Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects        (Topic#21759)
rbg 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 10-20-14
08-06-18 07:58 AM - Post#259964    

The Stepian website lists its Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects for next season and 3 Ivy Leaguers make the list.

They have Brown's Desmond Cambridge #5, Harvard's Seth Towns #6 and Yale's Jordan Bruner at #7. Cornell's Matt Morgan is in the Honorable Mention section at #15.

In terms of their NBA roles, Cambridge is listed as an explosive microwave scorer, Towns is a shot-making/shot-creating wing, and Bruner is versatile two-way forward.

https://www.thestepien.com/2018/07/29/10-mid-maj or...

 
GoBigGreenBasketball 
Masters Student
Posts: 555

Age: 46
Reg: 05-19-16
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-06-18 11:40 PM - Post#260001    
    In response to rbg

I like that the talent is distributed across the league.
"...no excuses - only results!”


 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-13-18 10:54 PM - Post#260243    
    In response to GoBigGreenBasketball

Just looked at Tovik's projections. He projects likelihood of making NCAA tournament:

Harvard 44%
Yale 39.5%
Penn 10.9%
Princeton 10.4%
Brown 0.5%
Cornell 0.3%
Dartmouth 0.1%
Columbia 0.1%

That's 105.8%

Does that imply a 5.8% likelihood of 2 bid Ivy?

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
08-14-18 07:28 AM - Post#260249    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Anyone who puts Penn only .5% ahead of Princeton is not basing the prediction at all on last year's performance. I expect Princeton to start turning it around this year. I don't expect them to contend. But that's fine---I prefer getting no respect.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-14-18 09:32 AM - Post#260252    
    In response to palestra38

I assume Yale's % is so high because they are hosting. Otherwise I fear the Jordan Bruner effect!

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-14-18 05:18 PM - Post#260273    
    In response to PennFan10

Seems so.

Torvik has Harvard (#72) ahead of Yale (#114) which is ahead of Penn (#139) and then Princeton (#149).

Torvik appears to give weight to returning minutes (and possessions), adjusted for injuries. As previously discussed in this forum, last year's graduating class was not very consequential, except for Penn which graduated Wood and Foreman (Cornell, of course, ended up losing Gettings). Harvard returns over 99% (which has to be among the highest in the nation), and Yale returns over 92%, which must include Bruner. With Bruner and Mason, Yale was possibly the league's 2017-18 favorite. I's assuming that Princeton is being recognized as only losing Bell and maturing its freshmen.

Yes, Yale at 39% must credit home court advantage as Torvik's overall gap between Harvard and Yale outsizes the 5% gap in tournament probability.

So, yes, Bruner and Home Court seem to be heavily weighted by Torvik. Back to my original point, I've gathered that the 105% aggregate odds to participate in the tournament assumes Harvard loses in the tournament, possibly to Yale in New Haven, but still makes the field as an at large selection (!).

Thus, a reason posited for a tournament in the first place - 2 bid Ivy - is actually well served by Yale hosting this year's version. Wonder if the Ivy League decision makers took this into consideration?

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-14-18 05:23 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 07:30 AM - Post#260283    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

I wasn't questioning the Harvard prediction--they have to be considered the favorite (although their best player has been cloaked in Belichick-type secrecy since his injury). Yale is the home team for the playoff (I still think they have to go single admission on each game, but that is a different thread). It's Princeton I don't get at all. They were out of the playoff last year, graduated their second best player and the freshmen were not ready (if they ever will be). Meanwhile, Penn has ready replacements for Foreman--it's the loss of Wood that appears to be a question, but it has 2 redshirted players who are of a very high recruiting background. And the frontcourt will be dominant in this league. So I feel pretty good about things.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-15-18 10:16 AM - Post#260287    
    In response to palestra38

Certainly, Princeton has upside. Stephens and Cannady are all league, maybe even first team, and the Tigers supposedly have the best freshman in Llewellen to replace Bell, so the variability applies to the deep freshman class and the center position. A lot of options and upside.

Penn has experience, depth and two bigs, but With its graduates and redshirts, Penn has some question marks.

Yale is much more than a sleeper. If Bruner is healthy, then Atkinson, Reynolds and the bevy of talented guards makes the Eli's very very good.

Brown is the sleeper. Can score and run, will need young frontcourt to develop. On any given night ....

I see Cornell without Gettings as a one man show, Dartmouth as rebuilding, and Columbia as reeling and possibly heading to another coaching change.

Certainly I'm biased, but if Towns is healthy the question becomes how a healthy Aiken affects this team. A lot of upside this year and next. Kirkwood (a 6'7" guard) could become a starter by year's end.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
08-15-18 10:20 AM - Post#260288    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Well, I just bought 2 seatbacks for Penn-Harvard up there and we'll see how competitive Penn will be. I think you're overlooking just how good its frontcourt will be this year.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 11:19 AM - Post#260293    
    In response to palestra38

Who is Yale other than the team Penn beat by a few TD's last March? Outside of HCA does Bruner really make them that much better? They can't play Bruner, Atkinson and Reynolds at the same time. Atkinson was an upside surprise that mitigated the loss of Bruner to some degree. And Mason never played last year so "they were the favorites" is pointless discussion. The "bevy" of talented guards includes some young guys that saw no time at all.

Princeton lost a lot of games last year that one guy does not fix.

Penn lost Foreman and Wood and returns everyone else including Goodman and Donahue. Those are much more known entities than Yale's unproven younger guards.

I don't see the spread between Yale and Penn as that big. And I am not sure I pick Yale on a neutral court. There are far fewer questions about Penn and Harvard and what they return than there are for Yale and Princeton based on unproven player projections.

Edited by PennFan10 on 08-15-18 11:19 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 12:03 PM - Post#260295    
    In response to PennFan10

Really? I think you're missing a few things:

1. Yale returns Oni, Phils, Copeland, and Swain as guards. This "bevy" of guards is neither young nor unproven. This could be the best and deepest backcourt in the league. These 4 averaged 43ppg last year, and certainly this backcourt more proven than Woods and backups Goodman and Donahue who averaged 15.1 ppg among themselves. Even if you add Betley (to offset Oni), that's only 29.3 ppg. Oni and Phils were all-league in 2018. Guard talent decisively leans to Yale over Penn.

2. Without Bruner and Mason, Yale beat Penn (with Foreman and Wood) in New Haven and lost by single digits in Philly. Atkinson got in foul trouble in the tournament at the Palestra - a uniquely hostile environment. With a healthy Bruner and maturing sophomore Atkinson, Reynolds becomes a weapon instead of a misplaced backup center (his role in the tournament game, as Atkinson was limited to 21 minutes). At Yale, Atkinson scored 17 points on only 6 shots (no misses!) in 33 minutes. There is a chance that Bruner can be effective on Brodeur. He is strong, long and athletic - think Kuakamensah.

Thus, I think - and likely so does Torvik - that the things unproven about Yale are whether Bruner is healthy and how much Atkinson improves. Penn's uncertainty revolves around its backcourt.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-15-18 12:04 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 12:31 PM - Post#260298    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

"Without Bruner and Mason, Yale beat Penn (with Foreman and Wood) in New Haven and lost by single digits in Philly."

Do you write talking points for Trump? Penn lost by 1 on a bad call and bad coaching decision at Yale after leading the entire game and Yale lost at Penn by 9 in a game Penn led all the way. Then, Penn trounced them in the playoff. Of 120 minutes of play, Penn trailed maybe in 2 minutes or so. To you that becomes the summary above? LOL.


That being said, you are making far too much about Penn losing 2 guys while still having a 5th year senior guard to step up and possibly one of the two best swingmen in the league, not to mention the best offensive center.

Long way to go, of course, but I like Penn's chances this year. They got to the title a year early.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-15-18 12:45 PM - Post#260300    
    In response to palestra38

All I cited were facts. What you quote is factual.

As for a judgment, I was astonished to read that someone believe's Yale's backcourt is more "unproven" than Penn's.

I never diminished Brodeur.

However, since you think Penn has the best offensive big man, one of the 2 best swingmen in the league and a phenomenal backcourt, then how could Torvik be so wrong?



 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
08-15-18 12:54 PM - Post#260303    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Because he underrates Penn's talent and overrates both Yale's (to a degree) and Princeton's (to a large degree).

Harvard clearly has the best talent, but I don't know that they either have the best coach or scheme for that talent.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-15-18 01:31 PM - Post#260306    
    In response to palestra38

Torvik? How could he be so wrong? Well he is basing his opinion, apparantly, on what Yale could have been last year vs what they actually were. How could he have been so wrong last year projecting a healthy Mason? Jordan Bruner has to prove he can actually stay on the court for the better part of a season, which he has yet to do. I don't think there is any comparison between he and AJ Brodeur, who has never missed a game. Bruner can't hold anybody in check from the bench and it's not clear how strong he will be in return. I get that you like Yale a lot more than Penn, but your evaluation makes it seem like Yale has so much more than Penn coming back. Penn pretty much dominated Yale last year and returns 6 of their top 8.Now Yale, with the same guys,are going to be that much better? I don't see it. I expect Yale to be better, perhaps much better. But I don't really expect Penn to go backwards by much, if any. But I could be wrong and Torvik may be right. I wouldn't give his opinion any more credibility just because he publishes it.

I see the Harvard story, obviously. Though I am very interested in the health of Towns and Aiken. And how do they play the level of defense they have played with the combinations they will have out there?

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
08-15-18 01:51 PM - Post#260307    
    In response to PennFan10

Having seen the games, there was a significant difference in talent between Penn and Yale, though Atkinson is Penn's kryptonite.

I can't see how Yale can be selected as essentially a co-favorite with Harvard.


 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-15-18 02:50 PM - Post#260311    
    In response to TheLine

I guess this could be an interesting year.

Harvard, Yale, and Penn are universally assumed to be competitive (e.g., headed to the tournament). What I see is that Harvard and Yale will be improved, while Penn is the most likely of the three to go sideways (KP 123 again?). As a Harvard fan, hopefully that's 50 spots behind the Crimson. I guess we on this thread disagree on whether Yale slides in between Harvard and Penn. As pointed out, the availability of Bruner is the wild card. He scares me as an opponent, assuming he's healthy. A true rim protector can influence things in this league. I truly feel he can take both Brodeur and Chris Lewis out of their games as he is just as long and [was] a better jumper.

Last year, Cornell grabbed the 4th tournament slot riding 2 stars. Without Gettings, I see Princeton heading to New Haven, possibly with a challenge from Brown. I hear that Princeton's Llewellyn is a game changer and being underestimated. Brown is lightning in a bottle, so who knows. Both teams are built around some great scorers (e.g., Brown 102, Princeton 100). It would be fun to see Cornell, Columbia or Dartmouth make a run, but don't count on it.

Once at the tournament, we'll see if HCA can propel Yale to the bid, whether Harvard can close it out as the likely favorite, or whether we witness an upset.

Of course, there's a lot to happen before March. We'll see and hope that everyone remains healthy.



 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 03:43 PM - Post#260314    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

  • HARVARDDADGRAD Said:
I guess we on this thread disagree on whether Yale slides in between Harvard and Penn.


I think the question is more whether Yale is on par with Harvard or whether they are at least a couple of notches behind.

Rating Yale as a co-favorite, which is what Torvik is doing, assumes a whole lot of good things happening for Yale that I don't think is warranted. You want to still slot Yale between Harvard and Penn? Fine by me though I'm not sure about it - it might be overselling Yale and underselling Penn.

Harvard is the favorite headed into the season IMO.

For what it's worth, Princeton's KP rating was better than Yale's last year. And Princeton doesn't have a bare cup board. Penn is returning the 2nd best player in the league plus 3 other starters. So how does Torvik have Yale's odds so high? I'm not buying it.


Edited by TheLine on 08-15-18 03:51 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 03:49 PM - Post#260315    
    In response to TheLine

I don't think that Torvik is considering Harvard and Yale as equals. He has Harvard at #72 and Yale at #114, that's a large 44 spot difference. The 44% Harvard vs 39.5% Yale is Torvik's handicapping of the HCA effect of holding the tournament at Yale this year. You may actually be suprised by Torvik's valuation of HCA.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-15-18 03:49 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
08-15-18 03:57 PM - Post#260317    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Torvik's numbers on likelihood of winning the IL

Harvard 44%
Yale 39.5%
Penn 10.9%
Princeton 10.4%

That's making Yale an equal to Harvard. No other way to read it. Seems way more than a HCA but maybe he massively values it since his Yale numeric ranking is closer to Penn/Princeton than Harvard.

And Yale is going to leap from 197 to 114? Based on what?


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
08-15-18 03:59 PM - Post#260318    
    In response to TheLine

Last year doesn't count.

And again, HCA only is actually "home court" when your fans are the vast majority.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
08-15-18 04:02 PM - Post#260319    
    In response to palestra38

It does serve as a baseline - both for teams and players.


 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 04:14 PM - Post#260320    
    In response to TheLine

Torvik is providing the % chance of winning the tournament, not the regular season title. Torvik predicts regular season as:

11-3 Harvard
9-5 Yale
8-6 Penn
8-6 Princeton
6-8 Brown
5-9 Columbia
5-9 Cornell
5-9 Dartmouth

HCA involves more than just fan count. It is the only possible explanation for giving Yale that high a chance to win the tournament. Similarly, it seem to be the only explanation I can think of as to why Torvik gives 9-5 Yale almost a 4x greater chance at winning the tournament when compared to 8-6 Penn/Princeton

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-15-18 04:14 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-15-18 05:36 PM - Post#260323    
    In response to TheLine

Just so I understand, The Omniscient Torvik has the following:

Harvard #72 (KP 144 LY)
Yale #114 (KP #197 LY) Nothing to do w HCA
Penn #139 (KP #125 LY)
Princeton #149 (KP #190 LY)

So HYP all make historic jumps of 40-80 spots but Penn regresses 14 spots? And that seems credible to you?



 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-15-18 06:34 PM - Post#260327    
    In response to PennFan10

Absolutely.

Yale and Harvard lost no one and are adding talent. Penn lost 2 of its top 6 rotation players.

According to 247, Harvard has the best recruiting class in the league by a large margin, while 247 ranks Penn and Yale's classes similarly. Princeton brings in the best player in exactly the right spot - to replace Bell, their only key loss to graduation.

Yale is also adding a Junior 6'9" 3* impact player who was in the running for ROY and is a potential DOY. Harvard gets Aiken back (1st team all ivy/ROY) and Tommy McCarthy. Penn gets back some 'redshirts.'

Yes, players can improve with experience, but there is no basis for thinking that any team will benefit uniquely.

I also remember reading that Harvard's second half KenPom was much higher than the first half.

Harvard, Yale and Princeton are likely to improve over last year, Penn less likely.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
08-15-18 07:56 PM - Post#260336    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

You have no clue what you are talking about. Penn had 3 recruits who match up with anything Yale and Princeton brought in who either didn't play last year or barely played. Penn will be as deep as any team in the league. Penn did not lose anyone in the 1st or 2d team all-Ivy. It will be enjoyable repeating next year.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 08:16 PM - Post#260337    
    In response to palestra38

Sure, whatever you think. Nothing else apparently matters to you anyway.

Maybe the recruiting services and Torvik have it all wrong .... maybe they don't.

Penn did lose Foreman, who was honorable mention. Penn lost more than any other team (except possibly Cornell with Gettings).

So, who are these guys who never played and what is the basis for their being impact players?




Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-15-18 08:21 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-15-18 08:24 PM - Post#260338    
    In response to palestra38

It must have really hurt losing 2x to Penn last year. Wow. That's some crimson colored analysis.

Tommy McCarthy? Did you seriously put Tommy McCarthy ahead of ANYONE? He is gonna be 3rd or 4th string on his own team. Keep smoking what you are smoking.



 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-15-18 09:16 PM - Post#260339    
    In response to PennFan10

Last time we saw McCarthy he led the Crimson to a 37-13 first half lead over the Quakers up in Cambridge. He was certainly ahead of the Penn players that day, as a freshman.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 08-15-18 09:17 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-16-18 06:38 AM - Post#260348    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

That was a long time ago. But keep thinking that Penn lost more than anyone else and will regress. They will find another designated shooter and have another senior guard to pick up the slack. Meanwhile, they return 4 of 5 starters, most of their bench and have 2 redshirted highly recruited sophs before we even look at freshmen. This was to be the first year they competed for a title.

 
Streamers 
Postdoc
Posts: 2853
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
08-16-18 07:17 AM - Post#260349    
    In response to palestra38

I’m a little surprised to see one of these summer prediction threads get so heated. Personally, I have never found that national media ever really gets the Ivy predictions right (aside from league coaches polls) and nobody has made a case that there is a lot of separation among the top 4 this year. We should all be optimistic going in.

For my part, I would be more likely to think Penn will crack the top 100 if Jelani had no gotten hurt again.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-16-18 07:18 AM - Post#260350    
    In response to palestra38

I love it.

Penn returns the 2nd best player in the league last year. I'd say he's odds on favorite to be the best this year. 3 other starters return, including one of the best shooters in the league and another who I think is likely to be the best guard on the defensive end.

Princeton is returning Cannady and Stephens. Sure, they under-performed but they have talent. KenPom had them above Yale.

And both Penn and Princeton are odds-on worse than than Yale?

Maybe Torvik is looking at Yale's shiny W-L record?

I'll take the under on Yale.


 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3331

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
08-16-18 09:45 AM - Post#260357    
    In response to TheLine

I, for one, am delighted to see the Harvard fans and the national media underestimate Penn.

And I'll tell you what I'm really looking forward to: as Harvard keeps bringing in high school players with gaudy recruiting ratings, and continues to underachieve the resultant expectations, how will the fans and media explain this?

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5285

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-16-18 09:59 AM - Post#260358    
    In response to TheLine

Hi all -

Figured this was as good an entry point as any to step away from my summer hiatus (sort of - more on that at the end).

Rather than try to answer all of the different questions/topics of debate one by one, I just want to share some thoughts about preseason rankings.

1) ACTUAL PERFORMANCE: Preseason rankings have a ton of predictive ability. Even those that are based on subjective means like the AP poll ( Preseason AP Poll Performance ). But those that are based on objective rankings of all 1-351 teams are even more on point ( Objective Preseason Model System Performance).

Of course, on a team-by-team basis, there can be huge misses, but if you look at it from a macro level, it's pretty impressive what a limited amount of information can produce when it comes to an accurate prediction.

2) WHY DO THEY EXIST? - Aside from fodder for rabid fans to digest, they actually serve an important ratings purpose. It used to be that most ratings systems "floated" early in the year - assuming all teams were equal to start - and thus took a long time to settle. From a Bayesian perspective, though, ignoring our priors (we kinda know that UNC is gonna be better than UNH) leads to unnecessary uncertainty early on. So, by establishing an objective preseason benchmark (and one that's pretty darn accurate to boot), we can more strongly credit teams that register close losses to great teams early and more strongly debit those teams that register narrow victories over the dregs of D-I.

3) WHAT DO THEY DO? - As has been mentioned here, they roll forward player performance, add in new player expectations, sprinkle in some team trends (plus some minor secret sauces by system) to spit out an objective offensive rating. Defensive rating tends to be more based on team style, continuity and general historical trend and is the less accurate of the two. It's important to note that the objective preseason rankings (Hanner, KenPom, Bart Torvik, etc.) do NOT involve the producer getting involved in any subjective way. So, it's not "Torvik thinks" so much as it is "Torvik's empirical model says."

4) PRESEASON RATINGS AREN'T STATIC - At this point last year, Harvard was looking at a full year of Bryce Aiken and Tommy McCarthy as the PG depth chart, Yale was going to be led by Makai Mason and Jordan Bruner, Dartmouth was going to have Evan Boudreaux. And so on...

Some of these systems will account for further player movement (Bart did along the way), some won't. We never survive October and November without some MASSIVE losses as a league, so these will assuredly change before tip off in November.

5) BELL CURVES ARE THICK AROUND THE MIDDLE - When I used to do detailed projections, my targeted miss was anything better than +/- .1000 in Pythag. At the top and bottom of the curve, that can mean the difference in 50ish ranking spots. Around the middle, that rises to about 80ish. Given that we often have a lot of teams around the middle, it takes a BIG rankings difference to imply a significant difference between two teams.

Hopefully, the above was helpful. I wasn't terribly surprised by Bart's initial cut.

Harvard lost nobody off a team that had the best conference adj efficiency margin and highest slope to its performance start to finish. Add to that players returning from injury and a strong recruiting class, and the modest increase over its stretch run performance seems right.

Leaving aside subjective expectations, Penn makes sense if you understand the model. When the model looks at Foreman and Wood, it sees about 41% of Penn's performance above replacement offensively going out the door. Bart's estimates of the ability of Penn to replace that production are quite strong, actually, but sum total the offense and defense get trivially worse.

Princeton and Yale are the same stories - strong, returning answers offensively drive the expected ORAT up, model generally favors long-run trends defensively so some improvement (regression to mean) boost them each there.

Not going to go through the rest, except to say that I expected Brown to be a little more ahead in 5th of 6th-8th.

Now to return to my comment about my hiatus from the top. My wife and I are about to have our third child, which is incredibly exciting. Between #dayjob and #dadlife, something has to give. Covering the league the way I'd want to cover it (checking in with folks around the league, watching a bunch of games from across the league, booting up the code), just doesn't seem like it will be possible - at least in the short run. So I'm going to power down the Twitter feed and my active participation on these boards for this season. I'll still be checking in from time to time, and I hope to get back to covering the league in the future. But I need to be realistic about my time, and this seems like it has to be on my cut list.

I'll still be watching, and if we can survive the usual devastation in October and November, it could be a HUGE year for our league!

-Mike

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-16-18 10:29 AM - Post#260359    
    In response to mrjames

Other than Princeton, I agree with you. They had 3 players who could play at this level and win last year and one was graduated. They are weak in the middle and for them to take a huge step up, it requires freshman play equivalent to the play of upperclassmen on Harvard Yale and Penn. So I just don't see them anywhere but in a fight for 4th with Brown.

I don't think anyone doubts that Harvard has the best talent. That has not translated yet to championships, however.

Congrats on the child-to-be and family life. My kids are now in their late 20s and I need some good Ivy basketball to fill that gap.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-17-18 11:11 AM - Post#260423    
    In response to palestra38

And we have our first (and possibly only) Mr James sighting. Thanks for these thoughts, they provide a helpful framework for the data. Understandably, we all gravitate to some part of your analysis. I was drawn to this:

  • mrjames Said:

Of course, on a team-by-team basis, there can be huge misses, but if you look at it from a macro level, it's pretty impressive what a limited amount of information can produce when it comes to an accurate prediction.




And subsequently was reminded that Penn had 8 players score more than 20 pts in a game last year. They return 6 of those players as well as most of the players on a top 75 defensive team. HarvardGrad, for whatever reason, has focused his entire Penn analysis on what the Quakers lost while talking exclusively about what every other team brings back.

Harvard is easy because they, theoretically, bring back everybody.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-17-18 03:50 PM - Post#260455    
    In response to PennFan10

My point was simple:

Harvard brings everyone back + Aiken + top recruiting class
Yale brings everyone back + Bruner.
Brown brings everyone back.
Princeton loses Bell and Brennan, but adds the league's top recruit to replace Bell.
Penn loses Foreman and Wood.

I see that Penn fans believe replacements are available, but - other than Bell/Princeton - no other presumed top 5 Ivy squad has to replace a starter, let alone 2 of its top 6 players.

Those are facts. By March, it may not mean much, but for Torvik's analysis it apparently did.

That's what I've been trying to communicate.




 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-17-18 05:06 PM - Post#260460    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

You mean those are the facts you want to focus on? There are other facts you have chosen to ignore.

Is it possible all of that happens and those teams are still not better than Penn? That's the other side of the coing. Yale loses Mason and they were not good without him. They lost Bruner, again, and there is not telling if he will be healthy for and entire season for the first time. Will that be enough to close the significant gap between them and Penn/Harvard? Brown bringing back everyone isn't enough to win a full Ivy slate and the ILT. They dont' have near the depth Harvard and Penn do.Is it possible Towns isn't recovered and won't play? Aiken? Also, Harvard only gets to play 5 guys at a time and I believe Penn was the team that had 8 guys with 20 pt games right? Did Harvard ever have that with that talent? Nope. Penn brings back 6 players who have scored 20+ in a game and a top 75 defense. No other Ivy has that.

Why is it that for you the new players at Harvard are "a top recruiting class" and for Yale it's great players but for Penn, the players on their roster are "replacements" or "redshirts"?

Your facts support your story. There are more than just your facts available.



Edited by PennFan10 on 08-17-18 05:07 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-17-18 05:53 PM - Post#260462    
    In response to PennFan10

I'm not predicting anything. I'm merely pointing out what each team has returning. Yes, I'm assuming that those players on the roster are healthy. Can't possibly do anything else at this point.

I can't believe that you have an issue with those facts, given the facts that:

Harvard's defense rated higher than Penn's (#55 vs #72). Yale's will improve dramatically if Bruner is healthy.

Eight 20 point scorers is a meaningless statistic. Penn's Non-conference SOS was 7th in the league at 249. Remove last few local contests and I believe it was over 300 while Penn's bench was scoring. Easier to find 20 point scorers vs Delaware St, etc. than against 77th ranked non-conference schedule. 4OT 100pt games do help meaningless stats like that alot.

Again, you have faith in your bench and trainer's room. Good for you.




 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-18-18 12:03 AM - Post#260467    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

“Yale’s defense will improve a dramatically”

Seems a lot like a prediction and not much like a certain fact.

“I’m merely pointing out what each team has returning”

You’ve done well pointing out what Harvard, Yale and Princeton has returning. You have only pointed out what Penn has lost. Outside of Harvard Penn has the deepest bench in the league and it’s not close. There is not nearly the dramatic difference in returning experience you portray.



 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
08-18-18 08:53 AM - Post#260471    
    In response to PennFan10

It seems that the point you are making is that I'm assuming that Bruner is signifcantly additive for Yale while on the other hand I am not giving much credit to Eddie Scott and Jared Simmons.

Here's why.

First, because no one knows who is and will remain healthy, I believe we can only assume they all are (except for Jelani Williams). Certainly, if Bruner is unavailable again this year it will leave Yale short again. Note though, that Atkinson, Reynolds and Oni still provide Yale with respectable Ivy League rebounding capabilities.

In their freshmen seasons, Scott and Williams contributed, but nothing like Bruner. As guards, it could simply have been because Foreman and Wood were ahead of them. On the other hand, as a freshman, in 22 minutes per game, Bruner averaged over 10ppg, 6.6 rpg, and 2 blocks per game. I believe he led the league in blocks per minute. A 4* recruit, he was in the running for ROY, DOY, and might have received some level of all-ivy recognition.

Defensively, a healthy Bruner will be a significant and - yes - dramatic addition. He has a flair for intimidating blocks and exciting dunks. Yale has an abundance of guards, but without Bruner Yale was left to rely on the freshman Atkinson and a versatile but less athletic Reynolds. In the tournament, Atkinson got in foul trouble very early, severely impacting Yale's ability to handle a larger Penn squad. Interestingly, the knock against Yale in past years has been its lack of depth. If Bruner is healthy, that won't be an issue this year.

This stands alone and has nothing to do with Scott and Williams. They may be awesome, but unlike Bruner, they have yet to evidence that on the court.
This is consistent with Bruner being a top 150/200 recruit, and choosing Yale over Clemson and other Power 5 offers. Scott and Williams may be just what Penn needs, but they were not considered at that level coming out of HS.

If I seem to be impressed with Bruner, it's because I was impressed watching him two years ago when he could hold his own against the league's top bigs. I may be equally impressed when Scott and Williams get their chance.



 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-18-18 11:38 AM - Post#260472    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

I respect your opinion and Mike's opinion a lot so went back to see if I was missing anything. I think I did.

Trey Phills - I haven't been so impressed with him because he hasn't been very good in the games I've seen him play. Maybe it had less to do with him and more to do with the defense played against him because his overall numbers are better than I thought they'd be. I'm still not totally sold on him but he's a plus Ivy starter based on numbers.

I haven't seen enough of a healthy Jordan Bruner to evaluate. Healthy Bruner - if that is a possibility - would be an All-Ivy caliber player. And that would give Yale at least 4 better than average starters. Such a strong lineup would move players down in the pecking order where they rightfully belong - for example I think Reynolds is stretched as a 30 minute starter but would be a good asset as a 15-20 minute role player.

I still expect Yale to underperform. Bruner has a tricky injury that has a good chance to limit his effectiveness. As much as I feel I underestimated Phills, he does have a habit of not showing up for games against stiffer competition. I believe Frosh and untested players have large uncertainty bars, it seems that Yale's are optimistically priced (I have no idea whether the optimism is warranted, I'm not an expert). And - biggest reason - Jones is a mediocre coach.

All in all, I guess I'll stand with putting Yale on the Princeton-Penn tier instead of closer to Harvard's tier. Brown may surprise and join them. And while Harvard should be the favorite, I don't consider them to be an overwhelming one.


 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
08-18-18 12:37 PM - Post#260474    
    In response to TheLine

HVG

That’s not at all the point I am making. My point is tha Penn, with just the healthy players returning, is better than Yale with their healthy players returning. If Bruner manages to stay on the court for a full season, that may change things but not 80 KP spots. Princeton lost the DPOY in Bell and have no one to match up w Penn’s bigs. Harvard is the favorite IF Towns AND Aiken are back fully healthy.

Penn is the reigning Ivy Champ with 6 of 8 rotational players returning. 3 teams aren’t jumping 10-50 spots past them from 20-60 spots behind them in my opinion. Penn should be in the mix for a repeat title.



 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 3561

Reg: 02-04-06
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
08-18-18 01:59 PM - Post#260475    
    In response to mrjames

"I'll still be checking in from time to time, and I hope to get back to covering the league in the future. But I need to be realistic about my time, and this seems like it has to be on my cut list."

I'm hurt that you'd put enjoying your growing family ahead of kibitzing with a querulous bunch of obsessives. Where are your values?

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
09-10-18 09:13 AM - Post#261072    
    In response to SRP

Busting Brackets out with 2018-19 predictions:
1. Harvard
2. Yale
3. Penn
4. Princeton
5. Brown
6. Cornell
7. Columbia
8. Brown

Author shows deeper familiarity than the standard prognosticator, and his logic echoes recent posts here (coincidence or 'research'?). However, he does make some mistakes and interesting observations:
- Dartmouth: rebuilding;
- Columbia: has Columbia 7th with Faulds incorrectly assumed to be returning. Loves Smith/Adlesh, but concerns about frontcourt and defense;
- Cornell: loss of Gettings or would have been competitive to make tournament;
- Brown: picked 5th largely on incorrect statement that Brown has only 1 player listed as 6'6" or above. Lauds backcourt;
- Princeton: author believes that Cannady/Llewellyn + Stephens (incorrectly listed as a guard) will get Princeton into the tournament. Concerns about young froncourt (Much, Desrosiers) but no mention of Aririguzoh or Gladson);
- Penn: projected 3rd because although balanced with depth, author believes that the better teams in the league will be improved over last year whereas Penn has to replace two top scorers;
- Yale: projected to finish 2nd based on Bruner's return, versatility of Reynolds/Oni + strong backcourt. No mention of Atkinson at all;
- Harvard: favorite based on talent and continued improvement of those who were underclassmen and will now be juniors. In possibly his most insightful (but probably incorrect) observation, notes lack of a true point guard and suggests that Spencer Freedman could eventually start in that role.

Overall, the author concludes that after a youthful 2017-18 the league will be dominated by upperclassmen. This experience/improvement is cited for Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Brown. Has Penn replacing key losses and moving sideways, but not declining.

Key assumption: players such as Bruner, Towns and Aiken are healthy.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 09-10-18 09:17 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
09-10-18 09:48 AM - Post#261075    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Does he list Brown 2x or is that your typo? Assume Dartmouth is 8th.

As an aside and to clarify: Penn does not lose its top 2 scorers (Betley and AJ) only 2 of the top 6.

 
AntiUngvar 
Sophomore
Posts: 161

Age: 63
Loc: New York City
Reg: 07-23-18
09-10-18 02:14 PM - Post#261082    
    In response to PennFan10

Dartmouth, in the eight hole.


 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
09-10-18 08:12 PM - Post#261092    
    In response to PennFan10

My bad - yes, Dartmouth was picked 8th

Here's the link:
https://bustingbrackets.com/2018/09/09/ivy-league -...

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
09-10-18 08:18 PM - Post#261095    
    In response to PennFan10

I was repeating from the article which says Penn is losing 2 of its 4 double digit scorers. Understand how my language could be construed different ways.

 
AntiUngvar 
Sophomore
Posts: 161

Age: 63
Loc: New York City
Reg: 07-23-18
09-11-18 08:47 AM - Post#261102    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Thank you for your efforts in researching and posting this information; seems the writer put quite a bit of himself into the essay, too!


 
rbg 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 10-20-14
09-16-18 07:21 PM - Post#261344    
    In response to AntiUngvar

Busting Brackets looks at Top 10 major recruits for 2018-2019.

https://bustingbrackets.com/2018/09/16/ncaa-baske t...

- 10. Noah Kirkwood – Shooting guard – Harvard

6-foot-7 versatile guard Noah Kirkwood will be one player to keep an eye on for the Harvard Crimson. Head coach Tommy Amaker was busy on the recruiting trail with his 2018 class, securing the Canadian native over the likes of George Washington, Tulane, and Pittsburgh.

Kirkwood ranks 128th overall in the 2018 recruiting class and is arguably the best Canadian prospect after turning in a productive high school career. He attended Ashbury College High School in Ontario, where he led his team to a record of 40-0. During the 2017-18, he attended Northfield Mount Hermon (MA) where he averaged 15.3 points, 6.7 assists, 5.9 rebounds and 1.7 steals per game while shooting 38 percent from 3-point range.

His versatility will be something to keep an eye on for Harvard. He was also a member of the U-16, U-17 and U-19 Canadian national team, winning both a gold and silver medal during his prep days. All that experience should pay dividends for the Crimson in the Ivy League and if it heeds positive results, look for Kirkwood to make the jump to the NBA.

- 9. Jaelyn Llewellyn – Point guard – Princeton

The Harvard Crimson aren’t the only Ivy League team securing top recruits. The Princeton Tigers secured a solid addition in point guard Jaelyn Llewellyn, a player who could be a Day One starter for them in 2018-19.

Llewellyn chose the Tigers over Power 5 schools like Florida, Clemson and his father’s alma mater of Wake Forest to better his backup plan after basketball. The 6-foot-2, 160-pound point guard finished ranked 99th in the country after his senior season at Virginia Episcopal School. While his commitment took some by surprise, his impact in the Ivy League shouldn’t be taken as one when he performs at a high level.

Llewellyn has sneaky athleticism as well as a smooth floor game that will compliment the Princeton offense well. As another playmaker for the Tigers, Llewellyn will be one player teams will have to key in on or he’ll make them pay. His growth with Princeton in 2018-19 will be something to keep an eye on. If all goes well, he could be another Ivy League player to make the jump to the league.

 
PennFan10 
PhD Student
Posts: 1935

Reg: 02-15-15
09-17-18 08:49 AM - Post#261364    
    In response to rbg

Seriously? All of a sudden we have not just one, but two, recruits who will "...make the jump to the NBA"? No one does it in forever and now two HS recruits are going to lead the Ivy League to the promised land of NBA talent?

I am sure these two are fine players but, I'll take the other side of "jump to the league" bet.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
09-20-18 11:00 AM - Post#261459    
    In response to PennFan10

Bart Torvik rankings for Harvard, Yale and especially Penn moving upwards:

#67 Harvard
#110 Yale
#117 Penn
#136 Princeton

Anyone know why there is movement now?

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 3923

Age: 55
Reg: 07-07-09
09-20-18 11:41 AM - Post#261464    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

He may have all these teams somewhat higher than they should be. Harvard's ranking only makes sense if both Towns and Aiken are healthy.

The relative tiers are what I said they should be earlier in the thread.

Where is Brown? I like them as a sleeper pick.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 19773

Reg: 11-21-04
09-20-18 12:17 PM - Post#261466    
    In response to TheLine

So do I--I think they may be better than Princeton this year. They have 2 of the most electric players in the league. But I think the projections are based on the rankings of incoming freshmen for Princeton, something that failed as a predictor last year.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
09-20-18 12:18 PM - Post#261467    
    In response to TheLine

#67 Harvard - Conf W-L 11-3; Bid 45.3%
#110 Yale - 9-5; 37.8%
#117 Penn - 9-5; 15.6%
#136 Princeton - 8-6: 9.9%
#219 Brown - 5-9; 0.3%
#246 Cornell - 5-9; 0
#258 Columbia - 4-10; 0
#261 Cornell - 4-10; 0

Yes, the low predictions for Brown surprise me as well.

Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 09-20-18 12:19 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
rbg 
PhD Student
Posts: 1035

Reg: 10-20-14
09-20-18 12:20 PM - Post#261468    
    In response to TheLine

Looking at Bart Torvik's numbers from the end of 2017-2018 and the predictions for 2018-2019.

End of 2017-2018

Penn 111
Harvard 128
Princeton 178
Yale 197
Columbia 216
Cornell 248
Brown 260
Dartmouth 303

Prediction 2018-2019 (as of 9/20/18)

Harvard 67
Yale 110
Penn 117
Princeton 136
Brown 219
Cornell 246
Columbia 258
Dartmouth 261


 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 5285

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
09-20-18 01:38 PM - Post#261472    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Bart changed his formula slightly to completely eliminate garbage time (determined by Bill James' safe lead algorithm) from his ratings. That caused minor changes to the baseline for projecting this year and thus some fluctuations to what the model spits out.

 
weinhauers_ghost 
PhD Student
Posts: 1075

Age: 58
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
Re: The Stepian: IL has 3 of Top 10 Mid-Major Prospects
09-20-18 03:05 PM - Post#261477    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

  • HARVARDDADGRAD Said:
#67 Harvard - Conf W-L 11-3; Bid 45.3%
#110 Yale - 9-5; 37.8%
#117 Penn - 9-5; 15.6%
#136 Princeton - 8-6: 9.9%
#219 Brown - 5-9; 0.3%
#246 Cornell - 5-9; 0
#258 Columbia - 4-10; 0
#261 Cornell - 4-10; 0

Yes, the low predictions for Brown surprise me as well.



You've got Cornell in there twice and dropped Dartmouth. That wasn't intentional, was it? I didn't know it was possible to be relegated out of the Ivies.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
PhD Student
Posts: 1202

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
09-20-18 03:34 PM - Post#261481    
    In response to weinhauers_ghost

Oops.
Second time I’ve omitted Dartmouth
Torvik has Dartmouth 8th

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

2737 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: 0.808 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 07:20 PM
Top