Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-08-22 06:59 PM - Post#332744
In response to AsiaSunset
It’s a terrible defensive team by the KenPom #s—bottom third in the country in nearly every category—but these last two were the best points-per-possession efforts on D since the Bucknell & Lafayette games.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 12:14 AM - Post#332905
In response to Chip Bayers
The Cornell win was positive, but the Columbia loss completely invalidates it.
The bottom line is that unfortunately it doesn't matter how tough our schedule was really. This is a 215ish KP team for better or worse.
Even with a larger spread against Cornell than expected (which ballooned at the end), that only got us to 200. Then "regression to the mean" said "hold my beer" tonight and we got blasted back to 220.
I mean, good teams just don't lose to the worst team in the league at home. We lost to 347 Columbia... at home. The 330ish offense scored 73 points against us. The results are in, our defense is terrible and if Coach Donahue really thinks we are good defensively, then well, I don't really know what to say about that.
Sadly, you could see this letdown loss coming from a mile away. I surely hoped we would win, but in the back of my mind I had a bad feeling this is what we'd see.
I wanted to hope that the 2-0 start meant something more, but this tells me it doesn't. We could certainly have a shot at making the tournament in the 6-8 to 8-6 record range, but at some point if the best you can do is be in the race for 4th, it gets tiring.
Really hope I'm wrong and expect a wild league season, so you never know, but neither the numbers nor the eye test tell me this is anything more than that.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-09-22 12:40 AM - Post#332909
In response to Mike Porter
On the wild season — 6-8 won’t cut it this year. Frankly, 7-7 probably won’t either. We’ve got to get to 8. Good news is we’re alone in second place. But we’ve got a long way to go.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8220
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 10:12 AM - Post#332923
In response to SomeGuy
Last night realized all my worst fears about the game and this team. Give the Lions some credit, they gave it away to PU and they came in as a 15 point dog determined to atone for that. I knew they would cover that because they are a terrible matchup for Penn with their frontline size and skills. We said before the game that our guards would need to shoot well from 3 and post up their guards to win the day. Didn’t happen. Dingle couldn’t get it going. Giving up second chances was also predictable, but this was ridiculous. Despite all that, don’t blame the defense. That (and all those missed 1-1’s) gave them many chances in the last 3 minutes and could not buy a hoop aside from the prayer from Martz.
Truth is, they likely beat Columbia 80% of the time at home, but their weaknesses were clearly on display last night and this game likely puts their ceiling at 7-7. Maybe that slides them in with a tie breaker.
|
andybech
Freshman
Posts: 80
Reg: 02-15-20
|
01-09-22 11:09 AM - Post#332926
In response to Streamers
I think Penn tries hard on defense, they are just not that good at it other than Monroe. Even someone like Mosh who is decent for his size is just overmatched against various bigs.
I can see how SD likes this bunch. They have been through a lot. They try hard. They are just undermanned inside and don't have a real point guard and can't stop good athletic players.
I think they need to inject a little John Cheney in their DNA to succeed. The 1-3-1 they went into yesterday was fairly effective. They do have a bunch of rangy guards in the 6-4 to 6-6 range that can cause issues with others. But then they also need to stop making bad passes and turnovers. I think I would rather see them take a long 3 than trying some of their inside passes which often don't work. They really need to figure out how to get better 3s. Charles seems so one dimensional out there but he could be a weapon and a lineup that has multiple shooters out there (Dingle, Martz, Charles, Slachert) should really be better at creating open 3s.
|
Penn7277
PhD Student
Posts: 1365
Loc: Lancaster, PA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 11:24 AM - Post#332927
In response to andybech
Oddly, Penn seemed to do better yesterday and much of Friday with Dingle out. It seemed that, especially yesterday, he was forcing the issue too much.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8220
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 11:27 AM - Post#332929
In response to Penn7277
When Dingle hits those 'forced' shots, he's a star, otherwise, he's a liability. it's not complicated.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-09-22 11:31 AM - Post#332930
In response to Streamers
Agreed that we lost this one primarily on offense.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21193
Reg: 12-02-04
|
01-09-22 11:35 AM - Post#332932
In response to SomeGuy
Agreed that we lost this one primarily on offense.
Well, if you ignore all of the offensive rebounds we gave up, which is not easy to do.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-09-22 11:45 AM - Post#332935
In response to Penn7277
Yes, oddly we won the 18 minutes of the game last night where Dingle was on the bench. And for the weekend we were out scored while he was in. Just a bad shooting night against Columbia, in a game that matchup-wise was the one where we really needed him to be a difference maker on offense.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21193
Reg: 12-02-04
|
This Crazy Schedule
01-09-22 11:58 AM - Post#332938
In response to SomeGuy
Yes, oddly we won the 18 minutes of the game last night where Dingle was on the bench. And for the weekend we were out scored while he was in. Just a bad shooting night against Columbia, in a game that matchup-wise was the one where we really needed him to be a difference maker on offense.
No-one could seem to get to the rim last night with any regularity, not even Dingle. And no-one except for Charles had any noticeable measure of success from distance. Oh, and no-one really got to the line last night (combination of first point and the fact that the refs simply were not calling much...at least when Penn was on offense).
That's a pretty fatal combo on offense.
Edited by penn nation on 01-09-22 11:59 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: This Crazy Schedule
01-09-22 12:50 PM - Post#332942
In response to penn nation
That said, if you simply take out Dingle, we shot 48% from the field and 35% from 3 — a combo that usually means a win, and would have in this case. So while it may have seemed like we weren’t getting shots, we generally were getting shots we were making at a reasonable rate outside of Dingle.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8220
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 02:06 PM - Post#332957
In response to penn nation
Agreed that we lost this one primarily on offense.
Well, if you ignore all of the offensive rebounds we gave up, which is not easy to do.
The latter was predictable, the former was not.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-09-22 04:09 PM - Post#332974
In response to Streamers
On the other hand, Princeton figured it out. Their frontline isn’t any bigger than our front line, and they played 4 guards for significant stretches of the game. So they played with Columbia having a massive size advantage at the 4 at times. Yet Princeton won on the boards because their guards rebound so well.
But agreed that this was a game that you would think we win while allowing some o boards. It may not be a coincidence that Columbia is the only team in the league that plays two more traditional bigs, and is ranked 345 in the country. It’s a mismatch that usually doesn’t play to their advantage. But last night it certainly did.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 04:07 PM - Post#333027
In response to SomeGuy
On the wild season — 6-8 won’t cut it this year. Frankly, 7-7 probably won’t either. We’ve got to get to 8. Good news is we’re alone in second place. But we’ve got a long way to go.
Fair points for sure. It will definitely be a wild ride that is clear, so I guess we'll see how it plays out and I hope we can make the tournament. Certainly feels like a year that any team could beat any team on a given night, so will be interesting to see how records shape up. Hell, at this point, I just hope we have a full season.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-10-22 05:36 PM - Post#333045
In response to Mike Porter
The original thread was about the crazy schedule. In addition to the crazy preseason schedule, the Ivy schedule will be tough too. Our team has high enough variance that I don't expect them to sweep many weekends, even against the bottom half teams. The results will hinge on a few plays in a few key games, rather than relying on the law of averages.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6406
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-10-22 07:04 PM - Post#333049
In response to Penndemonium
And it could be fair to revisit the schedule after Saturday’s result. Query whether a team that hadn’t gotten beaten up so much OOC pulls out that game against a weaker team.
That said, we held up fine in crunch time against a much better and more athletic Cornell team the night before. But it might be that the constant pounding of the Ivy back to back just means you don’t have the legs for it the second night. I thought Mosh, Smith and Slajchert all didn’t finish shots late where you kind of wondered if guys were tired.
|
Quake Show
Junior
Posts: 218
Reg: 03-04-20
|
This Crazy Schedule
01-10-22 08:05 PM - Post#333054
In response to Penndemonium
In line with your prediction on the manner in which we make (or don't make) the ILT, someone on Twitter remarked that the Ivy is one of the more fun conferences to watch. That was in response to Princeton pulling out a two-win weekend leading for only 12 minutes out of a total of 80 minutes played.
Clearly, this isn't a conference right now whose teams we can expect to be consistent. Some may call that fun to watch, but for me personally it's excruciating.
Edited by Quake Show on 01-10-22 08:06 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
