cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 12:00 PM - Post#215292
We had better win this one. KenPom has us just a one point favorite. Navy beat Penn, but as Penn rises, it becomes even more important to beat Navy, lest we continue our drift further downward to the bottom half of the league.
Engels has supposedly been working on the defense for last 8 days. If our defense tonight costs us yet another game, it is going to be a long, disappointing season.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-09-16 01:02 PM - Post#215294
In response to cc66
It's on Patriot League tv, free.
|
Wheeler
Freshman
Posts: 33
Reg: 02-11-06
|
Re: navy
12-09-16 03:04 PM - Post#215309
In response to cc66
Relax. They haven't even played 10 games yet. It's essentially a whole new team with a new coach.
|
Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2180
Reg: 02-14-06
|
12-09-16 05:06 PM - Post#215326
In response to Wheeler
Not to mention that Engles and his coaching staff have successfully recruited a standout incoming class which is likely to become even stronger in the next month because there is still one or two spots remaining. Also, the Lions will have a healthy Castlin returning next season. Incidentally, I am hoping to see more of Patrick Tape if not tonight, then against Division III opponent Lawrenceville next week.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 05:27 PM - Post#215330
In response to Columbia 37P6
I'm not worried about next season. Next season, Faulds will replace Petrasek, Castlin will return, and Meisner, Smith, and Hickman will all shift into high gear. We'll be very competitive then.
But this season has been disappointing, and the Navy game is another fork in the road. Ever since Stony Brook, we've under performed projections. With a projected margin of just one point, we have no room to underperform again tonight.
Finally, I'd like to see more of Tape, too, but it's Manhattanville on Sunday, not Lawrenceville, whom we are playing.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6415
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-09-16 05:49 PM - Post#215336
In response to cc66
Is Columbia really underperforming projections? Looking now, the only result that seems out of line with their level is the home loss to Army. However, the road wins over Stony Brook and Quinnipiac kind of make up for that.
Columbia is doing fine -- I think the Lions will be competitive for a playoff spot, which is about how it looked coming into the season.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 06:11 PM - Post#215340
In response to SomeGuy
Perhaps. But maybe then I can confess to you my deepest fear, i.e., that we are going to lose out on the 4th spot to Penn!
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6415
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-09-16 06:25 PM - Post#215344
In response to cc66
Your deepest fear, and my greatest hope. Well, Penn does seem to be outperforming the initial pomeroy projections, while Columbia is kind of meeting expectations. I'm not entirely sure what that means, because Penn has mostly played teams that are much better or much worse than both Penn and Columbia. How you do against the Stony Brooks, Quinnipiacs, Hofstras and Colgates may tell you more about what will happen in the Ivies. So we'll see. And even assuming Penn is really 161 and Columbia is really 217, that's not a margin that clearly determines who finishes higher in conference play. I'm kind of looking forward to a more inclusive race to win the league.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 06:37 PM - Post#215345
In response to SomeGuy
Well, from here, it does appear as if Penn is coming on faster than we are. But there is still a lot of the season--indeed, all of the Ivy season--to go, and young teams do sometimes begin to put it all together in February and March. If we do, then you're right--the KenPom numbers won't really tell us much of anything.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 08:56 PM - Post#215347
In response to cc66
Navy 40-30, at half time. No defense, lots of stolen passes, and 3 fouls on Petrasek: we are playing badly, and unless we're figure out something during the break, it really does look as if it is going to be long season.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 10:01 PM - Post#215350
In response to cc66
69-54 final. The only positive sign was that Tape played. He's still a bit tentative, but racked up 10 rbs and 7 pts. in the second half.
I'm lowering my projection for this team. I thought we'd split the season and win 14-15 games. We are now playing so badly, we'll be lucky to win 10.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2974
Reg: 03-02-08
|
12-09-16 10:17 PM - Post#215352
In response to cc66
Right now we are not very good. And the refs are taking Luke out of the game. Everyone we play will try to get him in early foul trouble.
|
Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2180
Reg: 02-14-06
|
12-09-16 10:46 PM - Post#215354
In response to cc66
I agree with you CC that the sole positive sign tonight was that Patirick Tape played because without his very strong performance there would be very little reason for any optimism. Basically, there were two Columbia teams tonight. Team One, without Patrick Tapei, was awful, reflecting the glaring deficiencies in the play of the frontcourt which we have enumerated over and over again from the start of the season. Petrasek's foul trouble tonight highlighted the ongoing problems in the frontcourt because without him Columbia lacks a big man who can score and defend at a consistently high level. However, Team Two with Patrick Tape, played well, and while the offense was not ready tonight, the defense was much, much better once Tape took the court. More succinctly, Columbia could very well have won this game if the starting line-up had been Tape at center, Petrasek at forward and Smith and Hickman st the guards with either Meisner, Adlesh or Hunter as the fifth man. Incidentally, I have no idea why Davis didn't play tonight. Anyway, it was obvious, was't it, that Tape is a very talented natural center and is ready to play NOW, so I would start him against Manhattanville along with Petrasek, Smith, Hickman and Meisner and see what happens. Of course, the Lions have not changed the starting line-up since the season began, but that may finally change after tonight's debacle.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 11:36 PM - Post#215358
In response to Columbia 37P6
I agree completely. With Tape playing center--even if he's a little raw and tentative--we at last had a center who could rebound and stop some of their inside drives. Without him, we get beat to a pulp.
I hope Engels adjusts quickly and starts the lineup you've suggested. We'll probably win a little more now, and, of course, any experience he gets will pay dividends in the future.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-09-16 11:38 PM - Post#215359
In response to Columbia 37P6
Killingworth played a little more, did reasonably well.
But, overall, the the number of turnovers border on an impossible hurdle to overcome. Navy's D certainly was potent.
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-09-16 11:47 PM - Post#215360
In response to internetter
Now down to KenPom 233 and sinking fast....
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-10-16 12:06 AM - Post#215361
In response to internetter
Hey guys - definitely a tough one, and as a Penn fan I know Navy can sneak up on you.
That said, as an outsider I think there is a 0% chance you'll see a starting line up of 6-10, 6-10, and 6-8. I haven't seen Tape, but P & M would not be able to defend wing players, especially in the Ivy League where we see a lot of small lineups.
You're offense is still ranked 2nd best to date and defense is 2nd worse. Problem is keeping the other team from scoring and that big lineup isn't going to help you there...
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2204
Reg: 10-09-09
|
12-10-16 12:15 AM - Post#215362
In response to Mike Porter
Okay, but the problem is that we are getting killed both outside on 3s--though not so much by Navy tonight--and inside, where Tape seemed to help. So for a brief experiment, even if wing players might drive past P & M, I think we should try this poison.
|
LionFan
Senior
Posts: 398
Reg: 11-07-06
|
12-10-16 08:56 AM - Post#215367
In response to cc66
A three-big lineup won't work defensively against a three-guard offense, or a two-guard and a swing man offense, in a man-to-man. But Columbia is playing more zone to try to improve performance at the defensive end. Perhaps three bigs can work in a 2-3, 2-1-2 or 1-3-1 against a smaller lineup? The bigger wingspan could make up for lack of speed closing on a corner shooter, alter mid-range shots and help on the boards - defensive rebounding having emerged as another problem. In the offensive end, 2 big bodies plus Petrasek could give him a mismatch he can shoot over. Maybe something to consider?
|
LionFan
Senior
Posts: 398
Reg: 11-07-06
|
12-10-16 08:59 AM - Post#215368
In response to LionFan
PS ... In last night's game, CU's players looked lost at times, and dispirited. Granted, Navy came off a high, edging Bryant after coming back from 25 down earlier in the week. But CU just looked poorly prepared to me.
|
