Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: Penn v Fairfield        (Topic#20653)
Cvonvorys 
Postdoc
Posts: 4438
Cvonvorys
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
11-10-17 11:11 AM - Post#235798    

Well folks... We're just about there.

Personally, I'm very excited about the start of the season and the possibilities for the team this year. What a great way to open the season -- With a big win over Sydney Johnson and the Fairfield Stags.

My Top Ten List: "Things I'll Be Looking For In Their First Game":

1) Brodeur and Betley picking up where they left off last year.

2) Brodeur and Rothschild playing well while on the floor together.

3) Woods living up to P38's expectations.

4) Wood eliminating his TO problem and draining 3-pointer after 3-pointer.

5) Foreman, relieved of any scoring burden, becoming the quintessential point guard.

6) The freshmen getting some playing time and showing off their potential.

7) Contribution from an unexpected source.

8) Penn making more foul shots than Fairfield attempts.

9) Less than 10 turnovers for the Quakers.

10) A double-digit Penn victory to open the season.

What am I missing? I know most of you will say that #4 will never happen, so what would you replace that with?

By the way, it looks like the game will be available through the Fairfield Sports Network:

http://fairfieldstags.com/watch/?Live=43&ty pe=...

LET'S GO QUAKERS!!!


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Penn v Fairfield
11-10-17 11:32 AM - Post#235799    
    In response to Cvonvorys

Fairfield preview---16-15 last year and bounced by UMBC---a team we should beat if we have improved. They did have an Italy trip and 2 exhibition games, so I worry a bit that they may be in better sync....but I guess that is the question.

http://www.ctpost.com/sports/article/Fairfi eld-men...

 
Penndemonium 
PhD Student
Posts: 1878

Reg: 11-29-04
11-10-17 12:37 PM - Post#235807    
    In response to palestra38

Advantage Fairfield. They actually play games on their Italy trips.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-10-17 01:05 PM - Post#235811    
    In response to Penndemonium

Penn is going to Italy next summer I believe.

 
rbg 
Postdoc
Posts: 3044

Reg: 10-20-14
11-10-17 01:11 PM - Post#235812    
    In response to Penndemonium

Per Penn Game Notes, the probable starters are Woods (G), Foreman (G), Betley (G), Brodeur (F), Rothschild (C).

http://www.pennathletics.com/documents/2017/11/9/1 ...

Looking at last year's stats, the two teams have a lot of similarity. This should be a good challenge for the Quakers, right out of the gate.

Regarding items #4 - I don't feel that Wood will be seeing much action. Since SD wants to go with two bigs and Brodeur at the 4, it seems really important that Rothschild have a good game. Not only does he have to be involved in the offense, but he needs to avoid picking up an early foul or two.

 
SteveChop 
PhD Student
Posts: 1150

Reg: 07-28-07
11-10-17 01:16 PM - Post#235814    
    In response to PennFan10

PF10 - Do you know anything else about the potential of an Italy trip next summer.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3615
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 01:57 PM - Post#235818    
    In response to SteveChop

4. Penn out rebounds Fairfield.

FYI, this is no easy game. We only beat them by 6 at home last year. Pomeroy gives Penn a 54% chance to win with predicted score of 73-72.

Will be a test early, and I think a really good sign if we win.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-10-17 02:00 PM - Post#235820    
    In response to SteveChop

  • SteveChop Said:
PF10 - Do you know anything else about the potential of an Italy trip next summer.



Just that they are going, likely after school in May.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 02:05 PM - Post#235821    
    In response to Mike Porter

According to Sports-reference, they lost 2 sophs (Cobb and Johnson) who were their 2nd and 3rd leading scorers and will have several first year players in the game. We should be better and they should be worse, on paper, anyway.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3615
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 02:19 PM - Post#235822    
    In response to palestra38

Yes, I see that now too. Pomeroy has them ranked pre-season as slightly worse than last year. Challenge is that the game is at their house, so that's why it is just a little better odds than a toss up. Also their best player is a senior and is really good - Tyler Nelson - whose stats look like a super charged version of Betley's. Will need to contain him on D. Will be interested to see who matches up with him.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 02:24 PM - Post#235823    
    In response to Mike Porter

It's always tough to play the opener on the road. I like our chances, though.

 
yoyo 
Senior
Posts: 354

Reg: 03-25-09
11-10-17 02:27 PM - Post#235824    
    In response to palestra38

Did Betley play in the game against Fairfield last year?

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
11-10-17 02:27 PM - Post#235825    
    In response to Penndemonium

  • Penndemonium Said:
Advantage Fairfield. They actually play games on their Italy trips.



Wow-- the Storied Italy Trip. That could probably be a b-school case. If that episode didn't make it clear that the program had issues with administrative competence, I don't know what would.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32685

Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 02:32 PM - Post#235827    
    In response to Silver Maple

Fairfield message board--a lot of information on their team and this game:

http://fairfieldstags.proboards.com/board/1/men-ba...

 
yoyo 
Senior
Posts: 354

Reg: 03-25-09
11-10-17 03:30 PM - Post#235832    
    In response to palestra38

Cool and there is a link to video for the game.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3615
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
11-10-17 04:31 PM - Post#235833    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
It's always tough to play the opener on the road. I like our chances, though.



Yep me too and feeling pretty good, but just not a push over us all. Let's Go Quakers!

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-10-17 06:39 PM - Post#235853    
    In response to Mike Porter

Vegas says Penn -2.5

 
Cvonvorys 
Postdoc
Posts: 4438
Cvonvorys
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
Re: Penn v Fairfield
11-11-17 05:05 PM - Post#235941    
    In response to Cvonvorys

  • Cvonvorys Said:
My Top Ten List: "Things I'll Be Looking For In Their First Game":

1) Brodeur and Betley picking up where they left off last year. (Not their finest moments.)

2) Brodeur and Rothschild playing well while on the floor together. (Didn't see it.)

3) Woods living up to P38's expectations. (Didn't see it, either. Is it possible that P38 could be wrong?)

4) Wood eliminating his TO problem and draining 3-pointer after 3-pointer. (3-4 from 3 and only 1 turnover... Caleb confirmed my faith in him.)

5) Foreman, relieved of any scoring burden, becoming the quintessential point guard. (Not good... 4-11 & 2-7 from 3, but 4 assists v 2 turnovers and 7-8 from the FT line.)

6) The freshmen getting some playing time and showing off their potential. (Nope. Eddie Scott got some PT, but has 1 rebound to show for it.)

7) Contribution from an unexpected source. (No.)

8) Penn making more foul shots than Fairfield attempts. (Ugh... Not even close. Penn = 11-19 from the foul line / Fairfield = 20-24 from the foul line.)

9) Less than 10 turnovers for the Quakers. (YES!!! Penn with only 9 TOs... But why did it seem like more?)

10) A double-digit Penn victory to open the season. (Ugh Ugh Double Ugh!!!)





That being said, some interesting stats:

Betley leading the team with 10 rebounds.

Donahue second on the team with 6 rebounds.

Two Penn starters with 0 points.


 
rbg 
Postdoc
Posts: 3044

Reg: 10-20-14
11-11-17 11:54 PM - Post#235957    
    In response to Cvonvorys

There were some positives, but, sadly, more negatives in this afternoon's game.

Positives

-- Betley, Foreman and Brodeur did not have their best games, but all still look good.

-- Goodman's three point shooting was reminiscent of his offensive performance in the Ivy Tournament semifinal, but the other parts of his game were solid.

-- Wood did a good job from three. He had a couple good games early at CCSU and Navy last year, so I am cautiously optimistic with today's performance.

-- 9 turnovers was certainly a positive.

-- Two point shooting (52%) was good, and similar to last year.

-- Woods is still an unknown at this point.

-- Rothschild, Donahue and Jones were all ineffective.

-- They got to the line a little more than last year, but the FT shooting (58%) was poor.

-- A school record # of threes (39) was a negative and the 23% three point shooting may have been worse.

-- The Stags' two leading scorers totaled 50 points.

-- Giving up 4 three pointers on 24% shooting was good, but giving up 24 two pointers on 62% was bad.

The biggest problem, on offense and defense, appears to be the lack of a second quality front court player. Without another offensive option, down low, Penn seemed content to have its guards heave three pointers. Defensively, they could not stop the Stags on the inside.

While a good backup, Rothschild does not seem to be a reliable starting and productive forward. Donahue does continue to hustle, but does not seem to have improved his three point shooting. Jones will have his moments hitting threes, but should not be counted on being a consistent offensive force.

Penn does have three solid starters with Foreman at the point, Betley at the wing and Brodeur down low. Goodman is also a good point guard to come off the bench. If Wood can play like he did today, then he can be the two guard. Otherwise, Goodman will have to play in that spot until Woods gets into game shape.

Simmons looks like he has the abilities to be a good compliment to Brodeur at the other forward position. Until he is ready, it may be more prudent to start MacDonald or Jones and keep Rothschild as a backup.




 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-12-17 10:16 AM - Post#235971    
    In response to rbg

Very disappointing start yesterday. The players executed poorly but Really this loss goes squarely on Steve Donahue. We all heard about the move to two bigs. He started two bigs and had 2 in there much of the time, So if that is the apparent strategy why in the world did we shoot 39 3s, which is 5 more attempts than our highest attempts against Columbia at home last year (also a loss). The game I watched featured zero shot attempts by Max (he played bad otherwise but really never got the ball in the post) and more importantly 4 of AJs 12 shots were 3s. He really didn’t get many post touches either and when he did, he scored going 6-8 from non three land. What about high low action? None. When they went zone I saw Max or AJ get to the high post with no entry passes multiple times. Our guards just dribbled around the perimeter hoping for the Red Sea to part. We had two bigs on the floor for somewhere around 50 of 80 possible minutes and they took a combined 8 shots in the paint, all of which were AJ.

And while we were going 9-39 from 3 ( and still somehow scored 72 pts) while not feeding the post our guards were regularly posted up by Fairfield bigs who got easy layups. Fairfield took 56 shots to score 80and we took 72 shots to score 72.

If you wanna jack up threes then play 4 guards and have at it. ( we tried some of that too) Don’t play two bigs with no plan to actually use them.

Then the rotations made no sense. SD played 12 different players. Only 3 who made the trip didn’t play. there was no continuity on the floor. I can’t imagine 12 guys are regularly in the rotation in practice so some of what SD did was not anything they had practiced. It’s mind boggling you can go a whole offseason and come up with this for a game plan. No thank you.

Maybe he is saving it for Lasalle. I hope so.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
11-12-17 11:26 AM - Post#235977    
    In response to PennFan10

Will pull lineup stats as soon as the NCAA posts them...

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-12-17 12:18 PM - Post#235985    
    In response to mrjames

While Penn bigs were 6-8 from 2, Fairfield’s bigs were 10-15.

 
pennsive 
Junior
Posts: 200

Reg: 11-21-04
11-12-17 01:28 PM - Post#235987    
    In response to PennFan10

I thought that Fairfield let the guys on our team that they wanted taking three point shots to take them. All they had to do was to watch twho shot and missed three pointers before the game even started to know that we couldn't beat them that way if our offense integrated the same shooters during the game because that was not our strength. We do need two bigs out there, but Simmons can be one of them because he has the athleticism to play outside and then to drive inside or to crash the boards. It was Fairfield's best option to have Brodeur launch threes, and when they missed, he was not around the boards to collect loose change. Were it Simmons missing from the outside, Brodeur could have collected the rebound, or if Simmons and Brodeur were underneath, and if Jones had the playing time to launch threes, many more would have gone in, and those that did not would have had a greater probability of being rebounded by us.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3580

Reg: 02-15-15
11-12-17 03:23 PM - Post#235990    
    In response to pennsive

I am guessing Division 1 coaches don’t draw up game plans based on who is missing shots in warmups.

 
Chip Bayers 
Professor
Posts: 6997
Chip Bayers
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
Penn v Fairfield
11-12-17 04:48 PM - Post#235994    
    In response to PennFan10

  • Quote:
He started two bigs and had 2 in there much of the time,



In the first half, per the PBP chart, AJ & Max were on the floor together for the first 3:47, when Rothschild & Woods were subbed out for Scott & Goodman at the 16:14 mark.

Penn played with only 1 big from then until 8:32 remaining, when Simmons came in for Betley. Brodeur & Rothschild had been subbed for each other to that point.

Wood & Betley came in for Simmons & Donahue with 6:36 left in the half.

First half court time for two bigs: 5:43.

Second half, Max & A.J. were together until 15:39, when Donahue came in for Max.

Max & A.J. subbed for each other until 10:16, when Max & Foreman came in for Goodman & Betley.

At 9:36 remaining Betley subbed for Brodeur.

Once again the two bigs subbed for each other until 5:11, when Max came in for Devon.

9 seconds later Dwyer made his first appearance in place of Max.

Dwyer & Donahue then went out for Wood & Goodman at 2:07 remaining.

Dwyer & Woods replaced Wood & Goodman at 1:42.

Dwyer back out for Goodman at 1:14.

Brodeur & Dwyer then swapped in the only remaining big substitutions.

Total 2nd half with 2 bigs: 8:33

So total for game: 14:16









Edited by Chip Bayers on 11-12-17 04:50 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Quakers03 
Professor
Posts: 12480

Reg: 12-07-04
11-12-17 05:53 PM - Post#236000    
    In response to Chip Bayers

Any explanation for Woods not seeing the court after early action?

 
SomeGuy 
Professor
Posts: 6391

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Penn v Fairfield
11-12-17 06:04 PM - Post#236005    
    In response to Chip Bayers

Any clue what the score was during their time together?

I'm a proponent of playing one big. I think we are best off with AJ down low as much as possible on offense, and in the middle guarding a 5 on defense. Playing with Max puts him out on the perimeter too much on offense, and then when AJ guards a 4 it takes our best shot blocker away from the basket. So I think AJ taking 4 3s, a limited number of interior buckets, and a bad day defensively all could be symptoms of the approach. That said, it was less than half the game. And I certainly agree with PennFan10 that these are things we should be able to adjust our way out of if we commit to 2 bigs. We just don't seem to have figured it out yet.

 
Chip Bayers 
Professor
Posts: 6997
Chip Bayers
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Penn v Fairfield
11-12-17 06:45 PM - Post#236011    
    In response to SomeGuy

  • SomeGuy Said:
Any clue what the score was during their time together?



Penn was up 9-4 when Max went out in the first half.

It was 5-3 Fairfield with Simmons & Brodeur together (that included the Donahue inbound TO & foul sequence).

There was an 8-4 Fairfield run to start the second half before Max went out.

It was 2-2 in the brief stretch around the 10:00 mark when Max & A.J. were together. Right after A.J. went out, Caleb hit the three that tied it at 53, on a kickout assist from Max. Fairfield then went on a 7-0 run to re-claim the lead for good.

It was 5-5 during the three minute stretch late when A.J. & Max (briefly) and then A.J. & Dan were together between 5:11 & 2:07 remaining.

2-0 Penn on an A.J. layup in the brief pairing with Dan between 1:42 & 1:14.




Edited by Chip Bayers on 11-12-17 06:46 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

2608 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: 0.486 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 08:21 PM
Top