UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
12-29-22 12:02 AM - Post#348521
The Wilkes game marks a convenient pre-ivy division, roughly halfway through the season. Using the KenPom stats and observation of play, we can develop a pretty good idea of Penn’s prospects in Ivy play. I use Ken’s statistics because, whatever their limitations, they are easily the best statistical measure of performance.
Given the returning talent, we expected a significant improvement over 2022, something needed for Ivy play since Penn’s sixth-place finish last season in Ken Pom rankings among Ivy teams says that Penn needed some good fortune to make the Ivy tournament. Without that fortune, in 2023, the team would need improvement to earn its slot – unless it legitimately is improved.
The stats after 14 games show a statistically significant improvement, summarized by the move from a KP rank of 211 to the current 156, mediocracy to competence. Among the IVYs, Penn now ranks fourth behind Yale 70, Princeton 112, and the surprise, Cornell at 142. Harvard is at 180, close enough to move into the tournament should one of the leaders stumble.
Importantly, Penn has NOT made the jump to light speed that we hoped for. It is a long way to Yale and Princeton’s rankings. Why is that? The answer remains defense, ranked at 262. That is better than last year at 295, but waaaaay above Yale at 54. KP may be somewhat wrong about Yale’s quality, given their schedule. But he ain’t that wrong. Penn’s offense is great at 78. Yet Yale is at 98. Penn’s defense is still rotten. Yale is ranked 54! We had hoped Penn might steal a 2023 championship in a down Ivy year. Ken Pom says, ‘no down year for the best teams.’ Princeton is at 112.
Still, we have Penn’s improvement. It comes from that drop of 28 places on offense combined with a drop of 38 places on defense. That is good, but not a jump to light speed.
Individually we see a nice improvement in all five starters. Jordan is now the favorite for POY, dominating on the offensive end of the court. Slajchert has improved, making more than half his two’s and a third of his three’s. Martz has solidified his status as the ultimate supporting player, on offense, defense, and rebounding. He would start for any Ivy team and most mid-major non-Ivies. Monroe is a step down, but still a very dependable ball handler, defender, and rebounder. Just a little more scoring would put him close to Martz’s class. Spinoso is the most pleasant surprise, developing into a full-time player who can rebound and pass. The bench is much stronger, if lacking players who consistently contribute at a high level. Andrew L is particularly intriguing, given his energy and length. Should he find a way to score regularly, Penn will benefit.
This litany of individual improvement explains why Penn has improved but not enough to threaten the 100 rank. All the starters have improved, but all but Spinoso were already good. Several bench players have improved, but not enough to consistently stand out. Put differently, Penn has not benefited from the emergence of a big NEW talent, like it did in 2020 when Jordan and Max appeared, or with the arrival of Clark last year. Neither of the freshmen has distinguished themselves. Of course, the big man has been hurt.
What do I conclude? To the good - barring injuries, Penn will make the Ivy Tournament and might make the dance via upsets. With the team's core returning next year, we can say the same thing. To the bad - there is no evidence YET of the truly excellent performance one hopes for at the top of the Dingle talent surge. We saw some of that with the Brodeur surge in 2018 when Penn edged out Harvard. That team had a real peak in 2019 had Betley and Wang been healthy. Think of it this way. Only Dingle from this year’s team would have started for either of those teams.
So Steve has given us at least an interesting Ivy campaign, if we are still waiting for a revival of the Dunphy excellence. Nothing new, unfortunately – continued competence but no excellence. I hope the Ivy season proves me wrong. That will take a significant improvement over the first half performance.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
Halfway there
12-29-22 04:50 AM - Post#348522
In response to UPIA1968
I can't argue with your points, especially the defense. I do think it has improved over the early season and it will look better in the Ivies. That said, the eye test says they just aren't determined enough to stay in front of their man as some past teams and they aren't that physical. They give up too many offensive rebounds and the big men don't clear out the paint. The lack of that toughness means that while they can beat any of the Ivies, they can lose to anyone. All teams have good and bad shooting days, but a stalwart defense can give you a chance to win every game. This is a dangerous pattern on Ivy road season back-to-backs.
Will be hoping they lock it down in the second half!
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8240
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-29-22 08:55 AM - Post#348528
In response to Penndemonium
We can all agree the defense is leaky, but I would argue the strength of our OOC has something to do with that as it did last year. More importantly, MLL can solve some of that by himself when he is in there. Of course, the offense suffers a bit when he is. My hope is that the versatility SD has up front with MLL, Spinoso, Mosh, and Martz (plus Monroe) gives him matchup options that will make this team far more effective defensively in Ivy play.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-29-22 03:26 PM - Post#348542
In response to Streamers
Defense in league play can definitely improve, although typically it doesn't translate to over 100 spots in KP rankings. There are many examples of better defense in league play. Princeton last year for example, 12-2 in league play and the favorite for the ILT bid, was KP29 in offense and KP 250 in defense. Their conference only defense was almost 100 spots better (which seems an outlier) than their non conference defense and in the ILT (losing 66-64 to Yale) they had a very capable defense, despite a 250 KP defensive rank. The top Ivy teams absolutely are better defensively in the Ivy slate than in the non conference, but it usually only translates to about 20KP spots better.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21193
Reg: 12-02-04
|
12-29-22 03:37 PM - Post#348543
In response to PennFan10
The defense is going to be an issue in IL play. It was less than stellar yesterday even against DIII guys, ended up fouling quite a bit on the floor.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
12-29-22 03:40 PM - Post#348545
In response to PennFan10
I have to agree with PF10 here. If the eye test told me something different, I would withhold comment, but they *appear* to give up a few too many threes, drives, and offensive rebounds. The don't look terrible on defense, but that is a long way from looking good. I'm at a loss to think of whose defense has impressed. MLL has strengths but isn't physical enough. Martz looks good in spurts. Spinoso hustles and holds his ground, but isn't especially quick. Monroe looks good sometimes. None are lock-down defenders consistently and they appear to be our best. We someone who will raise the game for our team on defense overall.
Non-conference is always a bit wild with our team.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
12-29-22 04:08 PM - Post#348548
In response to Penndemonium
If you look at the KP numbers closely there are few things we do well on defense and a number of things we simply don't do well.
The best things we do defensively are:
block % KP 123 (this is almost all MLL)
opponent Off reb KP158
Opponent FT % KP49 (this is mostly randomness but also indicates we foul the "right people")
What we are poor at defensively are:
Getting Turnovers KP 359
non-steal TO's KP 363 (Dingle is our best steal guy)
3pt FG % KP 201 (this is made 3pt %)
Opponent FTA/FGA KP 240 (we don't guard without fouling)
distribution of pts--2pointers KP 324. (opponents get much more of their pts from 2 against us than most other teams)
Interstingly, the distribution of pts from 3 pters (despite the bad 3pt % made against us) is quite good at KP 49. That means we are putting a premium at limiting opponent 3pt attempts but simply can't guard well enough to keep them from scoring in the paint or getting fouled.
2 things I take from this (others may see different things). 1-we don't stay in front of people very well (this is personnel driven) and 2-we don't help much on the drive or post touch (this is strategic--see 3pt distribution)
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
12-29-22 06:31 PM - Post#348558
In response to PennFan10
That's a more analytic take than my eye-test analytics from only a few games watched on-line! 
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
12-29-22 11:41 PM - Post#348569
In response to Penndemonium
The one thing that might help on defense in terms of personnel is getting Smith back. He was our best perimeter defender last year. Vince Curran actually said during the Temple game that he thought the team missed Smith more than Slajchert. McMullen doesn’t necessarily help with the size/physicality, but in spurts he also seems to be one of our better guys at staying in front of people.
One other interesting thing Donahue said after the Temple game — he basically said we’re really tough when we play team defense like that and Jordan scores the way he did. To me, this team’s formula is exactly that. It’s Dingle and whoever the best 4 defenders are.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23369
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-30-22 07:19 AM - Post#348570
In response to SomeGuy
Reminds me of Iverson and the Sixers before Theo’s injury. Surround your star with defense.
|
|
