PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-18-17 11:59 AM - Post#236841
Penn's Joe Tordy did his weekly interview with Steve Donahue, posted on the Penn athletics sight. and Steve had a few interesting insights into the state of the team right now and shed some light on many of the topics we have all discussed on here. A few snippets:
Playing so many games in a short amount of time (8 games in 12 days): "It has been great for our new players, and especially our new nucleus trying gel together, like Antonio Woods and the freshmen.
On taking so many 3's at Fairfield: "There may have been a couple [we shouldn't have taken] but we could have made 20 of them. That said, when you aren't hitting your 3's you have to adjust as well and we didn't do a very good job of that"
On looking at the box score from Navy, they didn't shoot well but you had something to do with that: "It started last year where we set the tone with our defense. We were arguably the 2nd best defense in our league, we were top 100 and we have everyone back except Matt. Everyone is bigger and stronger and with the addition of Antonio Woods I think we can be an elite defensive team. The numbers through 3 games are 3 games I have never seen. 8 three's in 3 games (2.7 a game), 16% and we are turning people over at double their assist rate. That's unheard of and overall shooting percentage is 40%. And we don't foul. That's how you win championships."
He spoke a lot more about Brodeur's new position, playing two bigs and also spoke at length about Antonio Woods and what he brings to the table for this team saying:
"Antonio is our best passer, he has the best feel for the game. He is getting the rust off now, getting used to playing and being more consistent with his shooting. He guards anybody 1-4 because of his quickness and toughness, it's a great asset to have"
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Steve Donahue's assessment
11-18-17 12:23 PM - Post#236843
In response to PennFan10
On looking at the box score from Navy, they didn't shoot well but you had something to do with that: "It started last year where we set the tone with our defense. We were arguably the 2nd best defense in our league, we were top 100 and we have everyone back except Matt. Everyone is bigger and stronger and with the addition of Antonio Woods I think we can be an elite defensive team. The numbers through 3 games are 3 games I have never seen. 8 three's in 3 games (2.7 a game), 16% and we are turning people over at double their assist rate. That's unheard of and overall shooting percentage is 40%. And we don't foul. That's how you win championships."
Wow that's a dumb hot take. I'd expect better from Steve, but I'd wager that's just what he says publicly versus what he actually knows.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8245
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Steve Donahue's assessment
11-18-17 12:39 PM - Post#236844
In response to mrjames
Dumb as in vacuous or dumb as in you’re not buying it?
|
91Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1125
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-18-17 01:08 PM - Post#236850
In response to Streamers
Dumb as in no H coach has ever said anything for public consumption before.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-18-17 01:10 PM - Post#236852
In response to 91Quake
Dumb as in no H coach has ever said anything for public consumption before.
I've pretty much given up on critiquing Amaker. He is who he is.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Steve Donahue's assessment
11-18-17 01:16 PM - Post#236853
In response to Streamers
You have to assess the defense as if it were allowing a reasonable percentage of jumpers to fall through the hoop. Because, at some point, it will. When it does, it's not going to look so great.
Also, they were inarguably the 3rd best defense in the league last year. Not sure what his argument is, but actual reality has him 3rd.
And the fouling thing... maybe he's doing some math to deduct the give-away fouls at the end of Fairfield and La Salle, but the team is fouling a fair deal. Free throw rates were 43% in the first two games, and not all of that is end-of-game fouling.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-18-17 01:25 PM - Post#236854
In response to mrjames
He did say "arguably" 2nd best defense in the league.
He also did say it was just 3 games....but the point being he believes Penn can be an elite defense this year and that will be their identity.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3777
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
11-18-17 03:11 PM - Post#236861
In response to PennFan10
Mike: if I didn't know better, I'd say that the tone of your posts suggests that you don't think Steve Donahue knows a bit more about basketball than you do. Of course, I know better, so I'm not going to say that.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-18-17 04:29 PM - Post#236864
In response to Silver Maple
I’m sure he does. I’m saying that his public statements don’t give that impression, but he wouldn’t be the first coach to paint things in an overly positive light in public.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-18-17 08:31 PM - Post#236867
In response to mrjames
Think about it for a second, though, Mike. What is he trying to do, both when he speaks publicly and when he speaks to the team? The numbers are the numbers, but they reflect how the guys play as a team. I'm sure what he says is intended to help them do that. Much of being a good defensive team is believing you are a good defensive team. Differeent coaches will approach this different ways -- some are going to tell the guys they stink and focus on what they do wrong because that's how they think you motivate. Some are going to try to build the kids up. Frankly, most do both, depending on the situation. I guess I don't see why you would expect a coach to speak in your terms about this. If the team has a positive defensive result, touting it seems perfectly reasonable, even if what it amounts to is luck.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-18-17 08:42 PM - Post#236870
In response to SomeGuy
Absolutely. We’re all basically saying the same thing.
Some folks here are pointing to things Steve is saying as evidence that things are a certain way in reality because Steve knows because he’s a coach. Like when he lauded Antonio - that was used by some to imply their argument was right because Steve agreed, publicly. My point (and yours) is that Steve may have a different purpose with his public statements than trying to give everyone an accurate view of reality.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-18-17 09:05 PM - Post#236873
In response to mrjames
Or he may actually believe what he says.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-18-17 10:26 PM - Post#236887
In response to PennFan10
nah, it's just coach speak. steve's not dumb.
and you'd have to be dumb to believe what he just said. so if someone believes it, they r dum.
|
Charlie Fog
Masters Student
Posts: 586
Age: 55
Loc: Philly
Reg: 11-12-13
|
11-19-17 10:11 AM - Post#236914
In response to Jeff2sf
I believe Steve believes this is a good defensive team and I believe he is correct.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
11-19-17 10:28 AM - Post#236920
In response to Charlie Fog
Yep
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32819
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-19-17 11:15 AM - Post#236929
In response to PennFan10
Yep Yep.
But in large part, that's the addition of Woods in the backcourt. With Woods and Foreman pressuring and 2 big men guarding their backs, Penn is a much better defensive team and able to compete at a much higher level.
Now I won't go saying that Woods' 2 3s against PSU-Brandywine has any real meaning, but it's good practice.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
11-19-17 11:25 AM - Post#236931
In response to palestra38
There is no way we are net better on D with Matt Howard out. Antonio is not that good.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8245
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-19-17 11:46 AM - Post#236935
In response to Jeff2sf
Jeff - losing Howard is big, bit having max and AJ guarding the hoop, add Simmons to that soon, plus 3 guys who can ball-hawk is just plain better than what we had last year defensively. We are already seeing how it all fits together and this will keep us in games (like Fairfield) where our shooting is a hot mess.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23378
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-19-17 01:07 PM - Post#236943
In response to Streamers
Losing Howard is not big. He was a totally replaceable guy. I liked Howard, but if losing Howard is crippling, the program has major problems. Losing Ibby was big. Losing Rosen was big. You get my drift.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
11-19-17 01:53 PM - Post#236945
In response to 10Q
From my 1 game watched (Navy), Antonio is interesting on defense. He has thick arms and body. I think it discourages opponents - he can hold his ground physically. He also got his arms out well in passing lanes. That said, Navy's guards didn't seem to be the best guards we'll see - so I can't tell if it will carry through to higher level competition with faster and taller guards.
I can see the potential that he is a positive defender relative to other guards we have trotted out in recent years.
|
