Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 1 of 5 1234>
Username Post: 2019-20 Projections        (Topic#23008)
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
04-09-19 12:44 PM - Post#283444    

Bart Torvik posted his preliminary 2019-20 rankings here: http://www.barttorvik.com/trankpre.php

Ivy ranks:
36. Harvard
53. Penn
114. Princeton
133. Columbia
163. Dartmouth
170. Brown
183. Yale
286. Cornell

If you click on the team, you can see which players comprise the analysis. Notably, Oni is not in Yale’s number. Also, despite many freshmen being included (mainly to consume open minutes), none of Harvard’s freshman class is in its number. Towns and Betley have been added back to Harvard and Penn, respectively.

As a whole, I think this shows a good amount of respect to how good this league could and should be next year. With the rankings above, each of the top two teams would have 4 Tier I/II chances in league play (1 Tier I, 3 Tier IIs). The bottom four teams would have 6 such chances (2 Tier I, 4 Tier II).

For me, it seems like certain teams’ departures are hitting them harder (Yale, Cornell) than others’ (Penn, Brown, Princeton). Not saying I agree or disagree, but specifically for Yale, they’re sitting on a lot of recent recruits who despite my feeling that they were a bit overrated, still comprise a very talented pool from which to draw. Curious that the Bulldogs dropped more in rank than Cornell, which ostensibly has a lot, lot less in the cupboard.

I think I’d feel better about the 4-7 above being exactly flipped, though it’s still early (probably lots of injuries and other fun stuff to inevitably wreck the rosters we thought we’d see as per usual) and the actual difference in Pythag between those teams isn’t huge.

 
HGA 
Sophomore
Posts: 106

Loc: New York
Reg: 10-16-18
Re: 2019-20 Projections
04-09-19 01:50 PM - Post#283445    
    In response to mrjames

Specific to Yale, they lose 4 starters, which is a big hit for any team. The 4 averaged nearly 50 points a game in total. They still will be good but its hard to calculate the impact of the loss.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
Re: 2019-20 Projections
04-09-19 07:56 PM - Post#283484    
    In response to HGA

No doubt they lose a lot.

But their talent is very solid which should emerge. Certainly this is a relative underrank.

No the recruits weren’t overrated. Having seen them play in high school I would argue the opposite. They were underrated.

now have they developed since they didn’t play much this year? We shall see. I wouldn’t bet against it.

And bruner who many on the inside believe had the highest ceiling last summer of the returning players...is the wild card. if healthy he will take over. But he needs a healthy offseason for once which he hasn’t really had in years it seems




 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: 2019-20 Projections
04-10-19 10:01 AM - Post#283496    
    In response to james

I was referring more to their starting point, which was hotly debated on these boards. Cotton was a 4-star and ranked at one point, while Kelly was seen as a three-star on the fringe of the rankings with power five potential.

By the time the 2018 rankings were finalized those players were more appropriately rated (and maybe underrated - given that they ended up barely inside the top 400).

Swain, Atkinson, Bruner is still a good core, but without Oni, this feels a lot like the 2015-16 Harvard team and the drop in the rankings was comparable. Maybe it's just convenient availability bias creeping in, but that feels like a tremendous comp, and it just so happens that the present year and next year projection line up very well.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
04-10-19 12:49 PM - Post#283502    
    In response to mrjames

Bruner is going to take over? If I had seen that in just one game I might believe it. Call me a skeptic. All the talent but hasn't really panned out relative to his ability in my opinion. Atkinson is a much better big that Bruner right now.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
04-10-19 12:50 PM - Post#283503    
    In response to mrjames

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the most likely course of events is that Oni will be back, right? If so, that's probably the strongest argument for Yale being underrated.

And, for the record, while I think Penn is likely to improve next year, I have a lot of trouble seeing them at #53.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
04-10-19 01:16 PM - Post#283506    
    In response to PennFan10

Bruner is a much more dynamic player than Atkinson, though Atkinson is a better pure big. If you're looking for someone that has a prayer of taking on the usage load left behind by Copeland and Oni, it's much more likely to be Bruner than Atkinson.

That being said, Bruner was a non-factor offensively down the stretch for Yale. His good showing versus LSU (24% usage, 116 ORAT) came over a month after his last 20+% usage, 100+ ORAT performance (the first Cornell game), which itself was one of only two Ivy games in which he managed that feat. Despite his ceiling (and I think he's shown it a little more than PF10 is giving him credit for), going from that to doing it every game is a big, big jump.

He's gotta stop the Greg Mangano perimeter grazing, though - he may become a good shooter some day, but he isn't right now. His best performance on any type of jumper was 38% on 2PT Js in 2017, and he's a closer-to-30% average shooter on all jumpers (2s and 3s). He's averaging 75% at the rim, and nearly half of his buckets there AREN'T assisted. For him to unlock his superstar potential, he's gotta find a way to consistently get that shot and stop settling for jumpers he can't hit.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
2019-20 Projections
04-10-19 01:51 PM - Post#283507    
    In response to mrjames

Any sense of where Yale would be in these rankings if Oni did come back? (And are people actually confident that he won't?)

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
04-10-19 02:10 PM - Post#283510    
    In response to mobrien

Bruner and Atkinson are very different players as you note MrJ, but Atkinson is much closer to being an all Ivy type performer than Bruner and that simply shouldn't be the case based on ability.

 
westcoast 
Senior
Posts: 302

Reg: 03-08-16
04-10-19 02:31 PM - Post#283512    
    In response to PennFan10

Here are their stats from last year:
Bruner: 10.4 pts, 8.4 rebs, 3.0 assts, 1.5 blks, 1.0 stls
Atkinson: 9.1 pts, 5.0 rebs, 1.0 assts, 0.6 blks, 0.5 stls

Bruner did average more minutes than Atkinson (28.0 vs 20.2), but Bruner's per minute stats are better than Atkinson in every stat except for points.

Bruner finished 2nd in the Ivy League in rebounds and 3rd in blocks last year. He's not too far from All-Ivy status.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
04-10-19 02:53 PM - Post#283519    
    In response to westcoast

BRuner does it all.

He didn’t trust his body in the post. when you have multiple knee operations in just a few yrs while your body develops its understandable.

If he stays healthy and gets past it he will play more like he did against LSU when he was Yale’s best player and a power 5 grad dream.

I think he will if gets healthy. certainly the coaching staff believes it. and as I said they believed it last year also.

And Yale’s recruits are undervalued. Jarvis and Mahoney I left off. They are dynamite. Can they build cohesion with all they have to replace?

Well they started 7. So you have 2+bruner (the most talented player according to the coaches) returning. if oni comes back they will be a force.

If he doesn’t they are still undervalued and the comment on the recruits is just wrong.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
04-10-19 02:59 PM - Post#283520    
    In response to james

and bruner didn’t shoot well Back half of year from 3.

But he facilitated and spread the floor. He was a key cog in the offense bc you need this role. not forgetting the 7’3 wingspan (watch the block of tremont waters floater, nuts)

With Atkinson and bruner with better legs this will be a powerful tandem.

Then you add in Jarvis to the mix of returning players who are all effective when they play—the 4/5 looks good. the guard play absent swain will be the question. But there’s talent. Does it develop?

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
04-10-19 03:01 PM - Post#283521    
    In response to james

Copeland was the best player against LSU offensively. But bruner did it all and popped off the screen (or court in person?

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
04-10-19 03:08 PM - Post#283522    
    In response to james

Atkinson has amazing post moves. If he can get stronger he will be a total force down low.

But bruner is far more we’ll rounded. He makes Atkinson better bc of his passing ability

If he turns alpha dog on good knees, look out. But his stats are fine but not fully reflective of his existing value at least to that team. Without copeland and maybe oni he will need to do more and use his length against the league



 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
04-10-19 04:48 PM - Post#283528    
    In response to james

A lot here to digest.

Just to be clear, I can get on board with the 2019 class from Yale being underrated. Mahoney and Jarvis should have a shot to be contributors right away. The 2018 class was the one that I wasn't a huge fan of.

Either way, for Yale to feel like a favorite to make the Ivy Tourney, much less contend for the Ivy title, they need Oni to return.

 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
04-10-19 07:04 PM - Post#283534    
    In response to westcoast

  • westcoast Said:
Here are their stats from last year:
Bruner: 10.4 pts, 8.4 rebs, 3.0 assts, 1.5 blks, 1.0 stls
Atkinson: 9.1 pts, 5.0 rebs, 1.0 assts, 0.6 blks, 0.5 stls

Bruner did average more minutes than Atkinson (28.0 vs 20.2), but Bruner's per minute stats are better than Atkinson in every stat except for points.

Bruner finished 2nd in the Ivy League in rebounds and 3rd in blocks last year. He's not too far from All-Ivy status.



Probably better to compare career stats since both guys have played 2 seasons. Those are much more comparable:

Bruner 25 minutes per game, 9.3 ppg 6.9 reb (1.8 Off Reb), 51% FG percentage.

Atkinson 22.2 minutes per game, 9.2 ppg, 4.8 reb (1.7 off reb) 69.5% FG percentage

The other stats are more about the different roles they play on the team. Regardless, Bruner has so much more ability these two shouldn't even be close. My original point was to highlight the idea of Bruner taking over in Oni's absence. Yale fans should hope that happens but to date we haven't seen that ability.


 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
04-10-19 08:01 PM - Post#283537    
    In response to PennFan10

Big question for Yale is how much hidden game Swain has. As a second or third option he was terrific, but can he be effective as the primary perimeter threat? If he's actually able to drive around defenders and finish (or dish) then Yale's offense looks potent for sure, but even if he's just able to run around off the ball and get off shots he could contribute a lot of efficient usage. OTOH, if he has trouble scoring when the perimeter D is tilted toward him, then Yale's offense will have to find a lot of new secondary perimeter scoring.

 
Stuart Suss 
PhD Student
Posts: 1439

Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
04-11-19 05:22 PM - Post#283585    
    In response to SRP

I do not have any personal favorite in a debate comparing Bruner and Atkinson. But debates like this are why I post my annual individual efficiency statistics.

They show that for regular season, conference games, Bruner ranked 3rd and Atkinson ranked 11th. However that difference was strictly a function of the extra 121 minutes that Bruner played.

On a per minute (per 40 minute) basis, Atkinson ranked higher because Atkinson went to the foul line more frequently, did not not take and miss almost 75% of his three point attempts, and because Atkinson had a much lower turnover rate.




 
PennFan10 
Postdoc
Posts: 3578

Reg: 02-15-15
04-11-19 05:41 PM - Post#283586    
    In response to Stuart Suss

A voice of reason emerges.

 
james 
Masters Student
Posts: 777

Age: 48
Reg: 03-18-19
04-15-19 12:06 PM - Post#283653    
    In response to PennFan10

Atkinson is not effective when the floor is not spread.

You spread the floor in a high ball screen oriented offense by having a 4 man off the block.

It is no secret why Reynolds had a solid year. It is also no secret as to why Atkinson was just as effective as last year in fewer minutes without showing an expanded game.

The link is bruner played this year and you undervalue him in this quant analysis.

Now did bruner play up to what jones expects offensively from him this year? No. Bc he didn’t trust his Body and settled too much. this would include the dirk fadaway with lower success (forgetting Miami game where he dropped a beauty)

Is he a better 3 point shooter than he showed? Well the insiders believe so though I only watch the games.

the projection is a qualitative exercise. But as it stands he was perhaps the best passer on the team. And rebounded well.

If he sits down more inside and uses his length he will be a force. And if he does that and hits the 3 ball like they feel he can then he will be elite.

The kid didn’t play his junior year of high school and has blown out both knees since. Not easy.

“I probably have never had anyone as talented as this.” James Jones

That quote is 10 mos old. I don’t watch practice but I played the game and understand the mental hurdles with injuries.

Can he get there? it’s a qualitative assessment but I like my primary research. I think it’s just being healthy starting now.

 
 Page 1 of 5 1234>
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

8614 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: 0.26 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 03:56 PM
Top