UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1125
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
05-30-23 10:42 PM - Post#356503
Whenever I get too down on Donahue's record I remember these facts.
1. In every year of his tenure but the first, Penn has had a premier player, if you include, as I do, a healthy Wang.
2. In every year of his tenure, but the first he has made the Ivy tournament (save for the Covid year.)
3. In every year of his tenure, but the first, if his best three players were healthy he had a real shot at championship.
2017 - one missed three throw from making the final game of the Ivy tournament.
2018 - won the tournament.
2019 - With a healthy Wang and Betley would have won again.
2020 - With a healthy Wang and Betley would have won again.
2022 With Dingle and a healthy Wang would have clearly contended.
2023 - One missed shot of free throw from a Championship (tie).
2024 - With Dingle, Penn would have been a clear contender.
4. During the past six seasons Penn has 1 dance card and 6 tournament qualifications, only slightly behind Yale with 2 and 6 and Princeton with 2 and five. With a healthy Wang/Betley (and no Covid) Penn could have been at 3 and 6 with Yale and Princeton with 1 dance card. It was that close. Oh yes Harvard's overwhelming recruiting advantages netted them 0 and 4.
Correct me if I forget, but did Franny ever lose a major player to injury or departure? I can think of only Pentinnela as a major loss.
Here's my takeaway. This pattern is too consistent to dismiss Donahue as a hopeless failure. Maybe with a little luck, the team will surprise this year.
Of course, if the bad (or normal) luck holds this year, looks like a disaster.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33159
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
05-31-23 08:04 AM - Post#356504
In response to UPIA1968
Wang???? What did he have---4-5 good games before he got hurt the first time? At best, I would call him someone with potential, but at no point call him a star.
But you make my point for me. We have had teams that have made the Ivy playoffs every year and with the exception of the team that he inherited from Jerome (with Foreman being Superman), no titles. Lots of just-misses. At some point, Donahue has to be charged with all those close losses.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6427
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
05-31-23 01:13 PM - Post#356509
In response to UPIA1968
Did Franny ever lose a player? Duncombe to academic ineligibility. Will McAllister left the team after a great first two years. Nat Graham transferred. Jamie Lyren both got hurt and ultimately left the team. Frankie Brown lost a season due to injury and never became what was expected, perhaps as a result. Geoff Owens missed a year (probably wouldn’t have won that year anyway, but who knows?). Lamar Plummer missed almost all of his junior year. David Whitehurst and Tommy McMahon both got hurt and left the team. And Brian Grandieri missed a full year due to injury.
I’m sure there are others.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33159
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
05-31-23 01:26 PM - Post#356510
In response to SomeGuy
While he was in Miller's first class, the classic example of injury was Darren Smith, who showed tremendous promise on the 2007 championship team and then 7 minutes into the season opener the following year, ripped his knee and came back a shell of himself the following year
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1125
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
Re: So close but so far.
05-31-23 08:37 PM - Post#356524
In response to SomeGuy
Right you are. Injuries happen
|
weinhauers_ghost
Postdoc
Posts: 2152
Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 01:00 AM - Post#356528
In response to UPIA1968
Health is a skill.
|
Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 07:38 AM - Post#356529
In response to UPIA1968
Oh yes Harvard's overwhelming recruiting advantages netted them 0 and 4.
Does make you wonder if we’ll ever hear “Fire Tommy” chants. No NCAA appearances since ‘15, and falling behind in the built-in advantages race within HYP in that time, despite having higher-rated recruiting classes throughout.
And in the all-important H-Y matchup it took JaJo 17 years to reach his first NCAA tournament, and that only after watching Harvard go to 4 straight, but since then he’s reaching Ivy Sadness more consistently, and has beaten Tommy the two times they’ve met there.
Edited by Chip Bayers on 06-01-23 07:41 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
jeromelh
Junior
Posts: 222
Age: 82
Reg: 03-30-17
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 08:58 AM - Post#356530
In response to Chip Bayers
Hi Chip
I was wondering what the basis is for your position that Penn has had superior recruiting classes compared to HYP.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6427
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 09:25 AM - Post#356531
In response to jeromelh
I think chip was saying Harvard has had superior recruiting classes. So he was wondering if there would be a point where Harvard fans began to question Amaker. If the Harvard equivalent of a jeff2sf type of fan exists, they certainly don’t post on this site.
|
jeromelh
Junior
Posts: 222
Age: 82
Reg: 03-30-17
|
06-01-23 12:53 PM - Post#356540
In response to SomeGuy
Ah, Thanks
I read it differently. Looking at the verbal commits site, HYP out-recruits Penn. Personally, I think Donahue is a pretty good coach. However, when recruiting against HYP, he usually loses, which is not his fault.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3620
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 01:48 PM - Post#356542
In response to SomeGuy
I think chip was saying Harvard has had superior recruiting classes. So he was wondering if there would be a point where Harvard fans began to question Amaker. If the Harvard equivalent of a jeff2sf type of fan exists, they certainly don’t post on this site.
This would require Harvard fans to be as passionate as Penn fans, which frankly is not likely outside the handful we know and love that post here.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3620
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-01-23 01:51 PM - Post#356543
In response to jeromelh
However, when recruiting against HYP, he usually loses, which is not his fault.
With this kind of logic, how can a coach ever be held accountable for their recruiting performance? I'm sorry, but this is not a logical conclusion. Recruiting has many factors, but at the end of the day it is salesmanship. In sales or business development, there is no clearer indicator of performance than winning or losing the sale.
|
jeromelh
Junior
Posts: 222
Age: 82
Reg: 03-30-17
|
06-01-23 07:27 PM - Post#356550
In response to Mike Porter
I don't agree with you at all. Please explain to me why HYP always out recruit not just Penn, but Dartmouth,
Brown, Cornell, and Columbia year in and year out. It doesn't matter who the coaches are. The recruiting results are always the same. I happen to believe that Donahue, Martin, and Earl are excellent recruiters and in game coaches.
And BTW, Harvard out recruits Y and P. It's name recognition. It's not fair, but that is just the way it is.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
06-01-23 08:23 PM - Post#356552
In response to jeromelh
If that's a given then we might as well give up now.
I do agree Penn has urinated away its former competitive advantages as a basketball Ivy, and there are fewer people who care about basketball at Penn as the years go by.
That said, you'd think if it's possible to land Brodeur and Dingle, then it's possible to surround them with better talent. But guess not.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 33159
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-01-23 08:25 PM - Post#356553
In response to TheLine
We didn't lose last year because of inferior talent. I'm tired of this as an explanation. We were easily as talented as any other Ivy team--we just blew it. Certainly, over the last 10 years, Harvard has recruited the best talent overall. They haven't won a title in a long time. But last year, we should have won the title and did not.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6427
Reg: 11-22-04
|
06-01-23 08:41 PM - Post#356554
In response to jeromelh
I think the truth is somewhere in between. Penn now has recruiting disadvantages compared to Harvard and Yale that are hard to overcome. Those things aren’t Donahue’s fault. I think it is very difficult to find a coach who can overcome those things right now, no matter how good a salesman a coach is.
However, Donahue can and should be evaluated on his recruiting. We can disagree about how quickly he has to fix what was lost during the Miller/Allen years, and we can disagree about whether he has made enough progress (I think even his detractors will recognize the overall competitiveness has gotten better). But I don’t think we throw up our hands and just say there is nothing he can do.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
So close but so far.
06-01-23 08:58 PM - Post#356555
In response to SomeGuy
This Penn team didn't have the depth to beat Princeton. They were worn down by Princeton in the final league game and in the tournament. That's a talent issue, either because the rotation isn't long enough or the coach doesn't trust enough of the players.
The coach also didn't adjust as well as Mitch did. Princeton systemically shut down offensive plays working for Penn. Penn had no answers to that. On the other side of the court, when something wasn't working then Princeton tried something else, typically with different players.
I'm expecting more of the same next year except without Dingle. Results are predictable.
Edited by TheLine on 06-01-23 09:00 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
jeromelh
Junior
Posts: 222
Age: 82
Reg: 03-30-17
|
06-01-23 09:07 PM - Post#356556
In response to TheLine
Thanks for the replies. Some very good points. As for Harvard, I personally don't think Amaker is a very in game coach.
We will see what happens next year in the league. Maybe there will be a few under recruited finds like Dingle and Tosan.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6427
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: So close but so far.
06-01-23 10:22 PM - Post#356558
In response to TheLine
Not sure it was depth exactly. Princeton didn’t play more guys than we did. And some of the distribution difference is just the fact that Princeton’s star was a natural distributor, while Penn’s star was a natural scorer.
Coaching and matchups are always a little weird. Henderson has been getting the better of Donahue for years. Yet Jones tends to get the better of Henderson, and Donahue tends to get the better of Jones. Some of that is physical matchups, some is stylistic, and some is a mystery to me.
All that said, I’m kind of in the middle on the talent thing, too. I don’t see us as having a talent advantage on the level where we should have won. But I don’t see us as hopelessly behind either. Sounds like a team that comes in third a lot.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1919
Reg: 11-29-04
|
So close but so far.
06-02-23 01:07 AM - Post#356561
In response to palestra38
We didn't lose last year because of inferior talent. I'm tired of this as an explanation. We were easily as talented as any other Ivy team--we just blew it. Certainly, over the last 10 years, Harvard has recruited the best talent overall. They haven't won a title in a long time. But last year, we should have won the title and did not.
This is absurd. yes, we were as talented as most teams, but definitely not MORE talented than ANY other top Ivy teams. Take a look at the all-ivy awards. We had the player of the year, but no other first or second teamers. Name a previous Ivy championship team where that was the case? We finished the regular season in 3rd place. We finished the Ivy tournament losing to the #2 seed. We were ranked #3 in Pomeroy at the end of the season. We lost to a Princeton team that was ranked higher than us, that beat us three times, had 2 All-Ivy players, and has 1 player getting a good sniff at the NBA. How can you possibly say our talent was superior or that we should have won? We have to concede they were the better team last year
Yes, we choked a few games, but every single metric says the team's outcomes were about where the overall expectation should have been beforehand. Maybe we were lucky to be leading some of those games or to be in the running at the end of the season and against Princeton in the tournament. None of those things seem outside a standard deviation of probability.
We have not had a top ranked Ivy recruiting class in a VERY long time. HYP may or may not have advantages, but it is ridiculous to say we had superior talent or that we SHOULD have won. We were marginally lucky that we could have. We only had 1 player with clearly superior talent this year period. I respect our other players and thought some were good, but none were remotely superior to the other All-Ivy players.
You can blame Donahue for it or not, but the assertion that we SHOULD have won the league and there was no issue with talent is simply not supportable. We had a competitive team in a league with more parity than usual, but there was nothing superior except for perhaps how they worked and the way they represent us. I personally can live with that, though I understand why others can't.
|
