penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21187
Reg: 12-02-04
|
12-07-17 12:21 PM - Post#239490
In response to Quakers03
With this current team, we are going to have a tough time winning consistently unless we hit threes at a decent clip.
We have AJ and Max who can score from up close. But no-one else other than our good to decent 3 point shooters can score (not at an efficient rate, at any case). And part of the issue here, in addition, is that we don't get to the FT line that much--and when we do, it's no guarantee that this will result in points.
So besides Betley, SD will have to look for the hot hand from distance between Wood, Donahue and Jones.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-07-17 12:22 PM - Post#239492
In response to Quakers03
Last year was just as bad for AJ and his left hand. He used it less than a handful of times (pun intended). He just doesn't use his left hand to shoot. It's going to really limit his already high ceiling until he commits to using it regularly.
Lafayette figured it out 10 pts in and didn't go for any shot fakes and overplayed his right side. he didn't score again until late in the second half, when he....went left (bit with his right hand).
|
SteveDanley
Sophomore
Posts: 102
Age: 39
Reg: 02-25-12
|
12-07-17 12:23 PM - Post#239493
In response to Quakers03
Steve, what are your thoughts on AJ and his left hand? I don't remember it being this egregious last year, but maybe it was? It's almost like he's completely afraid to use it. When you're going up with the right on a clear lefty layup, something isn't right.
It's weird, because I noticed the same thing last night. It was really obvious that he was coming back to finish with his right.
Last year, I thought he finished pretty well with his left, so I made a note of it.
I'd really have to sit down with more game tape to understand, but there's a difference between making a move designed to go left, and making a move designed to go right and being comfortable countering to the left.
I wonder if AJ is struggling because as scouting reports are getting better, they're making him go to more counters and he's most comfortable in the first set of moves (right or left).
Does seem like opposing Ds are throwing a lot at AJ -- including doubles and sitting on certain moves -- and there's a bit of an adjustment there.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-07-17 12:27 PM - Post#239494
In response to penn nation
With this current team, we are going to have a tough time winning consistently unless we hit threes at a decent clip.
Not sure I agree with this. We are the best rebounding team in the IL and are middle of the pack in 3pt %. Last night we hit 21% of our 3's in the first half and led by 9. Our defense only gave up 24 pts in the first half. Having two bigs seems to be working in that it is limiting teams to fewer shots and giving us more shots (we lead the league in offensive rebounding).
Not hitting 3s at a decent clip is a limiting factor vs a disqualifying one and it just amplifies our need to do everything else well to win, doesn't mean we can't win conistently....which is exactly what Asia said a few posts ago. Certainly our success will be defined by the games where we don't shoot it well and still find a way to win (see Monmouth).
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-07-17 12:28 PM - Post#239496
In response to AsiaSunset
Individual DRAT stats are poor indicators. I think even Mike James would admit that they reflect more on the team effort as opposed to the individual's effort.
Any defensive metrics that try to get to an individual's contribution are going to be challenged, primarily because defense is a team game, and much of how an individual performs well or poorly on defense is reflected in measurable outcomes that can often accrue to others.
Just to level set, here's what's in each defensive metric:
Individual DRAT - Based heavily on a team's overall defense, it assumes that players don't have a differential impact on forcing non-steal turnovers or forcing opponents to miss shots that aren't explicitly blocked (or otherwise put - that the team contributes equally to those outcomes). Where the individual DRATs will differ from the team DRAT is based on the number of DREBs, STLs and BLKs (stops) that a player produces. This obviously favors bigs as the best defenders, and there is a lot of debate about whether that's actually wrong (it might not be given that layups are the most efficient and defensively controllable shot).
I don't love individual DRAT. It has value in so much as stops are important and garnering stops is a defensive skill. Let's not understate that. The problem is, unlike assists in offensive rating which allow for the distribution of positive outcomes across the parties directly involved, if the on-ball defense is tight, forcing a player to throw up a shot that is easy to block or a pass that's easy to steal, that on-ball defender gets no credit for the outcome. In fact, the best on-ball defenders being assigned to the highest usage opposing players means that the best on-ball defenders explicitly WON'T be in line to get stops, even if they forced most of them.
Defensive Win Shares - Pretty much the same as Individual DRAT. Use Individual DRAT to figure out a player's marginal defensive value (in points) and then divide by the number of points that equal a win.
Lineup-Based DRAT - This is my preferred method, because it is based on actual defensive outcomes in points not in blocks, steals and rebounds. It also allows for understanding style (when this big is on the floor, the opponents shoot 20/50/30 layups/2PTJ/3PTJ, but when this big is off, opponents shoot 40/20/40). So it gives you a much better sense not only of true defensive performance, but how those outcomes are achieved (which can help for tracing back to what is random success/failure of an opponent and what is forced success/failure of an opponent).
Negative here is sample. Need a TON of sample to feel good about the all-else-equal nature of the analysis and the fact that randomness, which can linger for a while, has yielded to actual signal.
NONE OF THIS is a replacement for the great x/y coordinate-based and situational-analysis (PnR D, post D, etc.) work going on. That being said, with proper sample, the lineup-based DRAT does a nice 80/20 job of getting you to the right answer.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3770
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
12-07-17 12:29 PM - Post#239497
In response to SteveDanley
I imagine that part of what we're seeing with AJ is the challenge of adjusting to a new position.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21187
Reg: 12-02-04
|
Lafayette
12-07-17 12:38 PM - Post#239499
In response to PennFan10
But you prove my point. We can't depend on IL teams to shoot FTs as badly as Monmouth. That is what I meant when I said consistently. That is the other way we can win, of course--to play shut down defense. But our defense isn't fantastic and we are a somewhat foul prone team to boot.
With this current team, we are going to have a tough time winning consistently unless we hit threes at a decent clip.
Not sure I agree with this. We are the best rebounding team in the IL and are middle of the pack in 3pt %. Last night we hit 21% of our 3's in the first half and led by 9. Our defense only gave up 24 pts in the first half. Having two bigs seems to be working in that it is limiting teams to fewer shots and giving us more shots (we lead the league in offensive rebounding).
Not hitting 3s at a decent clip is a limiting factor vs a disqualifying one and it just amplifies our need to do everything else well to win, doesn't mean we can't win conistently....which is exactly what Asia said a few posts ago. Certainly our success will be defined by the games where we don't shoot it well and still find a way to win (see Monmouth).
Edited by penn nation on 12-07-17 12:39 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-07-17 12:44 PM - Post#239502
In response to PennFan10
I'd be a bit careful about the rebounding stats. Penn is quite good at rebounding, but it's important to note where the rebound opportunities are coming from, since the odds of grabbing a rebound differ by shot.
Penn has allowed a LOT of free throws at this point. Free throws are the easiest shot to grab a defensive rebound. Second easiest are misses off jumpers. Opponents are only rebounding 25% and 29% of 3PT and 2PTJs respectively, and they are shooting below average from both areas. When that regresses, that will mean fewer rebounding opportunities from those areas.
Penn is doing a nice job on rebounding at the rim (66.7% DREBs), so I think they'll remain an above average rebounding team on the defensive end all year. But there's some natural decline in that number that I'd expect to see. My wager is that Princeton's probably the best defensive rebounding team in league play, but I'd expect Harvard and Penn to be very good as well.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-07-17 12:45 PM - Post#239503
In response to penn nation
But in the Monmouth game we played shut down defense at the FT line, no?
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
Lafayette
12-07-17 12:51 PM - Post#239504
In response to mrjames
I'd be a bit careful about the rebounding stats. Penn is quite good at rebounding, but it's important to note where the rebound opportunities are coming from, since the odds of grabbing a rebound differ by shot.
Penn has allowed a LOT of free throws at this point. Free throws are the easiest shot to grab a defensive rebound. Second easiest are misses off jumpers. Opponents are only rebounding 25% and 29% of 3PT and 2PTJs respectively, and they are shooting below average from both areas. When that regresses, that will mean fewer rebounding opportunities from those areas.
Penn is doing a nice job on rebounding at the rim (66.7% DREBs), so I think they'll remain an above average rebounding team on the defensive end all year. But there's some natural decline in that number that I'd expect to see. My wager is that Princeton's probably the best defensive rebounding team in league play, but I'd expect Harvard and Penn to be very good as well.
Good points and noted, however Penn is the still the best offensive rebounding team in the IL. There is no doubt they are fouling too much. Some of the OR is the number of 3's they take which creates longer and likely random rebounding stats, but I would think most of those are just effort and size. Max is the leading offensive rebounder on the team I believe.
Interesting to note that Yale leads the league in 3pt attempts (3rd in make %) and Penn is second (5th in make %). Harvard is 3rd in attempts and last in make %.
Edited by PennFan10 on 12-07-17 12:52 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-07-17 01:02 PM - Post#239506
In response to PennFan10
Besides playing 2 bigs for a decent chunk of time, the other note on defense is the difference in how we play on ball screens. Last year we soft hedged everything and didn't switch and if it was a shooter, the on ball defender went over the top otherwise went under the screen and we allowed the ball handler to penetrate. This year we are hard hedging ball screens and switching almost everything. That's a big reason why Antonio gets a lot of minutes I believe. SD sees him (and is on record as saying so) as guarding 4 spots on the floor. Max can also guard multiple spots and that seems to have helped this team defensively.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3583
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-07-17 01:10 PM - Post#239507
In response to Silver Maple
I imagine that part of what we're seeing with AJ is the challenge of adjusting to a new position.
I have seen this comment a few times and frankly I don't understand it. What's different about AJ's position on the Penn offense and how does it affect his ability to go left?
On offense I see AJ getting the ball in pretty much the same spots he did all of last year. The only difference is he has the ball on the perimeter in the corner/wing instead of at the top of the key.
The big difference for AJ is on defense where he has guarded some of the more athletic 4's we play and he has excelled at it. Playing defense against a predominantly face up player/mobile wing is much different than playing against a physical 5 who stays in the paint. AJ's on ball defense has been outstanding from my perspective. It's likely he has an adjustment as a help defender and that may well have affected his block rate (though he seems to be getting his groove now) and it may also affect his rebounding numbers but I don't see much difference on the offensive end at all. He has taken (and missed) more 3's this year but that's not a position thing, that's something SD wants him to do.
I really don't see the big adjustment on offense that many here have assumed.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Lafayette
12-07-17 01:24 PM - Post#239509
In response to PennFan10
I see Penn as 3rd in OREB% in the Ivy behind Yale and Brown (though all Ivy teams are in the bottom half nationally, so I don't expect that to be a differentiating stat). Penn may very well end up as the top Ivy team in OREB% at the end of the day, if it starts making more FTs. Penn's rebounding an absurd percent of 2PT Js (39%), but the layup rebounding rate is believeable at 40%. Ultimately, I expect Penn to be a good rebounding team on both ends of the floor.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Lafayette
12-07-17 01:38 PM - Post#239511
In response to PennFan10
I imagine that part of what we're seeing with AJ is the challenge of adjusting to a new position.
I have seen this comment a few times and frankly I don't understand it. What's different about AJ's position on the Penn offense and how does it affect his ability to go left?
On offense I see AJ getting the ball in pretty much the same spots he did all of last year. The only difference is he has the ball on the perimeter in the corner/wing instead of at the top of the key.
The big difference for AJ is on defense where he has guarded some of the more athletic 4's we play and he has excelled at it. Playing defense against a predominantly face up player/mobile wing is much different than playing against a physical 5 who stays in the paint. AJ's on ball defense has been outstanding from my perspective. It's likely he has an adjustment as a help defender and that may well have affected his block rate (though he seems to be getting his groove now) and it may also affect his rebounding numbers but I don't see much difference on the offensive end at all. He has taken (and missed) more 3's this year but that's not a position thing, that's something SD wants him to do.
I really don't see the big adjustment on offense that many here have assumed.
You answered your own question above.. guarded some of the most athletic 4s. Now they get to guard him and his quickness is not as big of an asset. I also wouldn't trivialize where he gets to start with the ball but perhaps that impact is minimal. But which move beats a center vs which move beats a 4 is quite different. He may need more strength moves and less moves based on quickness.
Once again, I just want to point out this spacing is UNHOLY AND AN ABOMINATION AGAINST MAN.
Mike can you please post the on off with max and AJ numbers to soothe me because I can't take Max and his 97 ORat, clogging up the offense, making our 2nd best player play out of position, turnovering self...
unless I'm sure that he's helping our defense as much as I hope he is.
Edited by Jeff2sf on 12-07-17 01:39 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Okoro Dude
Senior
Posts: 309
Loc: Glen Mills, PA
Reg: 11-24-04
|
12-07-17 01:54 PM - Post#239515
In response to yoyo
With all deference to Steve, I vote we get the Archbishop Carroll coach down to practice to teach the big guys how to score and get fouled down low. Best I have seen at Penn in last 25 year in that regard.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
12-07-17 02:00 PM - Post#239516
In response to Jeff2sf
I'm not going to do it because I like the guys on this team and am fearful of upsetting some player's family relative, but it would be easy to write a strawman why some player other than Brodeur or Betley should have their minutes cut severely. Just like some argue that Sam Jones should be nailed to the bench.
But all the regulars serve a purpose and it's a good idea to blood Scott and Simmons now.
A good coach can figure out a role for a guy who has a really good outside shot that's difficult to defend. And I don't get arguments otherwise, despite the guy's shortcomings, because it's not like other guys on the team don't have shortcomings of their own.
Donahue didn't have much of a role for Foreman at the beginning of last year. He didn't have much of a role for Wood at the beginning of this year. So the argument that some guy doesn't deserve a role in the rotation because he doesn't have one now doesn't have merit.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
12-07-17 02:02 PM - Post#239517
In response to PennFan10
Everyone hit it on the head about switching roles and defenders. AJ's advantage last year was that he had space to move and has a very quick first move to the basket. He would make a lean at the end of his shot which stretched him further out - and made him even more unblockable by his defender.
Now there is an opposing center waiting to be a help defender. While AJ's defender would find it hard to block the lean, it actually makes it easier for the help defender b/c it is lower off the ground. Also, the help defender is less likely to foul because he can go after the block with less likelihood of hitting the body.
I'm not saying that this happens on every play, but AJ is forced to consider and compensate for it on every play when he takes things to the hoop. It would be much better spacing if Max was enough of an outside threat to draw his defender out and leave spacing for AJ to go to work. AJ is still very hard to defend one-on-one with space.
That's why I love it when we play out-of-conference and defenders give Max too much respect and don't give AJ enough.
. I imagine that part of what we're seeing with AJ is the challenge of adjusting to a new position.
I have seen this comment a few times and frankly I don't understand it. What's different about AJ's position on the Penn offense and how does it affect his ability to go left?
On offense I see AJ getting the ball in pretty much the same spots he did all of last year. The only difference is he has the ball on the perimeter in the corner/wing instead of at the top of the key.
The big difference for AJ is on defense where he has guarded some of the more athletic 4's we play and he has excelled at it. Playing defense against a predominantly face up player/mobile wing is much different than playing against a physical 5 who stays in the paint. AJ's on ball defense has been outstanding from my perspective. It's likely he has an adjustment as a help defender and that may well have affected his block rate (though he seems to be getting his groove now) and it may also affect his rebounding numbers but I don't see much difference on the offensive end at all. He has taken (and missed) more 3's this year but that's not a position thing, that's something SD wants him to do.
I really don't see the big adjustment on offense that many here have assumed.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
12-07-17 02:06 PM - Post#239519
In response to Penndemonium
One more comment - shooting with the right on a left hand layup can be effective on a given situation if you are beating your opponent with speed - you can get the ball under the arms of your opponent. That was a clear tactic of AJ many times last year - and it worked a lot.
That said, I agree with everyone's point that he may need to finish with the left more and take the foul.
|
T.P.F.K.A.D.W.
PhD Student
Posts: 1171
Loc: Our Nation's Capital
Reg: 01-18-05
|
12-07-17 02:12 PM - Post#239521
In response to Okoro Dude
With all deference to Steve, I vote we get the Archbishop Carroll coach down to practice to teach the big guys how to score and get fouled down low. Best I have seen at Penn in last 25 year in that regard.
Alas, I seem to recall Romanczuk was a pretty lousy free throw shooter, so he missed his share of 3 point plays.
Come to think of it, he'd fit right in.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12524
Reg: 12-07-04
|
12-07-17 02:13 PM - Post#239522
In response to Penndemonium
Agreed. However, on the one I am referencing, he spun beautifully and had no need to finish with his right as the left finish was wide open. It showed that he's just not comfortable finishing with that offhand.
|
