rating went from the 72nd to 87th percentile. Turns out, he’s a great example of the importance of how you miss.

In 2021, 73 percent of his shots were on net, and he shot 35 percent. This year, his shooting percentage has gone up 1.4 percentage points while his SOG rate has dropped dramatically from 73 percent to 58 percent. So a higher percentage of his shots are going in, but a lower percentage are on cage. The upshot is that far fewer of his shots are ending up in the keeper’s stick. As we all know, a saved shot can act like a turnover in many cases, so when you have a player drastically reducing his saved shot percentage, that’s a great way to boost your player efficiency metrics, assuming you don’t tank your shooting percentage to do it.

DUTCH FURLONG

What was the Alston Tarry and Tommy Sopko show last year has become the Dutch Furlong and Connor Davis show. And it’s working so far, especially with Tarry thriving in a role that requires him to be less of an initiator. The Bison are currently the 20th rated offensive unit after finishing 2021 in 47th.

When we look at Furlong specifically, his shooting stands out. Yes, he’s generating more assists this year, but if you wanted to pick one thing he’s done much better in 2022, it’s shoot the ball. Last season, only 38 percent of his shots were on goal, and he ended up with a 22-percent shooting percentage. This year, he’s shooting 34.6 percent. That means he’s gone from being a 25th percentile shooter a year ago to a 66th percentile shooter this year.

LACROSSE STATS RESOURCES

My goal with this column is to introduce fans to a new way to enjoy lacrosse. “Expand your fandom” is the mantra. I want you to walk away thinking about the players and stories presented here in a new light. But I also understand that some of these concepts can take some time to sink in. And part of the reason for this column is, after all, to educate.

To help this process along, I have several resources that have helped hundreds of lacrosse fans and coaches to internalize these new statistical concepts. The first is a Stats Glossary that explains each of my statistical concepts in more detail than I could fit here. The second is a Stats 101 resource, which provides context for each of my statistics. What is a good number? Who’s the current leader? That’s all there.

And last, I would love to hear from you. If you have questions or comments about the stats, feel free to reach out.