UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-14-24 07:08 PM - Post#361677
Cornell provides and interesting challenge to the Clark-less Quakers. As a 252 ranked defense Cornell is not likely to shut down Penn even without Clark. The issue is obviously defense, a very strong Cornell 2 Point offense (No 1 rank) against Penn's ordinary defense.
Fortunately Clark's absence does not weaken Penn. The two games since the injury suggest that the defense is stronger without him.
Because of these matchups, this game will tell us something about Penn's ability to play against the top three. Over the last four years Penn has averaged two wins against other teams in Ivy Madness. That indicates that an upset of two is likely. However, in those same years Penn has also usually lost two games to the rest of the league. This year KP predicts one loss.
After Cornell, Penn gets three also-rans, probably without Clark. Harvard is balanced O and D. Columbia is weak on D, while Brown is weak on O. That suggests to me that the Harvard game is the key to a good start against the 'others'. That game is on the road. A win there would be very important.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32840
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Cornell
01-14-24 09:01 PM - Post#361683
In response to UPIA1968
Penn is clearly better with Clark---Dartmouth was no test. And calling Harvard and Columbia "also-rans" this year is pretty presumptuous. I hope we make them look like that, but as of this date, they are clearly competitive games.
|
mbaprof
Senior
Posts: 345
Age: 67
Reg: 12-24-11
|
Re: Cornell
01-15-24 03:16 PM - Post#361695
In response to UPIA1968
Harvard game is next sat at palestra
Agree is a big one
|
91Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1126
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-15-24 03:21 PM - Post#361696
In response to mbaprof
Line changes galore! Need to take care of the ball better.
|
91Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1126
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-15-24 03:36 PM - Post#361697
In response to 91Quake
Would you rather Spinoso could finish bunnies or consistently be a decent FT shooter?
|
Penn7277
PhD Student
Posts: 1365
Loc: Lancaster, PA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-15-24 04:28 PM - Post#361704
In response to 91Quake
I'd settle for both.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23405
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-15-24 04:30 PM - Post#361706
In response to Penn7277
Sounds unwatchable. Glad I canceled ESPN +.
|
Penn7277
PhD Student
Posts: 1365
Loc: Lancaster, PA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-15-24 04:32 PM - Post#361707
In response to Penn7277
Looking pretty bad right now. Defense and shooting bad, and turnovers all over the place.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32840
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-15-24 04:40 PM - Post#361709
In response to Penn7277
The hallmark of Steve's teams is a lack of toughness. Someone hits us in the face and we fold. Happened last year against Princeton (and at Cornell and Dartmouth) and is happening again today. Made me search the story about the Franny team in the playoff against Yale--Schiffner gets cheap-shotted and bleeding all over the place, he gets taped up, and we kick Yale's behind. Have not seen that toughness as a team since....when we had it (Steve's championship team he inherited from Jerome), it was the players he inherited. Frankly, it's hard to watch now.
|
Penn7277
PhD Student
Posts: 1365
Loc: Lancaster, PA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-15-24 04:45 PM - Post#361713
In response to palestra38
Spinoso misses so many bunnies.
|
barryw
Sophomore
Posts: 122
Age: 78
Reg: 05-05-10
|
01-15-24 04:46 PM - Post#361715
In response to Penn7277
Whatever the coach said at halftime a it re didn’t work.
|
Penn7277
PhD Student
Posts: 1365
Loc: Lancaster, PA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
 01-15-24 04:51 PM - Post#361716
In response to barryw
A very disappointing performance.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-15-24 05:31 PM - Post#361723
In response to Penn7277
The winner had an efficient offense, creating 22 assists against 8 turnovers. The loser had 8 assists against 17 turnovers.
Penn led at half by 3 then was outscored by 20 when it mattered.
So there is no evidence here that Penn can play with the three good teams. Cornell certainly played to its KP ranking. Fortunately, Brown beat Harvard, so Penn is tied with a significantly lower ranked team for the fourth tournament spot.
We will know more next at Harvard about Penn's ability to win against the other 'also rans'. If you object to that term, which of the bottom five do you think can compete for anything but the last spot in Ivy Madness? Such is the situation when the league has three very strong teams all of whom are ranked well below Penn's last championship team.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3588
Reg: 02-15-15
|
01-15-24 06:37 PM - Post#361726
In response to UPIA1968
Harvard game next Saturday is at the Palestra fyi.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21214
Reg: 12-02-04
|
01-15-24 09:30 PM - Post#361739
In response to UPIA1968
Columbia was far more impressive in its visit to Ithaca.
The winner had an efficient offense, creating 22 assists against 8 turnovers. The loser had 8 assists against 17 turnovers.
Penn led at half by 3 then was outscored by 20 when it mattered.
So there is no evidence here that Penn can play with the three good teams. Cornell certainly played to its KP ranking. Fortunately, Brown beat Harvard, so Penn is tied with a significantly lower ranked team for the fourth tournament spot.
We will know more next at Harvard about Penn's ability to win against the other 'also rans'. If you object to that term, which of the bottom five do you think can compete for anything but the last spot in Ivy Madness? Such is the situation when the league has three very strong teams all of whom are ranked well below Penn's last championship team.
|
weinhauers_ghost
Postdoc
Posts: 2140
Age: 64
Loc: New York City
Reg: 12-14-09
|
01-15-24 10:27 PM - Post#361747
In response to penn nation
We coughed up a hairball in the second half. We didn't defend, couldn't shoot, didn't rebound and couldn't stop throwing the ball away.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3588
Reg: 02-15-15
|
Cornell
01-15-24 10:48 PM - Post#361748
In response to weinhauers_ghost
Not impressed with Spinosa. Same player as his freshmen year. He hasn’t gotten better in any way.
Edited by PennFan10 on 01-15-24 10:49 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-16-24 06:56 AM - Post#361751
In response to PennFan10
Disagree strongly. He is dramatically better than his Freshman year. He is stronger, has better post moves, and passes better. He is definitely a valuable player for us,
The problem is that missing good shots isn't really better than missing bad shots or not being able to get a shot off at all. Ivy coaches will scout him more than non-conference and know his tendencies better. If you foul him in the process, it's also not a tragedy. The other problem is that the ball slows down in his hands in the post. He can make some pretty good passes, but he takes a while to make his reads.
These things hold him back, but he is *this* close.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Cornell
01-16-24 12:59 PM - Post#361765
In response to PennFan10
I haven't been impressed either, but not entirely fair. He is a better passer, rebounder, blocker since his frosh year, though that doesn't mean he is a winning player.
He still turns the ball over far too much (same TO rate all 3 years, bad TO rate at that), misses too many close shots, he can't shoot FTs, and he can't make a 3 to save his life (he made 7 as a frosh which boosted his still mediocre ORAT).
This all results in him being a net negative on offense. His ORAT at 94.5 is worse than frosh year, and only mildly better than last year (which was bad). The path to being a positive on offense would be reduced turnovers, higher 2-point shot field goal % and upgrading to at least a mediocre FT shooter. Unfortunately at 3 years in with no progress on any of these things, seems unlikely to improve.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-16-24 01:11 PM - Post#361766
In response to palestra38
The hallmark of Steve's teams is a lack of toughness. Someone hits us in the face and we fold. Happened last year against Princeton (and at Cornell and Dartmouth) and is happening again today. Made me search the story about the Franny team in the playoff against Yale--Schiffner gets cheap-shotted and bleeding all over the place, he gets taped up, and we kick Yale's behind. Have not seen that toughness as a team since....when we had it (Steve's championship team he inherited from Jerome), it was the players he inherited. Frankly, it's hard to watch now.
Can't disagree with you, but the bottom line here is that Cornell is a better team at their peak. Unfortunately for them, Princeton is better, but this Cornell team is at a level that has won Ivy Championships in the past.
Penn is the same Penn it has been for a long while now. Mediocre. Will have a decent shot at making the tournament and unceremoniously losing in the first round (sound familiar?).
Steve Donahue has managed to do something that no other Penn coach in nearly 30 years has done for me... and that is make me stop caring. I think this is the least Penn basketball I have bothered to watch since my sophomore year.
I just haven't been very interested. Mediocrity is worse than being a train wreck for me because it is a trap you can't escape. Saves me time wasted, so probably a good thing I guess.
I do really like the frosh group on the team and seems promising, but I've seen this movie before for this year. The only way ahead is if the next batch of frosh next year match the quality of this year's frosh. That has been the short coming every time of the Donahue staff. They recruit one promising class and whiff on the next class or two. You need to stack quality to win. There's hope yet (Bradyn Foster looks v. interesting), but let's see.
|
pennsive
Junior
Posts: 200
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Cornell
01-16-24 01:36 PM - Post#361769
In response to Mike Porter
He is not THE problem. He is better than our alternatives. The problem is team defense and a marked inability to play aggressive man to man defense for two halves, denying the three and denying penetration without fouling. Often, as yesterday, we allow wide open threes as though we expect the other team not to make shots they practice every day in shoot around practices. Look how closely Cornell guarded your three point shooting in the second half. For years our front line, especially, has been less athletic and less physically strong than our opponents, and we wear down as the game progresses. Solid team defense without fouling is and has been our Achilles Heel for years. Conversely, we are typically bullied in the second half, to the point that we have no legs, and then we fold up. It is not the fault of our center. The question to focus on is WHY we couldn’t score in the second half, and why we allowed them to shoot three pointers as though they were having a pre-game shoot around. This wasn’t random. It has happened to us historically, even with a healthy Clark and with Dingle to bail us out and keep us close enough to mask those problems.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Cornell
01-16-24 02:01 PM - Post#361772
In response to pennsive
He is not THE problem. He is better than our alternatives. The problem is team defense and a marked inability to play aggressive man to man defense for two halves, denying the three and denying penetration without fouling. Often, as yesterday, we allow wide open threes as though we expect the other team not to make shots they practice every day in shoot around practices. Look how closely Cornell guarded your three point shooting in the second half. For years our front line, especially, has been less athletic and less physically strong than our opponents, and we wear down as the game progresses. Solid team defense without fouling is and has been our Achilles Heel for years. Conversely, we are typically bullied in the second half, to the point that we have no legs, and then we fold up. It is not the fault of our center. The question to focus on is WHY we couldn’t score in the second half, and why we allowed them to shoot three pointers as though they were having a pre-game shoot around. This wasn’t random. It has happened to us historically, even with a healthy Clark and with Dingle to bail us out and keep us close enough to mask those problems.
For the record, I'm not saying Spinoso is the problem. I was just reacting to the commentary about him.
I agree that generally defense is the biggest problem, though the offense isn't top 100 either.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-16-24 05:37 PM - Post#361780
In response to Mike Porter
Yeah, Spinoso is much better than our other options right now, and became much better than Mosh. We just haven't had really good big men recruits except for Brodeur from Donahue's early years.
If he could hit his free throws plus any ONE of the the open 8 footer jumpshot, the 4 foot scoop, or the 6 foot fadeaway, he would be much closer to Brodeur than Mosh.
I give him credit on seemingly working his way into becoming our best big man, though. I don't think many expected much from him as a recruit.
Ubochi has some tantalizing abilities, but isn't quite ready.
I think Foster will be one of our best for a while, but I predict we will use him at C instead of a more natural PF. This is the problem with thin big man recruiting classes.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-17-24 08:39 PM - Post#361808
In response to penn nation
Was Columbia much more impressive? Penn led much later in the game than Columbia did. Yes, Columbia held within striking distance longer. But they never had a lead after the 5 minute mark of the first half. Also, Penn played one bad defensive half — Columbia played two. Columbia looked better than Penn did on offense, I suppose. It’s the “much” word I’m questioning—Columbia’s 12 point loss looked a little better than Penn’s 17 point loss, but to me the difference between the two games was within the margin of error.
|
penn nation
Professor
Posts: 21214
Reg: 12-02-04
|
01-17-24 09:30 PM - Post#361810
In response to SomeGuy
I watched most of that Cornell-Columbia contest. It was anyone's game. Pretty amazing considering they were really undersized and, like Penn, missing a top player (De La Rosa).
It was a 3 point game with 5:40 to play. By that point in the Penn game, Cornell was up by 21.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-18-24 08:42 PM - Post#361815
In response to penn nation
Yes, I watched the game too. While Columbia hung in there, to me it looked like they were drafting behind a team that could score at will. They just never looked to me like they had any chance to stop Cornell — all they could do was hope they kept shooting the lights out. So to me it looked more like a lightning in a bottle or fools gold kind of game, where shooting really well for a while masked the fact they were outclassed. You could say the same of Penn’s first half certainly (and maybe it was Cornell’s cold shooting rather than Penn’s defense that made the first half what it was). But watching the two games I thought Penn showed the ability to defend Cornell for stretches, while Volumbia did not.
|
