UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
Re: Strategy
01-05-20 05:12 PM - Post#296102
In response to OldBig5
Say what you want about Princeton's setup and Donaheu's responses, Penn lost because Princeton's players outplayed Penn's. Some of that is luck of the night, but the three losses to ordinary teams shows us what the lack of contribution from two recruiting years means. When the three seniors are not on it is too much to expect freshmen to step up.
Put another way, with the big guy outplaying our big guy and all those post ups, we are seeing the fragile nature of this team's talent. It shines against teams that don't understand Donahue's schemes but is downright ordinary against teams that understand it. Those team's require individual execution on O and D. This year they are 1-3 against such teams and were 12-8 last year.
Early last year they peaked against Villanova with Wang and Mija had the blue snow shooting night against Temple. Sure peaks will happen again and the team should be the fourth in the Ivy Tournament. However, this loss suggests that their ranking will regress to what it was a year ago.
This should have been a top of cycle year. The injuries to Wang and Jelani nixed it.
|
pennsive
Junior
Posts: 200
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-05-20 05:24 PM - Post#296103
In response to SomeGuy
I disagree. We did a terrible job defensively, and it is on Steve. I am sure that you and most others on this board have noticed all season that four of our starters are seriously lacking in lateral quickness and are always one step behind. That is a recipe for terrible defense unless we play a clever defensive system (which we haven't all year) or at least play another athletic big down low to contest their drives. Against a team that does not make a living shooting threes, would it not make sense to play a 2-3 or a 2-1-2, or a triangle and two, and at a minimum, switch defenses from time to time they come down the court? I would much rather play MLL with AJ and give up one outside scoring threat. Against Princeton, let Ryan and Max share the 3 to have fresh legs and to give different looks to whoever is defending the 3, and let Byce sub in at the 2 for the same reason. As for the offense, we're not quick enough to run it against Princeton with its well- designed defense that only allowed our 30% and under three point shooters to take the threes. Steve did a bad job not adjusting to that. We have to do more next time than to play tougher and better. We have to be able to adjust our offense by taking longer on each possession, with crisp passing, if that is what it takes to get the shots and the shooters that we want, and not what their coach wants us to take.
|
weinhauers_ghost
Postdoc
Posts: 2137
Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
|
01-05-20 06:05 PM - Post#296109
In response to pennsive
Against a team like Princeton, which knows our offense as well as we do, we are simply not going to surprise them with off-ball screen and back cut activity. What I saw was a defense that effectively choked off passing angles whenever a cutter headed for the basket. Only Betley's drives to the basket were even somewhat effective, and every single one was contested.
I think if AJ had hit one or two more three point shots that might have changed the way they defended him, but when he didn't, they basically dared him to keep taking those shots.
They used Schwieger, Evbuomwan and Friberg in that "back into the post" role. We couldn't stop any of them, and that was with Betley, Martz, Scott and Monroe guarding them. I thought playing two bigs with AJ and Simmons was a good idea, but the coaching staff waited way too long to try that.
Whatever was left of the game plan we used last night needs to be shredded.
I think that game was actually more disappointing than last year's home loss. The final margin was 14 points, but it felt worse.
|
1LotteryPick1969
Postdoc
Posts: 2272
Age: 73
Loc: Sandy, Utah
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-05-20 06:26 PM - Post#296113
In response to weinhauers_ghost
Only Betley's drives to the basket were even somewhat effective
I seem to recall Dingle had some nice drives to the "tin", as your announcer called it.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-05-20 07:00 PM - Post#296115
In response to 1LotteryPick1969
That’s true but those weren’t the cuts without the ball WG is talking about. That was Dingle just taking his man off the dribble.
|
1LotteryPick1969
Postdoc
Posts: 2272
Age: 73
Loc: Sandy, Utah
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-05-20 08:09 PM - Post#296117
In response to Mike Porter
Got it.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-05-20 08:18 PM - Post#296118
In response to pennsive
Today probably isn’t the best day for me to defend the cleverness of the defense. However, there is at least a stat based method to it. We clearly effectively run people off the 3 point line. What that does is it puts people in position to get beat off the dribble. So I’m not sure that we are really that slow laterally, but we do by design give people a chance to get a step on us toward the basket. If we are slow laterally, though, a lot of what you suggest likely results in giving up a lot more 3 point attempts, which raises the randomness of the game results.
Now, as you suggest, Princeton may deserve an exception to our approach, because they would rather get inside and shoot 2s anyway. I have some skepticism about whether MLL (or Simmons, despite his couple of good possessions on Schweiger) are going to be the answer. Schweiger won’t back them down, but he may well go around them or shoot over them, and you can bet that Princeton would try to force switches and get MLL or Simmons trying to guard Llewelyn on the perimeter.
I’m not sure the coaching is either as good on the Henderson side or as bad on the Donahue sign as it appears. You had both teams kind of taking what the defense gave them, and Schweiger in particular executed better. Betley, Goodman, and Dingle took the chances they were given to drive, but only Dingle really converted. On the points regarding AJ and running the offense, basketball is always a complicated mix between taking what the defense gives you (the one on one drives) and forcing the issue to do what you do best. Betley May leaned too much toward taking what he was given, while AJ tried too hard to force the action. Kind of like when you keep taking the fastball on the outside corner for a strike, and then swinging at the slider breaking away.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-05-20 09:47 PM - Post#296121
In response to SomeGuy
The point of my earlier post is this teams losses, especially this one, are pretty strong indications of modest talent. Yes, AJ is the real thing, a true star. Betley and Devon are solid players, but neither are capable of carrying a team. Beyond that senior core we have two promising frosh in Dingle and Martz, however, Dingle is not yet efficient enough and Max has yet to prove he is anything but a stand-still shooter.
I remain very optimistic about this freshman class, but will they mature quickly enough to put this team over the top? Didn't last night. Probably won't by March.
As to the defensive talent. I understand the nature of Steve's defense. However, it was the same defense last year, same scheme, but Antonia could flat out shut people down, even within that scheme. Also, Max gave us big depth on D. That we don't have this year and the defensive rating has dropped 90 places. That's a talent shortage.
I hope Steve can fill some holes with an adjusted scheme. Still after 12 game the character of this team is pretty well set.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-05-20 10:15 PM - Post#296122
In response to UPIA1968
I think we should be careful not to read too much into last night. Yes, the same flaws we saw against Rice and Lafayette were on display. Obviously we’re not going undefeated in the league. But the same strengths that got us to 7-4 are still there. I don’t think one game (or three) demonstrates a fatal flaw that nixes our prospects. I think getting to the Ivy tournament may be tougher for this team than winning it, if that makes sense.
|
73Quaker
Freshman
Posts: 61
Loc: NC
Reg: 03-12-09
|
01-05-20 10:19 PM - Post#296123
In response to SomeGuy
So after the other 6 Ivy coaches watch the game film of this Penn loss, how many will develop a post-up offensive scheme for their Penn games? Harvard and Yale both have the size at 4 and 3 to take advantage of Betley. Scott, Martz, and Monroe in the low post. Cornell/Earl posted-up Boeheim last year, so we should see that again. Don't know enough about Brown, Dartmouth, or Columbia personnel to guess what they might do.
Yeah, our 3 pt. shooting may overcome the higher pct. shots available in the low post,but not for all 7 or 8 games we'll see such offensive scheme. Neglecting to develop a new defensive plan to at least have as an option would IMO be coaching malpractice.
|
weinhauers_ghost
Postdoc
Posts: 2137
Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
|
01-05-20 11:13 PM - Post#296128
In response to SomeGuy
Today probably isn’t the best day for me to defend the cleverness of the defense. However, there is at least a stat based method to it. We clearly effectively run people off the 3 point line. What that does is it puts people in position to get beat off the dribble. So I’m not sure that we are really that slow laterally, but we do by design give people a chance to get a step on us toward the basket. If we are slow laterally, though, a lot of what you suggest likely results in giving up a lot more 3 point attempts, which raises the randomness of the game results.
Now, as you suggest, Princeton may deserve an exception to our approach, because they would rather get inside and shoot 2s anyway. I have some skepticism about whether MLL (or Simmons, despite his couple of good possessions on Schweiger) are going to be the answer. Schweiger won’t back them down, but he may well go around them or shoot over them, and you can bet that Princeton would try to force switches and get MLL or Simmons trying to guard Llewelyn on the perimeter.
I’m not sure the coaching is either as good on the Henderson side or as bad on the Donahue sign as it appears. You had both teams kind of taking what the defense gave them, and Schweiger in particular executed better. Betley, Goodman, and Dingle took the chances they were given to drive, but only Dingle really converted. On the points regarding AJ and running the offense, basketball is always a complicated mix between taking what the defense gives you (the one on one drives) and forcing the issue to do what you do best. Betley May leaned too much toward taking what he was given, while AJ tried too hard to force the action. Kind of like when you keep taking the fastball on the outside corner for a strike, and then swinging at the slider breaking away.
The other problem here is that Princeton's floor spacing makes it more difficult for help defenders to rotate quickly enough to counter that move off the three point line and into the post. That's why we saw Schweiger backing his defender down low or getting an easy move to the rim with just one defender to beat.
I also thought they were more physical than we were last night. I understand AJ needing to avoid foul trouble, but collectively I didn't think we matched their physical intensity.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-06-20 12:50 AM - Post#296129
In response to 73Quaker
Yale and Harvard have a size advantage, yes, but they don’t really have anyone who does what Boeheim and Schweiger do. Bruener doesn’t back down and post up. Neither does Baker or Djuricic. Yale is a good matchup for us. Harvard is more questionable, but they won’t beat us the way Princeton did. I agree that Cornell is the other potential matchup problem in the league, but I don’t think Warren will be able to play AJ the way Aririgozuh did. So Boeheim will have to deal with AJ in the middle when he backs in.
|
Quaker75
Freshman
Posts: 37
Age: 59
Reg: 12-29-13
|
01-06-20 11:19 AM - Post#296138
In response to SomeGuy
I am sure Coach Donahue will be gladly consult all of you and take to heart your in-depth critiques.
He will also supply Xanax, and say long season, and the key is to make the Ivy Tournament. Nobody is getting an at-large birth in the NCAA tournament.
Go Quakers- Beat Princeton:
|
Tiger69
Postdoc
Posts: 2814
Reg: 11-23-04
|
01-06-20 12:13 PM - Post#296143
In response to Quaker75
Good luck, Quackers, Win the League. Lose the stupid tournament, and the Tigers win the damn thing and turn down the NCAA for the League winner.ðŸ…😈
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4910
Reg: 02-04-06
|
01-07-20 07:55 PM - Post#296217
In response to Tiger69
For all the gnashing of teeth here (and my enthusiasm for Princeton's best-in-season look in this last game), I think Penn should still be considered the favorite in the return match. The Tigers have been unable to defend home court this season, the losing team gets first crack at adjustments, and I expect the Quakers to be much more physical this time around. I still think Aririguzoh pretty much has Brodeur's number, but a couple of foul calls could end that edge really quickly.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-07-20 11:27 PM - Post#296223
In response to SRP
I didn't watch the game and certainly don't intend to now. That said, I can see in my mind what happened. The offense probably stopped moving the ball on the perimeter. AJ probably got the ball several times in the mid to high post, but had defenders more prepared for his juke and lean moves. A slowdown in motion meant less cutters and more one-on-one offense. I've seen this happen against Lafayette and Rice. Either the teams are executing a great counter-offense, or else Penn just doesn't have a counter for teams that prepare their defense for them.
|
penn92
Freshman
Posts: 19
Reg: 03-13-06
|
01-08-20 07:52 PM - Post#296267
In response to Penndemonium
I'm hoping someone can help with a question about actual tip-off time on Friday: I'm going to the game, and am wondering... is tip-off actually 5 pm, or is this one of the deals where the published tip-off is 5:00 but the ball doesn't go up in the air until 5:22 or some such? Does anyone have any helpful info to share? I would normally have no problem showing up well in advance but for this one I'll need to pull my kids early from after-school activity to be there for a 5 pm tip - would rather not. Go Quakers and thanks in advance for any help on this question.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
01-08-20 08:31 PM - Post#296269
In response to penn92
I am quite sure tip will be 5 on the dot. This is for tv purposes I’d assume.
|
Stuart Suss
PhD Student
Posts: 1439
Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-20 08:52 PM - Post#296272
In response to Quakers03
ESPNU is televising Penn at Princeton at 5:00 pm and Iona at Rider at 7:00 pm. I agree with Quakers03 that the network is not going to delay the start of the 5:00 pm game.
|
penn92
Freshman
Posts: 19
Reg: 03-13-06
|
01-08-20 09:16 PM - Post#296275
In response to Stuart Suss
Thank you both, that makes sense. Helpful to know. Also of note is that if one were to skedaddle quickly enough, one could actually attend both games. Not exactly a Big 5 doubleheader, but that’s as close as we’ll get here in Central NJ.
|
