SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
03-04-18 10:43 AM - Post#250720
In response to bradley
There may be something intangible that explains the difference. However, I thought the base 5 of Weisz, cook, Stephens, bell, and Cannady was such a difficult matchup because of its interchangeability. The group could defend bigs despite giving up size, and they basically always had at least two killer matchup advantages on the other end. And then they could throw in Miller with 4 of them to protect the middle.
I think this year Henderson never figured out the right mix around the remaining 3 guys. The most experienced returnees, Brennan and Young, have obvious strengths, but also some limitations that didn’t seem to fit. The freshmen showed some flashes, but were up and down. Stephens is a very versatile player, but this year it felt like they were plugging holes with him rather than playing to an advantage. There was a lot of juggling of lineups, and maybe that was a problem in and of itself, but it also could indicate that the winning mix wasn’t there.
Interesting similarities to ‘16-‘17 Penn. High Pomeroy OOC that would suggest a better Ivy season. Big in conference losing streak. Ended with losing record in conference despite easily having a top 4 Pomeroy (Princeton actually finished ahead of Yale in pomeroy). This suggests some bad luck may have been at play (also could be evidence of the intangibles issue). That similarity to Penn could provide some hope for getting it together next year.
|
