Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: Back to next season        (Topic#20431)
UPIA1968 
Masters Student
Posts: 693
UPIA1968
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
08-07-17 09:19 PM - Post#231676    

After several months of talking only about recruits who will not likely make an impact until the 2019-2020 season it time to start thinking seriously about this season. I performed an analysis of the Pomeroy statistics and the verbal commit statistics for all eight teams and have come up with the following conclusions.

First, the league loses only two players who made PomeroY ‘major contributions’ Spieth of Brown and Petrasek of Columbia. No top ranked ‘go-to’ contributors left. The only two such stars in the league, Aiken of Harvard and Boudreaux of Dartmouth return. Princeton lost three third ranked ‘significant’ players while Harvard, Brown and Yale lost 2 below the ‘Major’ rank and Penn lost one Significant, Matt Howard. Cornell and Dartmouth lost nobody of importance from 2016-17. In summary, the league lost relatively few really good players after last season and should be comprehensively better this season.

I next looked for freshmen and sophomore contributors on the theory that rising sophs and juniors improve the most. All the teams had four or more players in this category. The outliers were Harvard with four, all frosh (scary), Yale with five including two frosh and Penn, with six including three frosh. Penn will have real depth this season. Max Rothchild is typical of such a player.

Finally, I looked for newcomers with a 2.5 or higher recruiting score. This was not a good year for the Ivy’s with only two 3’s, one each to Penn and Princeton and four 2.5’s, one each to Penn, Harvard, Yale and Princeton. I also gave credit to Penn for the return of Wood who scored a 2.7 as a recruit and who was a promising freshman. All in all, however, the majority of improvement for the league from freshmen will have to come from the random pool of undistinguished recruits that Mike James points out make up most of good Ivy players, but with the majority riding the bench.

When one combines the results of the three inquiries each team has some hope of improvement divided into four groups. Columbia, Brown and Cornell have the least prospects for improvement. As decidedly mid 200 ranked teams the most they can reasonably hope for is a more down towards 200. Princeton is in the next category, with just enough talent to next just above the loss of the three good seniors. However, their rank of 58 was clearly an outlier, strongly suggesting a regression to the mean for good Ivy teams putting them around 100 - if things go well. They could easily be the surprize underperformer.

The next group includes Dartmouth, Yale and Harvard, all who should expect to improve noticeably. For Dartmouth, it simply means a chance at breaking even given their 305 rank for last year. Yale could move up from its 151 rank to challenge Princeton. Harvard, departing from a 112 rank could easily move below 100, particularly if they can replace the important Siyani Chambers.

In the final, best improvement slot is the good old Quackers losing just one player, with lots of returning young talent and the best incoming talent when one factors in Woods, not to mention the wild card seven-footer. The catch of course is the departure point, the mediocre 171 ranking for a team that did not break even. This analysis suggests that they can hope to approach a 100 ranking, still behind Harvard but equal to the Pussies and Puppies. With some extraordinary luck, one could make an argument for more, but should Steve D. get the team to 100 level in year three, we should all be very happy. I know everyone wants to move well down below 100 as Harvard may do again. But after all, last year’s flawed model got within a missed free throw of defeating the Ivy Champion to earn a rematch with a team they had just beat for a trip to the dance. I would suggest a three seed in the Ivy tournament next March with dancing dependent on the maturation of all those sophomores in Cambridge. I’ll be interested to see what Mike James surely more scientific approach says. One hopeful point: both Harvard and Penn had two frosh last season with Pomeroy offensive ratings over 100, Aiken and Lewis verses Brodeur and Betley. There is real cause for optimism in the Palestra this year for the first year in HOW LONG? Maybe this recently sorry program can move into the rarefied of the exaulted women’s program. Maybe my son, DPerry, the loyal reporter on that program on this site will resume his lapsed interest in the men’s program. Showing the good sense that has always differentiated him from me, he has been absent from the men’s program for a long time. He is a lapsed Phillie and Flyer Fan too. Go figure!


 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4224

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Back to next season
08-07-17 11:07 PM - Post#231677    
    In response to UPIA1968

Thanks for this. Good to get some thinking going about next year. Personally, I'm higher on Princeton and lower on Dartmouth than you are.

I think Princeton has a formidable 1-2-3 with Stephens, Cannady, and Bell, and the right structure to have big contributions from a very good freshman class. Obviously they lose a lot of depth without Weisz and Cook, but i think in some ways that will just help Stephens and Cannady to really step forward.

On Dartmouth, yes, they don't lose much in the way of possessions, but they were a pretty lousy statistical team last year. I think they need talent more than they can improve with the same players. So I don't see anything more than incremental improvement there. A team like Cornell loses more minutes, but they also shed their sub 100 ORAT guys who were eating lots of possessions. So I could see Cornell improving more than Dartmouth. Regardless, for now the gulf is widening between the haves and have nots in the league.

On the recruiting class, personally I think it is very good. Nothing like Harvard's class for the ages last year, but good nonetheless. I think you missed Columbia's Faulds in your count of 3 star guys. There is some debate between mrjames and the Columbia folks as to whether he is really the best recruit in the league (or even for Columbia), but he shouldn't be ignored.

Finally, I'm bullish on the Quakers, FWIW. I'm high on Brodeur and Betley, and i think one more strong player could make the whole thing gel. Hoping one of the freshmen can be that guy.

If I had to rank the league today:

Yale
Harvard
Princeton
Penn
Columbia
Cornell
Dartmouth
Brown

 
QHoops 
Junior
Posts: 268

Reg: 12-16-04
Re: Back to next season
08-08-17 08:30 AM - Post#231683    
    In response to SomeGuy

So the usual questions need to be asked.

Any scuttlebut on how the incoming freshman are playing now that they are actually on campus?

Jelani's knee?

Is Jackson more than just tall? (Is he really 7'3"?)

Is Eddie Scott the second coming of Barry Pierce?

Can we pencil in Brodeur and Simmons in up front for the next 3 years?



 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
Re: Back to next season
08-08-17 01:24 PM - Post#231689    
    In response to QHoops

  • QHoops Said:
So the usual questions need to be asked.

Any scuttlebut on how the incoming freshman are playing now that they are actually on campus? Mark Bradley is a project, Jelani has to be brace free to be cleared (he is working very hard and looks good from what I hear), Eddie Scott is what we thought but has to adjust to the speed and physicality of the game, Jarrod just got there the last couple weeks so no updates yet.

Jelani's knee? see above

Is Jackson more than just tall? (Is he really 7'3"?). He is legit 7-2 or higher. AJ looks up at him. Has good hands but literally hasn't touched a ball in 2 years (wasn't allowed to)

Is Eddie Scott the second coming of Barry Pierce? No

Can we pencil in Brodeur and Simmons in up front for the next 3 years? AJ yes, barring injury. Assuming Simmons is the heir apparent to Matt Howard is a dangerous proposition. He might be, but more than likely he will take some time to develop. Could easily be a Betley type story or Dev Goodman.






 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16416

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Back to next season
08-08-17 01:35 PM - Post#231690    
    In response to PennFan10

If what you say is true, we are looking to be at best the same as last year---give us improvement for AJ and Betley, but the loss of Howard will not be replaced by anyone close to his senior ability.

If we don't have an immediate freshman impact, ugh.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-08-17 02:09 PM - Post#231691    
    In response to palestra38

I actually don't know about Simmons. He could come in and be the next AJ as a freshman sensation. I don't have any info one way or another.

I have heard Jelani will be cleared prior to start of official practices, I only know he is working very hard, looks great but hasn't played in any of the pick up games this summer.

Bradley has not played in any games either as he has to work his way back into physical shape.

I also have high hopes for the contributions of some of the returnees due to improvement.

I think we are right about where I would have expected at this point. This team will be better than last year's version, but so will some of the competition.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3217

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
Back to next season
08-08-17 02:24 PM - Post#231693    
    In response to PennFan10

You mean Mark Jackson, right? Wasn't Bradley a center for the Sixers and Nets a few years back?

Good news re: Jelani Williams though no need for him to rush back.



 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-08-17 02:47 PM - Post#231694    
    In response to TheLine

Yeah, Jackson. I have 7footer dyslexia!

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3530

Reg: 11-22-04
Back to next season
08-09-17 04:28 PM - Post#231735    
    In response to PennFan10

one thing I don't think all penn fans get is that it's not that it would be nice if Simmons or Jelani/Scott (although it seems Scott's not going to be it) emerged this year.

IT'S THAT IT'S UTTERLY NECESSARY AND STILL MAY NOT BE SUFFICIENT THAT ONE DOES FOR US TO WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS.

Go ahead and read that again. We can not rely on our players who are already in the system improving. Why? Because we're way behind Harvard and Princeton and their players will also improve, the null hypothesis has to be that they'll basically improve at the same rate though you could argue that given Harvard's and Princeton's better program culture (kind of a catch all term for a bunch of things including coaching, development, attitude around the program, etc.) they might improve at a higher rate than our guys

Now, does that mean that you allow, for example, a clearly better Max Rothschild to sit on the bench in favor of Jarrod? No, it doesn't. But it does mean that if it's close, you play Jarrod. Otherwise we just repeat the doomed cycle of mediocrity. I believe Donahue gets this and why Tony Hicks left the program. I don't think all of our fans do.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-09-17 04:37 PM - Post#231737    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Yeah, I worry a bit that people are viewing last year's Penn team through the lens of its last two games alone. Penn has a long, long way to go to catch Harvard, Yale and Princeton.

Not saying they can't, but the freshmen need to be impact players.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3145

Reg: 02-04-06
08-09-17 04:49 PM - Post#231738    
    In response to mrjames

The obvious guy to jump up in performance would be Betley, whose PT was small until late in the season. He looked like a player with upside.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-09-17 05:06 PM - Post#231739    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:
Yeah, I worry a bit that people are viewing last year's Penn team through the lens of its last two games alone. Penn has a long, long way to go to catch Harvard, Yale and Princeton.

Not saying they can't, but the freshmen need to be impact players.



This has been your mantra for more than a year. I don't buy it. Clearly the talent at those three is more significant and if all things are equal, that makes for a tough road but not a "long, long, long, long, long....(e.g. impossible) road to catch...". The fact remains that we split games with HY last year and none of us beat P.

Penn outperformed last year and Harvard clearly under performed. That can happen again for a lot of reasons that don't come out in talent. We'll see.


 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-09-17 05:38 PM - Post#231740    
    In response to PennFan10

I don't believe that Penn overperformed or Harvard underperformed last year. Both performed.

Reasonable estimations have all of Princeton, Harvard and Yale as Top 75-100 teams. I don't see how Penn is a Top 75-100 team without significant contributions from freshmen. Harvard last year had a very similar starting point (its season was actually EERILY similar to Penn's 16-17 campaign), a better player returning from a year's absence, got historic performance from its freshman class and still didn't finish Top 100.

Now, if you think that none of HYP will be Top 100 teams, then I think Penn has a chance to be in that conversation.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 2913

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
08-09-17 06:27 PM - Post#231743    
    In response to mrjames

Jeff's right. Penn has had one good recruiting class in recent times-- last year's. We got at least one all ivy caliber player in that class, and maybe as many as three. This fall's incoming class will probably yield another 1-3 such players. That's great, but still probably not enough to win a title. Two more classes like that and then, if Donahue can coach the way we think he can, we should be able to complete on an even footing with the top teams in the league. Until then, we're still in rebuilding mode. I think Donahue's doing a very good job, and he clearly has things moving in the right direction, but it's still probably too early.

 
Penndemonium 
Masters Student
Posts: 579

Reg: 11-29-04
08-09-17 07:23 PM - Post#231749    
    In response to Silver Maple

  • Silver Maple Said:
Jeff's right. Penn has had one good recruiting class in recent times-- last year's. We got at least one all ivy caliber player in that class, and maybe as many as three. This fall's incoming class will probably yield another 1-3 such players. That's great, but still probably not enough to win a title. Two more classes like that and then, if Donahue can coach the way we think he can, we should be able to complete on an even footing with the top teams in the league. Until then, we're still in rebuilding mode. I think Donahue's doing a very good job, and he clearly has things moving in the right direction, but it's still probably too early.



I'm a fan of donahue, but the game has changed. I think you're mistaken. We got 1 all-ivy player in last year's recruiting class. I like Goodman and Betley a lot, but I view them each as 25% likely to make all-ivy and more like 3rd team at that. Short of massive improvements, we've got to hope for this year and next year to have some impact freshmen/recruits that includes a league dominant PG.



 
91Quake 
Masters Student
Posts: 472

Reg: 11-22-04
08-09-17 08:01 PM - Post#231751    
    In response to Penndemonium

I'm going to agree with SRP and disagree with Mr. James here. Not that Penn will be a top 100 team but that they are as far behind as you posit. I think the right way to look at this squad is through the prism of the last 8 or so games which coincided with Betley and Goodman getting much more time and the team turning it around. I don't know if anyone has run the advanced stats on that segment of games, but I believe that those will prove to have greater predictive power than looking at the whole season.

And in basketball depth is great but only gets you so far. Dunphy won (and still does) with an iron eight and sometimes fewer. One All Ivy type recruit and one very good role player will make you competitive in any league.

The only way Betley makes All Ivy is likely if Penn is not very good and he needs to take a ton of the load as no other players are demanding the ball. If Simmons, Scott, etc. are good additions his All Ivy chances probably go down.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-09-17 08:15 PM - Post#231754    
    In response to 91Quake

Penn was No. 130 over the final 8 games. And 189 over the first 20.

Point proven, right?

Well, Penn was 209 over its final 5 games. And 204 over its final 3.

Also, I think it's really, really challenging to make any comparisons to the Dunphy era now. Just a completely different league.


 
91Quake 
Masters Student
Posts: 472

Reg: 11-22-04
08-09-17 09:22 PM - Post#231755    
    In response to mrjames

Ah, c'mon, the sample size of 3 games is even goofier than my sample size of 8 games.

And Dunphy still wins that way. And I know it's not the Ivy League. I was not comparing across eras, but there are plenty of coaches who win that way.

 
UPIA1968 
Masters Student
Posts: 693
UPIA1968
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
Re: How many good players
08-09-17 11:19 PM - Post#231757    
    In response to 91Quake

Please keep in mind that there is only one basketball and only enough room on the court for two or three players from the foul line in. That means a pair of stars plus four or five role players puts you in contention (Ibby Zoller). Having three people who can pressure a defense makes you the odds on champion (Begley, Ibby, Zollar)

So that tells us this about Penn's chances next year. Brodeur is the real thing. If Betley plays all year like he did at the end of last year, Penn has two players the opponents will have to base a defense around. That should be enough to improve, but not enough to stay with any of the HYP's who might find that third star. That means Penn will need the low probability event that one of the Freshmen is an instant star to stay with any of the HYP's who find that third player. It's possible, as Brodeur and maybe Betley proved last year, but not likely. If it happens, Steve merely has to find three or four role players. If Simmons is the pearl, all steve has to do is find a dependable point guard from four candidates and a stand still shooter from another four candidates. Throw in two more solid role players and you have a legitimate contender. Remember that no matter how good Harvard's four sophs are, only three at a time will get the ball routinely. True, their numbers make it more likely that Amaker will find his three stars. But if any one of the three Penn heralded recruits turns out, and Betley continues his progress, Penn is there.

Here's the point about recruiting I am trying to make. All deep recruiting does is to increase the odds of finding the two or three lead players one needs to get into real contention. Franny's genius was his ability to find and develop those three stars while surrounding them with good role players like Lengle, Owens, et. al. The only reason we need worry about 2019 recruits now is if Betley regresses and the 2018 class disappoints. Two good recruiting years is enough for any era.

Remember the great UCLA Run when Wooden invented 'over recruiting'. Those championships depended on six great classes over the twelve years. There was the Goodrich class, the Jabbar class, the Sidney Wicks class, the Walton Class and the Greenwood Class. All the other high school all americans that Wooden recruited ended up as role players. In the same way Franny's fourteen-year run featured the Allen, Jordan, U, Begley and Ibby classes.

When Mike James says it's a new league, he is merely saying that the quality of the top three has to be better and it may take more good recruits to find those diamonds in the rough. If, however, Steve has found another diamond in his backyard this year, it should be enough to fuel an extended title run. Yeah, getting below 100 rank will take three or four things to go well, unlikely this year, but if one of the three nuggets does sparkle, Penn's CURRENT recruiting is enough.

I am so tired reading here about Penn's systematic inadequacy in recruiting, when clearly the cause of the current, about to end, bad era was an abject management failure. Last November my son and I happily sang the Red and Blue during the football championship celebration in Ithaca. It is something we have done several times among the nineteen football championships, with 17 championships in the last 34 years. Even me, a typical intellectually handicapped Penn grad (same year as The Donald) can figure that is HALF of the total titles since Penn found the secret sauce under Bernt. The best of the HYP's has 17 total and 12 since 1982. What systematic recruiting advantage? Oh and why does it not apply to the women's programs too. Yeah, they did oops big time at the end, BUT IT WAS IN THE DANCE.

Let's focus our attention on how the young men and women who matriculate play on the hardwood in November. I'll say it again. If Matt makes those free throws, Penn would have beaten each of the HYP's last year and would have been one just more good effort from the Dance. Sure, I would love to see a couple of 2.5's or 3.0's sign up for 2019. But I am much more concerned that the 3-shooting improves , the rebounding improves and we find a point guard who can run the team in the last three minutes of a close game THIS YEAR!. All of those wishes are within this talent's capabilities. Let's get to 9-5 in the Ivies and a third seed in the Ivy tournament. If Harvard runs the table and waltzes through the tournament, okay, Amaker hit the jackpot like Franny did with his three NBA guards in 93 and 94 or Steve did in the years of the blue snow in Ithaca. Two or three losses is more likely for the winner this year and at least one close game in the tournament. Two or three Penn stars will be enough to keep us interested into March. And boy or boy is that better than what we have suffered through recently. This glass is more than half full. Hallelujah!

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-10-17 06:50 AM - Post#231759    
    In response to UPIA1968

I think everyone is underestimating the importance of depth. If you look at lineup stats, you don't want your only net-positive efficiency lineups to be concentrated amongst two or three key players, because, at most, all three players are likely to play on the floor together for half the game, leaving the rest of the lineups to include just two or maybe even one of those stars.

Last year, lineups including Matt Howard and AJ Brodeur would have won the league. The problem is what happened when those two weren't on the floor together, which was a significant portion of the game.

If you're judging Penn's quality by its starting five and comparing that to the starting fives across the league, you might be drawing a conclusion that isn't that relevant for predicting outcomes.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-10-17 07:03 AM - Post#231760    
    In response to 91Quake

The 5 game number was quite the same, though. If we were to believe that the 8-game number is representative of Penn finding itself, you'd want it to be relatively consistent for the remainder of the season. It's not. It's comprised of three shellackings where Penn played like No. 39 followed by five up and down games that, in totality, were No. 209.

The point is that there's no evidence that Penn consistently "improved" down the stretch. All I'm saying is that I've been doing this a long time, and I'd need to feel very, very good about multiple freshmen to even think about getting Penn close to the Top 100.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3530

Reg: 11-22-04
08-10-17 09:06 AM - Post#231773    
    In response to mrjames

While I'm closer to Mike on this, I'll say that I'm basically a believer in Betley. I think that shooting will play and also has gravity that will make it easier on our other players to find space.

I'm higher on Betley than Devon but I will allow that more of Dev's value could come from defense. I'd like to see more on that before totally buying in.

I forgot Darnell was still on the team.

The big news to me in this thread is I did not know DPerry and UPIA were related.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-10-17 12:10 PM - Post#231803    
    In response to Jeff2sf

I believe Betley will be Penn's best and most consistent player this year. His off season has been spectacular from what I hear and his confidence level is off the charts.



 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-10-17 12:53 PM - Post#231812    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:
The 5 game number was quite the same, though. If we were to believe that the 8-game number is representative of Penn finding itself, you'd want it to be relatively consistent for the remainder of the season. It's not. It's comprised of three shellackings where Penn played like No. 39 followed by five up and down games that, in totality, were No. 209.

The point is that there's no evidence that Penn consistently "improved" down the stretch. All I'm saying is that I've been doing this a long time, and I'd need to feel very, very good about multiple freshmen to even think about getting Penn close to the Top 100.



Mr James, your "I've been doing this a long time" statement doesn't make sense to me unless you are worried about your credibility, which in my view is unquestioned. It does appear to me that you are blurring the lines between the facts and your opinion, at least a little.

You seem to be equating IL success with KenPom ranking (e.g top 100). Last year's IL Tourney teams were KP 58, 112, 151, and 171 by my count. While the overall record of KP 58 and 112 were much better than Penn the facts are that the goal is to be one of 4 teams in the conference tournament. Last years' KP 171 was 2 FT's away from beating KP 58 for a rematch with KP 151 whom they had defeated by double digits in New Haven just a couple weeks earlier. That doesn't seem like Penn is a "long, long, long" way away or not even "... in the conversation". From my perspective they out performed last year and competed with all 3 of the top teams.

And the predictive capabilities of your models notwithstanding, you get a lot of credit on Harvard last year (you picked them second in the IL-"performed") when most everyone was caught up in the hype of the frosh class, but you were wrong on Penn (I believe you picked them 7th, behind Cornell, Dartmouth and Columbia and they definitely outperformed) though you will likely say it was within the margin of error.

With Penn bringing in the most talented freshman class of the IL and returning most of the their minutes from a year ago, I don't see the rationale for them being so far away from the pack, with or without Freshman contribution. I do think Jelani and/or Jarrod will be significant contributors this year though which may make all of this moot.


 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 2913

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
08-10-17 12:54 PM - Post#231813    
    In response to PennFan10

From your lips to God's ear. What, specifically, was Betley been doing during the offseason?

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-10-17 02:35 PM - Post#231817    
    In response to Silver Maple

I am not privy to his individual workouts, I just know that he has shined in the pickup games against the other Big 5 schools. He looks quicker, more explosive and stronger.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3217

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
08-10-17 03:22 PM - Post#231821    
    In response to PennFan10

The hidden value of having a guy like Betley is that the final sequence vs. Harvard never happens without him on the floor. And he didn't have to touch the ball.


 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-10-17 04:30 PM - Post#231823    
    In response to PennFan10

So, there is an important distinction here, and I want to be clear on what I'm talking about.

I haven't done my full view yet, but I think Penn will have strong odds to be Top 4 and, if so, will be two home games away from the NCAA Tournament. With the HCA boost, I'd expect a Penn team to have a non-trivial chance (for magnitude sake, let's say 15-20%) to win two games. I'm not addressing that question, and my comment about them being a "long, long way" doesn't apply to that.

I want to get a sense of how good teams truly will be, because that's a more predictable endeavor than the specific outcome of one trial and getting that right can help define the likelihood of drawing any one specific trial. Penn's starting point is the lowest of the four, it lost Matt Howard whose lineup splits were insane and finished third in win shares among non-Princeton players and its frosh class isn't expected to be the best in the Ivies. That to me looks like a team that ends up closer to where it started than one that makes a leap to solidly Top 100 (where it would need to be to be among the conversation as tops in the Ivies).

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2210
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
08-10-17 07:43 PM - Post#231830    
    In response to mrjames

Listen I would love nothing better than to see Penn surprise and break top 100, but unless a few guys make big leaps AND Jelani is fully recovered and impresses right away AND Jarrod comes in with a AJ Brodeur type fresh year.

We got to 171 KP but lost a key player, so to me the most likely path of progress is get to 125ish this year, get an equally good recruiting class for 2018 (need to land at least one star like Cotton and not a bunch of 2 star guys), and then break top 100 next year.

That doesn't mean we can't be 125ish this year, come in 4th, and pull some real upsets to be dancing... but it means that is a much lower probability to Princeton, Yale or Harvard winning.

I also agree with Mike that depth is critical and frankly we aren't there yet. I think we are closer with quality starters, but we still just need more. If Donahue can pull in another good class with a star level player in 2018, I think we are in good shape. If not and Mike is right about AI hurting us, then color me concerned moving forward.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2210
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
08-10-17 07:45 PM - Post#231831    
    In response to Mike Porter

I'm a big fan of Betley and love to hear what PF10 is saying! If he can make a leap and AJ can learn how to play against a double team that's where things start to get interesting. Here's also to hoping AJ has been shooting a lot of threes this offseason. If that consistently adds to his game that will make him hard to stop (think of jumps Koko, Zoller and even U made when 3 was a threat).

 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4224

Reg: 11-22-04
08-11-17 12:07 PM - Post#231849    
    In response to Penndemonium

I don't really get the lack of love for Betley here. He was our leading scorer in Ivy games. He was 13th in the league. There is an argument that, if not for the biases toward vets we see every year in the selections, he played at a third team level as a freshman. Is there really something in his game where you don't think he will get better as he goes?

In regard to the arguments about overestimating Penn overall, I want to be clear -- I think we'll be behind HYP this year. I think we can close some of the gap though (and widen the gap from us to 5th, which admittedly wasn't really a gap at all in league last year). So while I self describe as optimistic, I'm still not talking about winning the regular season or anything like that. If we get the same type of freshman impact as last year, though, things could move faster.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3217

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
08-11-17 12:30 PM - Post#231850    
    In response to SomeGuy

What lack of love for Betley?


 
Penndemonium 
Masters Student
Posts: 579

Reg: 11-29-04
08-11-17 01:00 PM - Post#231852    
    In response to TheLine

Yeah, my comments that he will need to take a big leap to be all-ivy says more about the league than a lack of appreciation for Betley. He spent much of the season injured and he is a skilled but not yet physical presence. He has a lot to prove to have all-ivy credentials and to be counted on as the guy who will carry us night after night to a championship. He has shown flashes of that, but there are a laundry list of players who have shown flashes.

Goodman also showed flashes, but is a long way from being a league dominant player. Right now it is just Brodeur, and even he cooled down in the Ivy season.

I liked the look of our freshman class on their highlight videos. They showed some promising athleticism and swagger as HS seniors.

 
rbg 
Masters Student
Posts: 454

Reg: 10-20-14
08-11-17 06:05 PM - Post#231878    
    In response to Penndemonium

A couple of questions:
Who do people think are the starting five to start the season?

Will Coach Donahue settle on a starting five earlier this season than he did last year, or will he continue to experiment until the conference schedule?

Which of the incoming players make it into the starting lineup or rotation?

Will Hamilton have a greater role in this year's team?

Do people expect any improvement from MacDonald, Donahue, Wood, Silpe and Jones?

With Harvard, Princeton and Yale looking like 3 of the participants in next season's Ivy Tournament, which team do people think are the biggest threat to Penn for the other spot?


 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4224

Reg: 11-22-04
08-11-17 07:13 PM - Post#231880    
    In response to Penndemonium

To me he plays a fairly physical game. He's not pure touch from the outside, which is what separates him from, say, Jackson Donahue's scoring as a freshman. Betley can create for himself.

But it was the third team Ivy thing that got me -- I think he's already at that level, so the comment to me suggested that he won't improve as a college player, which seemed strange.



 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4224

Reg: 11-22-04
08-11-17 07:43 PM - Post#231882    
    In response to rbg

My guess is that it changes a lot during the year. Forced to guess now (and with less info than I'm sure some of the insiders have), I think Brodeur is a lock, Betley a virtual lock, and Foreman a near lock to start the year. After that, it could be lots of guys. I'll go with Hamilton and Goodman to start the season. I suppose Woods is likely to be in there somewhere, but we'd be small with Brodeur Betley woods foreman Goodman. That said, I think there is a good chance Betley fills the Howard role as the undersized 4 at least for stretches. Whether they go big with Rothschild/Simmons, small with Betley, or small with Hamilton/Scott at the 4 will be interesting.

Where does it end up? I wouldn't be at all surprised if we're starting Brodeur Simmons Betley Williams Goodman by the end of the year. Like this past year, we may see a lot of combos to get there.

 
Cvonvorys 
PhD Student
Posts: 1362

Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
08-11-17 10:16 PM - Post#231884    
    In response to SomeGuy

Here's the problem (and I guess the fun) with this speculation... Is there anyone on this board who last year predicted Betley would play so well? How many thought Silpe would be the next Rosen?

Put me down as someone excited about the 2017-2018 Penn Men's Basketball Team...

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-12-17 12:24 AM - Post#231885    
    In response to Cvonvorys

The big question is who fills the role of Matt Howard? He was a small forward playing the 4. Betley is a stretch for,that as he isn't strong enough to guard a true 4. We don't know enough about Jarrod's game but if he is like AJ/Max, then we know Donahue doesn't like playing two bigs. One of those bigs will have to be able to,play small (shoot 3's, drive the ball,and defend guards as well as bigs, all while rebounding). Donahue isn't changing his stripes so if Simmons is more like AJ then MH, we will likely see Betley and Tyler in that role. Maybe Max can play that but that's not what donahue has asked him to do up to now. Jarrod is the guy if he has the skill set.

Of the older guys I like Silpe to make a run at significant playing time. Just a hunch. But I think he'll be a factor.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 3736

Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 06:03 AM - Post#231886    
    In response to PennFan10

I think it's a fallacy that Steve prefers to play an undersized 4 with Matt Howard type skills. That's not what he did at Cornell when he had a bigger body available.

My guess is that Simmons is the exact type he would like out there or that he would play AJ at the 4 (presuming we had a bettter alternative at the 5 (which is unlikely).

The big question is whether or not Simmons is ready and I certainly don't have that answer.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-12-17 08:09 AM - Post#231887    
    In response to AsiaSunset

Well, I don't know about Cornell but he didn't play two bigs much at all the last two years. So it's not a fallacy if it actually happened?


 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 3736

Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 08:26 AM - Post#231888    
    In response to PennFan10

That's because he had a smallish 5 option and no real 4 option that fit the mold.

AtCornell he had. 7 foot center and a big bodied 4 with a good mid range game, but not an outside threat.

I think his last year after the 4 graduated he went small since it was his best option.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-12-17 08:37 AM - Post#231889    
    In response to AsiaSunset

I disagree. He would play 5 guards if he could. Last year we didn't see AJ and Max together much at all. unless one of the three of Jarrod/AJ/ Max can do what Matt H did I don't think we will see it this year either.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4863

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 08:54 AM - Post#231890    
    In response to PennFan10

Well, you need the bigs for D. If anything, two bigs that can't take threes hurts Steve's offense.

Now, if he sticks with that gimmicky zone, he probably doesn't need a second big, because no one can suck AJ out to the perimeter. That being said, his team was one of the worst at allowing 3pt attempts (irrespective of percent made). It's hard to stop that out of a zone, but if you go man, you probably want a second credible rim protector on the floor. That tradeoff could be where not having a "real" 4 hurts you.

Also, important to remember, Howard was the 10th best defensive rebounder by rate in the league last year, marginally behind AJ. Only Bathurst and Oni rebounded better as guards and they were only marginally better as well. Howard being so helpful there papered over another trouble spot of a zone.

I guess all of this is to say that Howard might have been a very special player that enabled some strategies and lineup combos that it won't be easy to just slot someone else in to take over. That doesn't mean that the new ways Penn will have to play will be worse - the new personnel could empower better strategies - but, for me, losing Howard makes it tough to talk about Penn from the same starting style as last year.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 3736

Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 09:14 AM - Post#231891    
    In response to PennFan10

Playing 5 guards equates to 0-14 in the Ivies. Playing Ryan Bentley at the 4 is also a formula for a losing season. Unfortunately AJ and Max are not a great 4/5 combo.

Simmons in intriguing because he has a skill set that is unique for a big on this Penn team. The big question is how it translates to D1 bb In his freshman year. I would not wait until Feb to find out.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-12-17 11:21 AM - Post#231892    
    In response to AsiaSunset

Obviously he isn't going to play 5 guards, I was being facetious.

If AJ/Max are not a good 4/5 combo then how is adding Jarrod going to change that?

I agree w MrJ that Howard was a unique mix and we will have to see how Donahue employs the current talents.

Part of my notion that Donahue doesn't want 2 bigs on the floor stems from the fact he started Matt McDonald most of the first half of the year last year. Max looks like a much more productive player than Matt (certainly during that stretch) yet AJ/Max appeared few times on the floor together and for very short stretches.

Someone posted that a lack of depth kept Donahue from playing 2 bigs more often last year, which is plausible. If AJ/Max got into foul trouble, there weren't many other good options. Jarrod should change that. I hope so because some combination of 2 of AJ/Max/Jarrod all the time may be part of our best lineup.

I still think Betley will make the biggest jump and will become our best player pretty quickly.

So I see Frontcourt combo of AJ/Max/Jarrod (2 of the 3) along with Betley and then Goodman/Darnell/Woods/Jac kson battling for the guard spots along with Jelani once he is full go. That's 9 players without mentioning MacDonald, Tyler, Silpe, C Wood, Eddie Scott and S Jones (or 7 foot Jackson).

Going to be a competitive fall for the Quakers.

 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4224

Reg: 11-22-04
08-12-17 12:14 PM - Post#231894    
    In response to SomeGuy

One more stat to overhype Betley -- over the last 8 games, he averaged a shade undear 18 ppg as we climbed back into it. So while overall I'd say he played at an HM level for the season, for the second half he was probably already playing at a 2nd team all-Ivy level.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2210
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 12:38 PM - Post#231895    
    In response to SomeGuy

Any word on how Antonio Woods is looking this summer? I'm wondering if he might pass a few folks to get on starting lineup.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 3736

Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 01:47 PM - Post#231897    
    In response to Mike Porter

"If AJ/Max are not a good 4/5 combo then how is adding Jarrod going to change that?

He changes the dynamics because he has a skill set neither of the other two has. He can actually bring the ball up the court or attack the basket off the dribble He is also very long and has superior athleticism. What's unknown is his maturity level as a freshman and ability to excel at this level right away.

Max is an undersized 5 with the skills of a 5 Brodeur has more skills than equate to a 4, but is a better option at the 5 than Max.

Undoubtably Max and AJ will share the court at times because Steve has to manage minutes and fouls. Having said that, it's not a strong front court combo.

So I think Simmons better be a preferred option or we are in a bad situation because i happen to agree with Mike James that we don't a very good Matt Howard/small 4 replacement on the team this year.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-12-17 02:40 PM - Post#231898    
    In response to AsiaSunset

I definitely disagree with your assessment of their skill set but we are in agreement in hoping Jarrod has a full complement of skills.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2210
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
08-12-17 04:44 PM - Post#231901    
    In response to PennFan10

My hope is that we will see a lot more 2 big sets if Simmons is ready to play at the college level. I think last year we saw hesitation to put Max and AJ out there at the same time because we had no depth and Donahue didn't really want to go deeper than Max and AJ in the bigs. I felt he was holding Max in reserve to back up AJ at the 5 knowing that we had a great multi-functional player in Matt Howard who could fill in at the 4 and do some unique things there. We'll see what happens in a few months!

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3217

Age: 54
Reg: 07-07-09
08-12-17 05:01 PM - Post#231902    
    In response to Mike Porter

Yes, I think the major consideration was to not get both bigs into foul trouble, but another was that they didn't seem to mesh particularly well when they were both out there at the same time. AJ and Max tended to gravitate to the same spots on the floor.

I'm of a mixed opinion. On the one hand, AJ has range on his shot and I wouldn't mind him using it more. On the other hand he's so effective underneath the hoop on both ends and I'd hate to give that away. His roll to the hoop is already close to unstoppable without doubling him - once he learns how to deal with double-teams then look out. Max also plays underneath the hoop most of the time. Jarrod - I don't know but in the little I saw of his high school play he also occupied the area under the hoop a lot.

One key is whether Simmons - or any other big on the roster - is going to be ready to contribute and be part of the rotation. If so then perhaps the staff will work more on offensive and defensive sets with two bigs on the court together and see how it goes.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 16416

Reg: 11-21-04
08-13-17 02:15 PM - Post#231919    
    In response to Mike Porter

I agree with you that Woods is the wild card this year. Few here seem to remember the hype for him when he started and he played with a confidence well beyond a freshman, even if he indeed was pretty raw. If his court sense has come up to his talent, he is a pretty special Ivy guard.

 
AsiaSunset 
Postdoc
Posts: 3736

Reg: 11-21-04
08-14-17 07:35 AM - Post#231938    
    In response to palestra38

I thought Antonio started to begin to show he could be a very good Ivy pg in the last few games of his shortened season. Being realistic though - he hopefully has improved his shooting, especially from distance. I do believe he has the skills to beat his man off the dribble and get into the lane with the shot clock running down, but, even there, his FT % needs to improve.

I totally agree he's a wildcard that could make the team much better if ......

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 9619

Reg: 12-02-04
Back to next season
08-14-17 12:28 PM - Post#231977    
    In response to mrjames

Has anyone seen Jackson on a basketball court this summer?

Talk about a wild card down the road....

Edited by penn nation on 08-14-17 12:29 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1129

Reg: 02-15-15
08-14-17 02:14 PM - Post#231986    
    In response to penn nation

Jackson is only running and doing individual workouts. He was not allowed to work out or touch a basketball for 2 years on his mission. The team is getting him back into running shape and he is putting up shots, etc before he can even begin to participate in a group/team workout. It's hard to imagine him having much of an impact at any point this year.

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

3162 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: 0.141 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 10:58 PM
Top