Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 6 of 7 « First<4567
Username Post: all that happened        (Topic#20939)
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3759

Reg: 11-22-04
01-11-18 04:19 PM - Post#243048    
    In response to Jeff2sf

and the reason I do this is it's so stark. Just like on the OT board when Colin states A, you and others say well actually A isn't true because of X, Y, Z, and then he keeps saying A.
I don't follow every stupid post, but it seems Colin-esqe and appropriate to call Palestra on his $ h i t.

 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2270

Reg: 11-23-04
01-11-18 04:26 PM - Post#243049    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Some Penn fans obviously know a lot more bball than me. You beat my guys and then you can still find so many things wrong with your players.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18624

Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 04:27 PM - Post#243050    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Your predicted best Penn starting lineup this year:

Foreman
Goodman
Betley
Jones
Brodeur

Your statement about Woods:

Antonio Woods was a highly mediocre basketball player. Maybe he'll get better. I hope he does. There's very little in his past to support that.

There is no way we are net better on D with Matt Howard out. Antonio is not that good.

Your statement about Rothschild:

No, sorry, PennFan, it's been proven that Max Rothschild's previous play was mediocre FROM AN EFFICIENCY POV. More minutes doesn't solve that.

This is what I said before the season started:

Having a veteran backcourt of Woods and Foreman might be a critical advantage in the Ivy race. We haven't had 2 guards with real on the ball skills since Toole-Begley and neither of them was a classic PG who could break down defenses. Rosen played with Belcore, certainly not a guy who could penetrate, same with Ibby (Grandieri?). Even Jordan played with Langel--a great combo but not 2 guards who could break down defenses. So this could be our most difficult to defend backcourt since Allen/Maloney. Betley then becomes critical for scoring off the pass, and I think he's up to that task. This works especially if those guys put such pressure on the ball on defense that their height cannot be used against them.

I like it.

I can go on and on. The problem is that you are all over the place once your initial view is disproven.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18624

Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 04:28 PM - Post#243051    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Yo Jeff. I disagree with Colin on everything under the sun politically, but if you're going to go after him, have the balls to state your opinion on that board where he posts his opinions rather than making snide comments about him here. Here, keep the snide comments to me.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3759

Reg: 11-22-04
01-11-18 04:31 PM - Post#243053    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
Yo Jeff. I disagree with Colin on everything under the sun politically, but if you're going to go after him, have the balls to state your opinion on that board where he posts his opinions rather than making snide comments about him here. Here, keep the snide comments to me.



That's exactly what I'm doing. I hadn't previously needed to explain why I was calling you that.




 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3759

Reg: 11-22-04
01-11-18 04:34 PM - Post#243055    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Antonio Woods was a profoundly mediocre player two years ago. On that, everyone agrees. He progressed to a below-median starter. I said there's little in his past to suggest he would improve... I would hope that would indicate his stats. I did ultimately predict him to improve. I was using some of his non statistical data to do so. I don't think this is inconsistent. But again, I've had no problem acknowledging when I'm wrong. You not only can't acknowledge when you're wrong, you can't even acknowledge me acknowledging it.

Just say it, why is it so hard, Colin?

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 3759

Reg: 11-22-04
all that happened
01-11-18 04:37 PM - Post#243056    
    In response to Jeff2sf

As for Max, this is even more of a miss. This is just a flat out miss by me. I hate playing two bigs, I think it clogs up all the spacing but Max got off to a terrible start and has steadily gotten better. He's our worst starter and in the bottom quartile of starters in the Ivies on offense, but I didn't think he could become an above 100 ORat player.

Defensively, the two of them (Brodeur/Max) do some nice stuff by soaking up rebounds.

Also, Mike, feel free to insert some deliciously tasty on-off splits if you got em.

 
Cvonvorys 
Postdoc
Posts: 2169

Loc: Princeton, New Jersey
Reg: 10-11-06
Re: all that happened
01-11-18 05:00 PM - Post#243063    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Dearest Penn Board Posters,

So if Penn finishes 12-2 in the Ivy League and splits its final two Big Five games, what do you figure their KenPom rating is? So is Penn as good as our current rating or as good as our potential rating?

Oh, and by the way, Penn is now a 15 seed in the South Bracket playing Duke in the first round according to ESPN Bracketology:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketba ll/bracke...

All my love,
Colin

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5236

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 05:31 PM - Post#243068    
    In response to palestra38

Over the past month, Princeton's played like No. 70 nationally, which is about where I expected them to be. Remains to be seen whether that was a mere, random hot stretch or a new normal.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 18624

Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 05:43 PM - Post#243070    
    In response to mrjames

I can't say I watched them in those games, but Donahue knew precisely what their weakness was and attacked it.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11304

Reg: 12-02-04
01-11-18 05:49 PM - Post#243072    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:
Over the past month, Princeton's played like No. 70 nationally, which is about where I expected them to be. Remains to be seen whether that was a mere, random hot stretch or a new normal.



How do you figure? The only team it beat during that stretch ranked higher than Penn was USC, but as noted that victory comes with a major asterisk.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5236

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 06:28 PM - Post#243077    
    In response to penn nation

Great tool for this...

http://barttorvik.com/trankslice.php?year=2018

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11304

Reg: 12-02-04
01-11-18 06:39 PM - Post#243080    
    In response to mrjames

I ran it for all games since December 1st, and Princeton is nowhere near #70.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5236

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 06:47 PM - Post#243081    
    In response to penn nation

Past month - i.e. 12/10 -1/10. Or choose any date around there after the GW game.

That’s roughly the same time last year that Princeton started its completely 180 that lasted the rest of the season, though diff circumstances.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11304

Reg: 12-02-04
01-11-18 06:57 PM - Post#243082    
    In response to mrjames

OK.

Princeton did play well on its West Coast trip, but again that ranking is inflated because of the USC game. Not that beating USC's subs still isn't something, but it sure as heck is not beating a Top 50 or Top 60 team.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5236

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
01-11-18 07:14 PM - Post#243083    
    In response to penn nation

Princeton’s game scores over the past month have been:
80, 89, 95, 72, 35, 91, 44.

Yes, USC is the 95, but that game score would still be over 80 even if you put them outside the Top 100 (around 90 depending on where you place USC). And they’ve got three others at 80 and above, which is at-large caliber.

 
westcoast 
Freshman
Posts: 87

Reg: 03-08-16
01-11-18 07:28 PM - Post#243084    
    In response to penn nation

  • penn nation Said:
Princeton did play well on its West Coast trip, but again that ranking is inflated because of the USC game. Not that beating USC's subs still isn't something, but it sure as heck is not beating a Top 50 or Top 60 team.

Haha. USC only played five ESPN Top 100 players that day - Chimezie Metu, Elijah Stewart, Jordan McLaughlin, Shaqquan Aaron, and Charles O'Bannon, plus two very good 3-4* recruits in Jordan Usher and Nick Rakocevic. That team would be a runaway favorite for the Ivy League champ, and could easily be a Top 50-60 team. A full-strength USC team is probably a Top 20 team (Sweet 16 last year with everyone back).


 
Tiger69 
Postdoc
Posts: 2270

Reg: 11-23-04
01-11-18 07:43 PM - Post#243086    
    In response to westcoast

PennNation is right. Beating USC was no big thing. We're overrated -- we couldn't even beat Penn.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 11304

Reg: 12-02-04
01-11-18 07:50 PM - Post#243087    
    In response to westcoast

  • westcoast Said:
A full-strength USC team is probably a Top 20 team (Sweet 16 last year with everyone back).




Hold yer horses there, bub. Right now it's a middle of the pack Pac-12 squad.


 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2396
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: all that happened
01-12-18 06:08 PM - Post#243254    
    In response to Jeff2sf

  • Jeff2sf Said:
It was basically this page http://boards.basketball-u.com/showtopic.php?tid/2...

Felt too over the top to me.

This page towards the bottom was also pretty nausea inducing.

http://boards.basketball-u.com/showtopic.php?tid/2...

When you're fundamentally the same team, there's no need to talk about buy in and wanting it more and intangibles and all that. It by implication seems to indict players from last year. There is no way that swapping Matt Howard for Max and Antonio is a net positive. He's much better than both of those players on offense and defense. But they're getting this credit not extended to him because we're 20 spots higher in KenPom?



Thanks Jeff - I looked too, but still mostly see excited fans and a few over exuberant ones. I think some of it you read into it honestly.

A few things I want to say:

1) We would ABSOLUTELY be a better team if Matt Howard was still here. Imagine one of Foreman/Woods being starting PG, Betley at SG, Howard at SF, Brodeur at PF and Max at C?

2) We didn't trade Howard for Max and Woods... we traded Howard and Donahue/Goodman For Max and Woods. I think def and rebounding from the later and based on ratings, I prob like them better on offense too. In general, team play looks better optically. I'd still rather have Howard on the team of course if that was Option C.

3) Woods ORAT isn't 105... unless you count D3. Via Kenpom he is 101.6.

P38 - love your passion, but good def and 101.6 ORAT on 16/17% usage is not a special player. I really like Woods, am pumped he improved and hope it continues, and think is a really good player. To help understand the distinction, Betley is a special player (see advanced metrics, eye test, 1st half of Princeton, etc. for reference).

Jeff - as you've acknowledged (appreciate that's), your timing here sucked and that's why you got backlash. Especially because your feedback was really for 1 or 2 posters.

Now, let's hope the guys come out and play great to beat Cornell and Columbia!


 
 Page 6 of 7 « First<4567
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

2207 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: 0.289 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 02:20 PM
Top