palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 10:06 AM - Post#248566
With 20 assists against Cornell, Penn surpassed last year's assist numbers with 4 games to go. Look at this progression in assists to turnovers from Jerome's last year to Steve's 3rd year:
'14-'15: 329 assists, 419 turnovers
'15-'16: 380 assists, 373 turnovers
'16-'17: 401 assists, 358 turnovers
'17-'18: 403 assists, 315 turnovers
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23199
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 10:09 AM - Post#248567
In response to palestra38
Sweet!
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3580
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-19-18 10:25 AM - Post#248568
In response to 10Q
Interestingly whats changed the most is the number of assists. If we average 10 TO's a game over the last 4 we will end up in the range of the last two seasons. What's dramatically increased is the number of assists. We have very few possessions where we are looking for someone to create in the last 10 seconds. I don't know if this stat is tracked but I would be willing to bet our number of assists in the last 10 seconds of the shot clock is higher than it's been and fairly high relative to other teams. I can remember at least 4 assists on Saturday night that came late in the clock.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
The Progression 02-19-18 10:53 AM - Post#248569
In response to PennFan10
Well, then you have to look at the second part of the Progression, i.e., the number of shots and FTs we are attempting, which shows that we have many more chances with the ball while making far more assists and consistently reducing our TOs:
'17-'18: 1564 FGA (with 4 to go), 520 FTs
'16-'17: 1602 FGA, 417 FTs
'15-'16: 1606 FGA, 508 FTs
'14-'15: 1379 FGA, 495 FTs
The one aspect where there has been no progression is our FT shooting, which is consistently subpar. If we hit our FTs, just imagine.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8141
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 11:20 AM - Post#248571
In response to PennFan10
What's dramatically increased is the number of assists. We have very few possessions where we are looking for someone to create in the last 10 seconds.
I think this is key, and vital against teams like Harvard that are strong defensively. This is another case of the numbers telling us where to focus our eyes and letting observation explain what the numbers suggest. In this case, I see a couple of things: dramatically improved ball movement and motion away from the ball on offense. Also note that substitutions and unusual lineups do not seem to disrupt this much. SD had a reputation for being very shooter-centric in his offensive philosophy, but he has these guys going to the rack and getting to the line more and more because it fits with the personnel. Give the kids huge credit for execution as well. All of our guards in the current rotation are seeing the floor quite well these days. I have not checked, but I will guess that defensive boards and steals are up and this is getting them opportunities on the break that create assists.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 11:30 AM - Post#248573
In response to Streamers
" I have not checked, but I will guess that defensive boards and steals are up and this is getting them opportunities on the break that create assists."
Don't know if steals stats show anything, but Defensive Rebounding is way up and part of the Progression:
'17-18: 756 DR (4 games to play), 157 steals
'16-17: 706 DR, 181 steals
'15-16: 713 DR, 146 steals
'14-15: 628 DR, 153 steals
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-19-18 11:52 AM - Post#248575
In response to Streamers
I mostly agree with you, Steve. Our ball movement on the perimeter and inside are both vastly improved. If we hit our outside shots more, our assist numbers would be even better. We are still too streaky and inconsistent there. I don't really see a lot of assists on the break. We have a tendency (Darnell, Betley, Antonio) to take it right to the basket and end up with very difficult, contested drives rather than dish or bring it back out. Sometimes we finish, but against Harvard we are more likely to miss or get rejected.
Frankly, the whole discussion of our season comes down to how we do against Harvard. We have kind of stumbled into a rare opportunity to win the league through a combination of improved play, opponents' injuries (esp. Yale, also Harvard), unexpectedly dramatic decline due to graduation (Princeton), a talented but unfortunate opponent who is better than its record (Dartmouth), and a rising program with a potential freshman superstar whom we can't guard (Brown).
In other words, circumstances might allow us to steal the title ahead of schedule. Next year we'll probably be even better, but will only be one of a handful of contenders and certainly not the favorite. The Ivy Tournament will probably not be at the Palestra next year either. This is a chance to get back to the NCAAs that we may not see again real soon.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:09 PM - Post#248578
In response to LyleGold
In my view, that is a far too pessimistic view that ignores the entire premise of this thread, that there has been a progression of improvement by Donahue teams which is not simply a function of having his recruits dominating the numbers. So far, he has 2 recruits with major impact---AJ and Betley. The remainder of the improvement is by guys who he inherited or transferred. So it isn't just a function of luck that Penn has improved nor (in my view) is this a one year window. I also disagree how you view the Harvard game as one where we got soundly defeated by a much better team. Again, we were shorthanded and missed shots we normally make (that were wide open) and it was a game late.
But we'll see a lot this weekend. I am very optimistic about what we can and will do.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:12 PM - Post#248579
In response to palestra38
It's better to look at rate stats for these metrics. Possessions played by year:
2017-18: 1892 poss so far
2016-17: 1896 poss
2015-16: 1929 poss
2014-15: 1777 poss
Thus the counting stats need to be adjusted a bit to account for the fact that the 2017-18 team has played roughly two more games worth of possessions than the 2014-15 team. Also, I'd ensure that you've pulled out the non-DI game (Penn didn't play one in 2014-15), and I'd consider the fact that the 2014-15 schedule was much more difficult than this year's.
That's not to say that there hasn't been massive improvement in some areas, including some of the ones that you mention:
TO Rate: 23.6%, 19.4%, 18.6%, 16.9% from 2014-15 to today
Def Rebounding Rate: 70.9%, 69.5%, 70.6%, 77.1%
But the rate at which Penn gets to the line is actually lower than it was in that final year under Jerome and the assist rate on baskets has basically been even (54.9%, 55.2%, 56.5%, 56.1% from 2014-15 to today).
Other than the TO Rate, the offense really hasn't progressed at all under Steve. The final year under Jerome, offensive efficiency ranked 291st. Over the three years under Steve, it went to 259th, 206th and 250th this year.
The defense, though, has shown steady improvement: 250th in the final year under Jerome to 226th, 133rd and now 50th today. What's odd is that Penn hasn't really maintained a calling card during that improvement. It's been driven by dropping the FT Rate allowed and 3PT attempts allowed in year one, then both of those regressed the next year and instead the improvement was bolstered by a high block rate, great 2PT D and high TOs, then those regressed this year and now it's driven by high DR% and very low 3PT % shooting allowed.
The Progression is definitely there, but it's been a defensive one, driven by oddly inconsistent factors.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:24 PM - Post#248584
In response to mrjames
I would think the increased possessions (which of course lowers the assist rate) are in and of themselves a measure of improvement, especially with the reduction in turnovers.
We have 2 major weaknesses on offense---inconsistent outside shooting and terrible FT shooting. But we're getting much better shots, and when we hit them (and it can be a variety of players who do it), we win. Someday, we'll have the players who improve on those two weaknesses , but I don't think the efficiency numbers (which are adversely affected by those two weaknesses) reflect how much better the team moves the ball and gets good shots.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8141
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:32 PM - Post#248585
In response to mrjames
Mike - Thanks for making the necessary adjustments. That helps, and I fully concede the point about the schedule. I have to point out though, that the 'inconsistency' is a function of the personnel we have, the skills they have developed, and the way they are being used. Defensive rebounding is a great example. Max and AJ are cleaning up there together. Offensive efficiency looks bad because they are not consistently converting the good looks the ball movement is getting them. Oh, and the FT% isn't helping either. One thing we can all agree on is that this team will go as far the defense takes them.
This past weekend has confirmed my suspicion that this team is hitting its stride at the right time and they are better than we think they are right now. I share P38's optimism about the Harvard game. Now that I have seen Harvard play a few times, I think a healthy and more rested Penn team playing at home can and will handle the Crimson. I'm actually more worried about them looking ahead on Friday and getting upset by a spoiler DC team.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:40 PM - Post#248586
In response to palestra38
Why would increasing possessions lower the assist rate? The assist rate is a rate and is irrespective of the number of possessions (technically shots, when it comes to assist rate, but same either way).
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 12:51 PM - Post#248589
In response to mrjames
more possessions = more shots which lessens the assist rate.
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-19-18 12:55 PM - Post#248591
In response to palestra38
Guys, just be clear how you use your terms. One of you means total number and the other means percentage.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-19-18 12:59 PM - Post#248592
In response to palestra38
no, that's not how that works, bud. Each shot theoretically has a chance to get an assist.
I mean if you hold the assists fixed and then change the denominator upwards for possessions, then sure. But beyond being tautologically right, you haven't added much.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3765
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
02-19-18 01:01 PM - Post#248593
In response to LyleGold
I don't see how total possessions would lower the assist rate, as you would expect to see assists to rise proportionately with possessions.
However, the contention that increasing possessions is, in itself, an indication of offensive improvement is a hypothesis that intuitively makes some sense to me.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 01:06 PM - Post#248595
In response to palestra38
That's my point. Penn's assist rate is lower this year, because what your counting stats don't consider is that there are more made buckets (opportunities) to get an assist where Penn failed to record one. An assist rate is the percentage of made baskets with an assist. The number of made baskets is irrelevant for rate statistics.
The number of opportunities (made baskets) is very relevant for comparing counting stats, though. Which is what you need to control for in your analysis of those counting stats.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 01:07 PM - Post#248596
In response to Jeff2sf
That indeed was what I was doing. As I understand it, while I was touting the number of assists increasing, Mike was saying that our possessions are up and thus our assist rate has not increased by much, if at all. My initial point was that assists were up and turnovers down, reflecting improvement. I don't think that changes from the fact that the assist rate has not increased--the fact that we have more opportunities should reflect an even impact on assists and turnovers if we were at the same level, but turnovers are down (and unless I am missing something, the turnover rate is down as well). So whether you look at it from sheer raw numbers or rate, it shows improvement.
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-19-18 01:07 PM - Post#248597
In response to Jeff2sf
That's only true for shots that are the direct result of passes. When Darnell takes the ball to the left on a one on three and ignores the two guys on his right, his shot has no chance of an assist and little chance of going in.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32685
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-19-18 01:09 PM - Post#248598
In response to LyleGold
While this is an aside only, I think Darnell has been great...except when he thinks he should take a 3. I don't mind his drives--he makes most of them.
|