Username | Post: Dartmouth | |
---|---|---|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-07-18 11:29 PM - Post#246868
Since we’ve been on the topic of who guards the opponent’s best offensive player, how do we guard Dartmouth? I’d guess Foreman on Barry, Woods on Johnson. After that, it gets interesting. Could see Max or AJ on Wright if Rai starts. Otherwise, I assume it’s Betley initially on Wright with Max on Emery and AJ on Jackson/Knight. Max on Stephens is kind of a revelation in terms of who he can defend, and shows we have lots of choices, though. So he could get the more mobile guy, which is what we did against Princeton. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-07-18 11:35 PM - Post#246869
Who guards Boudreaux? Thank God we can retire that question. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
02-08-18 01:50 AM - Post#246877
Maybe Jerome will come to the game! Celtics are in town and play Friday night and Sunday so he is available. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-08-18 07:48 AM - Post#246881
So maybe we blow these guys out and go deep into the bench early, and save the legs of the Iron 6 for the next night, er, afternoon. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-08-18 07:59 AM - Post#246882
Why do you say things like that? You'll turn into a pillar of salt. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-08-18 09:21 AM - Post#246884
Are you saying I'm giving the team an evil eye? |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-08-18 09:29 AM - Post#246885
That's what the plan should be. Would be nice that the key players don't have to play heavy minutes. Would also be nice that Simmons and Silpe in particular can get extended minutes with the first team players. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-08-18 09:46 AM - Post#246887
We haven't beaten them up there since '13-14. I would take absolutely nothing for granted. The Dartmouth game is the more important one given the scheduling and being a game we should win. If we walk away with a split, we still have Harvard at home and no worse than a tie. |
|
LyleGold PhD Student Posts 1712 |
02-08-18 09:47 AM - Post#246888
That only happens if you look back at Sodom and Gomorrah, er I mean, Jadwin Gym on your way to Hanover. |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-08-18 10:06 AM - Post#246890
Are you saying I'm giving the team an evil eye? Kina hora. [Spitting on the ground three times.] Now, take your keyboard outside and bury it in the backyard for a week. |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-08-18 10:07 AM - Post#246891
That only happens if you look back at Sodom and Gomorrah, er I mean, Jadwin Gym on your way to Hanover. Boy, did you just insult the good people of Sodom and Gomorrah. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-08-18 10:15 AM - Post#246892
Absolutely take nothing for granted. Win the game in front of you at all costs if necessary. But we also can't play all games with 6 players getting almost all minutes - there's too much risk of wearing out at least of couple of them the way I think the Princeton big 3 are getting worn down. If not that, then there may be a game where the foul situation dictates playing time. Simmons and Silpe will have to be trusted with more minutes at some point, it would be nice that we have a less stressful game which Donahue can use to bleed them in. That's my hope at least. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-08-18 10:22 AM - Post#246893
Our depth is good. We've got at least 10 guys who can play at a high enough level. Now go beat Dartmouth. poo poo poo |
|
QHoops Senior Posts 369 |
02-08-18 10:23 AM - Post#246894
I wonder if Ira ever thinks about the front end he missed in the last few seconds at Dartmouth his senior year. Penn lost by one, and I believe that game would have tied the UCLA record for league consecutive wins at 48. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-08-18 10:33 AM - Post#246895
And, of course, we finished in a tie and lost the tiebreaker to Princeton at Lehigh in OT. It couldda been us over UCLA |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-08-18 11:18 AM - Post#246897
Coach has shown trust in 6 guys to play at a high level right now. If he trusted more he'd be playing more. Actions speak. |
|
yoyo Senior Posts 365 |
02-08-18 11:26 AM - Post#246900
when are we going to see Sam Jones light it up again? |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-08-18 11:29 AM - Post#246902
Trust might not be the right word here. Nevertheless, it's clear to me that there are six guys who are playing particularly well together, and the drop-off in cohesiveness after that is noticeable. All that said, I hope that the coach gives some combination of Simmons, Silpe, Jones, Donahue, McDonald, et al at least 20 minutes of non-garbage time on Friday. Saturday's game is huge, and winning it would be a major achievement, and fresh legs would help. Apparently, Tommy Amaker likes to say that the league is won on Saturday nights. He's probably right about that (although I'd love to see if the numbers support that hypothesis). |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-08-18 11:39 AM - Post#246904
Yup--if we get a big lead. But Friday's game is more important in the big picture than Saturday. We cannot lose tomorrow. If we lose on Saturday, we still are at worst tied with Harvard having to travel to the Palestra. Get the game comfortably in hand and then loosen the roster. I'd be very surprised if we do anything different than that. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-08-18 11:53 AM - Post#246908
SomeGuy - I don't know enough about the Dartmouth players and their scoring is very distributed. My rule of thumb is to put Woods on a player who is quick, physical, and likes to drive strong to the hoop if there's someone like that on the roster, otherwise give Foreman the tougher assignment on D. But the two of them are largely interchangeable. There's a significant drop off from Foreman/Woods to any of the other guards. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-08-18 11:55 AM - Post#246909
We needed to go at least 1-2 this week to have good standing for the IL tourney, and 2-1 for the #1 seed. If we go 3-0...well, we'll have already eliminated Dartmouth from #1 seed contention. Even 2-1 if Dartmouth gets swept this weekend. I expect a split this weekend, in part because there is some unfinished business with Dartmouth. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-08-18 04:47 PM - Post#246920
Yes, the all important #1 seed. How far we've fallen since the days of the 14 game tournament. Now we'll be happy with 2-1 because of the #1 seed. Let's win them all! Let's go Penn! |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-08-18 04:55 PM - Post#246922
It's really winning the regular season that I care about--I'm using #1 seed as shorthand. Getting a guaranteed postseason appearance would be major cool and would save us some grief if we lost in the IL tourney. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-08-18 04:57 PM - Post#246923
It would soften the blow a bit, but if we finish #1 and don't get to dance, I'm going to be devastating. No tiny dancing for me. |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
02-08-18 05:05 PM - Post#246924
No tiny dancing for me. A shame. You'll be missing something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998%E2%80%9399_ Prin... |
|
Cvonvorys Postdoc Posts 4498 |
02-08-18 05:05 PM - Post#246925
Penn is -6 vs Dartmouth. We should be able to cover, yes? Other Ivy League spreads: Harvard - 3 vs Princeton Brown - 5 1/2 vs Cornell Yale - 4 1/2 vs Columbia |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-08-18 05:10 PM - Post#246927
Talk about burying the lede. That piece does not even acknowledge that Penn came back to administer the largest Jadwin whooping of Princeton ever in the season finale which clinched the Ivy title for the Quakers. |
|
LyleGold PhD Student Posts 1712 |
02-08-18 05:47 PM - Post#246930
when are we going to see Sam Jones light it up again? Next year's alumni game? |
|
rbg Postdoc Posts 3060 |
02-08-18 05:56 PM - Post#246931
While a sweep would be great, it may be difficult with the Harvard game at 4:00 pm on Saturday. Count me in with those that feel that Friday's game at Dartmouth is the more important one, in the big picture. Besides, Penn has not won in Hanover since 2/16/13 and it would be a big morale boost for the program to eliminate another losing streak. In addition to being without Evan Boudreaux (leaving program) and Guillien Smith (injury), Dartmouth has started slowly and fallen behind by double digits in each league game. They have done a very good job in the second half of each game to get close, but they have not been able to close out any game. They have lost 4 games by 5 points or less and all 6 by 10 or less. With 5 of their 6 losses on the road, some of those results may have turned out differently if they were playing at home. There is no exclusive player who is stepping up for Dartmouth in the 2nd half of these games. Wright (17 vs Columbia, 16 vs Harvard #1), Johnson (19 vs Cornell, 9 vs Yale), Emery (17 vs Brown), Barry (10 vs Harvard #2) and Knight (10 vs Harvard #2) have all led the team in second half scoring during league games. Comparing their two halves, they are averaging 12.4 more points in the second half (25.8 to 38.2). In terms of made baskets, that difference consists of + 1.8 for 2PT, + 0.8 for 3PT and +6.2 for FT. Dartmouth's opponents are averaging 1.0 less points in the second half (34.7 to 33.7). In terms of made baskets, that difference consists of -4.5 for 2PT, +0.5 for 3PT and +6.5 for FT. Compairing Penn's two halves, they are averaging 2.2 more points in the second half (36.0 to 38.2). In terms of made baskets, the difference consists of +1.0 for 2PT, -0.8 for 3PT, and +2.7 for FT. Penn's oppoents are averaging 5.9 more points in the second half (30.3 to 36.2). In terms of made baskets, that difference consists of +2.5 for 2PT, -0.5 for 3PT and +2.3 for FT. Looking at these numbers, Penn does a good job on the offensive and defensive end in the first half, while Dartmouth starts out cold on both ends. In the second half, Penn's offense is still good, but its defense slips a bit. Meanwhile, Dartmouth heats up on offense and gets a little better on defense. If these numbers hold up tomorrow night and Dartmouth starts out cold again, then the Quakers hopefully have a big enough cushion to withstand a second half Dartmouth comeback. No matter whether they try and improve from two (like the Cornell game) or three (like the Columbia game), a major key will be keeping the Big Green off the FT line. Offensively, if Penn is not hot from three, they will need to be aggressive on the inside to get some easy two pointers or get to the FT line. If Dartmouth manages to compete in the first half, things may be much more difficult. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8288 |
02-08-18 09:05 PM - Post#246935
when are we going to see Sam Jones light it up again? Next year's alumni game? well played, Lyle. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8288 |
02-08-18 09:10 PM - Post#246936
Penn is -6 vs Dartmouth. We should be able to cover, yes? Other Ivy League spreads: Harvard - 3 vs Princeton Brown - 5 1/2 vs Cornell Yale - 4 1/2 vs Columbia "should" is the operative word. We get the right guys to the line down the stretch and we cover easily. Brown should cover easily. PU will have problems with Harvard for the same reason they don't match up well with us, but PU is desperate at this point and will cover if they shoot well at all. Yale-Columbia? Stay away. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-08-18 09:22 PM - Post#246938
I think we are still a ways from not needing to worry about any league road game. If you believe Pomeroy (and I do), Penn isn't that much better than last year, and Dartmouth isn't any worse than they were last year. And we lost to them both times last year, the second time at home with our season seemingly on the line. So I don't view this as a game where we should cover. It's a game where we could, and I hope we do. But there is also a reasonable chance we lose. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-08-18 09:35 PM - Post#246939
How on earth can you believe we are not much better than last year? Just because Pomeroy gives us a number? My goodness, what will it take? There is no chance we would have won all the league games last year that we have won this year (and we didn't). We were far far worse defensively, didn't move the ball as well and shot worse, at least in league play. It's not as though we have been lucky to win 6 straight. But I suppose we'll really see something this weekend. I agree that nothing is certain and we must beat Dartmouth. But as I see it, the combination of Max, Antonio and Wood have more than made up for the loss of Howard and we don't have to play guards who aren't ready (or never will be ready) to play at this level. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1901 |
02-09-18 02:43 AM - Post#246943
How on earth can you believe we are not much better than last year? Just because Pomeroy gives us a number? My goodness, what will it take? There is no chance we would have won all the league games last year that we have won this year (and we didn't). We were far far worse defensively, didn't move the ball as well and shot worse, at least in league play. It's not as though we have been lucky to win 6 straight. But I suppose we'll really see something this weekend. I agree that nothing is certain and we must beat Dartmouth. But as I see it, the combination of Max, Antonio and Wood have more than made up for the loss of Howard and we don't have to play guards who aren't ready (or never will be ready) to play at this level. If the team needs to play like they're 0-6 to win, then maybe we shouldn't act like we're 14-0? |
|
Chip Bayers Professor Posts 7001 |
02-09-18 03:10 AM - Post#246944
It's not as though we have been lucky to win 6 straight. We have been incredibly lucky to win 6 straight, given that 5 were by single digits at home. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-09-18 07:20 AM - Post#246945
Exactly. And we were extremely unlucky to start 0-6 last year. These teams aren’t statistically very different overall (though as we’ve discussed there are some different strengths). The level of competition has been much lower. Obviously we’ve had a knack for winning close games, and Dartmouth a knack for losing them. Whether that is more luck or skill, eventually they are going to win a close one and we are going to lose a close one. And the way both teams have played (except for Tuesday) strongly suggests the game will be close. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-09-18 09:03 AM - Post#246947
You simply cannot say that a single digit victory is "luck." Of our 6 Ivy games, only Brown was a lucky win. The others we were the better team. Nonetheless, this is not a worthy argument, since we are 6-0 and 16-6, compared with 0-6 and an eventual 13-15. It doesn't matter if it is luck or we are better. I am sure if you asked the team they would say the latter, but we all can agree that we have to beat Dartmouth, or the work to get to 6-0 may be compromised. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-09-18 09:25 AM - Post#246949
Didn't we just blow out, BLOW OUT, Princeton at Jadwyn? Excuse me. This is a great Penn team until proven otherwise. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-09-18 09:53 AM - Post#246955
The numbers are a useful predictive measure. And I love the numbers. But at the end of the day the Ivy season champion is given to the team that wins the most games. And flags fly forever. And there are no asterisks for winning the league with a lower KP number than is usual. Now go out and win tonight. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-09-18 10:41 AM - Post#246960
I would not say that an individual single digit victory is luck. I would say that, in a series of single digit games, it is lucky to win all 5. And over time the numbers support that — teams that win by fewer points win less than teams that win by more points. I don’t think that there is any question that Penn has played the best basketball in the league thus far this year. That is true both over the course of the season as a whole, and over the 6 Ivy games thus far. I am absolutely thrilled that is the case. But there is some luck involved in what our Ivy record is, and there is good timing involved to boot — if we hold where we are in pomeroy and win the league, we will be the lowest ranked league champ since, well, I think since pomeroy started. The fact that the league doesn’t have any top 100 teams is a big factor in what our record is. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-09-18 10:44 AM - Post#246962
More importantly, I implore you all to stop making these statements about how good we are. I have to put a lot of effort into reversing the jinx. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-09-18 10:44 AM - Post#246963
And that's the reason to go out and win tonight. There are no games this team can take for granted. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-09-18 10:46 AM - Post#246965
Yes, but you have to look at the context of the single digit victories---we simply are not a high powered offense (although our recent games suggest that we are trending upward). We controlled all of these games except for Brown through the second half of each one. I think it's obvious that if you blow out all your opponents, you are a better team, but last year, we lost games that we are winning this year. Granted, road games remain, but we have played well on the road this year out of league. So I think it's a combination of the League being down and Penn being up. |
|
Cvonvorys Postdoc Posts 4498 |
02-09-18 10:55 AM - Post#246967
Typically, the better team (and/or the better coached team) wins the game. So far in this Ivy League schedule, when Penn needed a stop or needed a basket, they got it. Over the course of a 40-minute game, one less 3-pointer by one team and one additional 3-pointer for the other team is a 6-point swing. Sometimes that stop or basket happens earlier in the game, for example that nice run that Penn went on right after Princeton took their first lead of the game. In other words, in my opinion Penn has not been lucky in getting out to a 6-0 start, but that opinion might change after the next 8 games, starting tonight vs. Dartmouth. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-09-18 11:31 AM - Post#246970
Colin, you raise a good and perhaps overlooked point. Donahue has been real good at pushing the right buttons at the right times. This year has a totally different feel than the good Rosen year. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-09-18 11:43 AM - Post#246975
FWIW, based on current league play efficiency margins, Penn definitely deserves to be No. 1 based on its Ivy play thus far: PENN +0.12 points per possession PRIN +0.08 HARV +0.05 COLU +0.03 YALE +0.00 BRWN -0.03 DART -0.08 CORN -0.17 Then, if you adjust for what the teams have remaining on their schedule (to correct for an easier/harder schedule thus far), you still see a somewhat similar ranking: PENN +0.09 HARV +0.05 PRIN +0.05 COLU +0.02 YALE +0.01 BRWN -0.02 DART -0.06 CORN -0.17 To the extent that luck equals (to me) the difference between actual wins and the derived win expectation, then of course Penn has been lucky to get to 6-0. But the Quakers haven't been lucky to be in first. They are the best team in league play efficiency margin nearing the halfway pole, so they should be in the spot they're in. |
|
weinhauers_ghost Postdoc Posts 2141 |
02-09-18 11:47 AM - Post#246977
How on earth can you believe we are not much better than last year? Just because Pomeroy gives us a number? My goodness, what will it take? There is no chance we would have won all the league games last year that we have won this year (and we didn't). We were far far worse defensively, didn't move the ball as well and shot worse, at least in league play. It's not as though we have been lucky to win 6 straight. But I suppose we'll really see something this weekend. I agree that nothing is certain and we must beat Dartmouth. But as I see it, the combination of Max, Antonio and Wood have more than made up for the loss of Howard and we don't have to play guards who aren't ready (or never will be ready) to play at this level. If the team needs to play like they're 0-6 to win, then maybe we shouldn't act like we're 14-0? I don't think that is in any way indicative of the mindset of the players or the coaching staff. It might reflect that of certain elements of the fan base, but fortunately said fan base will have no impact on the outcome of the games. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-09-18 11:56 AM - Post#246978
We are overthinking. That’s what we are best at. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8288 |
02-09-18 12:03 PM - Post#246980
Thank you for providing data that backs up my sense that Columbia is most likely to be the last team in the Ivy 4. At least at the moment. Keeping an eye on Brown though. The Lions have a huge opportunity this weekend. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32859 |
02-09-18 12:09 PM - Post#246982
Princeton, of course, is by no means a sure thing at this point. Having lost 2 home games in a row, they have to play 6 of their 8 remaining games on the road , in which they play both Columbia and Brown. |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-09-18 12:37 PM - Post#246984
This conversation reminds me of that bit of wisdom coaches like to spout about a team that's turning around: it goes from losing big, to losing close, to winning close, to winning big. If this model is actually correct (and who the hell really knows), then Penn has clearly transitioned from losing close mode (last season) to winning close mode (this season). I watched a lot of the games last season and have seen many of the team's games this season as well. Last season, when things got dicey, the players seemed to lose confidence, and were unable to make big plays. This season they have consistently gotten stops and scores when they needed to. I don't think their record is entirely attributable to luck and lousy opposition. The players are more poised this year, and are making good decisions in high pressure situations. I realize that this factor is difficult to quantify, but that doesn't make it nonexistent. |
|
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4366 |
02-09-18 12:45 PM - Post#246987
Good teams win their share of close games. While "luck" is always a factor, good teams seem to find a way to create their own luck. The expectation for this team should be that all our games will be close. The last one was an outlier. If one is going to write off a single digit victory as merely a function of luck, maybe Harvard has been lucky that they are 5-1 instead of 2-4 in league play. We should be favored in both games this weekend. While each may be a challenge, the expectation should not be a split; rather, a sweep. Nor should anyone be shocked if we get upset in one or both of the games. Each remaining league game will take maximum effort to win. So far the effort has been there, the team chemistry has been great - but - you still have to put the ball in the basket enough times to come out on top and that's a game to game proposition. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-09-18 01:07 PM - Post#246989
If one is going to write off a single digit victory as merely a function of luck, maybe Harvard has been lucky that they are 5-1 instead of 2-4 in league play. Maybe not 5-1 to 2-4, but certainly, Harvard's actual wins have outpaced expected wins based on manifested efficiency differential in league play, thus far. I could run it to know for sure, but Harvard and Penn are each about a win over expectation thus far. Princeton might be 1+ wins below expectation. Cornell's probably a win or so over expectation and Dartmouth and Yale a win under. |
|
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4366 |
02-09-18 01:41 PM - Post#246995
Mike My comment wasn't really directed at you, but rather at those discounting single digit wins and, quite frankly, you guys have an OT victory over an 0-6 Dartmouth team, a two point victory over a 2-4 Yale and a 4 point victory over Cornell, each of which could have been chalked up to "luck", as a couple Penn posters have chosen to discount some of our wins. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-09-18 01:44 PM - Post#246998
IIRC, though, before last weekend Princeton led this thing by a country mile. Small sample size, no? |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-09-18 01:52 PM - Post#247003
Good teams win their share of close games. While "luck" is always a factor, good teams seem to find a way to create their own luck. . Or maybe it's that the team that got lucky is perceived after the fact as good. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-09-18 02:01 PM - Post#247004
I know - I agree. Harvard is lucky to be 5-1. If you played them out at the quality they've shown in those six games themselves, they'd probably most frequently 4-2. As for sample size, for sure it's small. That's why this would never be used for predicting the future. Just being descriptive about what's happened. |
|
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4366 |
02-09-18 02:05 PM - Post#247008
Maybe - but that usually doesn't translate to 6-0. For sure almost every team has its day - but except for the occasional totally dominant year, the best Penn teams have prevailed in a few nail biters while ending up on top of the league. |
|
yoyo Senior Posts 365 |
02-09-18 02:49 PM - Post#247011
Good teams win close games. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-09-18 02:51 PM - Post#247012
2004 Penn says hi!!!! |
|
Chip Bayers Professor Posts 7001 |
02-09-18 02:54 PM - Post#247013
If one is going to write off a single digit victory as merely a function of luck This is a strawman. No one here has done that. |
|
SRP Postdoc Posts 4915 |
02-09-18 03:27 PM - Post#247017
We've all seen the improvement in the decisiveness and choices of Penn's players both with the ball and on D compared to last year. That's the eye-test aspect. How much that holds up and how much it matters the rest of the way remain to be seen, but there is good reason for Penn fans to feel a lot better about what they're watching this year. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-09-18 03:32 PM - Post#247018
I'm still waiting for a game to be decided in the last minute or so at the FT line. Penn has done a better job of late at the line, but overall it's still not very good. |
|
LyleGold PhD Student Posts 1712 |
02-09-18 03:49 PM - Post#247024
Agreed. The better teams tend to win close games. We are better than last year in part because we are better at winning close games. Occasionally the lesser team manages to "steal" a close game because they manage to take advantage of their one chance to win. How many times do you see the lesser team not quite pull out the victory in regulation, and then lose by 10 or more in OT? In '79, we beat Princeton twice in overtime. Were we lucky twice or better than them? We happened to go to the Final Four that year. In '96, Princeton beat us in the playoff in OT. Were they lucky or better? They happened to beat defending national champs UCLA in the NCAAs. In last year's Ivy tournament, 14-0 Princeton beat 6-8 Penn in OT after Penn missed a front end that could have iced the game in regulation. Bad luck or was Princeton better? The whole discussion of discounting single digit victories as luck is largely a waste of time because it fails to take into account the intangibles that distinguish a winner from a close loser. I believe the Quakers have crossed over because they have gotten better. |
|
Cvonvorys Postdoc Posts 4498 |
02-09-18 03:51 PM - Post#247025
Both Wood & Betley are pretty good foul shooters and Foreman has done well late in games, so I think we should be OK as long as we get the ball in their hands at the end of games. |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-09-18 04:09 PM - Post#247026
One could make the argument that the ability to win close games is a skill-- or, more properly, a set of skills. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-09-18 04:57 PM - Post#247031
It's better to avoid close games. Better teams do that. Right now I'm happy with any sort of win. |
|
10Q Professor Posts 23451 |
02-09-18 04:59 PM - Post#247032
Better teams win. Winning teams are better. Tautology equals tautology. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-09-18 05:15 PM - Post#247033
If that’s directed at me, i’ll reiterate— I think 6-0 rather tha 5-1 is a function of luck given how close we have played. I do not think any individual win was lucky, or undeserved. I think we were clearly the better team in every game but Brown (and I would just call that one even). But if you play as close as we have, the numbers say your expected wins are somewhere south of six. Agreed that Harvard is in the same boat. They easily could have lost both Dartmouth games. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-09-18 05:23 PM - Post#247035
One could make the argument, but I think whether it is true is quantifiable. I think there is a pretty direct correlation between how much teams win by and how much they win. But Mrjames probably knows for sure. We had this debate years ago regarding the Rosen Penn team. Even if the correlation is direct overall, there will be outliers. The question is whether those outliers are just small sample variations, or whether those individual teams really are better at winning close games. While this is all interesting (at least to me), ultimately TheLine is right — in the end, this Penn team’s success or failure will be determined by their record and whether they win the league (either regular season or tournament). Won’t matter whether they were lucky or unlucky. 6-0 is 6-0, |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3780 |
02-09-18 05:31 PM - Post#247036
Better teams win. Winning teams are better. Tautology equals tautology. OK, but remember that the first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club. |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21247 |
02-09-18 05:39 PM - Post#247037
Rule 2: If confused, consult Rule 1. |
|
Go Green PhD Student Posts 1149 |
02-09-18 05:47 PM - Post#247039
Good teams win their share of close games. While "luck" is always a factor, good teams seem to find a way to create their own luck. See, for example, Dartmouth Football 2017. http://www.dartmouthsports.com/SportSelect.dbml?SP... |
|
Cvonvorys Postdoc Posts 4498 |
02-09-18 05:47 PM - Post#247040
Rule 3: If confused by Rule 2, consult Rule 3. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
02-09-18 05:56 PM - Post#247041
Correct - you can look at game scripts (the average margin a team lead's by throughout a game - think of it as the area under the curve) and see that the winning percentage at each increment of game script winning margin rises. That is to say, the longer and more you lead by during a game, the more times you're expected to win. A more technical approach that leads to the same result is to look at whether - in games that are close in the final minutes - the original projected winner wins at about the same rate or if the outcomes tend to shift more toward 50/50 (it's the latter). If the better team were more likely to win close games, we'd expect to see the winning percentage to stay the same as it started or even increase. Both demonstrate that the closer a game is toward the end, the more randomness reigns. What definitely *isn't* true is that any single-digit win is just luck and should be written off. That's crazy. In general, the better team will win close games - it doesn't immediate revert to a coin flip. It's just that the later in the game it gets with the game still close, the higher leverage each possession becomes and one crazy thing that happens on a possession can shift win percentage odds in a massive way. Penn has posted both the best record and the best efficiency margin in Ivy play thus far. When those two align, it generally means that the team that has played best to that point is leading the league. I think that should be the most important takeaway here. |
|
Cvonvorys Postdoc Posts 4498 |
02-09-18 06:05 PM - Post#247042
As for this weekend's games: http://www.pennathletics.com/news/2018/2/8/mens-ba ... For those who are hoping for a successful weekend, according to this article, this is the 62nd time Penn has made this trip to the Northern-most Ivy League programs. Penn has been swept nine times including each of the last four years. Here's hoping Penn's luck and Penn's skill continue... |
|
weinhauers_ghost Postdoc Posts 2141 |
02-09-18 08:15 PM - Post#247046
I hate my ISP, and I hate ESPN3. I have tried three different browsers, and none of them will allow me to use my login credentials with the ISP to get access to tonight's game. I am not a happy camper. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
02-09-18 08:52 PM - Post#247078
It's on ILDN as well |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8288 |
02-09-18 09:02 PM - Post#247089
Watch ESPN has an app on amazon fire TV if you have that. Works well. |
|
UPIA1968 PhD Student Posts 1121 |
02-09-18 10:39 PM - Post#247179
It is true that luck plays an important part in any close game. However, when a team wins 6 straight close games of loses 6 straight close games, their performance in such circumstances takes on statistically significance. Therefore we can conclude that this year's Penn team's performance in close games has a significant skill component as well as some luck. Put differently Penn is rightfully favored to finish first in the league. It is also likely that a continuation of such close games will result in some losses. Penn will not go 14-0 with two blowouts and 12 nailbiters. So the team needs to improve its performance to sweep. I would love to see that improvement against Harvard on Saturday. Free throw shooting has improved as has Silpe's performance. Let's hope Caleb regains his form. |
|
11Quakers Sophomore Posts 123 |
02-09-18 10:47 PM - Post#247181
Silpe saved the day. 3 for 5 from 3. |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
02-10-18 12:05 AM - Post#247193
Thank you for providing data that backs up my sense that Columbia is most likely to be the last team in the Ivy 4. At least at the moment. Keeping an eye on Brown though. What in the world happened to Brown?? Aside from losing a little scratch in a 3-team parlay, I will take that loss all day. Knock them down further please. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
02-10-18 12:45 AM - Post#247201
Yes, this was a night where, for Ivy tournament purposes, every game went optimally for Penn. We now have a 4 game lead with 7 to play. We probably need one more win to more or less clinch a berth. As for Brown, consistency is an issue for now. They have games where they play like they did at Penn and Princeton, and then there are games where they . . . don’t. They seem to have high offensive upside, but they often aren’t there. Which is why their pomeroy rating seems at odds with what we all thought we saw at the Palestra. Also, 24 shots for Cambridge is just too many, almost regardless of how good he is. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
02-10-18 12:45 AM - Post#247202
I’m sure the refs did another homer job. Oh wait, it was at Brown. |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
02-10-18 12:50 AM - Post#247204
Well played. I just wish you guys could have seen how fired up Mike's dad was last week after the game. And he was was wrong...Just like he was wrong with his football team of choice. It's still very contenting. |
|
Chip Bayers Professor Posts 7001 |
02-10-18 01:31 AM - Post#247208
Pomeroy, unimpressed with our single-digit road win, drops us from 134 to 142. |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
02-10-18 02:10 AM - Post#247209
So if Dartmouth doesn't hit that corner 3 fading away and Penn wins by 6-7, they don't drop or drop just by a few instead...Lol. It's not like this was a double-digit spread and there weren't so many games that winning teams jumped them either. They just didn't beat Dartmouth by enough. Their ranking, which I'm sure is why we fell, sure doesn't seem like that of a team with a ton of close losses. |
|
TheLine Professor Posts 5597 |
02-10-18 09:16 AM - Post#247215
Silpe saved the day. 3 for 5 from 3. This. We lose if not for Silpe. Though it felt like he made more than 3 of them. Welcome to the rotation, Jake. Just be more diligent staying with your man on D. |
|
Charlie Fog Masters Student Posts 587 |
02-10-18 09:35 AM - Post#247218
Oh darn |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3589 |
02-10-18 11:19 AM - Post#247230
Unlike last weekend the team with the huge FT disparity ( Dartmouth 22 Penn 9 before end of game fouls) still found a way to win while their fans never mentioned it. Just saying |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8288 |
02-10-18 02:30 PM - Post#247237
So if Dartmouth doesn't hit that corner 3 fading away and Penn wins by 6-7, they don't drop or drop just by a few instead...Lol. Absolutely. I said we would cover if we hit our FTs down the stretch and we would have if not for that crazy 3 which Penn to foul (love that move, BTW.) As for Silpe, he gave up a 3 when he fell and would have gotten credit for another 3 of his own had it not been waved off with an offensive foul off the ball. I think this game went down about the way we thought it would. I guess we were lucky again. NOT. Experience, depth (read: Silpe), AJ, and some shrewd coaching moves won this thing and it should not have been that close. I was surprised at how much size Dartmouth put out there, and how effective it was with Max and Caleb out of sorts. The only 'luck' was that Dartmouth shot the ball both inside and out as badly as we did when they got looks. Unaccustomed as I am to typing the words "when Colin was right" he called that Steve would address the defensive boards problem in the first half, someone would find the range from 3 and Penn would win in the end. Here is what I do not get: Why, with 3 of out top 6 having bad nights, and Betley in foul trouble, did we not see SD go to his bench aside from Jake and Jarrod. I was sure we would see Jones at some point, and this was a good opportunity to get Devon out there - he would have created a real matchup problem for Dartmouth just as he did in the 2nd game last year. Can anyone help me understand this? To win on road Saturdays, your bench needs to come through. |
|
Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved. Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution. |