The Penn men's basketball team defeated both Harvard and Dartmouth over the weekend by a combined 39 points, despite missing a huge presence that the Quakers rely on heavily. No, not senior point guard Andrew Toole -- he was able to go against Harvard. Penn was missing its inside game. Ugonna Onyekwe had 21 points in two games. Koko Archibong had a combined 17 -- six of which came from behind the three-point line. In two games that Penn's frontcourt should have dominated -- Dartmouth and Harvard's second tallest starters are 6'5" and 6'6" respectively -- its presence was neutralized. It was neutralized by the only team in the Ivy League capable of doing so -- Penn. "We try and attack everyone the same way," Penn coach Fran Dunphy said after the Harvard game. "We try to establish ourselves inside. But it hasn't quite worked out that way." It hasn't worked out that way to the tune of taking 35 three-pointers against Dartmouth compared to only 25 shots from within the arc. Penn shot 37 percent from long-range. Dartmouth's defense had more than a little to do with Penn's shot selection, collapsing quickly around any inside player and sagging off Penn's outside players. "I don't think that many of them were bad shots," Dunphy said. "They obviously gave us three-point shots." Exactly. They gave Penn three-point shots. Why should the Quakers let their opponents off easy? Penn's guards must feed the ball inside to the Quakers' two first-team All-Ivy selections. Against the Crimson, Penn did a better job working the ball inside, but apparently only because Harvard wanted it this way. "Even though we knew there would be some tough covers at the four and the five [Archibong and Onyekwe] I think our intent was to really get some inside game from them because they had shot the ball well last night and against La Salle," Harvard coach Frank Sullivan said. "We wanted to find some way to bring them inside the line... and to kind of tempt them with the inside play." Penn worked the ball inside more frequently, and despite Onyekwe and Archibong's subpar games, the Quakers got better looks from the three-point line due to their efforts in the post -- Penn went 11-for-20, 55 percent from behind the arc. Going inside forced Harvard to sag defensively, and charge out at the three-point shooters. This led to more dribble penetration opportunities for the Penn guards, which led to yet more open threes. These are good things. They result from Penn getting the ball inside. Particularly noticeable was a stretch early in the second half against Dartmouth when the Quakers seemed dedicated to working it into the post early, even if it eventually did come back outside. Not coincidentally it was early in the second half that Penn turned a competitive game into a rout. Obviously Dunphy knows this. He's far too good of a coach not to. It is a constant point of emphasis both at press conferences and -- more tellingly -- after halftime and timeouts the Quakers work the ball inside. However Penn's guards sometimes -- e.g. the Dartmouth game -- seem content to take the first open three that presents itself. Dunphy is correct, these aren't bad shots. However, the three-point shot is a fickle mistress. Sometimes the shots just don't fall. When Penn is making its three-pointers, they will beat any Ivy League team they play. No exceptions. However, when Penn is bombing -- and missing -- their threes they could be vulnerable against Ancient Eight opponents. This is not to say Penn should abandon the three-point shot as part of its offense. In fact, this is not to say that the three-point shot should not remain the focal point of their offense. But Penn needs to take advantage of the players that separate them from the pack of the Ivy League -- Onyekwe and Archibong. It will result in better and more looks from behind the arc and keep their best player, Onyekwe, involved on both ends. Otherwise they will be like any other Ivy League team -- very beatable.
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
DonatePlease note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.