Back to Post
| Username | Post: Macro Recruiting Question |
|---|---|
|
91Quake PhD Student Posts 1126 |
09-21-20 02:43 PM - Post#313701
Picking up on what a few people have said, this does not seem to be a fantastic year for Penn BB recruiting, especially compared to the rest of the Ivies. My question for all is what is the distinction between what is going on for the men's and women's results? They are both selling essentially the same product with some of the same advantages and disadvantages. However, the women's team can go after and win out with top 100 recruits, not every year but often enough to not be an anomaly. There are differences between the men's and women's games for sure but do those alone account for the vast differential in outcomes on the recruiting front? Is it just personnel? Does anyone understand this? |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-21-20 02:49 PM - Post#313702
H and Y have an enormous recruiting advantage with their undergraduate brands. If they are allowed to essentially admit everyone Penn (and any other Ivy) can admit (the entire purpose of the AI in the first place), they were bound to win the vast majority of recruiting battles as soon as they decided they wanted to do so. They decided to do so in men's basketball. And there are only so many basketball players of high quality who meet the Ivy academic requirements. It's not like general admissions, where Penn stays close because neither Yale nor Harvard can take all qualified applicants and they waste close to half their admits on legacies. Here, as long as there is an AI and Yale and Harvard want to win, we will lose virtually every head to head battle. |
|
Quake Show Junior Posts 218 |
09-21-20 03:07 PM - Post#313704
I dont think this take is particularly relevant to our situation though. Most of the recruits we've lost out on have not been head-to-head battles with Harvard and Yale (Hysier, Mitchell, Lieb, Zona, the list goes on), we simply haven't been able to match up with other Philly schools or even mid-majors. You're right that they have a better brand, but that's why they're going after top-75 and up recruits and winning. We're not winning the top-200+ battles with other schools. Second, there are plenty of inherent advantages that Penn can sell – brand is one thing but the literal job of a recruiter is to sell a specific vision. Clearly we aren't able to do that with one of the winningest teams of all time, the Big 5 and Philly being a basketball-crazy city, one of if not the strongest non-conference schedules in the IL, the Palestra, the best facilities in the league, the best undergraduate business school, etc. That's not a branding problem that's a recruiting problem. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-21-20 03:15 PM - Post#313705
The brand advantage we once had all disappeared after 2007 and the Jerome Allen fiasco hurt badly. No one in Philadelphia except for alumni cares anymore about college basketball other than Villanova. The Palestra is beloved, but no one goes to a game there unless Villanova is playing Penn. Now I don't know what you mean about Penn not getting 200 level players--we had great recruiting years the past 2 years although injuries have hurt us. This year looks bad right now---but we recruited a 3-4 place team after Harvard and Yale. Those are the only two we are not out-recruiting on a yearly basis. We'll be fine--we have a lot of returning talent that is young. We just cannot compete in this current setting with Harvard and Yale. |
|
91Quake PhD Student Posts 1126 |
09-21-20 03:50 PM - Post#313706
Fine. You guys are all talking about the men's team. But why can we win those recruiting battles on the women's side is the issue I am trying to understand? |
|
penn nation Professor Posts 21212 |
09-21-20 03:53 PM - Post#313707
H & Y don't yet take it as seriously? |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-21-20 03:56 PM - Post#313708
Harvard is not paying a women's coach over $1 million. Are they? |
|
section110 Masters Student Posts 847 |
09-21-20 05:39 PM - Post#313714
Yes, but Harvard has had a pretty good women's program for a long time. Yale, not so much. So, I think the question remains, how does Mike do & can it be translated to the men's program (which has done a great job of identifying overlooked & underrated talent), |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-21-20 06:17 PM - Post#313717
It’s personnel. Penn could be recruiting right up against there with Harvard and Yale instantly. I’ve been complaining about this for years now, because Penn is the missing piece to a Top 10 league. The notion that somehow this is primarily the result of institutional advantages demonstrates an unhelpful ignorance about how this league works. We’ve been over all this before, and I can’t wait for the Quakers to hire that former Power 5 coach and rockstar recruiter that gets fired for a disappointing NIT season who will have Penn consistently hauling in Top 100 classes. This is a really easy solve for a program with Penn’s resources. |
|
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3618 
|
09-21-20 07:27 PM - Post#313723
I dont think this take is particularly relevant to our situation though. Most of the recruits we've lost out on have not been head-to-head battles with Harvard and Yale (Hysier, Mitchell, Lieb, Zona, the list goes on), we simply haven't been able to match up with other Philly schools or even mid-majors. You're right that they have a better brand, but that's why they're going after top-75 and up recruits and winning. We're not winning the top-200+ battles with other schools. Second, there are plenty of inherent advantages that Penn can sell – brand is one thing but the literal job of a recruiter is to sell a specific vision. Clearly we aren't able to do that with one of the winningest teams of all time, the Big 5 and Philly being a basketball-crazy city, one of if not the strongest non-conference schedules in the IL, the Palestra, the best facilities in the league, the best undergraduate business school, etc. That's not a branding problem that's a recruiting problem. This. For the 2021 class, we haven't been losing to Harvard and Yale... honestly we haven't even been in range of Harvard's recruits. At different points, we have been involved with highly thought of targets, but none of them have come through to date and the pool keeps shrinking. Hoping some of our still existing targets do come through because we don't want to be scrambling again late in the cycle like we were in 2020. Regarding the quality of our last two classes... Our 2019 class is very strong based on rankings, offers, and performance (I'd categorize as great personally). Our 2020 class did not stack up to top of the league's classes based on rankings or offers, performance TBD (I would not categorize as great regardless). I like the potential of the top 2 players, but 1 of them just had a major knee surgery, so again lack of quality depth of class. As I've said before, this is critical as injuries are going to happen. Bottom line is that 1 very good recruiting class every 3-4 years is just not going to cut it in the current Ivy League. Need consistent quality recruiting, and we don't have evidence of that to date. My personal hopes for 2021 class are shrinking, so we should all hope for good news on that front soon to change the mood. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-21-20 08:28 PM - Post#313726
While I agree that that constitutes the only chance to compete in terms of talent, Amaker at Harvard would beat out Amaker at Penn every time. And that is what you are suggesting, so I suggest that your claim that my statement is ignorant is....ignorant. |
|
UPIA1968 PhD Student Posts 1121 
|
09-21-20 08:54 PM - Post#313731
And the Yankees should win the World Series every year. They have won one since 2000. Let's give Amaker and Jones credit for being good recuriters even with their high school gyms. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-21-20 10:19 PM - Post#313733
Is it though? Our last three searches didn’t result in such a candidate. Princeton and Yale don’t have one. The only team that has the type of guy you are talking about is Harvard. Donahue may actually be the next closest thing, as he is a guy who got fired from a power five conference school. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-22-20 04:34 AM - Post#313734
Sorry to be a bit slow, but who is the Power 5 coach who was fired that you are referring to? I'm afraid Penn's ability to target a coach will be limited, as the timing of firing a coach and hiring another requires some serendipity. |
|
Condor PhD Student Posts 1888 |
09-22-20 07:52 AM - Post#313739
MrJames, If we are going to be this tough on Donahue, should we not be equally tough on Amaker. He was fired by Michigan because of his postseason record, not his recruiting ability. Even if we consider the injuries, the players he had on the court the last four years were higher rated recruits than all the other Ivy’s. If he were at a P5 school, would the fans not be calling for his head? Also, with Harvard’s recent commitment to basketball success, should Harvard not be able to get a couch who could not only recruit, but also get better performance on the court especially OOC? |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 07:52 AM - Post#313740
Actually, there were two such coaches available at the time of the last search, Gary Williams and Ben Howland. Whether they were "candidates" is another question. |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8258 
|
09-22-20 09:07 AM - Post#313750
Why does this sound like we are re-litigating Amy’s rejection of the McCaffery hire? Didn’t SD have some recruiting success at BC? Is he is the issue or is it his assistants? Is he over-focused on system fit over raw talent? Are we over-valuing recruiting stars over results on the court where we have been on an equal footing with HYP. Are we in fear of a post-AJ apocalypse? Are we just annoyed with mrjames? So many questions. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 09:18 AM - Post#313754
Yes---Howland got $2.1 million from Mississippi State. No way Penn gets in that universe. But Harvard did---from what I understand $750K is his base (4 years ago--that might have increased), plus a house, camp revenue and a professorship and several hospital positions for his wife. That's a big package, and some of it is paid by boosters. Penn just isn't going to do that. So indeed it is the McCaffrey issue being pushed again. That being said, I think if we got Amaker's clone to come here, we'd still lose out to Harvard if they are willing to go to the bottom of their admit range consistently and together with the brand (which Amaker plays up to the maximum, not that I blame him), they have a better financial aid policy. It's just not a level playing field--I think in general, Steve has done a good job trying to compete. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-22-20 09:37 AM - Post#313760
we'd still lose out to Harvard if they are willing to go to the bottom of their admit range consistently and together with the brand (which Amaker plays up to the maximum, not that I blame him), they have a better financial aid policy. It's just not a level playing field--I think in general, Steve has done a good job trying to compete. You claim not to be ignorant, and then you post ignorant things. Cover the league. Learn what's really happening. If I were a biased fan, I'd be here dunking on Penn by clapping along with you. But I've covered this league for almost 20 years now. If you went around the league and asked: "Which program has the best resources to be set up for success?"... you'd get near unanimous response that it's Penn (The Palestra, Big 5/Philly, history, more flexible AI). All you need is the messenger... |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 09:41 AM - Post#313763
I've been following the league since you were in diapers. I know what is going on in admissions and in sports. You can't claim to be more knowledgeable when you post as Penn's "advantages" things that are meaningless to 90% of recruits in 2020, history, the Palestra, the Big 5. Harvard plays every bit as strong a schedule as Penn and the Palestra is empty most of the time. Recent history is far more important than past history and for Ivy recruits, Harvard is where 90% of them would go if they got in. the very slight AI advantage pales in comparison with the financial aid advantage possessed by Harvard. You can't bash Steve because he cannot compete with Amaker. He does seem to be having a bad recruiting year, though. I still think Penn will be very very competitive if there is a season this year. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-22-20 09:47 AM - Post#313764
You can't claim to be more knowledgeable when you post as Penn's "advantages" things that are meaningless to 90% of recruits in 2020, history, the Palestra, the Big 5. Harvard's "brand" was meaningless until someone came that could sell it. All advantages are meaningless if you can't use them well. You're tying yourself up in knots trying to avoid admitting what is patently obvious at this point. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 10:06 AM - Post#313765
OK, for whatever reason, you feel the need to complement Amaker's genius as the reason for Harvard's recruiting successes. I disagree. Amaker said what he was going to do ---play up Harvard's brand from the day he was hired and has been given tools no other Harvard coach had. He would not have those tools at Penn. You want to compare someone who has the tools but not Amaker's pedigree (which you claim is the reason for his success)? James Jones. Every bit as successful, if not more, as Amaker without any of the tools except for financial aid. Almost as good a brand---and one that can win 20-30% of the recruiting battles. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-22-20 11:11 AM - Post#313772
But what is patently obvious? Penn got the most win shares in the league from its last two freshman classes. How is that a recruiting failure? Penn has more tournament appearances than Harvard over the last four year cycle, despite this patently obvious issue. Everything about the program is light years better than it was under the last two coaches, despite this patently obvious issue. The team, whether because of one great player or not (we’ll find out soon), has turned completely around under this coach. Completely. But what really bugs me about your posts this issue is when you rely on covering the league to make these statements. Maybe it is the blending of fact and opinion that has gone on throughout media (and admittedly bugs me). But what you are expressing is, to my mind, separate from fact based reporting and frankly inappropriate to represent as such. I am always happy to debate it, but it simply is not patently obvious. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-22-20 11:42 AM - Post#313782
If you don't want it to be patently obvious, it won't be. Confirmation bias is pretty powerful. Your feelings about fact and opinion are shared by many. I'm pretty clear about what I mean by "covering the league." At times, I've been a reporter... more recently, I've been less about news (only when it's okay to do so) and more about being informed about what's going on with the league. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-22-20 12:14 PM - Post#313793
But again, it strikes me as odd to suggest that Penn as a program is not informed about what is going on with the league. Because that is clearly what you are doing. I understand that you think you know better, and to a degree that is the somewhat absurd purpose of a message board like this one — we all express opinions about things that I suspect it is patently obvious that every one of the professionals we comment on knows far more about than we do. I like “confirmation bias†better as a term than “patently obvious,†because it means something other than “I am just restating that I am correct without adding any evidence whatsoever.†We all fall into it sometimes. That said, my job is to see different sides of arguments, and I would argue that my perspective is actually taking into account more different sides of the issue than you are. It is a little internally contradictory to say something is “patently obvious,†and then say that the person arguing against patent obviousness is exhibiting confirmation bias. You’re the one presenting a one-sided view. I get that you have been irked by some of the opinions expressed by Penn folks about Amaker (I am not one of the people who has expressed those opinions), but that does not justify some of the oddly personal shots at Steve. Particularly because some of the anti-Amaker folks share your feelings about Steve. Your criticisms just land with people like me who think both coaches are great. |
|
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3618
|
09-22-20 12:39 PM - Post#313797
Didn’t SD have some recruiting success at BC? To answer your question, no. Per the BC fans at the time, lack of recruiting is exactly what sunk him. Taking a quick look at 247 and Rivals bears this out. To give you an idea, in his time there, the best class was his first class that was 10 out of 15 in ACC and 55th best in the country (and that was more about quantity than quality). During his run, he only got 1 top 150 kid (134) and everyone else was 200+ at best. They never landed better than a 3 star recruit in that period. Unfortunately this has never been a strength. Coach Donahue is a great coach in a lot of ways, but not a great recruiter. If this class ends up not panning out again, then I personally hope we start thinking of mixing up the assistant pool... all seems like great guys, but something has to change if we continue to see suboptimal results in this area. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-22-20 12:49 PM - Post#313801
Only caveat I would add is that it depends a little bit on how you define recruiter, at least at Cornell and Penn. He hasn’t gone out and killed it in terms of rankings and ratings. He’s been a good recruiter in the sense that he’s gotten kids who have been successful players in the league. Some of that is development that can be separated from recruiting in terms of skill set, but some of it is knowing how to find kids who will be successful playing for you. To me, that is part of being a good recruiter. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 01:05 PM - Post#313806
One thing we cannot deny is that we are not deep and when we suffer injuries, we really have problems replacing starters. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-22-20 01:31 PM - Post#313811
Steve is probably the best Xs and Os coach in the league, and his embrace of analytics allows him to get the most out of the talent that he has. If I had to win a game, he'd be the bench coach I'd want. When you're commenting on the efficacy of a coach, it inevitably becomes personal, because it's, ya know, about them. The problem is that the philosophical advantage has to be weighed against the personnel advantage and particularly within the context of how those have changed over time. The philosophical advantage is eroding. In Steve's final year in Ithaca, the average Ivy team was taking about 29% of shots as long 2s and forcing about 30%. A decade later, 7/8 Ivies took under 29% of shots as long and the average took 21%. Similarly, only one team (Princeton) could force over 30% and the average team could only force 23.5%. Steve's still a great tactician and open to the kind of data that could reveal the next big competitive advantage, but the previous advantages he had become known for are kind of what everyone is trying to do now. Meanwhile, the personnel side in our league has continued to expand with 2016 really being the key dividing line. Up until then, Harvard occasionally got a ranked player and others could occasionally beat out higher-level leagues for players in serious head-to-heads, but 2016 marked the first time that multiple ranked players landed in the same class and other another Ivy landed a ranked player (Yale, Bruner) as well. Since then, Princeton has landed a clear Top 100 player (Jaelin) and Yale and Harvard have continued to raise the level of the median recruit in their classes. Harvard and Yale won a bunch more Ivy games than Penn since that 2016 dividing line, and that's with AJ starting EVERY game of his career, NONE of Harvard's seven-man class being consistently healthy enough to do the same and Yale losing its best player to the NBA Draft. I completely agree that Penn is in good hands to be competitive enough to make the Ivy tourney a lot of the time and nab a bid from time to time through that forum. If that's what Penn fans want, then, you've got it. But, that doesn't change the fact that, to quote SNL's Celebrity Jeopardy, "you're sitting on a gold mine, Trebek." |
|
Streamers Professor Posts 8258
|
09-22-20 02:19 PM - Post#313826
Didn’t SD have some recruiting success at BC? To answer your question, no. Per the BC fans at the time, lack of recruiting is exactly what sunk him. Taking a quick look at 247 and Rivals bears this out. If this class ends up not panning out again, then I personally hope we start thinking of mixing up the assistant pool... all seems like great guys, but something has to change if we continue to see sub-optimal results in this area. Thanks for doing the research. I have to agree with you that another weak class should mandate a shakeup among the assistants. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-22-20 02:23 PM - Post#313827
Agreed that we aren’t nearly as deep as Harvard. You couldn’t remove AJ and Goodman last year and go out and beat anybody. Harvard has repeatedly had an injury or Amaker group benching, come out with an entirely different team, and still beat good opponents. |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-22-20 02:32 PM - Post#313829
Like with recruiting, I think it depends on how you define Xs and Os. Agreed that Steve may have a philosophical/analytical advantage, but I also think there is a certain predictability that comes along with that. So while his early season and early game Xs and Os seem to be an advantage, it often seems like opponents are able to adjust to it. Amaker has done it repeatedly the last couple of years. Some of that is depth and talent (recruiting advantage?) eventually winning out, some of it is also how Amaker uses it and adjusts. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
09-22-20 02:56 PM - Post#313831
"Meanwhile, the personnel side in our league has continued to expand with 2016 really being the key dividing line. Up until then, Harvard occasionally got a ranked player and others could occasionally beat out higher-level leagues for players in serious head-to-heads, but 2016 marked the first time that multiple ranked players landed in the same class and other another Ivy landed a ranked player (Yale, Bruner) as well. Since"then, Princeton has landed a clear Top 100 player (Jaelin) and Yale and Harvard have continued to raise the level of the median recruit in their classes. Harvard and Yale won a bunch more Ivy games than Penn since that 2016 dividing line, and that's with AJ starting EVERY game of his career, NONE of Harvard's seven-man class being consistently healthy enough to do the same and Yale losing its best player to the NBA Draft." MRJ, it seems to me that you are agreeing that HYP may have some recruiting advantages. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-22-20 03:37 PM - Post#313833
2016 is when Harvard increased the top income where one could get a free ride to $150K, based on individual standards. It's the most generous financial aid policy in the Ivies. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-22-20 05:23 PM - Post#313838
They definitely do have an advantage. Their advantage is that they’re really good at it. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-22-20 07:08 PM - Post#313843
I'm prepared to concede mrjames' point on recruiting. Not with certainty that SD can't succeed, but with a recognition that he hasn't rung the bell with a home run class. He has recruited enough to be competitive, and hopefully can recruit enough talent that suits his schemes. Some of the classes so far have been questionable - not enough shooters! I would say we should leave Amaker out of all of this. Everyone keeps bringing him up as an accusation against mrjames, but this is about Penn. I agree that Penn can be more successful in recruiting. I don't hear enough recruited players saying that Penn was a painful second choice to walk away from. I am not familiar enough with recruiting to know - can a change of assistant turn this around, or does this depend upon the head coach? Keep in mind, I am not against SD. I still like him and agree he is a great X's and O's coach. I actually think he's the best of our group, including Fran Dunphy. |
|
Old Bear Postdoc Posts 3998 |
09-22-20 08:02 PM - Post#313844
They’re good at it because of the brand advantage, and] the FA advantages. The AI limits Competition from the other guys.. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
09-22-20 10:17 PM - Post#313846
Good assistants know how to get in early with recruits and set the table for the head coach Nat Graham is a good recruiter. The other two are unproven. |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
09-23-20 04:33 PM - Post#313956
How much power do the other 2 actually wield in this process? Joe certainly has connections that could and should prove beneficial. This is the first time I've heard that Nat is a good recruiter so that's at least nice to hear. |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
09-26-20 09:38 AM - Post#314173
I have a hard time believing that Penn's basketball long ago history or the Big Five or the Palestra is a drawing card for today's players. Kids want to play a style that suits them and be on TV sometimes. And get a good education. All things being equal most kids are going to pick Harvard/Yale and maybe Princeton over the other Ivies. They just have more visibility and a greater reputation. No one is excited about playing St. Joe's and Lasalle and Temple every year. Villanova would be a draw. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-26-20 10:09 AM - Post#314174
Yup, that's what I said above. Mike gets tied in knots when anyone suggests that Harvard has an overwhelming advantage due to its brand, its financial aid policy, it's willingness to invest millions in the program and the AI and that it isn't all the genius of Amaker (who is good, but any quality recruiting coach could do what he has done at Harvard as long as he is given the same tools). The days when Penn filled the Palestra were the days Penn could recruit without having artificially imposed admissions requirements. It's not as though Harvard often goes well below those requirements for the right legacy admit or a musical genius. So for the relatively small pool of players who meet the AI limitations and are top basketball players, Amaker can promise most of them a Harvard diploma and a free ride. You're not going to see players coming from inner city schools to Ivies as Penn got in the '70s. It's prep schools primarily and there too, Harvard has an advantage. But as I repeatedly say, we had an extraordinary class last year and I expect Penn to be very competitive for the next 3 years. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-26-20 02:59 PM - Post#314175
“It’s not a lie, if you believe it.†-George Costanza |
|
Silver Maple Postdoc Posts 3778 |
09-26-20 03:42 PM - Post#314176
“It’s not a lie, if you believe it.†-George Costanza Wow. Pot. Kettle. Black. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-26-20 05:22 PM - Post#314177
Shrug. It's just a very ironic time to be talking about other Ivies' advantages. But you folks are gonna believe whatever you want to believe. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-26-20 05:49 PM - Post#314178
Your problem is that you cannot distinguish between your opinion and objective fact. You believe yourself to be such an expert on what's going on that you impose that belief on things you clearly do not know (why recruits choose Harvard over Penn). You have no idea why that happens, but the facts I mentioned are something you never challenge. That's fine--just don't call me a liar because I disagree with what is an opinion--that's obnoxious. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-26-20 05:57 PM - Post#314179
I have a lot of information. That’s what makes me really good at guessing... |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-26-20 06:51 PM - Post#314180
You are making conclusions based on what you believe are likely outcomes. That is not "information", it is opinion. But if you're going to come in here to argue, you shouldn't be so thin skinned. We're happy to debate, but not to be lectured to. |
|
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3618
|
09-26-20 06:55 PM - Post#314181
Harvard for sure has advantages and pros to “sell†to a recruit. Penn also has advantages and pros to “sell†to a recruit even as other Penn fans choose to discount them. Those Harvard advantages were literally worthless until someone came along with the skill to take advantage of them. The reality is that Harvard has a MUCH better salesman. Amaker showed his recruiting prowess long before Harvard. That is not Donahue’s strength (and history shows never has been though he has other strengths that I prefer to Amaker and is a very good coach). That said, all of this misses the point anyway. We aren’t losing recruits to Harvard because we haven’t even really been in a position to recruit the players they landed. What you notice if you follow recruiting is that Donahue and staff actually do a great job identifying and targeting very good players (often getting in on them before they blow up), but then we too often miss on them anyway and have to move on to secondary targets. The difference is that Amaker has a much better close rate on those targets they identify for themselves early. If we could bump up the close rate of actual players targeted early, this would be a much different conversation. This is one of the reasons I’m excited about Holland and why it was important to land him - he was offered early, recruited throughout, and closed. We need more of that. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-26-20 07:17 PM - Post#314182
No, it’s information. For instance, if you know that a highly-coveted prospect is unlikely to qualify for FA (which you ignorantly assume all HYP prospects qualify for at 100%, which is absolutely not the case), you know that you can wipe the Ivies off the list. If you know where a prospect stacks up academically, and know the rules governing teams and particular years - like this one - you know you can maybe wipe certain Ivies off the list. There’s a lot of information that can make it pretty clear where a recruit is going, and in that information, you begin to see how these schools work, what hurdles they face that are unique to particular institutions and our league as a whole. I come here to share what I can. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-26-20 07:51 PM - Post#314183
No, I never said Harvard was able to offer everyone a full ride. But they can offer it to far more prospects than Penn (or pretty much everyone other than Yale and Princeton). But you ignore (notice I'm not exhibiting your hubris and calling you ignorant) that you cannot read what's in a prospect's head. So you don't know for sure anything other than what all of us know---Harvard has a brand unmatched by any school in North America, that Amaker has said publicly: "The brand of Harvard, as we all know, is incredibly powerful. Their families realize, 'You mean he has a chance to go to Harvard?' It's a powerful force that people get behind in communities." (USA Today, 12/19/15). This is what Amaker is selling---when he did not have something to sell his competitors lacked (Michigan), he failed. I certainly don't blame him--he's there to win and has a winning formula--the strongest brand, the best financial aid, and for the first time in Harvard history, the flexibility to get kids who never thought they could get into Harvard, i.e, unquestioned institutional support and a salary that exceeds any other Ivy coach by at least 4 times. So go ahead and be arrogant---Amaker would not have the same success at Penn. Steve is doing very well and has played Harvard virtually even over the last 4 years. So it's not all recruiting that means success, even when it's really not possible to get a player Amaker wants. |
|
mrjames Professor Posts 6062 |
09-26-20 08:04 PM - Post#314184
When I say ignorant, I mean the traditional definition of the word - lacking knowledge or information about a subject. I have more information than you, which makes me more knowledgeable. I do not have complete information, nor do I say as much. But I have more info that makes me able to break news on this site, and through that info I can share a more informed perspective on the league. And my more informed perspective is that I don’t think there’s a staff in this league that wouldn’t trade places with Penn. You can believe me or not, but hopefully you’re not disputing that I’m basing that take on a lot more information than you have. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-26-20 08:21 PM - Post#314185
I'll admit only that it's impossible to debate with you so I'll bow in the glow of your superiority. |
|
UPIA1968 PhD Student Posts 1121
|
09-26-20 10:59 PM - Post#314186
To put some perspective on this I see Ivy recruiting post 1979 in three eras. In the era one only Penn and Princeton really cared and got a few three-star recruits and a lot of good two-stars. That was the talent of the Dunphy run. It was good enough to get an occasional first round dance win. Then Cornell proved that somebody else cared and got that great team of Dunphy type talent. Harvard showed some change, as did Yale. That was era two. Penn dropped back due to incompetency. Now we are in Era three where most teams care. Penn is back in contention because of good coaching and Dunphy-type talent. The problem is that Harvard and Yale are occasionally getting 4-star recruits, something no Ivy has done since Penn and Princeton in the Pre AI days. Pedigree counts I suppose. I added a Harvard diploma to my Penn degree and am snobbish enough to be proud of it. That said, the variance the college play of recruited talent is very large. Large enough that a good Dunphy type team can compete with H-Y-P. It happens all the time in Football where the recruiting advantages are just as big. So lets acknowledge that the world is round and recruit, develop and scheme to the best we can, knowing that our program can excel, win championships even if a rare peak-of-cycle Harvard could challenge for the Final Four. One other point. As a quantitative person I am aware that exactly one coach has succeeded at either Harvard and Yale. People used to think UCLA had a insurmountable advantage until John Wooden retired. We will not be sure of Harvard's and Yale's advantage until the next pair of coaches prove it. I for one would love to see Amaker go back to Duke to succeed Coach K. Keep in mind that Penn is the overwhelming b-ball power in the Ivies behind H-Y-P. All of its advantages didn't mean squat for that drought after Franny took the subway to Broad and Columbia. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-26-20 11:41 PM - Post#314187
P38 does not speak for all of us, mrjames. Please keep your comments flowing. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-27-20 06:53 AM - Post#314188
If you can tell me where I said at any time he should not participate, your comment w rould make sense. The issue is that after I set forth the specific advantages Harvard has in recruiting, he just launches personal attacks and says he knows better. So there's no debate to be had. But I never told him to shut up. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-27-20 04:27 PM - Post#314191
BTW, I don't personally agree that Penn can't recruit against HYP even with the financial advantages and reputation of schools. There may be some advantages for a large number of recruits, but I believe Penn has more than enough tools to offset that if the coach and administration push the right buttons with the right people in place. I'd love for it to be with Donahue. He appears to be both a fantastic teacher and student. He is a fine recruiter by historic standards of Ivy basketball. The game is changing, though, and some other schools are raising the recruiting bar. You can certainly disagree, but I also don't have endless bandwidth to argue about it. Way too busy trying to manage work and family through Covid.
If you can tell me where I said at any time he should not participate, your comment w rould make sense. The issue is that after I set forth the specific advantages Harvard has in recruiting, he just launches personal attacks and says he knows better. So there's no debate to be had. But I never told him to shut up. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-27-20 04:37 PM - Post#314192
People get tired of having to defend themselves. You may not have thought calling him biased was not an attack, but I think it was at least a bit antagonistic. On the receiving end of it, It's simply tiring. Many of our best posters in the past have signed off for good for little comments. He's volunteering very helpful information on a Penn board which I find incredibly insightful - and he's not a Penn alumni. He has his views, and there may be bias - but I've never seen him trying to antagonize. Frankly, I think he is less biased than most of us Penn fans. You never asked him to leave, but not everyone has the extra capacity to argue all the time and defend themselves about bias when they are just trying to help a conversation. I value his posts. I never said you actually asked him to leave.
If you can tell me where I said at any time he should not participate, your comment w rould make sense. The issue is that after I set forth the specific advantages Harvard has in recruiting, he just launches personal attacks and says he knows better. So there's no debate to be had. But I never told him to shut up. |
|
frank Junior Posts 211 |
09-27-20 04:55 PM - Post#314193
Don't all you guys get it yet? P38 is always right and you're stupid. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-27-20 05:23 PM - Post#314194
I never called him biased, either. Don't know why you are trying to put words in my mouth but I agree that there are far more important things in the world than continuing an argument which really ended after the first post by each of us. |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-27-20 08:25 PM - Post#314195
Yeah, we all could have given it a rest at the first counterpoint. There's way too much other stuff to deal with in life! I believe that mrjames has little kids to look after too. |
|
PennFan10 Postdoc Posts 3585 |
09-28-20 10:06 AM - Post#314199
When I say ignorant, I mean the traditional definition of the word - lacking knowledge or information about a subject. I have more information than you, which makes me more knowledgeable. I do not have complete information, nor do I say as much. But I have more info that makes me able to break news on this site, and through that info I can share a more informed perspective on the league. And my more informed perspective is that I don’t think there’s a staff in this league that wouldn’t trade places with Penn. You can believe me or not, but hopefully you’re not disputing that I’m basing that take on a lot more information than you have. Not to beat a dead horse but this struck me as interesting. MrJ, do you know how many of the (then) current IL head coaches applied for the Penn job when it was open in 2015? Did Amaker apply? |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
09-28-20 02:23 PM - Post#314212
I would think if you asked any high school kids to name Ivy League schools, Harvard and Yale would get mentioned the most. Then Princeton. Then everyone else including the school that some confuse with Penn State. |
|
caughtinasnare Senior Posts 362 |
09-28-20 11:35 PM - Post#314226
I didn't see any of the other Ivies being the question for a Daily Double on Jeopardy tonight... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ |
|
OldBig5 Masters Student Posts 639 |
09-29-20 06:57 PM - Post#314252
I didn't see any of the other Ivies being the question for a Daily Double on Jeopardy tonight... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I didn't watch Jeopardy. What was the answer (and the question)? |
|
westcoast Senior Posts 302 |
09-29-20 07:33 PM - Post#314253
Category: Colleges and Universities $600 Clue (and the Daily Double) Students on this school's campus may run into Ben Franklin relaxing on a bench reading a newspaper. |
|
caughtinasnare Senior Posts 362 |
09-29-20 09:13 PM - Post#314255
With a lovely picture, to boot! |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
09-30-20 01:08 PM - Post#314284
Did the contestant get it right? |
|
SomeGuy Professor Posts 6413 |
09-30-20 01:45 PM - Post#314292
That may be true, but 15 years ago if you asked a high academics high school basketball player which Ivy to go to to play basketball, they would have said Penn. 20 years ago, Penn or Princeton. While I think that much of that was Harvard not caring about basketball enough to use their brand advantage, it does show that it is certainly possible for Penn to overcome the brand advantage under the right circumstances. I don’t think it is nearly as simple as mrjames makes it sound, but it can be done. A player choosing Penn will play in front of bigger home crowds than anybody else in the Ivy, gets the Big Five and a game against Villanova every year, has a more vocal (though aging) alumni base that travels for games, and plays in the best facility in the league. In a lot of ways, playing at Penn is going to be the closest you can come to high major basketball in our league. |
|
Mike Porter Postdoc Posts 3618
|
09-30-20 03:46 PM - Post#314295
Exactly SG, exactly. Penn certainly has a lot positives to "sell" to a recruit (and the key thing to remember here is that recruiting is about "selling" the school). I would also guess that Penn likely has the best/most state of the art training facilities in general compared to rest of league, which is a place that the players spend a lot of time. https://www.facilities.upenn.edu/maps/locations/we... |
|
Penndemonium PhD Student Posts 1900 |
09-30-20 04:00 PM - Post#314296
Also, while I won't say that Penn has the same academic reputation as HYP, I think you are all living in the past when there was a more meaningful gap. The school made giant strides under Judith Rodin and somewhat under Gutmann. This current generation views Penn as elite, as they should. It is not an Ivy safety school and it is not the school ranked in the 30's as it was in the 90's. It is perennially top 10. Several programs such as M&T are viewed as the most exclusive programs in the country. I heard some HS kids remarking recently how it is viewed as more selective and elite than HYP, Stanford, MIT, and CalTech. A bunch of us old timers need to re-frame our old views, as times have changed. Reputations that were locked in stone for generations are changing. USC is becoming a very highly sought after academic school (Varsity Blues as evidence), whereas we never thought that in the past generations. Penn is right there in the mix with HYP for today's kids - or at least with a gap that's small enough not to matter as much as how the school fits for what they want to study. Penn's basketball merits would seem more than enough to tip the scales for a basketball student-athlete. The main tipping point that you hear about from recruits again and again is the relationship they are able to build with coaches and the team during recruiting and the vision they create for the students' future at the school and beyond. I am not well versed enough in the nuance of the athletic recruiting. I did get the sense that Gutmann was not quite as supportive of athletics in her early days from speaking with a Penn professor or two. I have no idea if that is the case today. I don't think she was intentionally unsupportive. She just didn't see the point of all of it. My wife agrees with that viewpoint. I... spend time on a Penn Basketball forum. |
|
Quakers03 Professor Posts 12533 |
09-30-20 04:38 PM - Post#314298
Getting that first kid to commit is often really important for the rest of the recruiting year. I remember the dominoes falling quickly for Jelani, Jarrod and Eddie so using recruits to help land other recruits matters. |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-30-20 04:52 PM - Post#314301
I don't want to get deep into this again, but while you are correct that Penn is light years more competitive to get into than it was 30 or more years ago, the brand still doesn't get into the same neighborhood as Harvard to anyone who isn't well versed in the US News rankings. Otherwise said, everyone knows Harvard. I'll just leave it at that. |
|
Quaker75 Freshman Posts 37 |
09-30-20 08:18 PM - Post#314306
Go Quakers |
|
palestra38 Professor Posts 32835 |
09-30-20 08:49 PM - Post#314307
Absolutely |
|
caughtinasnare Senior Posts 362 |
10-01-20 12:10 AM - Post#314318
Indeed he did! |
|
|
 |
|
| Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved. Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution. |
|