Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 2 of 2 ALL<12
Username Post: Fairfield TV?        (Topic#20660)
pennsive 
Junior
Posts: 200

Reg: 11-21-04
11-11-17 07:40 PM - Post#235951    
    In response to Yo-Yo

I was there today. Some things were evident right from the warm-ups. Our guys were shooting 3's poorly even then, and Brodeur, despite the small sample size last year, should NOT be shooting 3's. He misses many more than he makes. He needs to exploit his many advantages underneath and around the basket. Secondly, they need to hit the weight room big time. It appeared that not only were the Fairfield players much taller than our guards, they were much bulkier as well. During the game this became evident and was exploited by Fairfield every time down the court, it seemed. Then, when Rothschild, who played horribly, was out, we went small, instead of giving Simmons valuable game experience. Our basic problem, aside from lousy shooting, was that we have an army of undersized guards, and only one should be playing at a time.
That reflects a recruiting problem, but the solution is not to give everyone court time because such an undersized lineup will most time be taken to the cleaners. Last, our defense was horrendous, especially on their star player who got what he wanted virtually each time down the floor. Even Woods and Foreman weren't close to containing him, and there was no real help defense. It was only the first game, I know, but boy were we outcoached and outplayed. Moreover, let Sam Jones play. He's bigger and a far better shooter than most of our guys, and we need 3 point help desperately. One positive note: Caleb Wood found his stroke, and we will need him and SJ during the season, especially if we use them to complement AJ playing underneath..

 
UPIA1968 
PhD Student
Posts: 1117
UPIA1968
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
11-11-17 09:23 PM - Post#235955    
    In response to pennsive

There are two perspectives for drawing conclusions for game one. The first is the short term perspective. Penn lost by 8. Simply mediocre free throw shooting and 3 shooting would have given them 12 more points and the win.

The second perspective, the longer-term one is very disappointing. We were looking for improvement and saw precious little. 3 shooting of 23%; FT shooting of 59%; new players contributing no points and 2 rebounds; the two stars contributing 33 points, without dominating the game the way Fairfield’s did – their two stars contributed 50 points. And among the many players from whom we hope for improvement only Caleb Wood showed much. Okay, Foreman was decent and Goodman had flashes, but Max, Donahue and Jones showed nothing.

I won’t say much more after only one game except to say that there was nothing in this game that indicates that Penn will be any better this year, nothing. Last year’s first game gave us Brodeur, an obvious step up. This game nothing. Or put differently, the players that replaced Matt Howard did not do a thing, including only 5 minutes of playing time for Scott and Simmons. We had better do a lot of hoping because the results from game one offer little evidence of a good season.


 
 Page 2 of 2 ALL<12
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

1385 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: 0.53 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 04:03 AM
Top