Tuesday, August 10, 2010

The Cornell Basketball Blog's (Early) Ivy League Projection

With several online publications making their Ivy League 2010-2011 predictions, (see HoopsReport.com, CollegeHoopsNet.com and RushTheCourt.net), The Cornell Basketball Blog is joining in the action. We note, however, that we may change these predictions before the Ivy League Media Poll is cast later in the fall. Let us know your thoughts on our projections by leaving a comment to this post, sending us an email, or posting a message on The Cornell Basketball Blog's Community Forum (click here).


1. Penn
2. Princeton
3. Harvard
4. Cornell
5. Brown
6. Columbia
7. Yale
8. Dartmouth

In making our selections, we note to our readers that we predict a very tight race for the league title this year. We also believe that teams 1 through 4 (Penn, Princeton, Harvard and Cornell) are each capable of finishing anywhere between the 1st through 4th positions and are just an injury away from slipping into the lower division.

Here are are our ballots cast in the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 Ivy League media polls.


Anonymous said...

a much better prediction is this:

1. Harvard
2. Princeton
3. Penn
4-6. Cornell

Anonymous said...

This is all part of the master plan in tricking the other three schools into believing that CU will be an underachiever this year. Nice work, CBB, of putting the pressure on the Ps and Harvard.

The Cornell Basketball Blog said...

No way Cornell slides to 6th, unless the Big Red get hit with injuries.

In fact, based on Penn's past health problems, Penn has a better chance of finishing 6th than Cornell.

But our projections are based on the teams remaining healthy.

This means, Harvard does not lose guys like Keith Wright, Andrew Van Nest or Brandyn Curry, and Penn does not lose Andreas Schreiber, Mike Howlett or Tyler Bernardini.

Not At The Table Carlos said...

Blogman you have Penn winning the league, yet you previously said that they have 23 players and this would never work. Imagine the players sharing seats on the bus this is no way to build chemistry.

Turley: "hey you had the armrest last trip!"

Schreiber: "No you did you big idiot its my turn!"

That type of conversation between teammates does not equal championships

Anonymous said...

don't believe that schools always let all guys travel to all away games - another reason the super sized rosters can be problematic. previous posts have also referred to limitations on how many guys can dress for game.

Hello Newman said...

Not at the Table Carlos, you are absolutely correct.

Cornell bball bus rides are one of the major pillars of their incredible team chemistry. I can't see any Penn or Harvard players sharing Shark Bites or Veggietales fruit snacks with one another other.

Tyler Bernardini seems like the kind of guy who would hoard a giant bag of pretzels on the back of the bus.

Bus rides make memories people...we should not downplay the significance of those 3-4-5-6 hours on the road on snowy Northeastern evenings.

Until Penn and Harvard learn that, I think the vets on this Cornell team make us the favorites once again.

Anonymous said...

I know Penn has a lot of talent (Rosen, Eggleston, Bernadini, Cartwright, etc), but this is mostly the same time that was one of the worst teams in all of Division I last year. Can't see them making such a major improvement to finish first in the Ivy.

It'll be between Princeton and Harvard, and I think the Crimson's depth (giving so many freshman experience last year will be big for them) carries them to the title.

The Cornell Basketball Blog said...

Penn lost its top scorer (Bernardini) and its best big man (Schreiber) a year ago to injury.

Both return.

The Quakers also reload at the guard position.

This team has more size and balance than Harvard or Princeton.

A Quaker frontline of Schreiber, Howlett, Eggleston, and Bernardidi could be very, very good. And then there is Rosen.

Anonymous said...

It seems so tough and almost futile to try to make predictions about next year. I want to guffaw at CBRF's predictions but totally agree with them: for some reason I am most worried about Penn because they simply have more character. But it's like, they get posh recruits & have a proud history, but then half the team plays like they're NJIT. The Penn folk like acting as if this blog just fabricates their roster size and player discontent issues, when these problems are clear as day. Fitzpatrick left with an utter lack of decorum and implied dissatisfaction amongst other team members. IMHO he took a jab at Rosen when he said that Penn's system consisted of Rosen "scoring for himself" or dishing it off to others, which made me wonder if a few members of the team secretly resent Rosen; that kind of thing kills a team. Rosen responded with utter class, somehow managing not to disparage either his coaches' recruiting practices nor Fitzpatrick himself, but still, I get the impression that he stands apart from his team. If enough guys (Bernardini, Rosen etc) are mature enough next year to play to their potential and play as a team, they are a serious threat; but I honestly think the team has some serious chemistry issues. They lost two guys ranked 80+ by ESPN last year and they want to act like nothing happened.

G said...

the main question is how well can our Cornell boys adjust to not having Jeff Foote in the middle. If our other big men can hold their weight- we have a ton of perimeter threats, just like last year. We have guys who can ball- the question is - can they bang?

Not At The Table Carlos said...

If its a Snyder's One Pound Bag then I don't blame Bernardini for hording them...Osgood will bang down low don't you worry

Not At The Table Carlos said...

and don't forget about Josh "Big Fruit" Figini who can bang and spread the floor

G said...

I really don't see CU finishing that low. Having veterans like Wrobo and Coury, who have more big game experience than anyone in the entire league, there is NO WAY they will lose that many games, and they will win the close ones. I'm saying CU/Princeton for the right to go to the NCAAs.

Anonymous said...

Strangely, the recent debate re: Peck, Gaitlin etc has made me more optimistic about next year. It is nice to see names, imagine actual lineups, remind us of all the talent we still have instead of what we lost. I too am now cautiously imagining there's a very real chance of winning it all, again.

Anonymous said...

Think about it. In 2009-10, Princeton lost three three-point games, two to the Ivy League’s best team in 31 years. Like Cornell, they won a couple post-season games. In 2009-10, Harvard lost all four games against the league’s top teams. The Crimson made the post-season, but were blown away in their first game.

The Tigers lose their PG and a couple moderately productive bigs. They return a four-man front court (Maddox, Hummer, Barrett, Connolly), plus the league’s most productive returning backcourt (Davis and Mavraides) and a servicible wing (Saunders). Running their 58 possession per game offense, they can do PG by committee, until someone emerges. They’ve got one backcourt rotation spot to fill to give them the eight-man depth that marks a championship team.

Harvard loses an NBA signee and a couple moderately productive bigs. They return a three-man front court (Casey, Wright, Van Nest) replete with injury question marks, plus the league’s most talented returning backcourt (Curry, Webster, McNally, Giger [who among them is ready to replace Jeremy Lin?], Kenyi). They add an extremely promising swingman (Rivard), but have no frontcourt help coming.

Would you, as coach, rather try to replace Schroeder or Lin? Harvard is top-heavy at guard and seriously undermanned with health issues in the frontcourt. Princeton has every position covered (and then some) with an experienced, healthy player. Career-wise, Johnson is 5-1 against Amaker.

Think about it. Princeton must be the early pick to take the Ivy title.

Anonymous said...

Two words:

Ugo Okam

The Cornell Basketball Blog said...

Three words: High School substitute.

Anonymous said...

One More Word:


Anonymous said...

Now, look realistically at 2010-11 and Cornell. Given that Coury, Wire, and Wroblewski (note alphabetical order) will be back and ready to fire and lead, the Big Red must fill approximately three starting positions and two rotation spots with players who have spent no significant time on an Ivy League court. Does Cornell have individuals in the wings with the potential to be a team that makes a run at the top spot? Yes.

However, compared to what we have already seen from returning players from Princeton, Harvard, and Penn, I don’t think it makes sense to project the Big Red into the title chase today. Cornell has hope, but there is so much work to do that the probability of getting all of it done is relatively small. One can already look at what the returning players have done for Pr/H/P in the past and see productive lineups that will form the heart of their 2010-11 teams. A PG here, a big there, a passel of healed injuries… One cannot do this with Cornell. With so many newcomers in Ithaca, I am resigned to reserving judgment until their record on New Year’s Day turns a few heads. 7-5 or 8-4 on Jan-1st? I think a title run possibility is there. Anything less would forecast wrestling with the Bears for the last spot in the upper half of the league.

Coach not only has to figure out who his new five or six players in the rotation are going to be, but also get the various combinations enough time together to gel as a team. While it is probably the most fun challenge of any Ivy coach this year, it is a much bigger challenge than the Pr/H/P coaches have with their returning veteran cores.

Anonymous said...

somebody needs to grow a lumberjack beard on this team. I nominate Adam Wire.

Not At The Table Carlos said...

I saw Wire and Coury go combo beard where each grows out half of a beard on one side of their face

Hello Newman said...

Now, if only Wire could somehow get his facial hair to grow like his chest hair...then you'd have a beard my friends!

Anonymous said...

I think that Tommy Amaker is a liability for Harvard in close games. Against lower division Ivies, the Crimson's talent advantage will easily carry the day but, in a tight game which goes down to the wire, I believe that Amaker's in-game coaching decisions are suspect.

I agree that Harvard will be one of the three teams (H, Pr, P) in the race for the crown but, of the four games against the other contenders, figure that Amaker himself can turn one win into a loss. That alone could keep Amaker from winning Harvard's first men's basketball championship in 111 years.