Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?        (Topic#22964)
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1842

Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
03-25-19 01:44 PM - Post#282673    

Will the IL have two teams representing both the men and the women in 2020 as well as winning 1 or 2 games at the Big Dance by some team? If there is ever a year for opportunity, it may well be next year based on Harvard's men team and possibly, the Tiger's women team. Additionally, if Oni returns or one of the other men's team steps up and either Penn/Harvard step up on the women's side is it possible?

Are the BB Gods finally merciful regarding injuries for several of the teams in 2020?

Looking a the past six years, it is questionable based on what has actually occurred:

Men
2019 Yake 14th Seed 77 RPI Lost by 5 pts
2018 Penn 16th 125 Lost by 16
2017 Prin 12th 58 Lost by 2
2016 Yale 12th 77 Won by 4/Lost 7
2015 H 13th 75 Lost by 2
2014 H 12th 32 Won by 6/Lost 17

For the women which face somewhat less competition, the seedings from 2019-2014 are 11th,12th,11th,8th,12th and 9th. The women did win one game as a 8 seed.

The stage is set for Harvard to jump thru the hoop and send a message that the IL will no longer be primarily a one and done league which may be helpful as to seedings in follow up years. Additionally, IL teams need to continue to improve in non-conference play which took place last year. Will it happen - who knows but the time is right to make a statement. Easier to theorize than actually accomplish a challenging task.

After watching the quality of both NCAAM and NCAAW teams, it will not be easy as many schools have a lot of talent and I am not sure if the Ivies are there yet but hopefully so. We see IL teams improving talent wise but so are many other teams.

Was the Yale team of 2019 more talented than Yale's 2016 team that won a game and battled Duke in the round of 32? Is the competition more or less challenging than 2016? Time will tell.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-25-19 04:37 PM - Post#282688    
    In response to bradley

The explanation for what you're seeing is that the Ivies have concentrated their peaks for 2019-20.

Harvard was hitting its peak in 2014 with Yale aimed for 2015 and 2016 and with Princeton geared up for 2016 and 2017. That created a seamless transition of really powerful Ivy winners that were all competitive. But after Princeton hit its peak, the talent in the league was pretty much all aimed at a 2019-20 peak. There were zero seniors on the 2017-18 All-Ivy first two teams (half were sophomores) and two-thirds of the All-Ivy first two teams (plus the injured returnees) were not seniors this year as well. We're going to have ~15 former All-Ivy honorees back next season - can't imagine there have been too many other points in our past where that's the case.

So, while the alternate peak strategy is a good way to consistently hit the 12-13 line, the concentrated peak strategy is the best way to go for multiple bids.

The story can't be about Harvard, alone, though. If Harvard is our only Top 75 team next year (or more generally, if there is just one Top 75 team next year) that's not going to get the job done. There need to be five or six Q1/Q2 win opportunities in league play - best accomplished by having multiple Top 75 teams, where the home/road is worth a Q1 and a Q2.

The other key ingredient to this recipe - I believe all of the Ivy Tourney teams from this year have access to an MTE slot next year (though I've only seen Harvard and Penn announced thus far - and Columbia from amongst the non-tourney crew).

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
03-25-19 05:04 PM - Post#282694    
    In response to mrjames

Penn doesn't have an MTE left next year but I believe they are playing in the Wooden Tournament as part of their normal schedule.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-25-19 06:05 PM - Post#282703    
    In response to PennFan10

Really??? That’s what I had originally presumed, because they seemed to be out of MTE slots on the rolling four year, but I was told that there are blocks of four years, such that you could play four years in a row, technically, if you played the last two of one block and first two of another.

I had been pushing that “play as part of schedule” idea a ton but kept getting rebuffed that it was against Ivy rules. That’s awesome that it’s not against Ivy rules... definitely worth it for building a resume.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
03-25-19 06:07 PM - Post#282704    
    In response to mrjames

I might be wrong. I don't have any direct information on this but when you originally posted it I thought I had heard it elsewhere.

 
westcoast 
Senior
Posts: 302

Reg: 03-08-16
03-25-19 06:11 PM - Post#282705    
    In response to PennFan10

Penn is playing in the 2019 Wooden Legacy, along with Arizona, Providence, Wake Forest, Central Florida, Pepperdine, Long Beach State, and the College of Charleston.

http://espnevents.com/wooden-legacy/news-an d-updat...

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 21081

Reg: 12-02-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-25-19 08:09 PM - Post#282708    
    In response to mrjames

It's also pretty difficult to be Top 75 if you have a bunch of games against sub 300 teams (let alone lose any of them).

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-25-19 08:16 PM - Post#282710    
    In response to penn nation

Harvard is unquestionably a top 75 team next year. In terms of talent they are top 30.

Yale has to replace 3 key guys but I like their chances of being top 75. Will depends on development of a few guys and where we stand with the 2018 class in terms of development. Those guys didn’t play as much as I anticipated so hard to say.

Penn should be in a similar position as Yale and could be in a better spot.

Then the questions start though I am optimistic on Columbia is brown and Princeton being quite solid.



 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-25-19 08:38 PM - Post#282713    
    In response to penn nation

To be fair, with the new NET formula, it’s actually better to play some really bad teams you can pound, because RAW efficiency is a big component of the formula, so running up a bunch of +30-50 margins in a handful of games can really boost your NET.

NET perfection is to find teams that are going to be around .500 that are still pretty bad (way worse than their record) so you can beat them by a ton without recording an egregiously bad SOS.

 
Naismith 
Sophomore
Posts: 148

Loc: RI
Reg: 11-11-18
03-25-19 08:56 PM - Post#282714    
    In response to mrjames

Educate those of us from peach basket era. Clarify MTE. I know it has something to do with tournament participation.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-25-19 09:39 PM - Post#282718    
    In response to Naismith

Ha - yeah, acronyms are all over the place now.

MTE = Multi-Team Event

Used to be that there were only a few (Preseason NIT, Maui, Great Alaska Shootout), and a team could only participate in one every four years. When you did, you got to play three or four games for the price of one.

It became clear, though, that these events could provide valuable live sports content during some dead zones in the calendar while people were off and willing to tune in (Thanksgiving and Christmas breaks). So, the NCAA relaxed the rule to one every year, and a bunch of promoters, including ESPN Events, started creating either these 8-team bracketed events at one site or “auto-semifinal” events, where four teams would play on a big stage like MSG and the other teams in the field would get one shot at a big name and play three other games in regional pods. Again, the benefit is that you got to play up to four games, and it only counted as one game against your scheduling. And ESPN, Fox, CBSSN could be chalked full of college basketball all day during those holidays.

When the NCAA went from one-in-four year participation in MTEs to every year, the Ivies went from one-in-four to two-in-four. The prohibition on the other two chances to participate every four years severely handicaps the league’s ability to get quality opponents on neutral floors to have a better chance to rack up good wins. It also, in a self-defeating manner for academics, causes teams to have to chase quality opponents across the country to play at often inconvenient times to get those chances, when three could be had in the course of four days over a break.

 
Naismith 
Sophomore
Posts: 148

Loc: RI
Reg: 11-11-18
03-25-19 10:33 PM - Post#282727    
    In response to mrjames

Thank you. I suspected it was something along those lines. Maybe that's too logical for a league that figures a silly tournament is the way to get exposure. I'd suggest games on neutral courts against challenging competition is the Ivy path to moving up the food chain as it's related to any hope of multiple NCAA bids. Penn and Princeton are the only teams capable of drawing OOC games to their own arenas. The other six are at a disadvantage due to that. Every league team should be playing an MTE every year. Your points should be in front of the ADs and coaches right now.

 
Streamers 
Professor
Posts: 8141
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
03-26-19 08:34 AM - Post#282777    
    In response to james

  • james Said:
Harvard is unquestionably a top 75 team next year. In terms of talent they are top 30.



Sounds like an indictment of their coaching, no?

 
Chip Bayers 
Professor
Posts: 6997
Chip Bayers
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 10:51 AM - Post#282790    
    In response to Streamers

  • Streamers Said:
  • james Said:
Harvard is unquestionably a top 75 team next year. In terms of talent they are top 30.



Sounds like an indictment of their coaching, no?



It will be interesting to see how the possessions get distributed. The way the injuries shook out the last couple of years, Amaker resorted to having one guy eat a third of all the shots when they were healthy and on the floor—Aiken this year, Towns last year. That’s pretty extreme. A second heavy possession eater backed them up—last year Lewis, this year Kirkwood.

Mike probably has the raw numbers on this, but Towns and Aiken really haven’t spent a ton of time together on court, and when they did as freshmen they had a classic senior PG in Chambers distributing the ball to them, so their possession & shot distribution was pretty even.

One outcome of Aiken taking over in the second half of the year in ‘18-‘19 was that Lewis saw his offensive numbers decline across the board from last year—ORtg, %minutes, %possessions, %shots, eFG% were all down, while his turnovers on a very turnover-prone team rose dramatically, and he was at his worst on offense in conference play. I know injury may have played some part in that, but it was a pretty big falloff for the most highly-rated player in his recruiting class.

With all the guys mentioned back, plus at the very least Ledlum among the new faces (and with only Corey Johnson subtracted from the old faces) I’m assuming we will see a reversion next year to the more even distribution of past Harvard teams, and certainly not one that was as hero-ball oriented as this year’s (#300 nationally in A/FGM). But how the ball ultimately gets shared will be the thing to watch in the early going of the non-conference schedule.


Edited by Chip Bayers on 03-26-19 10:54 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-26-19 11:22 AM - Post#282792    
    In response to Chip Bayers

i agree with this. I am not looking at stats in writing this but harvard was generally not a good assist team especially when contrasted with yale.

Aiken played hero ball, quite well i might add but to the detriment of their overall talent level really.

My guess is Aiken missing the first half of the season and Towns being out hurt the integration of the offense. they all switched lineups 25x. You add in a couple of young guys playing real minutes and its more understandable.

Next year should be different. So if Aiken can distribute better or play off the ball, either really. Then this integration should be better.

it appears Kirkwood is playing some point. that is the step in the direction of Aiken playing off the ball. Either way its a scary setup given 7 top 150 recruits with more than half seniors.



 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
03-26-19 02:36 PM - Post#282799    
    In response to james

The Kirkwood comparison I fear is not the Wesley Saunders one popular on the Harvard board but rather T.J. Bray, a tall, robust, skilled PG who could pass, drive, post, shoot, and rebound (and happened to lead all of DI in efficiency his senior year). It would be a fascinating twist to have a tall point guard and a short shooting guard; I'm not sure if Amaker would have the nerve to take the ball out of Aiken's hands so much, but a balanced three-headed monster with Lewis as a low-post threat could be very challenging to defend.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 02:55 PM - Post#282804    
    In response to SRP

Harvard fan here. Very much agree that Kirkwood is more of a natural point than Aiken. The way I'd put it is that Kirkwood passes as a first resort, while Aiken mostly does it as a last resort. In other words, Aiken will get some pretty nice assists, but they're kick-outs or dump-offs when the defense has collapsed on his drives and he can't get a shot up himself. Kirkwood will attack with the intention to pass all along.

In that regard, Kirkwood might be the perfect player to pair with Aiken: a big point guard who allows us to play Aiken at the two without giving up any mismatches on the defensive end. The question, as you say, is whether Aiken would be willing to play that much off the ball.

Maybe the way to sell it is Kirkwood as the point for the first 20 seconds when we're moving the ball and looking for easy looks, and Aiken at the point for the last 10 seconds when we go to a pick and roll as a last resort. (I wish our offense had more looks than that, but that's generally the way we do things).

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 03:34 PM - Post#282812    
    In response to mobrien

So, Bryce Aiken had the 43rd-highest efficiency for any player to use above 28% of possessions. He used the 16th highest percentage of possessions nationally and took the 14th highest percentage of shots. In conference play, he was 8th in the league in assist rate. His skill curve (the degradation of efficiency as usage rate increases) is essentially flat - he's a freak of nature. (Meanwhile, Seth and Noah's skill curves both collapse at around 25% usage and Chris's steadily declines from 15% usage on).

If I could sign up for that exact performance over 30+ games next season, I'd do that right now.

Why exactly do people want to take the ball *out* of his hands? If he can comfortably handle 30-35% usage, that can allow Harvard to play Lewis at 15% usage and a low usage stopper (Bassey), while keeping Noah and Seth just north of 20%. There's no reason to ask a player that can handle 30+% usage to step that back...

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32682

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 03:45 PM - Post#282814    
    In response to mrjames

To use your logic, because a lot of what he did this year involved luck. No chance he would hit every buzzer beater as he did this year.

But he's really good--just not THAT good.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 04:12 PM - Post#282822    
    In response to palestra38

Yeah, not referring to the buzzer beaters, which were just a crazy, seemingly unrepeatable run. More just the overarching efficiency stats. Definitely would take 110 on 33% usage - that's insane.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 04:38 PM - Post#282825    
    In response to mrjames

I hear you about Aiken's ability to maintain such high efficiency despite such high usage. It's why I thought he deserved to be Ivy POY. It's a rare, rare skill to be able to do that.

It's more that I think with Towns back and Kirkwood hopefully making a pretty big second year improvement, we'll have other guys who can use possessions efficiently enough to justify tamping down Aiken's usage a little. And, more to the point, that I wonder if Aiken's efficiency could be even better if he had someone setting him up sometimes instead of always being the other way around. It's admittedly a tiny sample size, but Kirkwood looked really good finding guys these last couple of games. He sees passes well, stopped rushing like he had earlier in the season, and took better care of the ball.

There's something to be said for getting other guys more touches if only to make them feel more involved, and keep the defense guessing a little more. So even though there are definitely times where we need Aiken to just take over — he made a couple of big shots to staunch the bleeding when NC State looked like they were about to run us out of the gym in the first half —there are other times where we get a little stagnant standing around watching him. We should have the pieces next year that we don't need to do that anymore.

 
SomeGuy 
Professor
Posts: 6391

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-26-19 04:51 PM - Post#282827    
    In response to mrjames

I think the question is whether there is some mix where Aiken has lower usage and the rest of the team becomes more efficient. In other words, he may be detracting from what the other guys do at that rate. I don’t know if Morgan has a similar efficiency curve or not, but I often wonder whether having one guy take all that burden detracts from the whole even when that one guy can handle it. And to connect up with P38’s point, there may be a mix out there that puts Harvard comfortably ahead at the end, rather than counting on Aiken to do something crazy.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-26-19 05:05 PM - Post#282830    
    In response to SomeGuy

Why do they want to take the ball out of his hands?

Well because they lose too many games to teams with lesser talent. This would include Yale when it mattered and Cornell and more importantly hero ball led to the need for hero shots.

Now Aiken doesn’t see the floor particularly well though admittedly when you shoot 18x sometimes guys are more open at the end of a clock bc well you don’t pass much.

Stats are cool but exceptional hero ball makes them lie. The real issue is Harvard has underperformed its talent level for 3 yrs. there are reasons—injuries, other teams that mesh well etc. but how do you explain the loss to Yale in the playoffs two years ago. Youth? No ivy in modern times has recruiting like this. I guess you could explain the loss to penn last yr and Yale this yr—home court adv and injuries particularly the penn loss.

I repeat—no ivy has recruiting like this.

So next year assuming health either the status quo exists and improves. Or it’s disappointing yet again. As a Yale fan I hope for the latter.

But I know what i would do. I would short the usage/efficiency stats and go long another pg. that is my quAnt formula. It will matter even more bc you need to factor in the other head of the monster, towns. Spread the ball.

it is inconceivable you can’t win the league outright and evengo undefeated at least in the league with this roster. It’s that good. We’ll see.





 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-26-19 06:27 PM - Post#282833    
    In response to james

You’re blaming either Yale tourney loss on Bryce? This year’s was lost because Yale made a ton of low XPPS attempts, forced Harvard to go small to chase and then pounded Harvard inside to close it. Bryce had 38 pts on 1.45PPP at 42% usage. Harvard had its highest offensive rating of the season. In the 2017 edition, Harvard happened to have a miserable shooting night outside of Bryce, who had 28pts on 1.20PPP at 39% usage.

If you can post either of those numbers consistently, it’s no longer hero ball, it’s just effective offense. Hero ball was Desmond Cambridge’s Ivy campaign.

I generally think these comments are hitting on a key point, but it has nothing to do with Bryce. The offense this year was a poor fit for the team, because there were too many points where the ball would stick. The motion offense naturally levels out usage rates, because everyone has to be involved and has to create when the flow has given them a clear chance to. But this year (and last year too), the ball got stuck a lot (whole lot of low usage players not taking shots when shots were there), allowing teams to get set in their rotations. That pushed things deeper in the shot clock where Bryce had to go high PNR. (Also there was the whole not really being able to anticipate teammates’ moves which led to a lot of ugly-looking TOs).

In other words, I see Bryce’s numbers as a symptom of the offensive problems this team had, not the cause - and without his pretty historic production this offense would have looked awful. Similarly, his usage rates coming down won’t *lead* to better offense, but will be a function of better execution of the motion system. If him drawing help defenders and passing out puts the defense into rotation, and the offense is running properly, the ball should never end up back in his hands. All too often, it would hit someone not ready to take an open shot or someone in an unnatural spot where the decision took too long, and the advantage was lost.

The key for Harvard next year is how many possessions can be wrapped up in the first 20 seconds, because that’s when usage rates will be far more equal. The last 10 seconds are Bryce time, and he’s really, really good at it.

 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1842

Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
03-26-19 06:56 PM - Post#282836    
    In response to mrjames

I believe that Amaker will figure it all out as to how to score if everyone is reasonably healthy especially between Aiken and Towns. My only question which I raised before is not the 3-5 positions but will be the quality of big man play.

I do not see it as much of an issue in IL play but I do see it as a potential issue against quality non-conference teams. Lewis and Baker are good but not great and you need the big guys especially at the Big Dance. If I was a coach, I would go right at Lewis immediately, get him in foul trouble and get him off the court. What I have found interesting with Amaker and the coaching staff is that they have not received great results from Zena and Lewis over the years.

I do not see too many issues for the Crimson in IL play but can they beat big time programs in non-conference play. Certainly possible but no guarantees.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
03-26-19 09:58 PM - Post#282842    
    In response to bradley

I don’t think NC State shares your view on Lewis. When healthy he is a monstrous big

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
03-26-19 10:29 PM - Post#282844    
    In response to mrjames

That actually crystallizes a lot of what I've felt about Harvard's offense this past year. Were there any guys in particular that you think were passing up shots that they should have been taking? Or was it everyone but Bryce and Noah?

The two times when the ball seems to get stuck the most were: 1) when Lewis would do a slow-motion postup where he'd survey the defense for a second or two, then try to power his way to the hoop, and 2) when guys would stand around in those first 20 seconds just waiting for Aiken to do something (although sometimes, like in the NC State game, those would come out of 1-4 looks, so it was presumably what we wanted).

Our efficiency in both of those situations was pretty bad. I would love to see Lewis's TO rate when he held the ball for > 2 seconds before making a move. It seemed very, very high. One thing we never do that would be better would be a quick re-post if it's initially not there. That would have a better chance of success than Lewis letting the defense get fully set and sag off their men before he gets going. Bryce did better in our early iso looks, but we shouldn't be settling for end-of-the-shot-clock looks at the beginning of the shot clock.

But I agree: the first 20 seconds should be about the team, hopefully with Noah taking on a bigger role facilitating things since he does seem to see the court better, anticipate passes better, and, when it comes to things like skip passes, is able to make them easier since he is taller. But the last 10 seconds are clearly Bryce's time.

 
bradley 
PhD Student
Posts: 1842

Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
03-27-19 08:14 AM - Post#282849    
    In response to PennFan10

NC State is a guard driven team and the lack of good big men is probably the major reason why they did not make it to the Big Dance. LSU had two bigs that were on the court together and created major issues for Yale in addition to a very good PG.

Although one never knows for sure the extent of Lewis' injury, he was probably the 3rd or 4th best big man in the Ivies last year. Baker obviously has talent but his body time would have been an issue going up a LSU type big.

As I mentioned, Harvard bigs should not be an issue in the IL but it may be a issue in non-conference and more importantly post-season play.

Reality is that Zena and Lewis, to this point and time, have not developed to the extent anticipated.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-27-19 10:00 AM - Post#282851    
    In response to bradley

Yes, this is largely the point i was making (or trying to make).

No, i dont blame Bryce. i think he's terrific. But is he a pg? because, when he played, they didnt maximize their talent bc YES the ball is stuck.

So its some part in particular order 1) his pg play; 2) the system; 3) the rotation; 4) the talent development (maybe recruiting rankings dont matter? as much as i dignify)

But i take a step back....And i see a larger, deeper rotation of more talented players than the other top Ivies which is more reflective of the rankings.

Secondly, Yale lost bc they missed open shots. Some were created by the offense, some were created by their talent (Oni, etc). But at the end of the day (at least in person) they had countless opportunities when LSU didnt score for what 5 minutes? to get over the proverbial hump, and they missed very makeable shots i dont give a damn who you are playing.

Their 2 point shooting ratio was fantastic even factoring in the blocks which came exclusively in the first few minutes. LSU largely packed the lane. Even So Atkinson and Bruner finished consistently inside.

But you dont beat a team with top 5 talent who played well coach or no coach shooting 8/37 from 3. So you either, in so doing, 1) took too many; or 2) you missed open shots. it was some combination of both though i couldnt fault a single shot they took. And LSU make it very difficult to reverse the ball, which is a major issue in a high ball screen offense and played the dribble, hard. IN so doing they might have played with fire but they won. doesnt matter, it worked.
They were just open and missed.

Lastly, Lewis and Baker were top 100 recruits. they have largely developed their games. Lewis is a beast from 6 ft and in and Baker is 7' ish and long. he has range. and he certainly can affect shots at any level. its a highly complementary duo that can neutralize many power 5 bigs. LSU is a rather extreme example I believe for anyone to deal with.

I am a large human and standing next to naz Reed makes me feel like a child. Oh and he banged a 3 in REynolds grill to start the game and finished like a madman on the break. He is quite a talent. And bigby williams is big, athletic and knows his role. they both do. its a quality combination that makes a tough comparable.





 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-27-19 10:26 AM - Post#282854    
    In response to james

meant in "no" particular order.

also on the topic of recruiting i will add that I did like Bruner even post his first knee surgery in hs better than either Lewis or Baker when i saw all of them multiple times. IN so doing i contradict the rankings which dropped Bruner bc of when he got hurt before his junior year and after Dozier left for SC.

He had great length (Like Baker), but more pop and a better skill range imo. You saw this ceiling re-emerge against LSU. All the knee injuries and limited offseasons havent helped. his second jump pop wasnt what it used to be this year. he didnt have the confidence in his body and played way too soft on offense against physically inferior ivy players. the half hook on bigby williams was a sign its coming back! as were the block on waters (that sequence was just awesome including what should have been an assist to oni to cut the lead to 4)


But I agree with the other James (Jones) that he still has the highest ceiling who believes this fervently and sees it every day. if he doesnt show it for yale he probably will when he grad transfers. And my hope for the kid is he can have an injury free offseason bc you will see it much like you did in Jax albeit against inferior talent and more regularly.





 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
03-27-19 10:34 AM - Post#282856    
    In response to james

as for yale-lsu, this would have conserved words for me. but my eyes dont lie.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2019/03/27/by-th e-n...

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
03-27-19 03:09 PM - Post#282887    
    In response to james

I don't entirely disagree with Mike's analysis of Harvard's offense, but I think he underestimates how much Aiken's style reduced the effectiveness of his teammates. Except for Lewis, they frequently received the ball in awkward spots and seemed like they were expected not to attack in deference to Aiken, even though when Aiken collapsed the D he was able to pile up a ton of assists. Obviously, Aiken was amazing at converting late in the shot clock and he ought to do a lot of that. But if Kirkwood can initiate more, I think the flow will improve overall.

To some extent this problem will be self-correcting when Towns returns to full strength, because he has few awkward spots and Aiken has proven that they can work together productively.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
03-27-19 04:52 PM - Post#282896    
    In response to SRP

While it was fun watching Noah turn the ball over on 3-in-10 possessions and Juzang do so on 1-in-4 in non-conference play, I'll take their respective 19.5 and 15.5 rates in conference play alongside Aiken.

We got to see two months of those guys initiating the offense, and it resulted in a hail of turnovers. Also, everyone's making it sound like Harvard's offense was all balance until Bryce came along. That's fundamentally not true - the vast majority of Harvard's pre-Bryce games had a player see more than half the team's minutes and post a usage rate in the 30s. The results were, umm, not great Bob:

MIT - Kirkwood, 32% usage, 91 ORAT
Northeastern - (balance)
UMass - Kirkwood, 36% usage, 77 ORAT
URI - Lewis, 30% usage, 75 ORAT
USF - Kirkwood, 30% usage, 77 ORAT
St. Mary's - (balance)
Holy Cross - (balance)
Siena - Bassey, 35% usage, 93 ORAT
UVM - (balance)
GW - Bassey, 41% usage, 99 ORAT (Kirkwood did do a 126 on 29% usage)
Mercer - Kirkwood, 30% usage, 102 ORAT
UNC - Johnson, 30% usage, 32 ORAT
Dart1 - Lewis, 37% usage, 84 ORAT

In his 17 Ivy plus NIT games, Bryce used 30% of possessions in 14 and had half of those above 100 and four more in the 90s. It wasn't that Bryce flipped this offense from a balanced one to one that relied upon a high-usage creator, it's just that he supplanted the "high-usage-by-committee" from the non-conf with a consistent high-usage producer.

Next year better be different, or else Harvard isn't going to be the team most expect. But I think the commentary about what should have happened this year is ignorant of what was actually happening this year.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-27-19 06:45 PM - Post#282909    
    In response to mrjames

There is a very good chance I am overreacting to a very small sample size here, but the only reason I even raised this as something to think about was how well Noah played at the end of the year. His last four games were all among his eight most efficient of the year.

NC State: 35% usage, 130 ORAT
Georgetown: 16% usage, 117 ORAT
Yale: 27% usage, 117 ORAT
Penn: 19% usage, 128 ORAT

It's possible he just got lucky and played some of his best ball at the end of the year, but I don't think that's what was going on. I saw a guy who was really starting to get it. The dumb turnovers were gone. He had a much better sense of how to get to his spots — and, unlike earlier in the year, he was always under control — to either pass or score.

The NIT games were especially interesting because he was forced to take on more of a playmaking role. (Georgetown was denying Aiken so hard that we had to go to Kirkwood to initiate things more, and NC State's pressure did the same). And the thing is, he looked *really* good doing it. He had a 33% assist rate against Georgetown and a 53% one against NC State.

He's not going to maintain this kind of production over the course of a whole season, but if this is more the kind of thing we can expect from him next year, I think it makes sense to let him facilitate things more in those first 20 seconds of the shot clock. He just sees the court so well, and what passes are going to be there a half second before everyone else does.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 776

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-27-19 07:02 PM - Post#282912    
    In response to mobrien

Yes-see the last two games!! It’s also possible he initiated the offense more which he did!

Oh and why the hell would it be relevant to include efficiency when Aiken didn’t play?

if the supposition is he’s valuable then wouldn’t you evaluate efficiency for dependent players and a team when he was on the court but not initiating the offense as much? Otherwise how is this apples to Apples?

so how did that look the last few games. I know how it looked

and how did the team play? Probably the best on the road against the highest talent they played all year at the biggest road disadvantage. I know know , subjective.

My guess is amaker noticed and there was a REASOn
Kirkwood played more point?





 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-28-19 11:57 AM - Post#282974    
    In response to james

The reason that data is relevant:

1) It demonstrates that Harvard's offense usually wasn't balanced on any given night pre-Aiken's return.
2) It demonstrates that the player that went high usage on those nights was usually not that good at it.

I have started putting together the PBPs to derive off court, on court for different lineups, and I've got about half the games Bryce played in loaded. It's not pretty offensively when he's off the floor.

At the same time, I don't want to make it seem like Noah's development is credited to Aiken. While the pressure to create declined once Aiken came back, which would raise his efficiency regardless, I agree that Noah also was learning more of what he couldn't do at this level. Noah had a lot of double-whammy turnovers early in the year due to driving into trouble. He'd either yield a live-ball TO, which is the worst type of TO, or a charge-TO, which can put you into foul trouble really quickly.

It remains to be seen, though, if he can handle true PG duties at this level. I was one of the earliest folks on these boards calling him a PG, while he kept being listed as a SF or even PF, because his abilities as a facilitator at Ashbury and NMH were always undervalued. The flaws in his on-ball game are well-documented here... if he can fix those and bring the TOs down, I'm on board. Until then, Bryce is the only safe, ball-dominant, high-usage creator on this roster.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-29-19 10:07 AM - Post#283040    
    In response to mrjames

Annnnnnnnd Miye Oni is declaring for the draft and pretty steadfast about staying in...

So, 2020 isn't getting off to a great start, folks...

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-29-19 10:54 AM - Post#283045    
    In response to mrjames

Wow, I'm actually pretty surprised. I fully expected him to declare for the draft, get some feedback from NBA execs, then go back for his senior year to work on his weaknesses. He's someone who's beaten up on lesser competition, but struggled quite a bit against even the better defenders in the IL (Woods, Bassey, Stephens, Okolie). Signing with an agent, if he does, would be a big mistake, I think.

The only way it even comes close to making sense is that he *is* old for his class because of that PG year. He'll already be 22 by the time next season starts, so he might think he has a better chance to get drafted now than if he came back and improved his game.

Don't think he should leave for anything less than a first round promise, though, especially when he's so close to graduating anyway.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
03-29-19 11:00 AM - Post#283046    
    In response to mobrien

There is almost zero chance Oni is a first round pick, this year or next. That is such a high bar for only 30 players nationally. Last year over 200 underclassmen declared for the NBA draft that has 60 players chosen.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32682

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-29-19 11:00 AM - Post#283047    
    In response to mobrien

You can't blame anyone for trying to get an NBA contract. If he gets hurt playing this year for nothing, he loses everything. And he can finish at Yale later. But I would agree that it makes no sense unless he gets a guaranteed rookie contract, which you only get in the 1st round.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
03-29-19 11:01 AM - Post#283048    
    In response to mobrien

Although I guess the fact that Oni is so close to graduating makes it easier for him to figure out a way to finish his degree even after leaving. ESPN's Jonathan Givony reporting that Oni's already made arrangements to do so if he does stay in the draft.

https://twitter.com/DraftExpress/status/1 111641824...

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
03-29-19 11:32 AM - Post#283053    
    In response to mobrien

YDN says that Oni has in fact signed with an agent, not just planning to.

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2019/03/29/mens- bas...

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
2020 - Breakthrough Year?
03-29-19 12:37 PM - Post#283061    
    In response to mobrien

I'd forgotten, though, that the NCAA changed its rules about agents. As long as you notify the NBA Undergraduate Advisory Council, which Oni did, you can sign with one and even stay in the draft, and still be able to return to school if you go undrafted.

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

 
westcoast 
Senior
Posts: 302

Reg: 03-08-16
03-29-19 12:45 PM - Post#283063    
    In response to mobrien

Looking at the 2018 draft, every player drafted in the Top 50 signed a guaranteed, million dollar plus contract. Even the guys at the end of Round 2 signed two-way NBA/G-League deals. So even getting drafted in Round 2 is probably still worthwhile for Oni.

https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/07/2018-nba-draf t...

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3614
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
03-29-19 01:46 PM - Post#283073    
    In response to westcoast

Okay if there is a chance he can come back it isn’t the worst idea in the world.

Before knowing that I was thinking this was a pretty dumb idea. I see Oni anywhere from 51+ to not listed when I look at the major draft boards right now.

I don’t think he did himself any favors with his poor shooting in his tournament game... I genuinely think he’d have a better shot going higher next year, but my guess is that he isn’t very confident in Yale getting back to the dance either with other key pieces leaving.

Weird choice, but I guess we shall see.

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

4899 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: 0.255 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 11:02 AM
Top