Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-01-20 05:55 PM - Post#306889
In response to Streamers
First of all, Martz proved to be on his way to becoming a decent rebounder over the course of the season. He will continue to improve. Monroe has proven to be adept at it, and I agree with P38 that Dingle could emerge as one much the way a smaller Goodman did. I have to think MLL is going to be a beast from that perspective; hope he learns how to outlet like Max R. did. One thing guys like Zoller and Grandieri showed us is that, at least in our league, technique can matter more than physical traits when it comes to rebounding.
I'm a BIG fan of Max Martz and think he is going to be a really good, multi-level scorer and enjoy a great Penn career. I also think his positional defense is solid even though he might not be the quickest.
That said, his rebounding numbers were not good to start the year (rebounding % on par with small guards). His rebounding % ticked up, but pretty marginally and he finished with comparable rebounding percentage to rebounding behemoths like Mike Smith, Zach Hunsaker, Azar Swain, Terrance McBride, etc. In other words, still not what we need out of our 4...
I certainly hope and expect improvement, but currently this is not a strength for Martz. LOTS of other things to like, but we can be honest about rebounding.
P.S. rebounding concerns go well beyond Martz, so only highlighting him since his name was thrown around.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-01-20 06:12 PM - Post#306890
In response to besnoah
Ah, didn't realize I was participating in a running weeping match. I thought I was discussing team composition in a recruiting thread and speculating about why Penn has mostly offered HM-quality bigs over the past two years (Zona, Kepnang, etc.) without much in the way of secondary options.
Yeah... agree with this take. For me, it's honestly a given that the preference would be to have more options in the big slots than we have now... More options means higher likelihood of success. That doesn't mean we don't like MLL or see potential there. I think the problem is that you come from the perspective of everything working out to best case scenario.
If Wang comes back 100% healthy, Simmons makes a Jr to Sr jump out of nowhere and MLL lives up to all those offers and running the floor and dunking, rebounding like crazy and blocking a lot of shots, of course, I'd feel great about that.
BUT the last few years should teach a clear lesson that you can't plan on best case. Wang's health is a huge unknown (now missed a year +). MLL's progression is a huge unknown (couldn't crack regular rotation of an 8-6, 4th place Ivy team with 1 reliable big). Simmons progression is pretty well known and isn't what we hoped.
Ask yourself these questions honestly:
-Do you genuinely think it is more likely that most of the things above go right?
- Or more likely that a few of them go wrong?
- Had we landed/land a true big or two in this 2020 class, would we be in a better situation?
Note that I'm not even hating on MLL. I'm still very excited about his upside. It's about the odds for me. One of the Ivy advantages is that we can have bigger roster sizes with more recruits, but haven't seemed to convert on that as well as we'd like.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
2021 Recruiting
05-02-20 04:32 AM - Post#306900
In response to Mike Porter
Isaiah Walker junior year highlights can be seen here: https://www.hudl.com/video/3/10521344/5e66 8128c119...
Very impressive highlight reel (and great HS season stats). Shows a pretty smooth game with ability to score in different ways and defensively he looks pretty long and disruptive for the few D highlights. Looks like one to keep track of for sure.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-02-20 05:42 PM - Post#306929
In response to Mike Porter
Penn coaches get a mention from Walker here: https://scoopmantv.com/2020/05/02/isaiah-wal ker-co...
|
Condor
PhD Student
Posts: 1888
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
05-03-20 07:49 AM - Post#306942
In response to palestra38
In a late response, I think it is hard to argue with MrJames on the projections. On paper, Harvard looks like they will be the better team. I agree with P38 that there is much potential with MLL & Wang (assuming Wang can play). However, any way you spin it, the numbers seem to favor Harvard even from a less sophisticated perspective than MrJames.
On another note, MrJames never mentions Mark Jackson when comparing the centers. I know he has not received much playing time, but Donahue mentioned that he might have to play him because of his good preseason play before last season. AJ dominated play at center the last four years, and no one else really got a chance to play other than Rothschild and Simmons. With Simmons, he basically filled in for the 5 minutes or less that AJ did not play. I just wonder if Jackson can also contribute some valuable minutes next season. Further, does he have an extra year of eligibility that he might use with Penn?
|
Charlie Fog
Masters Student
Posts: 586
Age: 55
Loc: Philly
Reg: 11-12-13
|
05-03-20 08:14 AM - Post#306943
In response to Mike Porter
Very encouraging
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
05-03-20 08:27 AM - Post#306944
In response to Condor
It is easy to argue with him--he is basing his projections almost entirely on the fact that Harvard's players were higher ranked recruits, because when you look at returning minutes, it is almost identical. But I will readily admit that on paper, Harvard should be a better team. But they have some serious holes, and the guys they will rely on mostly have not been in positions where they had to be the first or second option. It's almost willful blindness to think that a team that loses virtually all its big man minutes (Lewis, Baker), and its most versatile remaining offensive players (after its two injured superstars, Aiken and Towns), Bassey and Juzang has enough in the tank to be a serious contender this year. I will put the Penn soph class up against their returning guys and give us a very good chance. And if we can get the freshman pre-injury output of Wang and Washington, Penn has a better team. But no matter how you look at it, a prediction is not based on returning production except for 2 players on each team---Kirkwood and Djuricic on Harvard and Dingle and Martz on Penn. Penn wins that matchup in my opinion. Beyond that, it's based on potential on both sides and I am bullish on MLL.
BTW, if Jackson plays anything more than garbage time, it will not be a good year for Penn.
|
Condor
PhD Student
Posts: 1888
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
05-03-20 09:12 AM - Post#306946
In response to palestra38
By the numbers, I agree it is close. However, if you go strictly by the numbers, I think any stats guy would pick Harvard over Penn. Everything else is subjective. One would certainly hope that MLL could be a difference maker. We also know that Wang, if healthy, is another piece that raises the prospects for Penn.
However, if Simmons does not raise his game, Wang can’t play, and MLL still looks like a raw talent next year, then Forbes + other Harvard guys looks a lot better to me than Penn C’s + other Penn guys. While I have been an advocate for Simmons possibly raising his game with more time sans AJ, hopeful about Wang returning, and optimistic about the prospects for MLL, I feel that it is more about hope and my bias than a hard objective look. I would add that I am also optimistic about Slajchert’s game fitting in with the sophomore crew earlier rather than later. In the end, I really hope that the stars align for our big guys. However, I also worry that the even with all the C’s in play, we will have trouble replacing AJ’s offensive contribution inside. Not only did he produce points, but he kept defenses honest and created opportunities for others. It is a major hole to fill with unproven talent.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
05-03-20 09:29 AM - Post#306947
In response to palestra38
Harvard won 6 of its last 7, including beating Penn, Princeton and Yale. Juzang was lost vs Columbia, so Harvard played without him for the last 6.5 games.
In those final 6 games, the returnees that we are wondering about played significant minutes:
Forbes 16 mpg
Haskett 19
Ledlum 19
Djuricic 18
Amaker didn't seem to settle on Tretout in his guard rotation until the final 3 games, when Tretout played 18mpg, scoring in double digits in the final games vs Cornell and Yale. Apparently Noah Kirkwood played hurt in that stretch as well, eventually sitting out the Yale game.
No question this team drops off in potential, but so does the entire league (except for Dartmouth and Brown). Amaker usually does a good job of utilizing his depth, and those guys played often and well in tight games down the Ivy stretch, including against the other 3 tournament qualifiers.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
05-03-20 09:43 AM - Post#306948
In response to palestra38
While I think mrjames is underestimating Penn (and has underestimated Penn’s last two recruiting classes as well), I do not think it is based almost entirely on the quality of Harvard’s recruits. Everyone who runs statistical models predicting next year will have Harvard ahead of Penn next year, probably significantly, and generally they don’t take recruiting into account. Even though the two teams lose the same number of minutes, Harvard’s returnees simply played better last year. They have more than 50% more returning win shares than Penn does. And even if the models don’t delve deep enough to look at the quality of minutes lost, they will approximate it by simply removing the same amount for both Harvard and Penn based on minutes lost, and Harvard will remain ahead because they were ahead this past year.
Now, Harvard is only 4th in returning win shares (behind Yale, Princeton, and Dartmouth), so like Penn they will need for it to turn out they have superior talent in order to compete for the league. Yale is way ahead. To quantify, Penn is 7th in the league in returning win shares. But Penn is closer to 2nd place Princeton than Princeton is to Yale.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-03-20 10:29 AM - Post#306951
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
This is what I am talking about with cherry picking. Let's just look at that narrow Harvard victory over Penn--here's the box score.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/boxscores/202...
Penn has 134 returning minutes. Harvard has 96, most of which was deep reserve. You can look at games against lesser teams that were not as close and make the overall numbers closer, but the primary thesis of Mike and you, that Harvard clearly has more quality returning minutes, is highly questionable at best. Again, it boils down to prospect rating and nothing more.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
05-03-20 10:38 AM - Post#306953
In response to palestra38
Cherry picking?
I looked at 6 games.
You looked at 1
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-03-20 03:08 PM - Post#306957
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
Yes, you chose them because they got more minutes against the dregs. But the performance of your underclassmen those last 6 games was undistinguished, to say the least, which is why all you are talking about is minutes.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2691
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
05-03-20 04:20 PM - Post#306960
In response to palestra38
No, I chose those games because - as I was very clear - Juzang got hurt and so Amaker had to finish the final 6 games without both of his senior guards. They were also the most recent 6 games, against every Ivy squad but for Dartmouth. Freshmen also are more assimilated and this representative. There aren’t any more relevant games than the most recent one’s, triggered and starting with the absence of another senior in Juzang.
You have it backwards. I didn’t pick their best games. These returning players had good games when called upon.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-03-20 04:41 PM - Post#306961
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
They weren't good though. Look through the stats of your underclassmen in these games. They won despite them, not because of them.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-03-20 05:00 PM - Post#306963
In response to palestra38
Next year (outside of Yale), is really is a crapshoot in my mind as to how the rest of the team's come together, so I'm not really that interested in wading into the debate on who will be better.
BUT, hey its Sunday and this is a distraction for a few minutes so why not, right?
My view is I think if both teams are fully healthy that we can definitely be as good if not better than Harvard next year. The problem is that is a BIG if. I hope I'm wrong because having fully healthy Mike Wang, Jonah Charles, Jelani Williams, and Bryce Washington to go along with rest of rising Sophs, rising Seniors, and incoming frosh would be a VERY intriguing roster. The problem is the probability of that (based on last few years track record) feels lower than I think any of us would like. So odds still favor likelihood of Harvard being better.
The fact that our 2020 class is smaller is where my personal frustration comes in as a fan, because a few more players means a few more chances of hitting on a good contributor early. For me it really is about desire to increase our odds for success. That's not a knock on guys coming in (I'm really high on Slacjert and Laczkowski), but just that we didn't fill out class a little more.
In general, I think this will be Coach Donahue and the staff's MOST difficult job yet at Penn, so if everything comes together, it will be super impressive. Here's to hoping 1) we have a season and 2) that it all does come together.
Another factor I'd like to throw into the mix that will be very interesting to track and no one seems to be talking about... Current isolation measures don't give guys full capabilities to work on their games, play alongside teammates in pickups, etc. Based on how long this goes on, I'm wondering aloud how that is going to affect/diminish off season improvement.
|
91Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1125
Reg: 11-22-04
|
05-07-20 07:35 PM - Post#307057
In response to Mike Porter
Casey Simmons has definitely seen his recruiting pick up in a major way but Penn still very much a consideration from Corey Evans at Rivals:
https://basketballrecruit ing.rivals.com/news/three...
|
nychoops
Junior
Posts: 240
Reg: 11-23-04
|
05-07-20 09:12 PM - Post#307061
In response to 91Quake
Son in law tried to get involved but was told he didn’t want west coast. Was told he likes Gtown and Penn but if/when G Tech offers they would be in it. Northwestern all over him. Also for those clamoring for a big know they are involved with 3-4 quality kids
|
Condor
PhD Student
Posts: 1888
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-08-20 06:59 AM - Post#307066
In response to nychoops
That sounds promising, NycH. Are you able to share if the bigs are 2020?
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
05-09-20 03:01 PM - Post#307115
In response to nychoops
Son in law tried to get involved but was told he didn’t want west coast. Was told he likes Gtown and Penn but if/when G Tech offers they would be in it. Northwestern all over him. Also for those clamoring for a big know they are involved with 3-4 quality kids
nychoops - always love your insights and thanks so much for sharing. Casey Simmons looks REALLY good so love to hear Penn is still in it. I think 2021 class is critical and seems like a lot of good targets. Fingers crossed on a big as well.
|
