Basketball Bruce
Freshman
Posts: 29
Age: 86
Reg: 01-22-17
|
11-14-17 03:21 PM - Post#236288
In response to mrjames
I get it. And putting aside all of the stats, ORATS and percentages, and just looking at the game, I can't help but think that if the players could just play, and not focus on three point shooting all the time, we would see an improvement.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-14-17 03:43 PM - Post#236295
In response to Basketball Bruce
Said otherwise, if we hit our layups at a clip resembling what we should hit from 2-3 feet, we should have won. That's true. What remains to be seen is if we actually can do that. One thing---we need AJ to be the guy in the middle on offense. Having him roaming outside while our center shoots 6-19---all from close range--kills us.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3770
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
11-14-17 03:50 PM - Post#236297
In response to mrjames
This much is clear to me: S. Donahue is reluctant to put players on the floor who aren't looking to score. Guys that compromise the overall effectiveness of the offense. That's probably why MacDonald got benched in favor of J. Donahue last season. Say this for Jackson: at least he's willing to hoist it up.
|
yoyo
Senior
Posts: 363
Reg: 03-25-09
|
11-14-17 03:52 PM - Post#236298
In response to Silver Maple
so is Donahue hurt?
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-14-17 04:03 PM - Post#236300
In response to Silver Maple
I don't think the game plan was faulty last night. The coach wanted to prevent LaSalle from chewing us up on the offensive end and played his defensive team. We had the shots that should have been made. The question is whether, as some here believe, these guys cannot hit 2 point shots at a rate sufficient to win games, or whether that will improve to what ought to be a much better percentage considering how many times we got to the rim and missed. I think we have to see more before a conclusion can be reached.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3584
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-14-17 04:07 PM - Post#236301
In response to yoyo
so is Donahue hurt?
Nope
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-14-17 04:25 PM - Post#236304
In response to PennFan10
In general I liked this rotation better - would have liked a little more Goodman, but generally liked the approach.
Max had a really rough night around the basket. We need him shooting somewhere in the middle of 1 shot in game one and 19 shots in game two (way too many). I also am questioning Max defending the opposing centers... AJ is a better blocker and is being pulled too far from post on D.
One positive here - Max has done a much better job taking care of the ball to start. If he can keep TO's down like this and get back to his historical shooting % at something like 10-12 shots a game, that would be really positive.
|
Cvonvorys
Postdoc
Posts: 4471
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
|
11-14-17 04:25 PM - Post#236305
In response to palestra38
I don't think the game plan was faulty last night.
P38... Really? Do you think a game plan that entails Max taking 19 shots (nearly 3 times more than AJ) is going to win us many games? Do you think a game plan that puts a dominant shot blocker farther from the basket (zero blocked shots that game) is going to win us many games? Do you think a game plan where Antonio & Darnell each take the same number of shots as Ryan (and a lot more than AJ) is going to win us many games?
I was high on Caleb before the season started, and he's earned more playing time, IMHO. One turnover after 2 games... Who, besides me, would've predicted that? I prefer Caleb shooting to either Antonio or Darnell.
Brutal loss is right. And we were favored in both games, by the way...
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-14-17 04:29 PM - Post#236307
In response to Cvonvorys
Favored by fewer than 3...essentially a push given our home court and a game that we should have won.
I criticized Max taking so many shots and blocking AJ's access to the basket. I do not criticize the idea against LaSalle (only) to put our best defensive team out there--hound the hell out of them and try to beat them inside. We did hound the hell out of them, took them completely out of their game and blew makeable close in shot after shot. That's what I am not criticizing. Max needs to stop being a black hole with the ball inside, but other than that, the game plan should have given us a W
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
11-14-17 04:30 PM - Post#236308
In response to Cvonvorys
The rotations may not have been faulty but the ball absolutely has to get in Betley's hands, no matter what it takes to make it happen. We did not see that last night.
|
Cvonvorys
Postdoc
Posts: 4471
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
|
11-14-17 04:37 PM - Post#236309
In response to palestra38
Couldn't we "hound the hell out of them" better without our starters playing 40+ minutes each (Max played 38)? Couldn't we still "hound the hell out of them" while allowing AJ to take more than 7 shots?
And can anyone tell me how playing Antonio & Darnell at the same time benefits us? Fewer TOs?
|
yoyo
Senior
Posts: 363
Reg: 03-25-09
|
11-14-17 04:40 PM - Post#236310
In response to Cvonvorys
I have seen enough of Darnell.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Brutal Loss
11-14-17 04:45 PM - Post#236312
In response to Cvonvorys
Look, we put the freshmen in twice for about 3 minutes total and we lost the game (in terms of +/-) then. Those guys weren't ready to play at the pace that LaSalle can play. I think that we had the right guys out there for that matchup. Max took too many shots where he was going one on one, but the guards got to the hoop and just missed a few very makeable shots. Yes, Wood looked good as a shooter and I would have liked to see him play more. Other than that, you have to agree that we had every chance to win and should have won. I don't think any other guards we have could have played LaSalle's guards as tough as we did. We were hurt by Johnson, but we took the ball from him 8 times and converted those turnovers into points. They had a very quick and athletic team and we tried to match that.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-14-17 05:25 PM - Post#236316
In response to Cvonvorys
Antonio + Darnell + Any 3 = 51% of possessions (79 poss)
92 ORAT
104 DRAT
All other combos = 49% of possessions (77 poss)
91 ORAT
95 DRAT
Much better at getting to the rim (41% of shots vs 33%), much worse at finishing there (37% vs 56%), many, many more 2PT Js (30% of shots vs 17%) and much higher FT Rate (39% vs. 22%).
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-14-17 05:36 PM - Post#236317
In response to mrjames
eddie scott played 7 minutes in the first half and was a minus 5. Not great but I mean that seems like a pretty ordinary occurrence.
One thing that I thought was dumb - there should never be a minute of a close game (particularly one where the starters play as much as they do) where both Betley and Brodeur are off the court at the same time. What is this, Oklahoma City?
|
Cvonvorys
Postdoc
Posts: 4471
Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
|
11-14-17 06:31 PM - Post#236320
In response to mrjames
Antonio + Darnell + Any 3 = 51% of possessions (79 poss)
92 ORAT
104 DRAT
All other combos = 49% of possessions (77 poss)
91 ORAT
95 DRAT
Much better at getting to the rim (41% of shots vs 33%), much worse at finishing there (37% vs 56%), many, many more 2PT Js (30% of shots vs 17%) and much higher FT Rate (39% vs. 22%).
Thanks for that. But please keep in mind, although I graduated from Penn, I was only a Communications Major, so if you could please indulge me (time permitting).
I know it's only 2 games, but do we have enough data where only Darnell or only Antonio is on the floor? I ask because I'm using the "P38 Eye Test Analysis Methodology" which shows that both of them fill the same role. The stats from the La Salle game are not favorable for Antonio and Darnell (poor outside shooting -- combined 7-23 & 0-4 from 3) and poor foul shooting (combined 8-16). From my living room watching the game, I'm screaming at SD... Begging him to put a "shooter" in the game. What are Caleb Woods stats (time permitting, of course)?
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Brutal Loss
11-14-17 07:10 PM - Post#236321
In response to Cvonvorys
That’s where the Matt Howard departure hurts. He was a great piece in that 1-3-1, because he defended his area well AND rebounded well. That allowed you to play/hide any number of bad defenders on the wings of that zone and not be in trouble defensively. Now that you’re forced to man, you need defenders that can play man - and sadly that doesn’t cross well with your best 3PT shooters.
On all of this, though, you’d need pretty overwhelming evidence right now to update your prior beliefs. In smaller samples, style tends to correlate better with longer-term outcomes than shooting percentage (at least on jumpers). So, for me, the concerning thing is that without that dynamic two-way guy like Howard, it seems like Stevie’s going to be choosing between offense and defense all year (the best defenders combine for a terrible “style†of offense - inefficient for today’s game), which could put a ceiling on where this team can go...
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-14-17 09:53 PM - Post#236340
In response to palestra38
I tend to agree with P38 about the gameplan. I think we had the right guys out there for the matchup, and the strategy on offense was to have a team of guys who could get to the hoop. Which they did. A lot of little things could have gone either way in this one, playing against a team that may be better than even our highest realistic expectations (at least currently kenpom 109). It is frustrating for a whole slew of reasons nonetheless, but this is a game against a pretty good opponent that we very well could have won. More offense for us may well have resulted in less defense, and I thought we lost the game on defense over the last 3:30 or so.
Another note on why the sky might not be falling -- if we just shoot poorly from 3 (say 30%), we are 1-1 and maybe 2-0. If we just shoot ok, we're 2-0. And if we shoot it well, we're 2-0 with 2 pretty easy wins. That's in addition to the fact that we'd have won in regulation if Woods puts the ball in the basket.
So I worry about what the start might mean, but I'm not giving up yet.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-14-17 09:55 PM - Post#236341
In response to yoyo
I don't see this. Darnell has been our 3rd best player thus far. Whatever his limitations are, he's our best option.
|
Penn90
Masters Student
Posts: 573
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-14-17 09:58 PM - Post#236342
In response to SomeGuy
If the team lives and dies by the three-pointer then that's not much of a strategy or foundation, especially when your outside shooters are basically interchangeable "meh" players.
Combine that with what looks like a disastrous recruiting class this season and all you can say for Donahue is that the program is no longer a dumpster fire. It's merely mediocre. Sad!
|
