Big frontcourts no big deal for Penn on boards

More than anything, this weekend's opening Ivy League games were a chance for the Quakers to rebound from a rough first half of the season.

And rebound they did.

In the two games this weekend, Penn beat Harvard and Dartmouth on the glass by a combined 88-63.

Going up against Big Green seven-footer John Marciano and a formidable Harvard front-line duo of Brad Unger and Evan Harris, rebounding had to be a concern for Penn coming in, especially considering the Quakers lack of inside size.

But coach Glen Miller said the Quakers gained the rebounding edge not by their play inside, but by crashing the boards as a team.

"We had five guys that were concentrating on rebounding," Miller said."If you're going to out-rebound another team by double figures, your guards are probably going to have to rebound the ball, and we did that."

After the ejections during the Harvard game left the Quakers' frontcourt shorthanded, it was that much more important for Penn's perimeter players to hit the glass. Guard Brian Grandieri, Penn's leading rebounder this season, once again had a team-high on Friday, with nine.

"We have to help those guys out," the captain said, referring to Penn's forwards. "Rebounding is just something I love doing, and we needed it tonight."

Harvard coach Tommy Amaker credited the Quakers for being "a little bit tougher than we were on the backboard" and felt the rebound differential - along with his team's poor free throw shooting - was the difference in the game.

Against Dartmouth, Penn used a similar team-oriented style of rebounding, but this time it was the forwards who stepped up the most on the glass.

"Their bigs - they're big, but they're not as athletic as us, so we really wanted to emphasize that and get on the glass," said forward Cameron Lewis, who had a game-high 10 rebounds.

"We thought we'd have an advantage there, and I think we exploited that."

Dartmouth coach Terry Dunn expressed his disappointment about being "terribly outrebounded in the first half." The Quakers jumped out to a 27-11 edge in the first 20 minutes, which not surprisingly coincided with a 12-point halftime lead.

The Big Green actually outrebounded Penn 20-17 in the second half, and the Quakers' lack of domination on the glass was one of the main factors that allowed Dartmouth to creep back into the game.

Another telling statistic from the weekend may have been second-chance points, in which Penn enjoyed a 38-23 advantage. In games that were decided by a combined six points, the extra scoring opportunities were the difference.

Coming into Ivy League play, Penn's rebounding margin was -2.8. There was no indication that the Quakers would be capable of dominating the glass once league play started.

They proved the naysayers wrong.

Miller compared it to last season when he said his team's defense was criticized throughout the season, but "when it was all said and done, if you just took Ivy League games, we were the best defensive team in the conference from a statistical standpoint."

Last year, Penn took its defensive game to new levels once the real season began.

And this year, the Quakers may still be an underdog going up against the Ivy favorite in Cornell, but if they keep gaining double-digit advantages in rebounding, that might change.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.