Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 6 of 9 « First<6789
Username Post: Men vs. Princeton        (Topic#20124)
SteveDanley 
Freshman
Posts: 78

Age: 32
Reg: 02-25-12
03-14-17 11:00 AM - Post#226920    
    In response to palestra38

We don't have that elite guard right now. We have to have it to be in the elite of the league.

But Ibby played the 2 until Miller came (Dunph never saw him as a point, and played Copp/Osmundson at the 1).

And that's kind of the point -- Silpe / Darnell / and maybe Goodman fit more into the profile of complementary pieces. To have a complementary piece at the point, we need a stud at the wing position. Otherwise they will be forced to up usage because they have the ball in their hands.

Luckily, we finally have a stud big man (half way there -- our best teams have also had stud bigs). Get that second all-Ivy type talent in place (or Betley grows into it, or someone else surprises) and surrounding pieces (including Silpe, if he gets the chance) will likely look a lot more like a contributor.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 15388

Reg: 11-21-04
Men vs. Princeton
03-14-17 11:00 AM - Post#226921    
    In response to palestra38

Let me add that Goodman was inserted to major minutes after the Princeton home game (where he played only 2 minutes) the next 4 games were all wins, with romps over Cornell, Brown and Yale. And in that first game against Columbia, he harassed Smith into a 5-16 shooting day. From the time Goodman started playing major minutes, Penn was a much better team....and the teams playing against us shot more poorly....the big difference with Goodman is defense. He still needs to work a lot on his playmaking skills if he is to be the PG. I see Woods in that role next year.

 
SteveDanley 
Freshman
Posts: 78

Age: 32
Reg: 02-25-12
03-14-17 11:04 AM - Post#226924    
    In response to palestra38

I like Goodman. Love that he pushes the ball -- giving us a chance at some easy baskets. Clearly a quick athlete.

Point wasn't so much to contrast the two (coaches have to make decisions, and you can see positives from Goodman).

Instead, it was to argue that these decisions rarely come down to one player being a starting guard, and one player not being good enough. Situation, coaching decisions, players development curves, lots of things go into it, and lots of players never meet their potential -- it's the nature of college hoops. Still good players.

It's why I have mixed feelings about our rotation this year -- on one hand, we gave a lot of guys a chance to prove they are head-and-shoulders above their teammates (most weren't). On the other hand, the inconsistent rotations make me wonder if we put flawed-but-potentially-us eful players in good situations to succeed. Not sure.

That's why being a coach is so hard.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 15388

Reg: 11-21-04
03-14-17 11:09 AM - Post#226928    
    In response to SteveDanley

But you appear to keep looking at it from the offensive side only---the huge difference when Goodman was inserted was on defense. The guy is very very hard to beat off the dribble. We were getting hurt badly off the dribble earlier in the year. I think that, more than anything else, was why Goodman was playing 30 minutes a game over the push to the playoff.

 
Basketball Bruce 79
Freshman
Posts: 13

Age: 79
Reg: 01-22-17
03-14-17 11:22 AM - Post#226934    
    In response to penn nation

I had to go back and look at the stats. Last year, in all combined games, Silpe shot .368% fg and .313% from the three. If you look at just Ivy League play, his percentages were .408 fg and .455 from the three, showing a marked improvement. Goodman's in conference percentages were .451 and .344. So, I'm not sure why, if people think Jake has no shot, why the same thing isn't being said about Devon.

Jake also led the team in steals and assists and averaged 2.6 rebounds per game, compared to Goodman's 1.6 per game.

I also don't believe that we should consider what we saw from Silpe this season with regard to shooting. For the most part, he played garbage minutes in a rotation of twelve. I'm sure he forced shots, believing that if he made them, he'd stay on the floor. He didn't have time to have the game come to him or to get in a flow. We could all see what a difference it made to cut the rotation to 7. Chemistry and flow develop. I believe it could have been almost any of the players out there as the seven and the results were bound to improve.

In addition, and what I don't think was mentioned here, is the intangibles that I have seen Silpe bring to his games. True on court leadership. Directing traffic. Looking his teammates in the eyes during huddles and willing them to win. He was a constant communicator on the court. I think the team needs that vocal, animated leader on the court.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 8966

Reg: 12-02-04
03-14-17 11:37 AM - Post#226937    
    In response to Basketball Bruce

  • Basketball Bruce Said:
I had to go back and look at the stats. Last year, in all combined games, Silpe shot .368% fg and .313% from the three. If you look at just Ivy League play, his percentages were .408 fg and .455 from the three, showing a marked improvement. Goodman's in conference percentages were .451 and .344. So, I'm not sure why, if people think Jake has no shot, why the same thing isn't being said about Devon.




First of all, that is comparing apples to oranges. Silpe averaged 6 minutes more PT per game last year than Goodman did this year, so naturally the cumulative and avg metric per game will skew higher for Silpe as a result.

But more to the point--no-one is saying that either Silpe or Goodman is a good shooter. But the difference is that Goodman has other ways of scoring while Silpe (relative to Goodman) must rely on his outside shooting to be successful in scoring.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 15388

Reg: 11-21-04
03-14-17 11:50 AM - Post#226942    
    In response to penn nation

More important is the defense though and the results. Once Goodman came in, we won 6 of 8 and should have beaten Princeton. We were a completely different team and he was the only difference.

 
Basketball Bruce 79
Freshman
Posts: 13

Age: 79
Reg: 01-22-17
03-14-17 12:31 PM - Post#226947    
    In response to palestra38

He might have had something to do with it, but clearly cutting the rotation from 12 to 7 was a huge factor.

 
section110 
Masters Student
Posts: 692

Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
03-14-17 12:54 PM - Post#226954    
    In response to Basketball Bruce

And Betley turning into an absolute monster had something to do with it as well.

 
SteveDanley 
Freshman
Posts: 78

Age: 32
Reg: 02-25-12
03-14-17 01:10 PM - Post#226961    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
But you appear to keep looking at it from the offensive side only---the huge difference when Goodman was inserted was on defense. The guy is very very hard to beat off the dribble. We were getting hurt badly off the dribble earlier in the year. I think that, more than anything else, was why Goodman was playing 30 minutes a game over the push to the playoff.



I'm not as convinced as you are that Silpe is a poor defender. And I have a really hard time evaluating defense without knowing scheme, etc, but I'll give it a bit of a shot.

Hard to have these discussions in a nuanced way in college, where sample sizes are so small and players are gone so fast, but my understanding of research on defense is that rate stats for steals and rebounding do a decent job of measuring athleticism. And Silpe's rate states (St/Rb/dRat 3.9/3.9/101.5 in limited minutes this year, 2.5/6.7/105.6 last year) compare ok to Goodman's (2.8/6.2/103.7). [all stats from sports-reference].

I agree that Goodman looks a little quicker and with better fast twitch change of direction. My eyes say Silpe is a little stronger (he certainly added some strength going into this year). Would want to know more about the scheme to understand the context of gambles / pnr coverages and beyond. But my eye-test of Silpe was never that he was the problem as a defender -- perhaps not an elite defender (and maybe Goodman is elite at keeping guards in front of him, I certainly hope so) -- but that Silpe is a competent defender at this level.

That said, I certainly agree that the cocktail Donahue mixed (shorter rotation, more Goodman, whatever they did to adjust to the double team fiasco) worked. Kudos for figuring out a path to winning more games. A quick look at the final scores over our winning streak shows that we saw about a +5 increase in scoring over that stretch and -4 in what we gave up -- a HUGE 9 point swing that includes improvements in both areas (none of that is pace adjusted).

Where I disagree is with the initial assessment of Silpe: "he simply doesn't have the quickness to guard the elite guards in this league".

Just not sure it's what my eye-test, or the stats I've seen say. More importantly, the fact that elite quickness may be super helpful to us (a team with limited athleticism) doesn't mean that in other contexts (say a team with a lot of athletes, that needs a facilitator) that Silpe wouldn't be super valuable, and very playable. Context is king, and guys only get so many chances. Silpe hasn't figured out a way to produce in the opportunities he's had -- but I see him as a mid-level defender, a good distributor, and a guy who hasn't figured out how to make his offensive game work at the college level in the context of the system we're running. Maybe he doesn't get another shot with a good class coming in, and I understand if the staff goes another direction.

But was always hard to see guys like that get lost in the shuffle when I played; guys who know they can play and just don't fit the moment/team/system or, for whatever reason, it just doesn't work when they get their chance. I think it's a better way of thinking about the guys that get passed over than thinking of them as fundamentally flawed and unplayable.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 8966

Reg: 12-02-04
03-14-17 01:33 PM - Post#226965    
    In response to SteveDanley

  • SteveDanley Said:

But was always hard to see guys like that get lost in the shuffle when I played; guys who know they can play and just don't fit the moment/team/system or, for whatever reason, it just doesn't work when they get their chance. I think it's a better way of thinking about the guys that get passed over than thinking of them as fundamentally flawed and unplayable.



That's a fair assessment. Many of us saw him play in high school against good competition and he could certainly play. Perhaps with a different mix of players/scheme/coach the result to date might have differed in college.


 
T.P.F.K.A.D.W. 
Masters Student
Posts: 671

Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
03-14-17 01:37 PM - Post#226966    
    In response to SteveDanley

Nice analysis, Steve. It’s got to be really hard for any of these kids, who were all seen as REALLY GOOD PLAYERS in high school, to get knocked down a few pegs like that. Takes a resilient personality to not get discouraged and keep your head in the game and be a good teammate.

That’s one thing that did impress me with this team—particularly during their hot streak. I made a point of looking at the bench during games and to a man they all appeared utterly engaged and genuinely excited and happy for their teammates who were getting the PT at their expense. That’s got to be as big a coaching challenge as any—keeping the benchwarmers on board. I think it’s a credit to Donahue, Bowman, and Graham that the morale of these guys never appeared to waiver.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 15388

Reg: 11-21-04
Men vs. Princeton
03-14-17 01:53 PM - Post#226970    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

Let me add that I did not want to limit my opinion about our defense from the guards to just Silpe. MacDonald and Wood also had trouble keeping players in front of them. To my "eye", the biggest difference once Goodman and Betley (yes, he deserves credit too) were given major minutes was that our opponents seemed to have to work much harder for shots.

 
Penndemonium 
Masters Student
Posts: 519

Reg: 11-29-04
03-14-17 02:12 PM - Post#226975    
    In response to T.P.F.K.A.D.W.

I subscribe to S. Danley's beliefs on Silpe. I think that in the right system and team, he is a college player.

Our team struggled to put two complementary guards on the floor together for most of the season and even struggled to put two solid Ivy guards period.

At the end, Goodman and Betley wound up to be a complementary pair. Goodman can guard the better penetrator, can penetrate himself, and moves the ball. Betley can shoot and be disruptive on defense with his length.

Silpe has some great PG tools, but I'd imagine he would be complemented by someone who can nail the open shot but also can finish Silpe's passes slashing at the hoop. We don't really have that. I have some hopes for Hamilton, though I may be in the minority.

Silpe and Betley would be a better combo than any other combo Silpe would have played with early in the season. Is it any wonder that Silpe struggled with any combo pair with Donahue/Foreman/Wood? That is the type of PT he got.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
Masters Student
Posts: 792

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
Men vs. Princeton
03-14-17 02:20 PM - Post#226978    
    In response to palestra38

FWIW, from the perspective of an opponent, Goodman adds quickness and speed that had been missing earlier in the season. Before the season, fans proposing a halfcourt trap were met with arguments that Penn's guards were not quick enough to extend that far out.
At Harvard, the Crimson fell behind 19-4 in a halfcourt game before deciding to push the pace, outscoring Penn 65-40. It was obvious that - without Woods and with Goodman playing only 16 minutes - Penn was vulnerable in transition. Foreman fouled out with 4 TO's.

At Penn, Goodman played 29 minutes and Penn had only 10 TO's (compared to 19 TO's in the first meeting). Harvard had no fast break pts and only 12 points off TO's (compared to 8 and 23 at Harvard).

Looking at the distribution of minutes, it appears that Caleb Wood's minutes were shared by Betley and Goodman.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 03-14-17 02:21 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3038

Reg: 02-04-06
03-14-17 02:24 PM - Post#226981    
    In response to palestra38

In a limited sample of views, Silpe seemed OK defensively, more prone to being overpowered than out-quicked and kind of scrappy, and a big plus in ball-handling and passing. He could dribble under control in traffic, not just on committed drives to the basket, but turning in the lane, etc., and he had decent court vision and decision-making. Nobody else on the team had those skills, as far as I could tell.

 
Streamers 
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
03-14-17 05:11 PM - Post#227011    
    In response to SRP

I feel for Jake and all the kids like him who get buried in the rotation. I agree he has some skills our other guards could use but I have to ask where his minutes would come from? Goodman will get his because there are so many really good quick guards we will see that he must defend; not to mention the dimension he adds to the offense. Even when he does not start, he will get his PT. We have to assume Woods will get major minutes even if he does not start. Williams likely will not be ready initially. JD will likely come of the bench and not play the point. That leaves Foreman who will be a senior. Jake would have to improve enough in the eyes of the coaches to beat him out as I see it.

 
SteveDanley 
Freshman
Posts: 78

Age: 32
Reg: 02-25-12
03-14-17 05:51 PM - Post#227021    
    In response to Streamers

I agree -- for someone out of the rotation to make it into the rotation you have to see a big leap over the summer (more than incremental progress). That will be doubly so for some of the older guys because they have younger guys behind them.

 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4104

Reg: 11-22-04
03-14-17 06:12 PM - Post#227022    
    In response to Basketball Bruce

For the record, while the raw shooting percentages you list look comparable, Goodman had about a 101 ORAT in conference this year (so right around average), while Silpe's last year was about 90 (well below average). PER and win shares show the same thing -- that Goodman seemed to progress to an average level by the conference season, while Silpe never did (despite playing more) his first year. The main issue is turnovers, and it is enough of an issue that it basically ruins everything else statistically.

To echo Mr. Danley's very good points for a moment, I do think that removing Howard from the mix changes things. Obviously the easiest thing to do is find a guy who does everything Matt did. Assuming that doesn't just happen, it could be that the best mix turns out to just be different without him. So that creates opportunity for Silpe, and Sam, and Tyler, etc.

 
Basketball Bruce 79
Freshman
Posts: 13

Age: 79
Reg: 01-22-17
03-14-17 07:05 PM - Post#227028    
    In response to SomeGuy

I agree that Silpe committed more turnovers in his freshman year than Goodman did. For one thing, Jake played 628 minutes to Goodman's 369 minutes, resulting in more time handling the ball. More importantly, I think, is the fact that Goodman was able to ease into his role as point guard, having the benefit of relieving Darnell for a few minutes each game and gradually increasing his time. Jake was thrown in for game one as a starter, without that benefit. I am also sure that with the sudden departure of Tony Hicks, (and later, Woods) and the fact that this was Steve's first year of coaching this team, the offensive and defensive strategies were not entirely clear. Goodman had a more talented and experienced supporting cast. Last year there was no AJ or Betley, and Matt Howard and Max demonstrated a year's growth.

 
 Page 6 of 9 « First<6789
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

3307 Views





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: 0.085 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 03:08 PM
Top