Printing a Post - 2021 Recruiting

Select "print" from your browser's "File" menu.

Back to Post

Username	Post: 2021 Recruiting
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	04-19-20 03:22 AM - Post#306364 I donâ€™t recall if we started a 2021 recruiting thread, but saw on Twitter today that we offered Garrett Johnson, 6â€™7â€ wing/forward from Episcopal: http://www.verbalcommits.com/players/garrett-johns ... Some videos here: https://www.maxpreps.com/m/athlete/garrett-joh nson...
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	04-19-20 01:11 PM - Post#306377 We did, but it was truncated. Here are the offers that were in it: Casey Simmons 3/4 wing from Milton Academy (plays for the same AAU team Jarrod Simmons played for) Noah Harris (NR) PG from Rutgers Prep (same school Jonah Charles attended) Jack Molloy (NR - Yale Commit) wing from NMH (maybe re-classified in 2020?) Franck Kepnnang Very high 4* Center from Westtown (same HS as TJ Berger), offered by Kansas and visited by Calipari. Stevie Mitchell 4* PG offered by PSU, Stanford, with Villanova involved, but not yet offering. Ed Holland NR wing from Friends Central with offers from PSU, VCU, and interest/offers from the whole Big Five (except Nova). We also Andy Barba discussed in the 2020 thread because he might be a 2020. Also, for locals, Garrett Johnson goes to the Episcopal in Virginia, not EA. Anyway, it's an interesting group of offers given recent history because Penn didn't come in before these players were highly rated, they came in after the players already were hyped.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	04-19-20 03:55 PM - Post#306380 Ah yes, I felt like there was one but couldnâ€™t find with a quick look. Thanks for reminder and bringing all relevant prospects here as well. Sorry I couldnâ€™t find the other thread you started. One question and note on above: - Did we actually offer Jack Molloy? I see on Twitter he had an unofficial visit but I see no offers there or on VC. He looks like a very good player so itâ€™s not that we wouldnâ€™t want him, but I just donâ€™t see an internet trail of an offer. - As part of Molloyâ€™s commitment announcement, he said he is doing a post grad year at The Hotchkiss School and committing to Yale (pending admission). Can kids not do a post grad year at NMH? As a prep school I kind of figured some kids were doing post grad, but Iâ€™m not super familiar.
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	04-19-20 06:28 PM - Post#306386 You are correct that I was confusing the unofficial with an offer.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	04-19-20 06:55 PM - Post#306387 Definitely can do a post grad year there. He averaged like six points a game there this year... a change of scenery and more PT could be helpful...
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	04-20-20 03:12 AM - Post#306390 Thanks Mike, yeah I thought it was weird a kid would leave NMH... thatâ€™s usually where kids are going to rather than leaving. Still seems like a nice prospect, but Pennâ€™s offered a lot of big wings, so weâ€™ll see what happens.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	04-20-20 03:14 AM - Post#306391 For those so inclined, Garrett Johnson junior year mixtape is here (and looks to me like he either dunks or hits 3â€™s so have to think would be a good fit for Donahueâ€™s offense!): http://www.hudl.com/v/2DDdMZ If you want to check out his junior year stats, you can see them here: https://www.maxpreps.com/m/athlete/garrett-joh nson...
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. PhD Student Posts 1173	04-20-20 11:07 AM - Post#306399 besnoah Said: Also, for locals, Garrett Johnson goes to the Episcopal in Virginia, not EA. Think that's Llewellyn's school right?
welcometothejungle Masters Student Posts 788	04-20-20 11:12 AM - Post#306400 T.P.F.K.A.D.W. Said: besnoah Said: Also, for locals, Garrett Johnson goes to the Episcopal in Virginia, not EA. Think that's Llewellyn's school right? It's a little confusing but Llewellyn went to Virginia Episcopal School, not Episcopal High School. Columbia's Asa Shannon did go to Episcopal High School though
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. PhD Student Posts 1173	04-20-20 11:32 AM - Post#306403 welcometothejungle Said: T.P.F.K.A.D.W. Said: besnoah Said: Also, for locals, Garrett Johnson goes to the Episcopal in Virginia, not EA. Think that's Llewellyn's school right? It's a little confusing but Llewellyn went to Virginia Episcopal School, not Episcopal High School. Columbia's Asa Shannon did go to Episcopal High School though Is this the Episcopal that John McCain attended? I think it's in Alexandria.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	04-20-20 12:41 PM - Post#306404 From my observation, certain Ivies use certain prep programs as their stash spots. Yale had success with Makai Mason at Hotchkiss in the past. Harvard has had success stashing kids at NMH in the past (and certainly it's a feeder for all Ivies). There may be others that I'm less familiar with. Not at all saying that's what happened here, just that it's something I've observed with certain schools...
sparman PhD Student Posts 1352	04-20-20 02:40 PM - Post#306406 I know you could figure this out, but being home and having time on my hands - Episcopal High School is a boarding school in Alexandria. VA. It has sent various athletes to the ivies, in numerous sports. Although it's a member of the Interstate Athletic Conference in MD-DC-VA metro area (Georgetown Prep, Landon, St. Albans, St. Stephens/St. Anne's, all ivy feeding schools), it's traditional rival is Woodberry Forest School, a boarding school in Orange, VA. John McCain graduated from EHS. Virginia Episcopal School is a boarding/day school in Lynchburg, VA, 2 hours west of Richmond, a member (for boys) of the Virginia Independent Conference. Lllewelln graduated from VES. Trinity Episcopal school is a small, relatively new (1972) independent school in Richmond, VA. There are many more episcopal schools in VA, some but not all of which are so-named. Perhaps not surprisingly, I had multiple uncles who were episcopal ministers in VA.
1LotteryPick1969 Postdoc Posts 2280	04-20-20 06:08 PM - Post#306408 sparman Said: Perhaps not surprisingly, I had multiple uncles who were episcopal ministers in VA. About what am I not to be surprised?? Multiple uncles Episcopal ministers In Va. Or the combination of the three?
hoopsfan Masters Student Posts 648	04-20-20 06:53 PM - Post#306409 This is an incomplete list but Columbia has had many kids attend Peddie including Rosenberg, Frankoski, Agho, Hickman, CJ Davis and now Supreme Cook.
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 4008	04-20-20 08:16 PM - Post#306412 Can I get an amen for Sparski?
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	04-20-20 08:33 PM - Post#306414 Another good one!
sparman PhD Student Posts 1352	04-20-20 08:59 PM - Post#306417 Your choice....
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. PhD Student Posts 1173	04-21-20 11:01 AM - Post#306424 hoopsfan Said: This is an incomplete list but Columbia has had many kids attend Peddie including Rosenberg, Frankoski, Agho, Hickman, CJ Davis and now Supreme Cook. There is NO WAY Supreme Cook doesn't become a celebrity chef one day.
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639	04-22-20 04:56 PM - Post#306500 It will be impossible to compete against Harvard now with all that stimulus money they received.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	04-22-20 06:27 PM - Post#306509 Harvard declined the money.
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	04-22-20 06:45 PM - Post#306510 HARVARDDADGRAD Said: Harvard declined the money. You mean returned. They were getting killed over this.
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 4008	04-22-20 07:26 PM - Post#306512 I thought I read that Penn and Cornell got more?
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	04-22-20 07:32 PM - Post#306513 Even so, Harvard has a $39 BILLION endowment. That is 9 BILLION dollars more than #2, Yale.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	04-22-20 07:54 PM - Post#306515 The money was allocated by the feds without any application on the basis of augmenting financial to students affected by COVID 19. The need test is relevant to the particular students covered, not the institution. Under this logic, no Ivy institutions would get federal funds. Sounds like socialism to me!
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	04-22-20 07:55 PM - Post#306516 Penn Funding: $9,907,683 Endowment: $14,649,762,000 Tuition: $55,584 How many students: 24,806 How many employees: ~23,000 (likely includes the health system) This was pocket change for most of the Ivies - not worth the blowback for Harvard Should Swarthmore give theirs back? Couch pennies for them: Funding: $1,200,865 Endowment: $2,131,553,000 Tuition: $50,424 How many students: 1,577 How many employees: ~600 In any of these cases, if it is used to directly aid students or adjacent independent businesses in need - it's better than restaurant chains getting it.
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639	04-22-20 08:19 PM - Post#306517 HARVARDDADGRAD Said: Harvard declined the money. So did Shake Shack--at least they have good burgers.
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	04-22-20 08:43 PM - Post#306518 Only 50% of these funds were required to be distributed directly to students. Colleges had a lot of discretion on how to handle the rest. Again, bailouts for bigger institutions across the board with few questions asked. But for the average individual, tough to get a whiff of anything. Temple, by the way, got $28 million and I'm sure those funds were desperately needed.
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	04-23-20 02:43 PM - Post#306564 No doubt Temple can put the money to good use.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	04-27-20 03:08 AM - Post#306673 Some videos and nice scouting report on Ed Holland III here: https://www.nationalcollegepreps.com/ncp-2k-ed-hol... Have to imagine he is a top local target for the staff and looks like a good one.
SteveChop PhD Student Posts 1156	04-27-20 09:51 AM - Post#306677 The coach at Friends Central is Jason Polykoff, a former unpaid Penn assistant who became a head coach for a couple of years at DIII Earlham but returned home, so IF Ed Holland III is a target of the coaches, that can't hurt us.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	04-30-20 12:14 PM - Post#306839 We just offered a 2/3 from Ohio named Isaiah Walker. Would love to see us offering more frontcourt players although I realize there are fewer 6â€™10 kids around with strong academics
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	04-30-20 01:15 PM - Post#306844 I suspect the answer is "no," but I do wonder if their plan is to just be small/positionless defensively if they can't add someone they view as a meaningful frontcourt contributor.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	04-30-20 07:20 PM - Post#306847 Ivy Centers are generally a few inches short or very late bloomers. Otherwise, they're recruited elsewhere.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	04-30-20 11:48 PM - Post#306849 If the Houston Rockets can survive with such a short lineup, height is not necessarily the key. Problem is that though we're small, we're not really beating teams with our ball handling and shooting. Our team passes pretty well.
weinhauers_ghost Postdoc Posts 2144	05-01-20 01:35 AM - Post#306850 Penndemonium Said: If the Houston Rockets can survive with such a short lineup, height is not necessarily the key. Problem is that though we're small, we're not really beating teams with our ball handling and shooting. Our team passes pretty well. There was no guarantee that the Rockets were going to be successful playing that small come playoff time. The NBA playoffs are much more about half court basketball, and the pace tends to slow down pretty dramatically. If you can't speed up your opponent, you lose that advantage.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 07:59 AM - Post#306853 If Lorca-Lloyd can play as we believe he can, Penn is not short. He had offers from majors (Ohio State, Baylor) and Ivies (Harvard, Columbia). https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/max-l... Why don't we wait and see how this plays out rather than having a running weeping match about how we have no bigs? Yes, in college basketball, you graduate your best players and have to rebuild. We started that process in fine fashion last year. Assuming there is a normal season next year, I fully expect Penn to be in the tournament and get better for the following 2 years.
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	05-01-20 09:33 AM - Post#306856 Ah, didn't realize I was participating in a running weeping match. I thought I was discussing team composition in a recruiting thread and speculating about why Penn has mostly offered HM-quality bigs over the past two years (Zona, Kepnang, etc.) without much in the way of secondary options.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 09:54 AM - Post#306857 Lorca-Lloyd is not chopped liver.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-01-20 09:57 AM - Post#306858 Another key difference is that Houston has undersized rebounders/defenders in Covington and Tucker. Our undersized 4s donâ€™t really rebound, with the exception of Monroe. And Westbrook is an otherworldly rebounder for his size. Our guards our rebound poorly, again, with the exception of Monroe.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 10:06 AM - Post#306859 I think with the athleticism of our young guards, they will rebound just fine. Dingle was rarely in position to rebound given how often he had the ball and where he was on the court. AJ was the guy on the inside and we didn't want to crowd the paint. But that all should change this year.
weinhauers_ghost Postdoc Posts 2144	05-01-20 10:08 AM - Post#306860 SomeGuy Said: Another key difference is that Houston has undersized rebounders/defenders in Covington and Tucker. Our undersized 4s donâ€™t really rebound, with the exception of Monroe. And Westbrook is an otherworldly rebounder for his size. Our guards our rebound poorly, again, with the exception of Monroe. Seriously. We don't have an Ivy-sized version of PJ Tucker on our roster.
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	05-01-20 10:24 AM - Post#306861 First of all, Martz proved to be on his way to becoming a decent rebounder over the course of the season. He will continue to improve. Monroe has proven to be adept at it, and I agree with P38 that Dingle could emerge as one much the way a smaller Goodman did. I have to think MLL is going to be a beast from that perspective; hope he learns how to outlet like Max R. did. One thing guys like Zoller and Grandieri showed us is that, at least in our league, technique can matter more than physical traits when it comes to rebounding.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	05-01-20 10:58 AM - Post#306864 What the "weeping match" folks are concerned about are the probabilities here. Players can have uncertainty around potential performance and potential injuries. Proven players have far less uncertainty around performance but some odds of injuries. Unproven players have uncertainty around both. Compare the stable of bigs coming back for other top teams: Yale Atkinson Yess Alausa Basa-Ama Harvard Forbes Djuricic Ajogbor Hemmings Princeton Myriad 6'7 dudes who could be Ivy fours Plus Zach Martini, also 6'7 Hooks Brown Gainey (We'll make an exception for Choh here) DeWolf Ndur Moses Then compare that to Penn: Simmons Myriad 6'6 dudes that maybe could be Ivy fours MLL Wang Why did every other top Ivy - all of which were in a better spot than Penn to start (maybe except Princeton...) - bring in at least one big, if not multiple? You can't look at those lists above and tell me that you wouldn't set Penn's odds as the lowest out of those five given that it's relying on uncertainty both in a production and injury perspective... It just doesn't make sense.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 11:03 AM - Post#306865 Yale is a lock. Every other team is a pure question mark. Harvard in particular---you need guys who can shoot. We're getting here to you trying to provide mathematical probabilities to situations where it is not based on performance. And if you are basing your prediction on potential, Lorca-Lloyd has as much as any non-Yale big man. And Penn has 2 guys who can be very good at the 4, not including Wang. If Wang returns to his pre-injury level, Penn is a lock for the Tournament.
Quaker75 Freshman Posts 37	05-01-20 11:20 AM - Post#306866 I think a good strategy is to play the games and see if we win. Go Quakers
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	05-01-20 11:34 AM - Post#306867 I mean, Danilo Djuricic has logged almost 50% of team mins over the past two years and has shot 35% from three. Mason Forbes played 25% of team minutes in Ivy play and about that for the year last year (and was twice a KenPom game MVP). Also, Harvard has a bunch of "Ivy four" options in Kirkwood, Ledlum and Catchings. While I like Atkinson plus anything over what the rest of the league has, the rest of the league has VERY different levels of question marks. Harvard's question marks are the smallest, and it could credibly get away with what it has. Not all question marks are the same size and Penn's are friggin HUGE.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-01-20 11:55 AM - Post#306868 Did Goodman become a good rebounder? Statistically, he had the lowest rebounding percentage of any starter in the league last year. Dingle was only a little above him, and was also among the very weakest rebounders in the league. Martz got better in conference, but he still got less than 10% of available rebounds. We need our 4 to get at least his share of available rebounds, particularly without AJ next year.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 11:56 AM - Post#306869 He's averaged only 6.1 where he did not have to be the big man....and you lose him after next year. You lost Lewis, Baker and Bassey, who played big. You can talk it up all you want, but Harvard is going to have to find guys who didn't do it this year to do it next year. And your one returning double digit scorer has some holes in his game, Kirkwood. Mike, here's where your objectivity always descends to a rooting interest. There is no way you can say Harvard is anything but a question mark after losing either its best or second best 5 man class ever with no returning player over 6' 8", no one who got more than 4 rebounds per game and one double digit scorer. Sounds very much like Penn. I'm sure they have talent---we'll see how that plays out. I like Penn has returning better than what Harvard has, but that's my rooting interest
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	05-01-20 12:15 PM - Post#306871 Quaker75 Said: I think a good strategy is to play the games and see if we win. Go Quakers You are no fun; this is way better than watching the news.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-01-20 12:19 PM - Post#306872 Hmmm. Agree shooting isnâ€™t the issue for Harvardâ€™s returning bigs. Djuricic and Forbes are both highly efficient. However, they have extremely low usage rates (werenâ€™t you saying this was Pennâ€™s problem earlier)? But I donâ€™t necessarily see the certainty for Harvard. Harvard has lacked lineup consistency in recent years to my eye, and has benefited from Amaker having a lot of flexibility to play big or small, etc. Forbes functioned well as a change of pace to Lewis. But is he more than that? He isnâ€™t as slight as Baker, but he is slight. Does he need Lewis bludgeoning guys for the rest of the game to be effective? Similarly, Djuricic does some 4/5 things, but there are also aspects of his game that arenâ€™t very big mannish at all. Harvard will be very different defensively (and probably not nearly as good) if they are playing Forbes and Djuricic together at 4 and 5 for the majority of games. And they will really struggle if they play Djuricic in the middle with a small lineup. So much so that I donâ€™t think they will do either of these things. So I donâ€™t see certainty as to what Harvard will do, and I see even less returning up front depth than Penn has (and I agree Penn lacks front court depth). Finally, I donâ€™t think Brown is the biggest threat to pass Penn. They lost too much at guard, and donâ€™t have enough to replace it. The biggest threat is Dartmouth, which was statistically about the same as Brown last year, and should be better with Barry back.
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	05-01-20 12:20 PM - Post#306873 SomeGuy Said: Did Goodman become a good rebounder? Statistically, he had the lowest rebounding percentage of any starter in the league last year. Dingle was only a little above him, and was also among the very weakest rebounders in the league. I know the stats belie this a bit, but watching him for 4 years, especially the last 2, told me he was getting a surprising number of contested rebounds underneath for his size. As for Dingle, he certainly has the vertical and the strength to get rebounds over taller players, much like Woods did. It really depends on how the coaches want them positioned, especially with MLL on the floor.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-01-20 12:32 PM - Post#306876 I never get this. I donâ€™t care a lot about offensive rebounds, where positioning and philosophy does determine whether you get them. But there is no positioning excuse for not getting defensive rebounds. Everyone needs to get them. Woods wasnâ€™t a strong statistical rebounder either, at any point. He never got more than 7.5% of available rebounds. It doesnâ€™t matter how strong or athletic you look when you occasionally get a rebound. It matters whether you get them.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	05-01-20 12:45 PM - Post#306877 Agree that Harvard will be weaker inside at 4/5. Freshmen Justice Ajogbor (6'9") and Josh Hemming (6'8") will certainly help fill things out. Ajogbor has unusual size and strength for this league. Harvard's strength is that the remaining starters are beasts. Ledlum, Kirkwood and Haskett may each be the among the best defenders and rebounders for their positions. Don't underestimate Harvard's rebounding, as exemplified by last year's RPM stats: 9th in league - Ledlum 10th - Djuricic 20th - Forbes 43rd - Kirkwood Haskett was much further down the list but he can come up big. With roughly have the league's RPM leaders graduated, Harvard still has roughly 3 of the top 10 returnees, plus 2 big athletic freshmen. Teams like Yale, Brown and Dartmouth are looking tough under the boards this upcoming season, and Penn and Princeton will have depth hoping to step up, but Harvard has a squad of league leading rebounders per minute returning.
weinhauers_ghost Postdoc Posts 2144	05-01-20 01:20 PM - Post#306879 Streamers Said: First of all, Martz proved to be on his way to becoming a decent rebounder over the course of the season. He will continue to improve. Monroe has proven to be adept at it, and I agree with P38 that Dingle could emerge as one much the way a smaller Goodman did. I have to think MLL is going to be a beast from that perspective; hope he learns how to outlet like Max R. did. One thing guys like Zoller and Grandieri showed us is that, at least in our league, technique can matter more than physical traits when it comes to rebounding. I see Martz as a small ball 4 who can stretch the floor offensively and is willing to stick his nose in there and defend and rebound in the paint. If MLL turns out to be the rim protector he showed flashes of in limited PT, that would be great. I like the fact that he seems to have a mean streak defensively. I just don't know what his strength is offensively. He's clearly not AJ (which is to be expected), and I think that was a huge contributing factor to his inability to crack the rotation this season. Monroe could be something of a wild card. He's got a bit of the slasher to his offensive game, but he needs to iron the wrinkles out of his jump shot in order to make that slashing more effective. I'm curious as to whether the point guard skills he displayed in high school really translate to this level. If so, he's a credible secondary playmaker.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	05-01-20 02:38 PM - Post#306880 This has absolutely nothing to do with my rooting interest, though it's convenient to throw that around to dismiss what I have to say. I've proven on here through the years that I'd rather be right than be wrong pretending things are rosier than they actually are for partisan purposes. There's a reason why Bart's 2021 projections have Harvard 40 spots ahead of Penn WITH Wang producing at a very high level. Why you can't see that comes down to my point about question marks... EVERY Ivy has question marks heading into next season - even Yale. But the question marks are smaller when you are projecting more on performance than potential. A starting five of Haskett, Ledlum, Kirkwood, Djuricic and Forbes combined for about 40% of team minutes last year. And all played at least a quarter of minutes in Ivy play. So your base case can all be modeled based on actual performance, which is far more stable. From there, different folks will have different opinions on a step Tretout might take, if Kale can find his old game after finally recovering from injury, whether the freshmen can contribute, etc., but having real performance at five spots diminishes the size of the question marks. Penn doesn't have that. If it gets Wang and Washington back, then it could, but those are question marks right now. Without them, the production you can model off of is Dingle, Martz, Simmons, Scott, Monroe. And as we discussed before, the usage doesn't really add up there. So those question marks are much bigger. That's why Penn isn't going to be projected as highly.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	05-01-20 02:44 PM - Post#306881 Djuricic has been in the 16-18% range on usage during his career and Forbes was at 17% last year. Those are low, but not extremely low. Penn has three guys in the 13-15% range, which is getting to extremely low, but not quite there. However, it is the COMPOUNDING effect of having multiple players in this range that makes it harder and harder to overcome. The simplest way to see this is to add up the usage rates: Harvard Ledlum - 28% Kirkwood - 24% Haskett - 19% Forbes - 17% Djuricic - 16% Total = 104% (works!) Penn Dingle - 25% Simmons - 18% Monroe - 15% Martz - 14% Scott - 13% Total = 85% (doesn't work!)
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 04:02 PM - Post#306882 That's misleading. In conference games, Dingle,Martz and Scott played more minutes than any 3 returning Harvard players and Wang, before his injury the year before, was a 20+ minutes per game player. You are cherry picking the stats to come up with a very small advantage and declaring it signficant.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	05-01-20 04:44 PM - Post#306884 I do wish people would stop calling mrjames biased. He's right that everyone keeps throwing that out every time he posts something a bit critical of Penn. He may have some rooting interest, but he has clearly shown himself to be more balanced and less biased than the rest of us. For example, I don't know if I root for a strong conference the way he does. I only hope for good times for Penn. We may disagree with mrjames' points, but we don't have to question the motives anymore. mrjames Said: This has absolutely nothing to do with my rooting interest, though it's convenient to throw that around to dismiss what I have to say. I've proven on here through the years that I'd rather be right than be wrong pretending things are rosier than they actually are for partisan purposes. There's a reason why Bart's 2021 projections have Harvard 40 spots ahead of Penn WITH Wang producing at a very high level. Why you can't see that comes down to my point about question marks... EVERY Ivy has question marks heading into next season - even Yale. But the question marks are smaller when you are projecting more on performance than potential. A starting five of Haskett, Ledlum, Kirkwood, Djuricic and Forbes combined for about 40% of team minutes last year. And all played at least a quarter of minutes in Ivy play. So your base case can all be modeled based on actual performance, which is far more stable. From there, different folks will have different opinions on a step Tretout might take, if Kale can find his old game after finally recovering from injury, whether the freshmen can contribute, etc., but having real performance at five spots diminishes the size of the question marks. Penn doesn't have that. If it gets Wang and Washington back, then it could, but those are question marks right now. Without them, the production you can model off of is Dingle, Martz, Simmons, Scott, Monroe. And as we discussed before, the usage doesn't really add up there. So those question marks are much bigger. That's why Penn isn't going to be projected as highly.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-01-20 04:47 PM - Post#306886 Usage rates arenâ€™t necessarily a good thing if the ORAT isnâ€™t good. In conference, Harvard had Ledlum and Kirkwood around 28% and Rio at 24%, but all with ORATs of 93 or lower. Among the returnees on both teams, Dingle is the highest conference ORAT among the high usage players. Both teams have high ORAT guys with low usage. For both teams, the key may be upping the usage of those guys. Penn may actually have a better chance of doing this, because they donâ€™t have multiple high usage/low ORAT guys using up all the oxygen.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-01-20 04:52 PM - Post#306887 We're on a site where we all give our opinions. I stated my opinion---so did Mike. I think he was speaking as a fan in terms of his opinion of Harvard vs Penn, because even the numbers he uses gives Harvard a very slight advantage (and I think they are cherry picked) yet he concludes that Harvard is much better. It's fair to call him out on it. I think that these days, we can do a lot worse than call someone a fan. Hell, if I commented as he did in the Harvard Board (or especially in the Columbia one), I would be told to go back to my board as a Penn fan. I would never do that--I appreciate his contribution, I just do not think it is convincing.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-01-20 05:55 PM - Post#306889 Streamers Said: First of all, Martz proved to be on his way to becoming a decent rebounder over the course of the season. He will continue to improve. Monroe has proven to be adept at it, and I agree with P38 that Dingle could emerge as one much the way a smaller Goodman did. I have to think MLL is going to be a beast from that perspective; hope he learns how to outlet like Max R. did. One thing guys like Zoller and Grandieri showed us is that, at least in our league, technique can matter more than physical traits when it comes to rebounding. I'm a BIG fan of Max Martz and think he is going to be a really good, multi-level scorer and enjoy a great Penn career. I also think his positional defense is solid even though he might not be the quickest. That said, his rebounding numbers were not good to start the year (rebounding % on par with small guards). His rebounding % ticked up, but pretty marginally and he finished with comparable rebounding percentage to rebounding behemoths like Mike Smith, Zach Hunsaker, Azar Swain, Terrance McBride, etc. In other words, still not what we need out of our 4... I certainly hope and expect improvement, but currently this is not a strength for Martz. LOTS of other things to like, but we can be honest about rebounding. P.S. rebounding concerns go well beyond Martz, so only highlighting him since his name was thrown around.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-01-20 06:12 PM - Post#306890 besnoah Said: Ah, didn't realize I was participating in a running weeping match. I thought I was discussing team composition in a recruiting thread and speculating about why Penn has mostly offered HM-quality bigs over the past two years (Zona, Kepnang, etc.) without much in the way of secondary options. Yeah... agree with this take. For me, it's honestly a given that the preference would be to have more options in the big slots than we have now... More options means higher likelihood of success. That doesn't mean we don't like MLL or see potential there. I think the problem is that you come from the perspective of everything working out to best case scenario. If Wang comes back 100% healthy, Simmons makes a Jr to Sr jump out of nowhere and MLL lives up to all those offers and running the floor and dunking, rebounding like crazy and blocking a lot of shots, of course, I'd feel great about that. BUT the last few years should teach a clear lesson that you can't plan on best case. Wang's health is a huge unknown (now missed a year +). MLL's progression is a huge unknown (couldn't crack regular rotation of an 8-6, 4th place Ivy team with 1 reliable big). Simmons progression is pretty well known and isn't what we hoped. Ask yourself these questions honestly: -Do you genuinely think it is more likely that most of the things above go right? - Or more likely that a few of them go wrong? - Had we landed/land a true big or two in this 2020 class, would we be in a better situation? Note that I'm not even hating on MLL. I'm still very excited about his upside. It's about the odds for me. One of the Ivy advantages is that we can have bigger roster sizes with more recruits, but haven't seemed to convert on that as well as we'd like.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-02-20 04:32 AM - Post#306900 Isaiah Walker junior year highlights can be seen here: https://www.hudl.com/video/3/10521344/5e66 8128c119... Very impressive highlight reel (and great HS season stats). Shows a pretty smooth game with ability to score in different ways and defensively he looks pretty long and disruptive for the few D highlights. Looks like one to keep track of for sure.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-02-20 05:42 PM - Post#306929 Penn coaches get a mention from Walker here: https://scoopmantv.com/2020/05/02/isaiah-wal ker-co...
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888	05-03-20 07:49 AM - Post#306942 In a late response, I think it is hard to argue with MrJames on the projections. On paper, Harvard looks like they will be the better team. I agree with P38 that there is much potential with MLL & Wang (assuming Wang can play). However, any way you spin it, the numbers seem to favor Harvard even from a less sophisticated perspective than MrJames. On another note, MrJames never mentions Mark Jackson when comparing the centers. I know he has not received much playing time, but Donahue mentioned that he might have to play him because of his good preseason play before last season. AJ dominated play at center the last four years, and no one else really got a chance to play other than Rothschild and Simmons. With Simmons, he basically filled in for the 5 minutes or less that AJ did not play. I just wonder if Jackson can also contribute some valuable minutes next season. Further, does he have an extra year of eligibility that he might use with Penn?
Charlie Fog Masters Student Posts 587	05-03-20 08:14 AM - Post#306943 Very encouraging
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-03-20 08:27 AM - Post#306944 It is easy to argue with him--he is basing his projections almost entirely on the fact that Harvard's players were higher ranked recruits, because when you look at returning minutes, it is almost identical. But I will readily admit that on paper, Harvard should be a better team. But they have some serious holes, and the guys they will rely on mostly have not been in positions where they had to be the first or second option. It's almost willful blindness to think that a team that loses virtually all its big man minutes (Lewis, Baker), and its most versatile remaining offensive players (after its two injured superstars, Aiken and Towns), Bassey and Juzang has enough in the tank to be a serious contender this year. I will put the Penn soph class up against their returning guys and give us a very good chance. And if we can get the freshman pre-injury output of Wang and Washington, Penn has a better team. But no matter how you look at it, a prediction is not based on returning production except for 2 players on each team---Kirkwood and Djuricic on Harvard and Dingle and Martz on Penn. Penn wins that matchup in my opinion. Beyond that, it's based on potential on both sides and I am bullish on MLL. BTW, if Jackson plays anything more than garbage time, it will not be a good year for Penn.
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888	05-03-20 09:12 AM - Post#306946 By the numbers, I agree it is close. However, if you go strictly by the numbers, I think any stats guy would pick Harvard over Penn. Everything else is subjective. One would certainly hope that MLL could be a difference maker. We also know that Wang, if healthy, is another piece that raises the prospects for Penn. However, if Simmons does not raise his game, Wang canâ€™t play, and MLL still looks like a raw talent next year, then Forbes + other Harvard guys looks a lot better to me than Penn Câ€™s + other Penn guys. While I have been an advocate for Simmons possibly raising his game with more time sans AJ, hopeful about Wang returning, and optimistic about the prospects for MLL, I feel that it is more about hope and my bias than a hard objective look. I would add that I am also optimistic about Slajchertâ€™s game fitting in with the sophomore crew earlier rather than later. In the end, I really hope that the stars align for our big guys. However, I also worry that the even with all the Câ€™s in play, we will have trouble replacing AJâ€™s offensive contribution inside. Not only did he produce points, but he kept defenses honest and created opportunities for others. It is a major hole to fill with unproven talent.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	05-03-20 09:29 AM - Post#306947 Harvard won 6 of its last 7, including beating Penn, Princeton and Yale. Juzang was lost vs Columbia, so Harvard played without him for the last 6.5 games. In those final 6 games, the returnees that we are wondering about played significant minutes: Forbes 16 mpg Haskett 19 Ledlum 19 Djuricic 18 Amaker didn't seem to settle on Tretout in his guard rotation until the final 3 games, when Tretout played 18mpg, scoring in double digits in the final games vs Cornell and Yale. Apparently Noah Kirkwood played hurt in that stretch as well, eventually sitting out the Yale game. No question this team drops off in potential, but so does the entire league (except for Dartmouth and Brown). Amaker usually does a good job of utilizing his depth, and those guys played often and well in tight games down the Ivy stretch, including against the other 3 tournament qualifiers.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-03-20 09:43 AM - Post#306948 While I think mrjames is underestimating Penn (and has underestimated Pennâ€™s last two recruiting classes as well), I do not think it is based almost entirely on the quality of Harvardâ€™s recruits. Everyone who runs statistical models predicting next year will have Harvard ahead of Penn next year, probably significantly, and generally they donâ€™t take recruiting into account. Even though the two teams lose the same number of minutes, Harvardâ€™s returnees simply played better last year. They have more than 50% more returning win shares than Penn does. And even if the models donâ€™t delve deep enough to look at the quality of minutes lost, they will approximate it by simply removing the same amount for both Harvard and Penn based on minutes lost, and Harvard will remain ahead because they were ahead this past year. Now, Harvard is only 4th in returning win shares (behind Yale, Princeton, and Dartmouth), so like Penn they will need for it to turn out they have superior talent in order to compete for the league. Yale is way ahead. To quantify, Penn is 7th in the league in returning win shares. But Penn is closer to 2nd place Princeton than Princeton is to Yale.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-03-20 10:29 AM - Post#306951 This is what I am talking about with cherry picking. Let's just look at that narrow Harvard victory over Penn--here's the box score. https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/202... Penn has 134 returning minutes. Harvard has 96, most of which was deep reserve. You can look at games against lesser teams that were not as close and make the overall numbers closer, but the primary thesis of Mike and you, that Harvard clearly has more quality returning minutes, is highly questionable at best. Again, it boils down to prospect rating and nothing more.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	05-03-20 10:38 AM - Post#306953 Cherry picking? I looked at 6 games. You looked at 1
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-03-20 03:08 PM - Post#306957 Yes, you chose them because they got more minutes against the dregs. But the performance of your underclassmen those last 6 games was undistinguished, to say the least, which is why all you are talking about is minutes.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	05-03-20 04:20 PM - Post#306960 No, I chose those games because - as I was very clear - Juzang got hurt and so Amaker had to finish the final 6 games without both of his senior guards. They were also the most recent 6 games, against every Ivy squad but for Dartmouth. Freshmen also are more assimilated and this representative. There arenâ€™t any more relevant games than the most recent oneâ€™s, triggered and starting with the absence of another senior in Juzang. You have it backwards. I didnâ€™t pick their best games. These returning players had good games when called upon.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-03-20 04:41 PM - Post#306961 They weren't good though. Look through the stats of your underclassmen in these games. They won despite them, not because of them.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-03-20 05:00 PM - Post#306963 Next year (outside of Yale), is really is a crapshoot in my mind as to how the rest of the team's come together, so I'm not really that interested in wading into the debate on who will be better. BUT, hey its Sunday and this is a distraction for a few minutes so why not, right? My view is I think if both teams are fully healthy that we can definitely be as good if not better than Harvard next year. The problem is that is a BIG if. I hope I'm wrong because having fully healthy Mike Wang, Jonah Charles, Jelani Williams, and Bryce Washington to go along with rest of rising Sophs, rising Seniors, and incoming frosh would be a VERY intriguing roster. The problem is the probability of that (based on last few years track record) feels lower than I think any of us would like. So odds still favor likelihood of Harvard being better. The fact that our 2020 class is smaller is where my personal frustration comes in as a fan, because a few more players means a few more chances of hitting on a good contributor early. For me it really is about desire to increase our odds for success. That's not a knock on guys coming in (I'm really high on Slacjert and Laczkowski), but just that we didn't fill out class a little more. In general, I think this will be Coach Donahue and the staff's MOST difficult job yet at Penn, so if everything comes together, it will be super impressive. Here's to hoping 1) we have a season and 2) that it all does come together. Another factor I'd like to throw into the mix that will be very interesting to track and no one seems to be talking about... Current isolation measures don't give guys full capabilities to work on their games, play alongside teammates in pickups, etc. Based on how long this goes on, I'm wondering aloud how that is going to affect/diminish off season improvement.
91Quake PhD Student Posts 1126	05-07-20 07:35 PM - Post#307057 Casey Simmons has definitely seen his recruiting pick up in a major way but Penn still very much a consideration from Corey Evans at Rivals: https://basketballrecruit ing.rivals.com/news/three...
nychoops Junior Posts 244	05-07-20 09:12 PM - Post#307061 Son in law tried to get involved but was told he didnâ€™t want west coast. Was told he likes Gtown and Penn but if/when G Tech offers they would be in it. Northwestern all over him. Also for those clamoring for a big know they are involved with 3-4 quality kids
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888	05-08-20 06:59 AM - Post#307066 That sounds promising, NycH. Are you able to share if the bigs are 2020?
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-09-20 03:01 PM - Post#307115 nychoops Said: Son in law tried to get involved but was told he didnâ€™t want west coast. Was told he likes Gtown and Penn but if/when G Tech offers they would be in it. Northwestern all over him. Also for those clamoring for a big know they are involved with 3-4 quality kids nychoops - always love your insights and thanks so much for sharing. Casey Simmons looks REALLY good so love to hear Penn is still in it. I think 2021 class is critical and seems like a lot of good targets. Fingers crossed on a big as well.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-09-20 05:24 PM - Post#307120 Caught this on Twitter from earlier this week on Monday: Garrett Johnson (@gjohnson_3) had a virtual visit with #Penn today. He really enjoyed the visit.
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	05-09-20 08:37 PM - Post#307122 Forgot to mention this one the other day. Forward/Center who appears to also play TE: jake lieberman Bennett Pitcher has told me that Penn, Princeton, Harvard, and #UMass have offered. The junior wants to commit by this summer or fall, more offers should come.
HARVARDDADGRAD Postdoc Posts 2701	05-09-20 09:59 PM - Post#307127 Some Big offers if 247 is correct. Gotta outrecruit UVa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio State, UCLA, Baylor, Northwestern, and, even if he like the state of Pennsylvania, Pitt, Penn State and Villanova.
nychoops Junior Posts 244	05-09-20 11:18 PM - Post#307131 My understanding after asking around, and apologies if Iâ€™m misinformed but Bennetts power 5 offers are football based and that his basketball ones are not quite at that level yet. As for the bigs I mentioned yes be glad to share that information just let me check to make sure Iâ€™m not betraying anybodyâ€™s trust. Hoping everyone and theyâ€™re loved ones are safe and well
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	05-09-20 11:34 PM - Post#307132 Wasn't Woods a two sport recruit?
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-10-20 01:13 AM - Post#307133 Antonio Woods was a 3 star QB recruit out of Ohio and his FB offers were better than his BB offers: https://n.rivals.com/news/basketball-or-fo otball-f...
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888	05-10-20 07:08 AM - Post#307136 Thank you, Nychoops. I always enjoy your posts - very informative.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	05-10-20 09:40 AM - Post#307157 Did you watch Pitcherâ€™s highlight video? While he is being recruited at the very highest level for football, I think heâ€™d be a terrific addition to Penn basketball. He can really ball.
nychoops Junior Posts 244	05-10-20 10:12 AM - Post#307160 Have not seen him play or a video unfortunately.. asking around heard heâ€™s an ENORMOUS body with great feet and hands. Im sure heâ€™s quite talented and hope my initial post wasnâ€™t disparaging of his talent. Only intent was to relay info I had heard about his offers... sorry if I was unclear on that... my bad
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	05-10-20 11:23 AM - Post#307166 Not questioning your intent. I was just so surprised when I goggled him and watched the video. He is a very good outside shooter with a significant inside presence and also runs the court very well. Itâ€™s worth watching even knowing that highlight videos can mislead
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	05-11-20 12:14 AM - Post#307169 I watched the video and thought he has potential. He runs the floor very well, seems to be a very good finisher, and he hit a few deep balls. You can't tell his shooting percentages on videos, but his form looked solid. My biggest concern would be that he looked like one of the biggest kids on the floor at 6'6. That just made it tougher to gauge what his game would look like in college. He seemed to have a really good frame to put on muscle on college. AsiaSunset Said: Not questioning your intent. I was just so surprised when I goggled him and watched the video. He is a very good outside shooter with a significant inside presence and also runs the court very well. Itâ€™s worth watching even knowing that highlight videos can mislead
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-11-20 03:25 AM - Post#307171 Thanks as always for info nychoops! Always great to have your insights on the board. Bennett Pitcher looks like a BIG down in the post with some face up skills as well. Very interesting and prefer that he not have bigger b-ball offers. Penndemonium - he is 6â€™9â€ per multiple places I saw eg Verbal Commits.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	05-11-20 06:00 AM - Post#307172 Yes - actually 6â€™9.5â€ and 275 lbs right now. If Bennett wants to play both sports, a school like Penn likely offers a better opportunity than the Ohio States of this world. Still - itâ€™s a difficult double anywhere. Itâ€™s worth mentioning that his dad is both a teacher and the bb coach at Deerfield. I donâ€™t think thatâ€™s irrelevant but weâ€™ll see.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	05-11-20 12:33 PM - Post#307191 FWIW, Dad went to Princeton. I believe he has ties to Penn as well. He's a big prize in this class. Player that comes to mind is Greg Mangano, but maybe a better shooter.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-11-20 12:42 PM - Post#307192 Certainly looks like a great post prospect, and clearly will be a huge battle to land him. Looks like Harvard offered 4/14 (along with UMass) and Penn and Princeton both offered same day 4/25: https://247sports.com/Player/Bennett-Pitche r-46083... Will be an interesting one to follow, and fingers crossed as a Penn fan...
QHoops Senior Posts 369	05-11-20 01:39 PM - Post#307204 I hope they show him endless tape of AJ directing the offense from the high post and having the freedom to shoot 3's. With all the usual caveats about recruiting video, it's not hard to see him being a great fit into Donahue's offense.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	05-11-20 05:18 PM - Post#307213 Realizing I was commenting on the wrong guy. I thought we were still on Johnson, who also looks really good (though smaller). Just watched Pitcher's vide. Ooh. He would be a game changer right away. While I think the league now requires depth, he would elevate us to Ivy Championship material. Mike Porter Said: Thanks as always for info nychoops! Always great to have your insights on the board. Bennett Pitcher looks like a BIG down in the post with some face up skills as well. Very interesting and prefer that he not have bigger b-ball offers. Penndemonium - he is 6â€™9â€ per multiple places I saw eg Verbal Commits.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	05-11-20 05:57 PM - Post#307220 We havenâ€™t had a lot of really broad framed bigs at Penn with that skill set. Nelson - Henry was good in the paint but didnâ€™t have Pitcherâ€™s game. Eric Moore comes to mind but he was only 6â€™6â€ and his range extended only to 15 feet on his jumper.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	05-11-20 06:02 PM - Post#307223 Eric Moore had no 15 foot game. He had a single outside shot--right at the head of the key at the 3 point line. I honestly don't remember him taking any other outside shot.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	05-11-20 07:55 PM - Post#307230 My memory also has Moore hitting a reasonably reliable 10-15 footer from the wing opportunistically when left open. Other teams weren't exactly killing themselves to defend him. Regarding Pitcher - there aren't many Ivy big men who show up able to be as physical as him. I can really picture him clearing out the low post as a Freshman. When you add his skills, he would be someone who could actually replace Brodeur, our best big man in generations. I can also easily picture Pitcher, Dingle, Martz, Charles, Wang, and others cutting down nets soon. Am I getting a bit ahead of myself?
mbaprof Senior Posts 346	05-11-20 09:00 PM - Post#307232 Pitcherâ€™s dad was all ivy track at princeton
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	05-11-20 09:01 PM - Post#307234 A name like Pitcher, and all I'm hearing is track, football and basketball.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	05-12-20 12:11 AM - Post#307240 Yes, and he could hit that shot. He only took 1-2 per game, but he hit 38% from 3 for his career and 47% as a senior.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	05-25-20 03:29 PM - Post#307894 Penn offered 6â€™10â€ Philip Byriel today. Looks more like a Michael Wang type as opposed to a Chris Lewis type. I saw offers from BU and Bucknell
nychoops Junior Posts 244	05-26-20 11:32 AM - Post#307907 A few names Ive heard associated with Penn 1)Nana Owusu-Anane....hes come up the most,by far. Heard he is being very under recruited and has tons of potential 2)AJ Braun 3)Brandon Lieb 4)Gianni Thompson 5)Gabe Dorsey not really sure how accurate so dont shoot the messenger. Hope everyone is safe and well
20Penn14 Senior Posts 364	05-26-20 02:50 PM - Post#307908 https://twitter.com/PhenomExposure/status /12653221... Phenom_Exposure @PhenomExposure 2021 Jarvis Moss @EspnJay03 received an offer from Penn #PhenomHoops
20Penn14 Senior Posts 364	05-26-20 02:56 PM - Post#307910 Per verbal commits: 1)Nana Owusu-Anane 6'9 PF 2)AJ Braun 6'8 PF 3)Brandon Lieb 7'0 C 4)Gianni Thompson 6'7 PF 5)Gabe Dorsey 6'6 SG Looks like Penn is interested in more bigs in this class than 2020
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	05-30-20 04:28 PM - Post#308149 nychoops! Thanks as always for the insights and I do think a really interesting mix of players. Definite credit to the coaching staff to getting involved with a lot of high quality kids in 2021 which seems to have very good potential. This will be a tough year to recruit, but this class is critical as I said elsewhere, so really have to close on a good class here. Hope that we do!
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-06-20 01:35 PM - Post#308603 Looks like we can scratch Gianni Thompson off the board, as he announced his top 7 and we didnâ€™t make the cut. It seemed he was further down our board of likelihood per nychoops. https://phenomhoopreport.com/2021-gianni-thompson- ...
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	06-07-20 08:39 PM - Post#308623 Bennett Pitcher to Harvard, per Twitter. Also, Stevie Mitchell, whom Penn was involved with (is involved with?) was offered by Villanova.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	06-07-20 11:22 PM - Post#308625 Oh no. That is terrible. Pitcher looked like a player who could actually make me forget about Brodeur for a while. That is a VERY high compliment. I think he will terrorize us. The league doesn't get very many wide-bodied big men who actually know how to use their size. This one looks real. I guess Amaker is looking like the better recruiter right now.
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	06-08-20 09:13 AM - Post#308630 This kid was a 4* football OT before he switched to hoops. Must be a helluva athlete. Princeton was in on him too.
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3783	06-08-20 09:22 AM - Post#308634 I continue to be skeptical about these head-to-head losses of players to Harvard and Yale being due to the coaches' recruiting abilities. Penn is at a substantial financial aid disadvantage in these situations. Until the university can find a way to close that gap, I predict that we'll lose all of these contests.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 09:41 AM - Post#308637 As I said, I disagree strenuously with Mike over the institutional advantage possessed by Harvard. I think virtually any decent coach could win a head to head with (1) the Brand and (2) a free ride offered at the top. Add a long time Power Conference coach such as Amaker with his AAU ties and major upgrades to the practice facitlies shown to the recruits and the lead is virtually insurmountable. Having had a great national program in the '70s and a dominant Ivy era in the '90s and '00s is ancient history---You have a coach offering a Harvard diploma with a free ride and see the coach with his big time salary and ability to bring in legends of basketball to speak to them evokes an investment that far far exceeds what any other Ivy is putting into basketball. Of course, that makes what James Jones is doing even more impressive, because all he has in comparison with Harvard is a similar FA policy, not the big time connections or facility upgrades. But Yale stands as Ivy Brand No.2 and that helps. Point being, we will lose every head to head matchup with Harvard for someone they really want until such time as Amaker leaves and Harvard decides not to maintain the investment at that level.
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3783	06-08-20 09:54 AM - Post#308642 Even if Amaker leaves and Harvards commitment to the program wanes, I predict we'll still lose pretty much all of the head-to-heads. The money alone is too much of a disadvantage.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 10:06 AM - Post#308647 That's what I said. I think any decent coach will win the battles for Harvard given its institutional advantage.
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3783	06-08-20 10:36 AM - Post#308651 Iâ€™ve wondered more than a few times what would have happened if Harvard had given Frank Sullivan the same advantages they gave to Amaker.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	06-08-20 11:16 AM - Post#308656 A Harvard alumni who is a large donor told me that the administration didn't fully realize the benefit of a winning basketball team - until they won. They found the best pound-for-pound athletics benefit from basketball. Now they are committed to investing in basketball. Full credit to Amaker for teaching them the benefit of a winning program. I accept on face value what I've been told by mrjames and some Penn fans - that a recruit that is evaluating HYP and another Ivy knows they can get the same FA from the others. I can believe that Amaker in this case just had the better recruiting toolkit - he can show a program capable of competing nationally with a good chance to play in the tournament. I can also believe that Amaker is a good recruit. It feels to me that Amaker can sell a vision. He understands a recruit's buttons. He is charismatic. He is willing to go to extreme measures to win. For example, showing up at Zach Rosen's supermarket. A lot of us thought that was pretty cringeworthy, including me. But it also shows me he's willing to play extremely hard to win. My sense is that Donahue is selling a great education and a well run clean program. He seems to be doing a good job, but not playing the game to its extremes. We all know that the extremes in college basketball recruiting are pretty foul.
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	06-08-20 12:27 PM - Post#308663 I want to draw a distinction on â€œdoing a good jobâ€ because Penn is clearly doing a good/very good job on evaluation. They are regularly offering kids who end up HM targets/4*s earlier than other schools. The kids who are committing can play and a core of â€œOOC Jordan Dingle, 2019 Bryce Washington, OOC Michael Wang, and Ivy Max Martzâ€ is, IMO, good. But they are losing a lot of these battles, and not just to Harvard and Yale, though theyâ€™re seemingly losing all of those two schools.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 12:41 PM - Post#308665 Quote: That's what I said. I think any decent coach will win the battles for Harvard given its institutional advantage. There are some pretty epic statements on this board, but this one is up there. Especially if you remove all of BRF's.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 01:14 PM - Post#308667 I think your statement may have surpassed it. Most Penn fans would agree that Harvard right now has an institutional advantage that, has Sullivan had it, would have allowed him to win the recruiting battles he always lost. This isn't to say that Amaker isn't a great recruiter. But getting 3X as much money as any other Ivy coach gives him some street cred when he is out there. And as I put it with his approach to talking FA with recruits, don't think he doesn't play up the institutional support he has in comparison with every other Ivy school. You are simply wrong on this---Harvard is getting the best recruits year after year because of the brand, the FA and the institutional support. And Amaker knows it and plays it up to the hilt. Doesn't mean they will win the title every year, but puts them in the running every year.
penn nation Professor Posts 21311	06-08-20 01:23 PM - Post#308669 palestra38 Said: But getting 3X as much money as any other Ivy coach gives him some street cred when he is out there. Not when they play in the facility that they are currently in.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 01:35 PM - Post#308671 Quote: Most Penn fans would agree that Harvard right now has an institutional advantage that, has Sullivan had it, would have allowed him to win the recruiting battles he always lost. These are absolute gems. Keep them coming.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 01:40 PM - Post#308673 AS long as you keep insisting that there is a level playing field, I'll be here. But when was Harvard's last title, anyway? Strange. I don't remember Amaker dominating the Big Ten in recruiting when he was at Michigan. Nor Seton Hall, despite a nice NCAA run one year, when he left after an ugly fist fight in the locker room and reports of unrest among players, after missing the NCAA's 3 of his 4 years (he never made it from Michigan). So in your mind, Harvard's domination of recruiting since Amaker came to Allston is really all Tommy. OK. Fine, whatever. But that's your story and I expect you to stick with it.
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 4008	06-08-20 01:56 PM - Post#308675 I.m with P'38 on this. I don't think Penn will win may head-to heads with Y or P either. The "little 4" are even more disadvantaged.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 02:01 PM - Post#308677 Harvard won titles in 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018 and 2019. I'm not insisting that there is a level playing field. There are actually multiple playing fields (financial aid is one, then there's the Academic Index/admissions, facilities, resources like weight rooms, etc.). These playing fields all tilt in different directions and advantage different teams at different times by different amounts. The relatively well-informed opinion that I am trying to convey here is that the complaints about Harvard having institutional advantages over Penn are wildly overstated. Even the specific institutional advantage being discussed here (FA) is overstated, and that ignores other areas where Penn has a decided advantage. I've never really understood why, specifically for Penn fans, it is so difficult to give Amaker the credit he deserves. He's been an absolute unicorn hire who not only has built the Harvard program out of nothing but also has spent a ton of time making himself part of the Harvard community. For all of us who ever said that athletic achievement doesn't have to conflict with a positive contribution to the academic environment, Amaker has built a program that embodies this. To say that an average coach could have done what he has is either laziness or bitterness, but it's not accurate. Finally, and I really want to emphasize this: Our opinions are not equal. My opinion should carry more weight than yours, because it's more informed than yours. While I know that's a source of frustration on these boards, it's also the truth, and I feel compelled to share that fact from time to time.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 02:09 PM - Post#308678 Quote: Strange. I don't remember Amaker dominating the Big Ten in recruiting when he was at Michigan. Nor Seton Hall, despite a nice NCAA run one year, when he left after an ugly fist fight in the locker room and reports of unrest among players, after missing the NCAA's 3 of his 4 years (he never made it from Michigan) https://www.thesetonian.com/2020/04/17/the-forgot t... Team recruiting rankings were sketchy back in the mid-00s, but Michigan was generally top 5 in the Big Ten and I believe one of Amaker's classes was Top 10 nationally. At a program that was just leaving heavy sanctions.
Stuart Suss PhD Student Posts 1439	06-08-20 02:24 PM - Post#308680 It is going to be exciting around here. Whenever he posts political opinions, Palestra38 tells the rest of us (implicitly, if not explicitly): <<Our opinions are not equal. My opinion should carry more weight than yours, because it's more informed than yours. While I know that's a source of frustration on these boards, it's also the truth, and I feel compelled to share that fact from time to time.>> Now that Palestra38 is receiving a taste of his own medicine from Mike James, I can't wait for the fireworks to begin.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 02:43 PM - Post#308682 Stu, while I am aware from talking to you in the past that our political views are not very similar, I cannot recall a single time we exchanged views on this board or in the OTB. So I think that statement is unwarranted. As far as Mike saying he knows better, let me revise that to he has far more information about recruiting than I. I don't think he has far more information about institutional support, nor the past history of these programs. He's just viewing the chicken and egg problem (here the Amaker and Harvard change in institutional priorities which occurred at the same time) as having an easy answer---a Unicorn.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	06-08-20 02:43 PM - Post#308683 An advantage that Jones and Donahue have over Harvard is that they can tell top recruits that top recruits always get to play at Yale and Penn. Fewer bites at the apple means that you will find ways to make it work. A top recruit going to Harvard always has the possibility of ending up being Chris Egi and never getting to play. And you arenâ€™t even guaranteed to keep playing if you are a starter early in your career. You could end up being Christian Webster.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	06-08-20 03:05 PM - Post#308684 I certainly value your factual contributions to the board over just about anyoneâ€™s. However, you have lost me on some of the Amaker stuff, which seems personal. Are there some Penn fans who donâ€™t like the guy? Obviously. And my other alma mater is Michigan, so I know a heck of a lot more passionate irrational basketball fans who donâ€™t like the guy. But Iâ€™m not one of the people who doesnâ€™t like him. I think heâ€™s great for Harvard and the league. And yet any suggestion I make that suggests that he might be a smidge behind Jones because I think Harvard has some institutional advantages seems to be an unfactual affront. At the very least, it seems to me to be debatable. The debate is certainly more fun if you can come up with better arguments than â€œThis is what I say and I know more than you.â€
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 03:14 PM - Post#308685 And I have been hardly "anti-Amaker." I readily acknowledge that he is a great recruiter with well established ties to recruiting networks. I don't quite understand Mike's visceral reaction here. I haven't even really criticized his on-court coaching, other than to say that the results have not necessarily exceeded the talent, even with the injuries. But contrary to what Stu seems to think, I don't have any problem with Mike disagreeing and having his own opinion---indeed, the reverse appears to be the case.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 03:23 PM - Post#308688 I have covered this league heading into my 19th season. I have FAR more information about the administration of this basketball league than you. I didn't even think that was going to be a question. What I want to clear up, because my above statement reads horribly, I don't mean to contend that your basketball opinions aren't more valid than mine (aside from basketball analytics, in which I have particular expertise). They probably are. Especially on Penn basketball. And the pre-2000s, I have very little insight there either. But if you're going to look at The Palestra, the Big 5, the history of Ivy championships and a Final Four that wasn't in the Stone Ages, more admissions flexibility, more administrative flexibility (for instance, Penn can play MTEs whenever it wants and violate the 2-in-4 rule while other schools have to stick to 2-in-4 and aren't allowed to play MTEs that aren't during a holiday break) and weigh that against having slightly less favorable FA than H-Y (with the ability to match) and some how say that the latter matters more, then I don't know what to tell you. You're just choosing to live in a Fantasy Land. Go hire Chris Collins when he gets let go from Northwestern. Or similar. Things would change quickly.
besnoah Masters Student Posts 803	06-08-20 03:27 PM - Post#308689 Quote: I've never really understood why, specifically for Penn fans, it is so difficult to give Amaker the credit he deserves. Why would fans of team "give credit" to a head coach they root against? Is it weird for Eagles to make fun of Jason Garrett's in-game decisions even while he proved himself to be an adept QB developer? Should Florida fans give a standing ovation to Nick Saban when Alabama plays in the Swamp? Just because some people here want to root "for the league" doesn't mean all of us do.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-08-20 03:38 PM - Post#308690 Well, I wanted to do something similar when they fired Miller. Like you, the Penn administration didn't listen to me either. Look, I agree that Amaker is a better recruiter than Donahue. But the question is if you reversed them and Donahue had every bit as much support as Amaker has, would the results be the same. I think Donahue would fare much better in these head to head matchups.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-08-20 03:45 PM - Post#308691 palestra38 Said: I think your statement may have surpassed it. Most Penn fans would agree that Harvard right now has an institutional advantage that, has Sullivan had it, would have allowed him to win the recruiting battles he always lost. This isn't to say that Amaker isn't a great recruiter. But getting 3X as much money as any other Ivy coach gives him some street cred when he is out there. And as I put it with his approach to talking FA with recruits, don't think he doesn't play up the institutional support he has in comparison with every other Ivy school. You are simply wrong on this---Harvard is getting the best recruits year after year because of the brand, the FA and the institutional support. And Amaker knows it and plays it up to the hilt. Doesn't mean they will win the title every year, but puts them in the running every year. Yeah... I don't know if I am most Penn fans, but I couldn't disagree with this more. In my view it is a defeatist and small minded view of the Ivy Basketball world. It's a perfect way to accept/allow mediocrity in recruiting regardless of who Harvard's or Penn's coaches would be, oh and it also instantly detracts from Amaker's A++ skill in recruiting (which he showed at all levels of basketball coaching he has been it before Harvard). That's absurd. Penn has a lot to sell, and even has certain advantages, and if you donâ€™t see that I donâ€™t really know how to respond. Letâ€™s take a blast to the past when Amaker landed at Harvard and they SUUUUUUCCCCCKKKKEEED. Like they sucked the suckiest suck that ever sucked a suck. In about 10 minutes he came in, while Harvard had zero basketball history or credibility, and punched Penn right in the jimmy by snagging Keith Wright, Oliver McNally, and Max Kenyi in his first class (all kids Penn wanted). Those kids committed mere months after Penn won Ivy League and was dancing in the NCAAs in 2007. Then his next class was even better in year 2, and it is history from there. Letâ€™s look at these all over the map type advantages being thrown about: - Brand name: Of course Harvard has this, no argument and it is a BIG advantage. BUT, they had this in the past and were terrible, so not insurmountable. - Financial policies: Did Harvard even have the financial policy then (I genuinely donâ€™t remember when that started)? - AI: Did Harvard allow Amaker to go lower than Sullivan could in the AI? They sure did, but it still wouldnâ€™t have been any lower than Miller could go at Penn at the same time (still would have same floor regardless, and still would have had less slots at that floor than Penn). So sure, an advantage over what Sullivan got, but not an advantage over Penn. - Amakerâ€™s Pay: I have no idea what Amaker gets paid, but what the heck does that have to do with recruiting? Leaving that, Iâ€™ve never seen it stated anywhere that he gets 3X any other coaches. Not saying he doesnâ€™t, but can you please point me to the source of that math? You keep saying this despite there being no connection whatsoever to ability to recruit, but since you keep saying it, would like to see the numbers myself. - â€œAAU Connectionsâ€: Iâ€™m not sure what youâ€™re going on about with â€œAAU connectionsâ€ like that is some mystical thingâ€¦ I donâ€™t even know if that is a strength Amaker truly brings (or if it is even that relevant for Ivy recruiting), but even if it was, any coach can build AAU connections, it is relationship building exercise, so how is that some unachievable goal? You know what the advantage was for Harvard in that 2008 class I mentioned with Wright, McNally, and Kenyi? Miller had the personality of a box of nails and was a mediocre recruiter, meanwhile Amaker could recruit his butt off and sell a future vision of Harvard kicking butt in basketball (even though they SUUUCCCKKKED). Those kids believed him, and they were right to because it came true. Recruiting is a SKILL, and a key skill to succeed as a college coach. Oh and here is the thing... Penn currently doesn't just only lose to Harvard or Yale (as was stated earlier in thread) for competitive recruits. We donâ€™t win enough recruiting battles (regardless of who is involved) for kids that have a lot of competition, and particularly higher competition. We do win a handful like MLL or AJ, but otherwise, if you truly go look through offers, youâ€™d find that we lose TOO MANY of the high stakes recruiting battles. I want Coach Donahue and staff to win and succeed, but I can be honest with myself about the reality of what has happened to date and what needs to happen in the future to succeed at the level we all want. That includes winning more recruiting battles, and I donâ€™t believe we are so disadvantaged that it canâ€™t happen. Our staff really good at identifying under recruited players that are REALLY GOOD players which is awesome and also is a skill, but we need to get better at getting Wâ€™s in the tougher recruiting battles.
SteveChop PhD Student Posts 1156	06-08-20 03:46 PM - Post#308692 Mike I'm not going to get into the urinating contest between you and P38. However, your statement that "Penn can play MTEs whenever it wants and violate the 2-in-4 rule while other schools have to stick to 2-in-4 and aren't allowed to play MTEs that aren't during a holiday break" is either incorrect or disingenuous. Penn elected to play in what was an MTE for other teams but counted as THREE GAMES for Penn as an alternative to playing games against lower level Division 1 teams to have a more competitive schedule and to help balance some of the recruiting disadvantages it has versus HYP which have been discussed ad naseum above (as well as some probably financial considerations). As you are probably aware, (if there is a 2020-2021 season) Penn is playing in another MTE in Myrtle Beach. I am unaware that this violates any Ivy rule (including the 2 in 4 rule) - if it did, I'm sure Penn would not be allowed to do this. I resent the implication that Penn is somehow "cheating" by scheduling MTEs in this manner. Just because the other Ivy schools have elected not to do this does not make Penn a rules "violator"
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-08-20 03:56 PM - Post#308693 besnoah Said: Quote: I've never really understood why, specifically for Penn fans, it is so difficult to give Amaker the credit he deserves. Why would fans of team "give credit" to a head coach they root against? Is it weird for Eagles to make fun of Jason Garrett's in-game decisions even while he proved himself to be an adept QB developer? Should Florida fans give a standing ovation to Nick Saban when Alabama plays in the Swamp? Just because some people here want to root "for the league" doesn't mean all of us do. So for the record, I hate that I feel I have to defend Amaker. If not clear, like I assume you would, I would be really happy if he took another job somewhere else, so things were easier for Penn. I don't mind being honest and giving credit where credit is due though in saying he is a great recruiter. In fact, that's the reason I would love if he went somewhere else - I think it is more Amaker that is actually the biggest advantage they have in recruiting and I do not think someone else is going to come in and instantly be able to replicate that.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	06-08-20 03:57 PM - Post#308694 Chris Collins seems like a weird example. If this stuff is really all about the coachesâ€™ ability to recruit, shouldnâ€™t he have been able to elevate Northwestern?
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 04:14 PM - Post#308695 First of all, I've been pretty public in APPLAUDING Penn for taking this approach to MTEs. The 2-in-4 rule is ridiculous, and my hope is that if other Ivies join Penn in what they're doing, that ultimately it will be changed either to permitting one each year or keeping 2-in-4 but explicitly permitting participating all four years, but counting each game twice. That being said, last I heard, Penn was potentially going to be penalized for participating in excess MTEs (loss of a game from the schedule was my understanding). I have not heard about a final ruling taking place. I don't think Penn is cheating - even if it gets penalized, I still don't think it's cheating. It's the league office being ridiculous. It's still an advantage to have an administration that will support attacking a weak and dumb rule.
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533	06-08-20 04:17 PM - Post#308696 The MTE thing got me too. You'd think Penn would be commended for this and pressure would be applied by other schools to the league to change it. Penn helps the league while its fans get the short end of the scheduling stick. But the idea that this is the advantage that is going to sway a kid to come to Penn over the advantages Harvard presents is absolutely laughable. I love what Mike brings to this board and he has helped me to change the way I view the game, but this is not a stats-based argument. I could see the AI floor argument and I obviously don't have all of those facts, but it seems the weighting being given to the recruiting advantages are very much being viewed through a Harvard-fans lens. Now if Mike is saying that he's so in-tune with the league and it's happenings that he knows EXACTLY why certain students pick a school, that's different. As to Stu's political leanings, I am so very disappointed.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 04:30 PM - Post#308697 Was just thinking of him because he's likely to get fired at some point, and he's ended up with a few kids that Harvard was very interested in (folks like Falzon... ugh; AJ Turner via transfer and Jared Jones).
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 04:36 PM - Post#308698 I've commended Penn for this. I love that they're doing it. But there are tons of little administrative things that schools like Harvard and Yale have to deal with that Penn doesn't. They're out of sight to the normal fan because they're relatively trivial in isolation (and not really all that important in aggregate - that's why they aren't news stories even in our small corner of the college basketball world). But it's part of the different playing fields involved in succeeding in this league.
SteveChop PhD Student Posts 1156	06-08-20 05:00 PM - Post#308699 To penalize Penn for "violating" a ridiculous rule would be even more ridiculous than the rule but I expect nothing less from Robin Harris. She loves to stick it to Penn - this would give her great jollies. If you're correct, why would they take so long and let Penn schedule another MTE this year?
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533	06-08-20 05:07 PM - Post#308700 And you think those trivial items add up to the needing a better recruiter range you shared last week? You made it seem like it's not even up for debate while also acknowledging the MFN aid issue. Do you not agree that players feel stronger connections to those who offer a "full" package first and that can also give Harvard an advantage? It may sound like sour grapes from Penn fans but I'd like to ask fans from some of the other schools what they think. We saw what Old Bear thinks.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 05:12 PM - Post#308701 Iâ€™m pretty sure I listed out more playing fields than just administrative support...
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 05:24 PM - Post#308702 I havenâ€™t followed up, so itâ€™s possible they decided not to punish Penn, which would be great, as I imagine other Ivies would consider it if itâ€™s explicitly allowed. I may ask if I have the right occasion to, but I donâ€™t tend to do a ton of summer work on the ivybball front.
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533	06-08-20 05:36 PM - Post#308704 mrjames Said: Iâ€™m pretty sure I listed out more playing fields than just administrative support... Yeah, we know. We went to the Final 40 years ago. Maybe Steve just didn't push that hard enough this time...Obviously the Palestra and Big 5 are selling points, but put Tommy down here vs Tommy up there and Boston Tommy wins more than Philly Tommy. Is there a reason you won't answer the question about being offered full first? I love how easily you get your back up over this. I understand when you do it with stats on your side, but this isn't that, unless you're telling us that your inside info puts you in a unique position to know the truth about recruiting decisions, not just the Harvard truth.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	06-08-20 05:39 PM - Post#308705 I don't think we have to question Amaker's recruiting ability. Regardless of whether there are any institutional advantages or not, no one in the modern Ivy league has put together top 25 recruiting nationally ever. Not Dunphy, Jones, Donahue, Carmody, Carrill... I suspect historically Harvard had disadvantages such as its gym, program history, support in the administration, etc. Most of those things have changed BECAUSE of Amaker. He plays hard in the recruiting wars and he's not just winning one or two battles - he's changed the game completely. That said, I am curious about Donahue's recruiting. He seems like a great guy who runs a great program. I'm not sure it's in his nature to sell a vision and to make the charismatic close on a recruit. Penn has plenty of advantages to sell. This is all conjecture on my side, of course. The FA advantage is a newer wrinkle for the league. I don't begrudge Harvard offering 100% aid, because it is being offered to ALL students. That said, the league simply needs to move on from no scholarships then. Or at least let all teams provide athletes with the same sliding scale of FA and tuition assistance. The same should be said for the AI. Not sure what the basis is for each school being different. Professional sports teams certainly have unfair advantages relative to each other, but can you imagine if they each had a different salary cap and had different eligibility requirements based on the Wonderlic test? Ridiculous. They should place eligibility requirements based on real and meaningful academic accomplishments at the school, not based on the AI.
Streamers Professor Posts 8347	06-08-20 06:25 PM - Post#308706 I just caught up on this thread, and all I can think of is that - for all the discussion about Harvard's advantages - and Amaker's skill set - you'd think his program was regularly been treating Penn like a dwarf on the court for years. That hasn't exactly been the case on Steve's watch. AJ had a lot to do with that - maybe we are just getting really anxious about life without him. For my part, I still think Penn will be very competitive with Harvard and the rest of the league if we have a season and can keep most of the kids healthy.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-08-20 06:32 PM - Post#308707 Getting in early with a recruit matters. Offering first matters. But if your question is â€œdoes being the first school to provide its financial aid pre-readâ€ matter (or â€œdoes being the school that offers the largest financial aid pre-readâ€ matter)... I mean, I think if you polled the coaches, theyâ€™d tell you what matters most about that is proving to the recruit that the cost wonâ€™t be large relative to getting a full ride outside the Ivies (or knowing it will be and thatâ€™s a problem), which is, by the way, in almost all cases something weâ€™re competing against. Put another way, if FA were so important and coaching recruiting skill so much less important, why arenâ€™t Harvard, Princeton and Yale, which all have similarly rich policies, splitting the battles for the top recruits? So far, Jaelin is the only one that Harvard has lost to either of those two schools. Princeton just lost a kid to Harvard whose dad WENT to Princeton.
UPIA1968 PhD Student Posts 1122	06-08-20 07:10 PM - Post#308708 Sure I stipulate that Harvard has financial, reputation and coaching advantages regarding recruiting. And the Dodgers and Yankees have financial advantages over every other baseball team. No amount of debate will change that. But doesn't Penn turn down 90% of its applicants? Its advantages should be more than enough to attract quality college b-ball players. The current crew coming off a dreadful decade and terribly injury prone was more than close enough to all the HYP's to seriously contend when things go right. What more can we ask? Oh, whatever the recruiting battles ratings said - was not AJ the best Ivy player over the last four years? Was not Devon the fastest player in the league. Was not Woods the best backcourt defender in the league. Would not a healthy Wang start and star for any team in the league. Was not Wood the best sixth man in the league his second year. Which team recruited them again? If Steve can avoid the blank years like the current seniors, the talent is sufficient otherwise. Maybe not like it was in the 70's but clearly sufficient.
pennsive Junior Posts 200	06-08-20 10:28 PM - Post#308719 Agreed, we have a lot going for us, and a lot of it is compelling. Harvard's name, recent success, and financial aid advantages already make it a winning formula. With Amaker's personality, reputed contacts, and diligence they have a deal closer with some of the top prospects. There are only so many of those that Amaker can fill his roster with, so there is room for Steve and others to comb the remainder of the field and pull in players of the caliber you mentioned. If our head coach had a personality that commanded a room the way Chuck Daly's did, or Fran Dunphy could do (I had personal experience with both), or Digger Phelps when he was our assistant coach under Harter, our recruiting would match up pretty evenlyHarvard's with Amaker, even if they might win a few more head to head contests. Dick Harter, Bob Weinhauer, and Steve Donahue ( full disclosure--I knew Dick and Bob from personal contact, but have only come to know Steve and his staff from many tv viewings and most recently Nat Graham's thought provoking article) all had success because they were great tacticians, oozed sincerity, and made their players believe. I have written before on this Board that any parent would be proud to have a son play for Steve and his staff because they are (or, at least appear to me, to be the real deal). Without having a big personality like a Daly or a Dunphy or Phelps, I am guessing that Steve can't walk into a living room , or communicate by Zoom, and sell a big-time recruit the way Amaker probably can, and then automatically clinch it with a campus visit. I agree with your point that we need to get past the defeatism, however. Steve cleverly put together teams that beat Villanova, Alabama, Providence, Temple , Harvard (several times), Yale (several times), and others, so he ain't chopped liver. I'm happy with that, and I think many others are too. Next coaching cycle, things will change again, but for right now, Steve and his staff have at least brought back championship level basketball to Penn, and I am betting he'll sustain it. I know we all want it to be so, and the empirical evidence supports that contention. Let's get healthy, and if we do, will be right there crowing again.
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1905	06-08-20 11:56 PM - Post#308721 Yeah, I know many will think this is "settling" but I like Donahue and what he means for our program.
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533	06-09-20 12:27 AM - Post#308724 What kind of an impact does Nat have on recruiting?
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-09-20 09:20 AM - Post#308740 One final set of questions: If Amaker could be replaced by an average coach and achieve similar results due to Harvard's institutional advantages, as has been supposed previously in this thread, how do you explain the unprecedented, continued success his program has had at outmaneuvering high majors for recruits? Does Harvard also have advantages over those programs?
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 09:34 AM - Post#308744 Yes. I think we always on these boards said that if the Ivies could give scholarships, they would have advantages over virtually any institutions because of the value of the diplomas. And Harvard has the best brand among the Ivies. Add to that the ability to offer anyone whose family income is under $150K a free ride and you have access to just about any player in the country. Add academic freedom that Amaker's predecessor did not have and you have a juggernaught. However, Amaker has great communications skills and networking---I never minimized those attributes. I just believe what Harvard made available to him and him alone among Harvard coaches has more to do with his success than his ability. He clearly closes well, but then again, he has an unbeatable package to sell among his peers in the Ivies.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-09-20 10:12 AM - Post#308757 Let's take these one at a time... Quote: Add to that the ability to offer anyone whose family income is under $150K a free ride and you have access to just about any player in the country. I mean, there's a calculator on their website (https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/net-pri ce-calculator). I haven't found a way to get a completely free ride for anyone even over $100K. I don't think it helps the argument to continue to spew misinformation. Quote: Add academic freedom that Amaker's predecessor did not have and you have a juggernaught. This might have been true at the beginning of his time at Harvard (though still was not true relative to other Ivies, but that nuance always gets lost in this). But the AI floor has continually been increased to the point that its in line where Sullivan could fish for most of his tenure. Quote: I just believe what Harvard made available to him and him alone among Harvard coaches has more to do with his success than his ability. He clearly closes well, but then again, he has an unbeatable package to sell among his peers in the Ivies. Again, the question is not about beating his peers in the Ivies. The question is about high major programs. It seems that you are saying that he has an unbeatable package to sell against high major programs. Which... is... crazy...
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 10:30 AM - Post#308761 But true, and that is why it is happening. I don't mean to get personal on any of this but your rose colored glasses consistently ignore tautology. Amaker wouldn't be able to get top Power Conference talent unless Harvard was able to get that talent. Amaker gets it because it is possible to get it selling the Harvard brand. Give him credit for closing deals, but calling him a "Unicorn", i.e., he is one of a kind, is a very very subjective opinion. You are entitled to your opinion but on that subject, using the "Do You Know Who I Am" defense to counter disagreement is disingenous. By the way, yes, there is a sliding scale from $100K to $150K so you have a small point there. I don't think that much matters with the recruits we are talking about.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 10:33 AM - Post#308762 So do I. I think I have been among the most optimistic posters about the coming years at Penn. The Harvard advantage only goes to recruiting head to head. There are more players than Harvard can get and the game is determined on the court. I was fully confident this past season that Penn would have beaten Harvard in the tournament. But we'll never know.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-09-20 10:55 AM - Post#308764 The sliding scale starts much lower than that, and your impression of how FA works in this league divorced from reality. What you're missing is that the Harvard brand ("40 year decision, not a four year decision", "when the basketball stops bouncing") as it pertains to basketball was Amaker's creation. That's part of his program building genius. As is personally fundraising to get the facilities improvements he needed. And becoming part of the Harvard fabric to create opportunities for his players. Harvard is a tremendous platform. So is EVERY Ivy. But there are plenty of coaches who can't figure out how to sell the platform - it's not a given or easy by any stretch. I'll leave this here. It's sad to hear this resignation. This league NEEDS a strong Penn program. With H-Y humming (and hopefully Princeton turning back around to where it was for most of the 2010s), Penn being back to where it was in the 1990s and 2000s would elevate this league easily to Top 10 and at large contention. Penn has so much to offer - it's still the best job in this league. I don't know how else I can convince folks here of that. Get a coach that can recruit, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
Jeff2sf Postdoc Posts 4466	06-09-20 10:57 AM - Post#308766 This is so sad and bizarre. Harvard is tough to beat, but we should not accept this. Another way to think of it is we don't have to think about our place in the Ivies. I don't want to spend time rooting for a first place Ivy if we average KenPom 200. And I'm much more comfortable being in 2nd with occasional pops of 1st if we're hanging around a KenPom 100 as opposed to a KenPom 150.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 11:18 AM - Post#308768 Most students graduate debt-free, and Harvard does not expect its students to take out loans as part of financial aid packages. Students with a family income from $65,000 to $150,000 will typically contribute from 0-10% of their income. No loans. Big difference right there. And at $150,000, paying max of $15,000 (and that is MAX---they will find a way to get more aid to that basketball player) is a tremendous bargain for Harvard. But if you have information on how many of Harvard's players are actually paying anything, I'd love to hear it and how much.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 11:25 AM - Post#308770 And again, Harvard has a $37 billion endowment, Yale has a $27 billion endowment and Princeton has a $23 billion endowment. Then you skip to Penn at $13.7 and Columbia at $10.7 billion, falling off rapidly after that. So the schools are not on a level playing field---Penn has 3 times as many students as Harvard with 1/3 the endowment. Making basketball aid contingent on the wealth of the University is ridiculous. The Ivy Agreement was based on 1950s standards of gracious wealth and amateurism. Players overwhelmingly came from prep schools and besides that, until the 1980s, tuition was cheap. Everything has changed. The Ivy Agreement should change too. Each school should be allowed to decide its own financial aid policy, including athletic grants in aid. Until that happens, Amaker is good, but no "Unicorn"
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	06-09-20 01:38 PM - Post#308803 I think we should stop crying about fin aid differences. We donâ€™t do well head to head with Harvard with both athletes and non athletes but we seem to do much better on both counts with Yale and Princeton. Two of our 3 bb commits this year were offered by Yale and another ( our decommit) was as well. We donâ€™t have Harvardâ€™s depth but neither do they. A key for non Harvard teams is staying healthy.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 01:42 PM - Post#308805 I'm not crying at all---I keep saying how optimistic I am and think Steve had a great class last year (I never judge recruits until I see them play). My only point is to respond to Mike's victory lap for Tommy Amaker. I respect the man's sales ability, but it helps to have the better merchandise. Once he called him a unicorn, I had to respond. Anyway, let's decide it on the court.
mrjames Professor Posts 6062	06-09-20 02:35 PM - Post#308807 Penn is not winning the majority of recruiting battles with Yale.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-09-20 02:40 PM - Post#308809 Love your fandom and passion (despite completely disagreeing with you), but you're being disingenuous - you responded WAAAAAAAAAAY before Mike called Amaker a "unicorn" and have repeated the same reasoning over and over both before and after. I'm genuinely exhausted by the cop outs and defeatism, so I'm not going to respond to the same points again, but let's be honest that it wasn't mention of "unicorn" that meant you "had to respond".
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-09-20 02:41 PM - Post#308810 Jeff2sf Said: This is so sad and bizarre. Harvard is tough to beat, but we should not accept this. Another way to think of it is we don't have to think about our place in the Ivies. I don't want to spend time rooting for a first place Ivy if we average KenPom 200. And I'm much more comfortable being in 2nd with occasional pops of 1st if we're hanging around a KenPom 100 as opposed to a KenPom 150. Yep.
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888	06-09-20 02:43 PM - Post#308811 During the Dunphy years, it seems that many posters measured his performance by NCAA wins which we all know totaled 1. Amaker started off impressively, but I wonder how Penn fans would have felt if Penn had Amaker and the Harvard players the last 4 years loaded with 4* players but failing to make the NCAA once. Even without Towns and Aiken, they appeared to be loaded compared to the rest of the league. I suspect that Penn fans would have sounded more like Michigan fans than Harvard fans. Regardless, I think both Amaker and Donahue are good coaches. They bring different skill sets, but their results on the court have not been that different, and that is what ultimately matters. They are both dealing with a limited recruiting pool because of Ivy rules, and it appears that Duke type players are out of their reach. On different front, another lost recruit for Penn was Saddiq Bey, and he is leaving Villanova for the draft. He will be a big loss for the Wildcats, but I will not miss him. I think he was the difference in preventing Penn from having a 2-game streak against Villanova.
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 02:49 PM - Post#308813 I thought I was pretty measured all along. I like our team and program, but it's not a level playing field. Do you disagree with that? And if not, your issue is that I took issue with Mike's view, whether it is the "unicorn" comment, the 'do you know who I am" comment or his comparison of me to BRF. Your really think I was the one who was over the top here? LOL. That's ok, it's not personal.
Quaker75 Freshman Posts 37	06-09-20 03:02 PM - Post#308815 Always great to read a bunch of people promoting their own insecurities through a Harvard vs. Penn recruiting blog. Get a life, both are fine schools and you make do with what you have. If a kid wants to go to Harvard, go for it, there is a kid for Penn too. Somehow Penn and Dartmouth are near the top in football titles- and they do not have the most money. Enjoy the games and stop whining about what school has a bigger endowment. So inane. My Dad a 51 grad of Cornell saw them beat Michigan and then endured many losing seasons until his passing but still loved being in Ithaca for a game. That's what it is about. Penn was horrific in football during the late 70's, and then we were pretty good. Now Harvard has a run in b-ball after being terrible, and your insecurities come to light. LOL
palestra38 Professor Posts 32910	06-09-20 03:12 PM - Post#308816 Another over the top response. Fine. Basketball is apples to football's oranges. No one cares about Ivy football and what happened in the 1970s. But recruiting for Ivy football has much less to do with FA issues, as we recruit largely from a prep school and much more well to do demographic. Having de facto scholarships in basketball makes the comparison a false one.
SteveChop PhD Student Posts 1156	06-09-20 03:59 PM - Post#308822 I'd also posit that Ivy football does not attract as much attention because of the Ivy's asinine policy that ONLY football cannot participate in NCAA playoffs, i.e. have possible exposure on a regional or national stage. Basketball, of course, does provide such a platform. Whether this is because H-Y will not permit an Ivy League team to play after "The Game" (a reason that I have heard for years) and only need one more Ivy to go along with it to keep this stupidity in place.
Quaker75 Freshman Posts 37	06-09-20 09:04 PM - Post#308837 22 players from the IVY league currently play professional football, so yes the level of play is decent. The point about football was not about football was about ups and downs. Talent comes and goes. But it's about sitting in that seat and rooting for your team (soccer, hockey, basektball, etc.) win or lose. To the comment, no one cares about the 70's, this website is full of people reliving the days of Weinhaur and Daly. Get a clue. My comment was you cheer for the team on the playing field. Whining about who has more money is exactly what it is-whining. And yes you are promoting your insecurities about your institution with that silliness. A kid you who wishes to go to Harvard and gets a better package-wonderful for him- great for Harvard- did you ever think Penn might not have been right for him? A kid who comes to Penn, Cornell, Yale, Princeton, or what ever school he school he chooses- that's great. You have to recruit kids who fit. Chemistry matters. Enjoy the summer, Go Quakers.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	06-09-20 11:01 PM - Post#308843 Didnâ€™t we win all of them against Yale this year? I donâ€™t think we were in on any of their recruits, and they were in on ourâ€™s. You keep trotting out Kelly and Cotton, but they are now a couple of years ago and donâ€™t seem to have been big misses. In terms of resignation to our fate, you are presuming that we share your opinion of Donahue as a recruiter and in terms of future prospects. I donâ€™t think your opinions are shared by any of his supporters. Iâ€™m certainly not a supporter because Iâ€™m fine with coming in 4th all the time. You think thatâ€™s his upside, I donâ€™t. You seem to think that your opinion is somehow a factual one that anyone in the know would agree with. That is simply not true, and it canâ€™t be (if it was, Penn wouldnâ€™t have hired Donahue in the first place). Most college basketball programs, Penn included, are actually trying to win. They might not have figured it out, but they are trying. Penn absolutely can win without beating Harvard at recruiting. Harvard has been â€œwinningâ€ recruiting for years, and yet the last 3 NCAA appearances have been Princeton, Penn, and Yale. Those teams are coming close enough to make it so the recruiting â€œlossesâ€ arenâ€™t the end of the world. Over the past 3 years, Penn has more wins than Harvard. Accepting the recruiting superiority you claim for Harvard is a double edged sword. At a certain point, you have to ask why the recruiting wins arenâ€™t getting reflected in the results on the court. It has been 5 full seasons since Harvard last went to the tournament.
mobrien Masters Student Posts 403	06-09-20 11:58 PM - Post#308844 "Why hasn't Harvard's recruiting advantage translated into an on-court advantage when its two best recruits both missed two of the last three years" isn't a hard question to figure out. Although the premise isn't exactly right either. Despite those injuries, Harvard has still won the most regular season Ivy games of anyone the last three years.
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-10-20 03:03 AM - Post#308845 SomeGuy Said: Didnâ€™t we win all of them against Yale this year? I donâ€™t think we were in on any of their recruits, and they were in on ourâ€™s. You keep trotting out Kelly and Cotton, but they are now a couple of years ago and donâ€™t seem to have been big misses. Honestly not going to get into my thoughts on the rest of your post because I'm sort of over this thread (in general, not directed at you), but as I follow recruiting pretty closely I do feel compelled to respond to this point. Not sure where you are getting your recruiting info, but it's not right. Our best two recruits in 2020 class are Clark Slajchert and Andrew Laczkowski (both of which I'm excited to see by the way). Yale offered neither of them. Yale did offer TJ Berger, but he is no longer a Penn Quaker. He is an A+ shooter, but even when committed, he was solidly 3rd best recruit. I don't want to knock the kid, so not going to go into it here, but there are some other factors around why he would be recruited by Penn or Yale (feel free to send me a private message if you'd like me to explain). In 2020 class, Penn did offer Blair big man Luke Kolaja (HS teammate of Jordan Dingle), who committed to Yale. In fact, you might not remember, but his dad posted to this board a few years ago after a visit to Penn. In 2019 class (this year's frosh), we offered both Yale frosh E.J. Jarvis and August Mahoney. Yale did not offer any Penn frosh. Note, I wouldn't trade places because I love our frosh class, but just clarifying who had offers and who didn't. Bottom line, we haven't faired real well against Yale in head to head recruiting battles. 2021 class there is at least 3 kids who have/had offers from Penn and Yale at this point. Yale won first round getting Jack Molloy. Ed Holland III and Garrett Johnson are the other two and they are VERY good with many offers to quality schools. Penn offered both of these guys much earlier than Yale. Holland is in Penn's backyard and is still closer to Johnson, so this will be a real litmus test.
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6418	06-10-20 11:57 AM - Post#308866 My info was coming from Asiasunset above. He usually knows what we are doing in terms of offers. There is internet evidence of Laczkowski being involved with Yale (he visited), too.
AsiaSunset Postdoc Posts 4370	06-10-20 12:57 PM - Post#308874 They both had Yale offers
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3619	06-10-20 02:31 PM - Post#308884 SG, sorry I missed that AS said that earlier in the thread, so I stand corrected! I have no major inside information so certainly defer to AS - I do follow all the public recruiting details pretty closely and there was no report of an offer on any recruiting site or on social media, so that's info I had. And again to be clear, I'm very high on both Clark Slajchert and Andrew Laczkowski regardless and have been since they committed (both played at a very high level in AAU and in HS).


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.

FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.252 seconds. Total Queries: 7 Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 12:37 AM
Top