UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1122
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-09-19 01:10 PM - Post#275656
After watching Penn make more than half of their threes last night I decided to test the influence on their three shooting for the whole season. I looked at all the games and put the results into four buckets: below 30%, 30-34%, 34-33% above 40%. 34% is the college average.
Here are the results. Penn is 1-5 when shooting below 30%. They are 1-1 in the 3-33% bucket. They are 2-1 in the next bucket and 8-0 when making 40% or more. The average is 36.4% good for 80th in the country.
The bad news is that seven of their 40%+ games were in the first 10 games with only two in the subsequent 10 games. The average for the first ten was 39.9%, since then 32.9%, below average for college teams.
Let’s look at it another way. Above 40% means a victory against most anybody. They shot 43.8% against Villanova for instance. On the season they have done that nine times or 45%, so they have about that chance of beating Yale or Harvard. But in the second half of the season they have done it only twice, reducing their chanced to 20%. Puts into perspective what a hot Mike Wang has meant to this team. In the first half they were above 40% seven of ten games.
On the negative side they have shot under 30% five times and three of those have occurred in the second ten games. That means they have either a 20% chance or a 30% chance of losing to anybody in the Ivies.
In the simplest of terms, assuming the deterministic nature of their three shooting, this means the following for the remaining nine games. If they can regain their first-half performance they should go 6-2, losing to one bottom feeder and one to Yale or Harvard with one game up for grabs (think free throws). That should get them in the tournament.
If they continue as they have during the second half, -they go 2-3 with 4 up for grabs. Since they are 2-3 in up-for-grab games 4-5 is a distinct possibility. They would need a wildly-improbable tie breaker with Cornell to make the tournament.
These dynamics are easy to see. This is a decent defensive team that gives up a bunch of offensive rebounds – no distinctive competency there. They don’t win on D like last year’s team did sometimes. On offense, they have a great inside scorer and sometimes great three shooters. Outside of AJ nobody else can create off the dribble consistently. And, of course there is the free throw shooting, 335th in the country. Put simply, AJ keeps them in games and the three shooting determines the outcome. This team is a teaser because they have one great 3 shooter in Bryce and a bunch of others who vary from okay to great. There is enough among the ‘others’ to push the team’s performance into the stratosphere. But there is not enough offensive quality to overcome, either good defense or the normal bad night among the ‘others’. Next year with Ryan and a healthy Mike that should change.
Here’s the way I see it. This program has now proven it has a marvelous upside, the ability to play at very high levels against good teams and the possession of an effective pipeline of talent. The proof of that is the Championship last year and the Big Five breakthrough this year. Looks like we have one more year of waiting for the program to sustain very high-level play. In the meantime the team has six home games against only three road games to pull another rabbit out of the hat. This analysis suggests strongly that the rabbit will have to emerging firing and making threes.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8309
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-09-19 01:35 PM - Post#275659
In response to UPIA1968
Agree with all you said conceptually, but if I can nitpick a bit. Through the first 6-7 games, this team was great off the defensive boards. Then it all changed when Max & Mike went down. It's better now but not where it needs to be. Goodman and Antonio need to hits 3s as much as Wang - why? because it forces defenses to play up on them to a point where they can crate. We know they are both well capable of it. Aside from forcing Penn to shoot FTs, opposing coaches have a dilemma scheming against us. They can the 3's away on occasion, but ball movement can make them pay when Penn hits bunnies. They can pack the lane and double AJ, but that often backfires too. Penn really misses Darnell defensively, as well as Betley, but Jake has stepped it up and hit timely 3's as well. I think this team is - right now - at least as good as last year's team, if not better and will go 9-5 even if they lose tonight. They do need to manage the ball away from AJ when FTs matter though.
|
Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-09-19 01:48 PM - Post#275665
In response to Streamers
They only made 5 threes in the second half after hitting 8 in the first.
The obvious analytical conclusion is that the program is headed in the wrong direction.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1122
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-10-19 09:29 AM - Post#275781
In response to Chip Bayers
Saturday Penn shot less than 30% from three, a loss.
Why losses from that one factor? Three reasons: First Penn was a better defensive team last year. It ranked 72 in Pomeroy's adjusted efficiency against 126 this year. It could win ugly. That's the small reason.
The big reason is that the Ivies are waaay better. Last year the lead ranked 21st. This year 11th. The four Ivy losses come from teams ranked an average of 60 places higher this year than last. Penn is currently ranked 2 spots above last year and doing way worse in the league. We said in November that they would have to improve to contend. Well, they have on good days but are worse on bad days and they have more bad days.
The other reason is that Penn is playing more poorly during the Ivy schedule. It has more bad days in league play. Last year it peaked in league play. It's offensive and defensive ranks last year were 2 O and 2 D in the league. This year they are 5 O and 7 D. There is that defensive problem again.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32875
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-10-19 10:28 AM - Post#275784
In response to UPIA1968
It's also the schedule. We played Princeton shorthanded and then had the next 4 on the road. Only the Cornell loss was unforgivable, as we should have crushed them in the first half. Losing to Yale on road on a Saturday is not surprising, although disappointing.
The real season starts Friday--we have to hold serve at home.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21267
Reg: 12-02-04
|
02-10-19 11:35 AM - Post#275791
In response to palestra38
We have to win at least 3 out of the next 4 (but we have to beat Cornell, period). Otherwise we will probably be kvetching about the inane tiebreakers down the road, at best.
It's also the schedule. We played Princeton shorthanded and then had the next 4 on the road. Only the Cornell loss was unforgivable, as we should have crushed them in the first half. Losing to Yale on road on a Saturday is not surprising, although disappointing.
The real season starts Friday--we have to hold serve at home.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8309
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-10-19 12:07 PM - Post#275797
In response to penn nation
As much as I was against the Tournament, and still dislike it in current form, it sure make this time of year more interesting, on the court and on this board. Otherwise, we'd all be speculating on the probability of a Yale collapse and little else.
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-19 09:03 AM - Post#275847
In response to Streamers
As much as I was against the Tournament, and still dislike it in current form...
What form would you prefer? All eight teams qualify? Three team tournament with #1 seed hosting the final? Fourteen game double round robin tournament? That would be pretty radical.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8309
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-19 09:26 AM - Post#275849
In response to LyleGold
I would abandon the men-women same site requirement and do the 3-team format except that #2 would host the 1st game.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23482
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-19 09:57 AM - Post#275852
In response to Streamers
I'm ok with a tournament as long as the regular season champ gets the bid. The tourney winner gets an NIT bid.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-11-19 10:42 AM - Post#275855
In response to 10Q
I wouldn't change anything (except maybe location). I think the ILT is great for the game and the league.
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-19 11:59 AM - Post#275874
In response to Streamers
I would abandon the men-women same site requirement and do the 3-team format except that #2 would host the 1st game.
Sounds good to me.
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-19 12:00 PM - Post#275875
In response to 10Q
I'm ok with a tournament as long as the regular season champ gets the bid. The tourney winner gets an NIT bid.
You can't actually think the league would do that, do you? Hold a tournament for the NIT bid? I assume that's your ironic sense of humor.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23482
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-19 12:07 PM - Post#275877
In response to LyleGold
I don't think they would do it. But I think it would be better. We have lost one of the things that made us different and special. I value that.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-11-19 12:58 PM - Post#275890
In response to 10Q
There is no way it would be better, as an event. It's a suggestion that represents a way to go back to the old way. It lessens any idea of a tournament and rewards the 14 game regular season winner, which for many is preferable. Eliminating a tournament altogether is a much better version of this.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-19 01:58 PM - Post#275899
In response to PennFan10
before a tournament came, I couldn't really fight back against the idea that a tourney would reduce interest in the regular season.
I now find that idea almost absurd. The regular season is so much fun now.
I'd be open to considering the top 3 thing on fairness grounds. Just don't increase to 8 teams. Please.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32875
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-19 02:21 PM - Post#275902
In response to Jeff2sf
Certainly, for us, it is essential this year for our enjoyment. Last year would have been even better under the old system. How much fun it is depends on which team you root for in a given year.
A lot of us put stock in fairness and earning the title. But I admit that I am far more involved now than I would be if it were the 14 game tournament and we would be virtually eliminated.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1903
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-11-19 02:40 PM - Post#275907
In response to palestra38
Certainly, for us, it is essential this year for our enjoyment. Last year would have been even better under the old system. How much fun it is depends on which team you root for in a given year.
A lot of us put stock in fairness and earning the title. But I admit that I am far more involved now than I would be if it were the 14 game tournament and we would be virtually eliminated.
Yeah, it is definitely fairness vs. fan interest. I believe that the regular season champion deserves the bid for their body of work, winning a league which includes home-away against each team. The problem is that I think EVERY conference should work that way and the other conferences clearly aren't going to change. While I never minded the league doing it differently than everyone else (and never begrudged the league winner the right to go to the tourney as a result), I think the current ILT is a fine format. The three game format is OK by me too.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6415
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-19 02:56 PM - Post#275908
In response to palestra38
I’m a fan of the tournament and the discussions it produces, and I agree that 2-4 and 3 games back of Yale would pretty much mean a lost season for Penn under the old system. That said, we probably should acknowledge that the current standings/outcomes result from a world where everyone knows 4 get in. Who knows whether increased desperation in some cases or virtual elimination in others would have produced some different results already.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3590
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-11-19 03:53 PM - Post#275913
In response to SomeGuy
You mean like Bryce Aiken's desperation 3 to extend the game on Friday night?
|
