CrimsonBlood
Freshman
Posts: 46
Age: 33
Reg: 03-15-18
|
03-03-24 12:57 AM - Post#364357
This will be Harvard and Tommy Amaker’s third straight losing record in Ivy League play.
I understand there have been injuries.
But at what point should he start getting more scrutiny?
He is a class act… and Harvard may be content with being mediocre in the Ivy League, but they shouldn’t.
Amaker’s in game coaching has been poor to say it mildly.
This was perhaps best highlighted by Tyler Simon getting the ball with 5 seconds left in a game we had to win, after a timeout, and calling for picks before passing it as time expired. Just complete lack of game awareness on the most crucial possession of the season.
Harvard has so much to offer. From best in the world academics to Boston/Cambridge to an amazing alum network… the list goes on.
I don’t think Amaker will be on the hot seat simply because most people at Harvard can’t recite the teams record. However, he should be. We need a younger, more energetic coach that can elevate us to the top of the Ivy League.
We are clearly moving backwards under Amaker.
|
Ever True
Junior
Posts: 255
Age: 28
Reg: 02-02-15
|
03-03-24 11:25 AM - Post#364380
In response to CrimsonBlood
If I'm Tommy and I get called to the AD's office to talk about performance, I'm doing a Denzel in Training Day monologue about where this program would be without me - the NCAA bids, the renovation of Lavietes, the Breakfast Club, etc. I then walk out the door. I imagine that pretty much ends the conversation.
What I could see is Tommy doing a Coach K-esque naming of a successor - in my mind, number 1 on that list would be Christian Webster, given Tommy's insistence on bringing in guys with Harvard connections to the coaching team. But I don't know at what point he would feel ready to make that call.
In the short term, I think the hope has to be that Tommy rediscovers his recruiting mojo. He's never been an in-game guy, but now he's being regularly out-coached AND out-recruited by Princeton and Yale. Given the quality of play across the league, though, even that might not be enough.
You either leave a hero or live long enough to become the villain, and I don't think Tommy's leaving anytime soon.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
Season Recap, the way forward, Amaker
03-03-24 01:27 PM - Post#364401
In response to Ever True
Next year Amaker is going to have to completely change his game plan.
Barring injury, transfers, etc., Harvard will be guard heavy:
Mack
Nelson
Lesmond
Pigge
Simon
Hinton (FR)
Wojcik
Nesbit
Hopefully, Evan Nelson will be healthy. His speed and scoring - including his 3 point shooting (38.8%), FT (81%), Asst's (3.4). And that's despite being shifted to PG from his natural SG position. Nelson and Mack will be an explosive backcourt, although they are each somewhat undersized, a circumstance that larger guards like Lesmond, Simon and Pigge more than compensate for.
Unless we stretch one of the above, our only froncourt players will be Okpara, Batties and Ace-Nestaski. Okpara and Batties can run like smaller forwards.
I'm thinking Amaker will need to coach this assemblage to run, shoot and play aggressive full court defense. Mack and Nelson alone exemplify the need to do so. I don't know much about Hinton, but if he's got that level of speed and scoring, this will be a fun squad to watch.
Of course, opposing bigs like Wolf/Townsend, Spinoso and Nana/Anya will be a problem, and the assemblages and depth at forward at Cornell and Columbia will be have to be dealt with. The guards are going to have to rebound aggressively, which Pigge, Simon and Lesmond can do. Although Ajogbor is certainly our best rebounder, at 6.5 rbg is isn't like his teammates totally relied on him.
It will be interesting to see how Amaker, a guard himself and on occasion criticized for his development of true bigs, will respond.
Let's hope our key players are available next season.
Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 03-03-24 01:29 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
CrimsonBlood
Freshman
Posts: 46
Age: 33
Reg: 03-15-18
|
Re: Season Recap, the way forward, Amaker
03-03-24 06:37 PM - Post#364426
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
-Amaker has done some great things at Harvard and that’s why I said I doubt he will actually be on the hot seat.
-But we should also be realistic: breakfast club. Really? That’s why he should stay? Renovation of Lavietes? Harvard has all the money in the world and I think many coaches could help rally around some $ for a respectable basketball gym. Look he is a class act, no one disputes that. I’m a huge fan of him personally. But 3 losing seasons in a row and moving in the wrong direction.
-If he is sick a bad in game coach, he should recruit assistants and rely on them. It’s not that hard to say “give Mack the ball” with 5 seconds left. I’m not impressed with his assistants either tbh. We need more experienced assistants to help Amaker with his weaknesses.
-I agree with the Christian Webster comment. It’d be a gamble given he has never been a head coach, but Webster was involved as a player and assistant during the best of the Harvard teams, and perhaps he could bring more energy to a program that is in decline.
I just don’t think Harvard should settle for hoping and praying to scrape their way into the 4th slot in the Ivy League Tournament. That’s not good enough.
|
mobrien
Masters Student
Posts: 402
Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
|
03-03-24 11:47 PM - Post#364439
In response to CrimsonBlood
Disappointing end to another disappointing season, especially given that, somewhat surprisingly, it started with so much promise.
This is the third year in a row that we've finished with the second-to-worst offense during Ivy play. Once again, we turned the ball over too much (19% in conference play), and simply couldn't make shots; the 30% we shot on threes in Ivy play was actually our worst mark of the last three years.
There are problems. First and foremost, we don't have enough shooting. Part of that is that we haven't recruited enough shooters, another is that some of the shooters we have gotten haven't have gotten hurt (Lesmond last year and Nelson this year), and the last part is that guys who, at one point, were among our best shooters have subsequently gone through long cold stretches (Sakota last year and Mack this year after returning from mono).
The good news is we're trying to rectify that. Dowdell, Barbour, and Hunt all profile as plus shooters. The fact that Princeton was after Hinton as well suggests that he should as well (in addition to what I think will be some Bassey-like defense and rebounding from the wing). Hopefully we don't forget this moving forward. It's hard to have a good offense without having at least four shooters on the court.
It doesn't help that the system is so stale. We don't add any wrinkles to the basic motion offense, like Coach K did when he added double high screens, so what we end up doing is weakly passing it around the perimeter for 20 seconds before calling for a late ball screen. The basic motion would be fine if we actually executed it, which is to say if we really moved it from side to side, if guys took at most 2 seconds to pass or shoot, if we got the defense out of position by even just half a step to create driving lanes. But we don't. The ball sticks; or guys think they can drive, only to realize there isn't any room once they get doubled or tripled in the lane, and then they end up flailing around for a few seconds because they have no passing angle. Turnovers are the result. We have to focus on actually moving the ball, moving our players, and moving them fast. Anything else just lets the defense load up against any drives (especially when we don't have the shooting to punish them for it).
The last three years should be humbling. Yes, injuries have played a big part in our struggles. The offense wouldn't look as bad if we had Pitcher grabbing offensive rebounds and stretching the defense, or if Kirkwood and Ledlum had gotten to play together. But even then, it shouldn't have been as bad as it's been. I think Amaker is still a very good recruiter, and I think he understands the types of guys we need to get. That, plus health, would go a long way. But I also hope he's willing to think about adding some variety to the offense. We need it. If only to keep the rest of the Ivies off balance. They know our system better than we do sometimes.
|
Silver Maple
Postdoc
Posts: 3777
Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
|
03-04-24 07:22 AM - Post#364446
In response to mobrien
I'm just going to lob this thought in as an outsider: injuries have plagued this program consistently for years and years. At some point it's reasonable to ask if that's really only bad luck.
Back to lurking I go.
|
CrimsonBlood
Freshman
Posts: 46
Age: 33
Reg: 03-15-18
|
03-04-24 08:56 AM - Post#364451
In response to Silver Maple
It is wild to watch Princeton’s office and how well they move with and without the ball and contrast versus Harvard standing around.
You also have to wonder whether Silverstein could have made a difference this year. I still never heard the story of why he elected not to play. I have to think he makes a 1 point difference against Penn at a minimum.
|
digamma
Masters Student
Posts: 468
Loc: Minneapolis
Reg: 11-27-11
|
03-04-24 11:12 AM - Post#364466
In response to mobrien
It doesn't help that the system is so stale. We don't add any wrinkles to the basic motion offense, like Coach K did when he added double high screens, so what we end up doing is weakly passing it around the perimeter for 20 seconds before calling for a late ball screen. The basic motion would be fine if we actually executed it, which is to say if we really moved it from side to side, if guys took at most 2 seconds to pass or shoot, if we got the defense out of position by even just half a step to create driving lanes. But we don't. The ball sticks; or guys think they can drive, only to realize there isn't any room once they get doubled or tripled in the lane, and then they end up flailing around for a few seconds because they have no passing angle. Turnovers are the result. We have to focus on actually moving the ball, moving our players, and moving them fast. Anything else just lets the defense load up against any drives (especially when we don't have the shooting to punish them for it).
I had a thought about halfway through the season that we looked like a late 80s ACC team.
Agree with pretty much everything else you wrote too.
I am an Amaker guy, and I do think part of that is what else he does with the team in the university. I think that stuff is really important, particularly as we drift farther and farther from the student athletics in the grand scheme. He's also created a ton of fun for my family in the last decade, something that wasn't something I could have imagined when I graduated.
That said, I'd obviously like to win more than five or six Ivy games a season. I pegged us sixth coming into the season, got my hopes up when we started the season on fire. I do think there's a lot of promise. Maybe we'll get some breaks too.
|
mobrien
Masters Student
Posts: 402
Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
|
03-04-24 05:15 PM - Post#364492
In response to digamma
A lot is riding on our next two recruiting classes.
I like the freshmen we have coming in next year. Hinton is a top 100 kid coming from an absolutely loaded Harvard-Westlake squad—two of his teammates were top 50 guys—so college shouldn't be too much of a jump up, competition-wise, for him. He might start as a freshman.
Dowdell, Barbour, and Hunt should give us the shooting depth we need. I'm not sure how much any of them will be ready to contribute next year, but if one of them is, I could see us playing small with Mack (assuming he returns...), Hinton, one of these three, Lesmond, and Okpara. That'd be a lot of shooting to put around Mack, should open up some actual driving lanes for him. It would also let Simon and Pigge anchor a second unit that would have some actual punch to it. (It's hard enough for pro athletes to come back from an Achilles in just a year and have anything close to their old explosiveness; for a college kid who doesn't have as much time to rehab ... I'm not counting on much from Nelson next year, and hoping to be pleasantly surprised).
2025 is the big one though. We're supposedly the favorites to land Elzie Harrington, a 6'3" combo guard who, depending on the scouting service, is at the worst an easy top 100 player, and at best a legit NBA prospect. Amaker is good friends with his dad, and Xavier Nesbitt is his godbrother. He'd be a program changer.
We're also supposed to have a good chance at landing a 6'10" top 50-ish center, Eric Reibe. He'd also instantly improve our prospects. He's probably more of a longshot than Harrington, but maybe getting Harrington would help out there.
Even if we hit a recruiting home run, though, the offensive system needs to get better. We need to move the ball. We need to cut. We need to get defenses out of position other than just off our drives. We can do all this and keep the basic structure the same; we just need to run it with a purpose, along with a few more wrinkles to make defenses worry about more things.
Most of all, the ball can't stick. We were really bad at that this weekend.
|
1LotteryPick1969
Postdoc
Posts: 2275
Age: 73
Loc: Sandy, Utah
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-04-24 05:49 PM - Post#364495
In response to mobrien
I read this with mixed emotions. From a Princeton perspective, I would not like to see Harvard dominate again, but on the other hand, I credit Amaker for raising the bar for the entire league, so I wish him well. Maybe he could do it again and raise the league another notch. NIL will place a ceiling on what the league can do to compete nationally.
His teams have always been a bit painful to watch on the offensive end.
|
Naismith
Sophomore
Posts: 149
Loc: RI
Reg: 11-11-18
|
Season Recap, the way forward, Amaker
03-05-24 01:12 AM - Post#364524
In response to 1LotteryPick1969
It's hard to imagine any Ivy League admissions offices tolerating one-and-done type "student athletes" when the theme is 4-years on campus, and 40 more after graduation. Nil is not a friend of this league.
Edited by Naismith on 03-05-24 01:16 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 423
Reg: 10-11-18
|
Re: Season Recap, the way forward, Amaker
03-05-24 10:25 AM - Post#364540
In response to Naismith
Well, two things.
One, there is no reason Harvard (or any other Ivy) couldn't create an unbeatable NIL package for any team/player. But related to that, and two, is that the IL sticking to its no-athletic scholarships nonsense is going to become a bigger and bigger impediment to recruiting. Because even if a Harvard player were to get a nice NIL deal the financial aid implications would be considerable. The longer IL sticks with its current policies the further its sports get from being competitive D1.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
03-05-24 12:13 PM - Post#364552
In response to CM
So, anyone planning on watching tonight's game?
I find the fact that the game was moved up to tonight - apparently because of exams, refreshing, but emblematic of how this League is and wants to be different. In the end, hopefully, these priorities will prevail, although the likelihood of that happening would be because big time college sports destroys itself due to greed.
Back to Amaker, I fear that tonight's team will be thoroughly unmotivated and disjointed. We can't default to the Seniors, as that only adds Christian Rich to Ajogbor. Will guys like Malik Mack even dress? It sure appeared to me that the refs have been allowing defenses to be very physical with him, and this is the teams 3rd game in 5 days - a completely meaningless one at that. I guess if we had a bench I'd expect to see it get minutes tonight, but we don't. Uninspired and ugly? Hoping no one gets hurt and that Amaker maintains control.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32834
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-06-24 10:59 AM - Post#364624
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
Good call. Tough to lose to the Union, but you called it.
|
mobrien
Masters Student
Posts: 402
Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
|
Season Recap, the way forward, Amaker
03-06-24 12:06 PM - Post#364630
In response to palestra38
Depressingly fitting way to end the season: blowing a 10 point second half lead because we couldn't make open shots.
We scored four points in the final 10 minutes. We missed open three after open three; Mack finished 2 for 9 on threes, with at least half of those misses coming towards the end. We missed a bunch of point-blank layups too. The sad thing is that almost all of these were the shots we wanted—completely open, in good rhythm—and we just kept missing.
It was really a tale of two halves for Mack. He was making almost 50% of his threes in the nonconference (which was obviously unsustainable, but you hoped he wouldn't regress too hard) and just 25% in Ivy play.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
03-06-24 05:47 PM - Post#364674
In response to mobrien
We lost last night because of our lack of intensity on defense.
We scored just above our average in points, FG% and 3FG#. Yes, it was against Dartmouth, but on the road and being our 3rd game in 5 days it wasn't scoring that was our problem. We hit 10 3's and although it seemed Okpara missed some bunnies, he still shot 10-17, including 2-4 from deep. Heck, Lesmond shot 5-10 from 3. Our offense tailed off in the second half when we scored 28 points compared to 41 in the first half, but that was mainly due to 5-19 on 3's. As abysmal as that seems, that's 27%, which is barely below our 31% rate for the entire Ivy campaign.
No, it wasn't our offense, it was our complete lack of interest in and pitiful intensity on defense. Dartmouth, also playing its 3rd game in 5 days, scored 76 points, well above it's league average of 62 PPG. Dartmouth shot relatively well compared to its norm, but not exceptionally so. How can Dartmouth outrebound us? Ajogbor? Okpara? Mack was our leading rebounder with 7.
Anyway, although our offense appeared to be disappointing down the stretch, it usually is. Dartmouth only eclipsed last night's offensive output by slim margins in its games against Cornell (80 pts) Thomas Moore (77) and Westfield State (79). Rarified air!
So, I respectfully posit that we didn't come ready to play hard as evidenced by a complete lack of intensity on defense.
|
|
|
Report Post
Quote Post
Quick Reply
|
|
Print Topic
Email Topic
1185 Views
|
|
|
|
|
