[81alum]

I wonder if we are sticking with it next year?  If we do, it may take time for our frosh players to be ready for it.  It takes time to learn.

In the past I never really found an excellent website that explained it in terms I could fully digest.  However, I just came across this site and it is quite good:

https://www.basketballforcoaches.com/princeton-offense/

[81alum]

I wonder if we are sticking with it next year?  If we do, it may take time for our frosh players to be ready for it.  It takes time to learn.

In the past I never really found an excellent website that explained it in terms I could fully digest.  However, I just came across this site and it is quite good:

https://www.basketballforcoaches.com/princeton-offense/

[82 Card]

I always thought of the Princeton Offense as an oxymoron, basically a way of saying concentrate on defense. At least that's what it looked like from my seat in the Palestra in the late 70s. Princeton was really good at keeping the score low. A 42-41 game is not all that much fun for the fans taking a study break.

[82 Card]

I always thought of the Princeton Offense as an oxymoron, basically a way of saying concentrate on defense. At least that's what it looked like from my seat in the Palestra in the late 70s. Princeton was really good at keeping the score low. A 42-41 game is not all that much fun for the fans taking a study break.

[BobK]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

[BobK]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

[Mick]

Apropos of not all that much, my son would occasionally practice with the Princeton women.  He said they were the best-run practices he'd ever seen, very crisp, lots of hustle, an idea behind every activity, no wasted time.  Princeton is limited by their recruiting, but they went 22-10 last year and lost in the NCAAs by five to #17 Kentucky.  They routinely win the Ivy league and went 31-1 in my son's senior year.

[Mick]

Apropos of not all that much, my son would occasionally practice with the Princeton women.  He said they were the best-run practices he'd ever seen, very crisp, lots of hustle, an idea behind every activity, no wasted time.  Princeton is limited by their recruiting, but they went 22-10 last year and lost in the NCAAs by five to #17 Kentucky.  They routinely win the Ivy league and went 31-1 in my son's senior year.

[BobK]

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

[BobK]

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

[slide]

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

Pete Carril is coaching at UNC?

[slide]

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

Pete Carril is coaching at UNC?

[81alum]

The Princeton certainly benefits from lots of time since it would allow the offense to run the defense ragged by forcing them to go, over and over, through the rotations until they make a mistake. 

Does it continue to be effective vs. the shot clock?  Other teams have pressed us a little just to burn up time.  It makes the difference between us being able to run one set vs. two sets vs. three sets.  Think of each "set" as a football passing play with several receivers in progression.  The more time we have the more "downs" we have to complete the pass.  If it takes us 10 seconds to bring the ball up, we lose a down.

While the Princeton is said to be "positionless" basketball on the offensive end, there is one exception.  It depends on the post being able to be the quarterback, read the defense, make the pass, or make the elbow jumper.  In the Princeton, the post player almost replaces the point guard as the key distributor.  

Without a post who can consistently make the elbow jumper, the Princeton is vulnerable to the zone.  Fingall tried hard to develop that shot and was effective at it in a couple of games.  Dodson had not yet, as of last year.  Coffee became an excellent passer and distributor but was not consistent as an elbow shooter, although those treys against Baylor were sure welcome.  Will Prechtel or Belibi or even Jones be effective in that role?  Time will tell.

Based on past experience, our team struggled to execute the Princeton quickly and effectively during its first year of implementation--with a disastrous 6-6 start.  That makes me wonder how much our talented frosh will be able to play.  It has to be the hardest offense to learn.  I wonder if talented Dodson has even now adjusted to it.  It seems to lead to the paralysis of analysis for some players.

In short, I wonder if it is the best offense for this year when we have enormous frosh talent who can probably operate successfully on instinct at the offensive end.

---

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

Pete Carril is coaching at UNC?

Courtney Banghart.  

Banghart was the 2015 Naismith National Coach of the Year after leading Princeton to a 30-0 regular season record, and has helped propel the Tigers to the NCAA Tournament in eight of the past 10 years, winning seven Ivy League titles along the way. In 12 years at Princeton, she amassed a 254-103 (.711) record, including a 137-31 (.816) mark against Ivy League opponents. She accomplished all while emphasizing academic pursuit, service, and leadership.

https://goheels.com/staff.aspx?staff=3126

It seems that North Carolina made a clean break with the past and hired a highly successful (and ethical) coach. It will be hard to get used to a non-slimey UNC.

[81alum]

The Princeton certainly benefits from lots of time since it would allow the offense to run the defense ragged by forcing them to go, over and over, through the rotations until they make a mistake. 

Does it continue to be effective vs. the shot clock?  Other teams have pressed us a little just to burn up time.  It makes the difference between us being able to run one set vs. two sets vs. three sets.  Think of each "set" as a football passing play with several receivers in progression.  The more time we have the more "downs" we have to complete the pass.  If it takes us 10 seconds to bring the ball up, we lose a down.

While the Princeton is said to be "positionless" basketball on the offensive end, there is one exception.  It depends on the post being able to be the quarterback, read the defense, make the pass, or make the elbow jumper.  In the Princeton, the post player almost replaces the point guard as the key distributor.  

Without a post who can consistently make the elbow jumper, the Princeton is vulnerable to the zone.  Fingall tried hard to develop that shot and was effective at it in a couple of games.  Dodson had not yet, as of last year.  Coffee became an excellent passer and distributor but was not consistent as an elbow shooter, although those treys against Baylor were sure welcome.  Will Prechtel or Belibi or even Jones be effective in that role?  Time will tell.

Based on past experience, our team struggled to execute the Princeton quickly and effectively during its first year of implementation--with a disastrous 6-6 start.  That makes me wonder how much our talented frosh will be able to play.  It has to be the hardest offense to learn.  I wonder if talented Dodson has even now adjusted to it.  It seems to lead to the paralysis of analysis for some players.

In short, I wonder if it is the best offense for this year when we have enormous frosh talent who can probably operate successfully on instinct at the offensive end.

---

The excellent Princeton coach is now at North Carolina

Pete Carril is coaching at UNC?

Courtney Banghart.  

Banghart was the 2015 Naismith National Coach of the Year after leading Princeton to a 30-0 regular season record, and has helped propel the Tigers to the NCAA Tournament in eight of the past 10 years, winning seven Ivy League titles along the way. In 12 years at Princeton, she amassed a 254-103 (.711) record, including a 137-31 (.816) mark against Ivy League opponents. She accomplished all while emphasizing academic pursuit, service, and leadership.

https://goheels.com/staff.aspx?staff=3126

It seems that North Carolina made a clean break with the past and hired a highly successful (and ethical) coach. It will be hard to get used to a non-slimey UNC.

[CompSci87]

Of course the triangle is hard to learn too. It's also all about making reads.

[CompSci87]

Of course the triangle is hard to learn too. It's also all about making reads.

[82lsju]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

[82lsju]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

[BobK]

Hope you booed as loud as me 821

[BobK]

Hope you booed as loud as me 821

[82lsju]

Hope you booed as loud as me 821

we did boo!!!!

we went to the game early, my roommate was from Portland and knew a couple of guys on the OSU team, was fun to meet them, it would have been even more fun to beat them!!!!

[82lsju]

Hope you booed as loud as me 821

we did boo!!!!

we went to the game early, my roommate was from Portland and knew a couple of guys on the OSU team, was fun to meet them, it would have been even more fun to beat them!!!!

[82 Card]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at Stanford then but not at Maples. It was my first year in law school and the team was unwatchable. Maples was empty at the few games I made it to. The Daily article on the game is amusing:
https://stanforddailyarchive.com/cgi-bin...IN-------#

[82 Card]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at Stanford then but not at Maples. It was my first year in law school and the team was unwatchable. Maples was empty at the few games I made it to. The Daily article on the game is amusing:
https://stanforddailyarchive.com/cgi-bin...IN-------#

[bl82]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

I was at that game too. I felt embarrassed to be excited by the way we kept it close. I don't know what the attendance was that night, but I recall being able to walk up 15 minutes before tipoff and sit pretty much wherever you wanted to.

Really ugly days...

[bl82]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

I was at that game too. I felt embarrassed to be excited by the way we kept it close. I don't know what the attendance was that night, but I recall being able to walk up 15 minutes before tipoff and sit pretty much wherever you wanted to.

Really ugly days...

[81alum]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

I was at that game too.  I felt embarrassed to be excited by the way we kept it close.  I don't know what the attendance was that night, but I recall being able to walk up 15 minutes before tipoff and sit pretty much wherever you wanted to.

Really ugly days...

I was a junior that year but was not going to basketball games.  I did hear friends talking about it and read the article in the Daily.  Yes, Ivan wrote a very entertaining summary of that not very entertaining game.

[81alum]

82 card that was before the shot clock
You should have been at Stanford when Oregon state beat us 18-17

I was at that game!!!!!

I was at that game too.  I felt embarrassed to be excited by the way we kept it close.  I don't know what the attendance was that night, but I recall being able to walk up 15 minutes before tipoff and sit pretty much wherever you wanted to.

Really ugly days...

I was a junior that year but was not going to basketball games.  I did hear friends talking about it and read the article in the Daily.  Yes, Ivan wrote a very entertaining summary of that not very entertaining game.

[2006alum]

81, I could be wrong, but I don't really recall our Princeton sets operating quite like described in that helpful website. I recall very little distribution coming from the "5" player inside and much more coming from the elbow "4" high-post, which is where I recall Fingall and Coffee often serving as solid if not fantastic distributors. In those sets, Smith was usually on the wing and was available either to take a trey or else cut inside. And IMHO I still feel like most of our ball distribution was going through Williams, whatever the ultimate set was. I might be mistaken, but it seemed to me that our most common distribution patterns were from either Williams or the high post to either the wing or else a player who cut inside - I recall very few inside out passes or sets where the 5 was the key distributor.

In terms of how our new players will integrate, I will be honest that I don't see Belibi being a great fit for the Princeton (at least yet), as she seems way more comfortable staying inside and is neither a great outside shooter nor a great distributor. And she can muscle her way to the basket really well, so I'm not even sure she needs the kinds of sets that make the Princeton offense shine.

Jones can do it all, so no worries there. I think Jump will fit in a 4 outside lineup well too. As for Prechtel, her play was so limited on offense during the Jordan Brand Classic that I didn't get a great sense of how we she'd work in a fluid offense, but my sense is that she, too, would prefer to be closer to the basket, like Belibi.

All that said, given that we have a lot of bigs to work with over the next few seasons (Belibi and Prechtel this season, then Brink, then Demetre), it'll be interesting to see if we stick with an offense that really only requires one big. That was a smart move by Tara for the past few seasons where most of our primary scorers have not been brobdingnagian in size (McPhee, Carrington, and Williams), but a universe where all of our best players are 6'1" or taller (Jones, Belibi, Brink, Demetre), I could easily see a return of the triangle. 

Incidentally: when did Stanford become the Cardinal instead of Cardinals? I found it so jarring to read an article in the Daily that kept referring to us as the "Cards" as if we were a football team in Arizona or a basketball team in Kentucky. I've spent my whole adult life chiding people for calling us that, so WTF?!

[2006alum]

81, I could be wrong, but I don't really recall our Princeton sets operating quite like described in that helpful website. I recall very little distribution coming from the "5" player inside and much more coming from the elbow "4" high-post, which is where I recall Fingall and Coffee often serving as solid if not fantastic distributors. In those sets, Smith was usually on the wing and was available either to take a trey or else cut inside. And IMHO I still feel like most of our ball distribution was going through Williams, whatever the ultimate set was. I might be mistaken, but it seemed to me that our most common distribution patterns were from either Williams or the high post to either the wing or else a player who cut inside - I recall very few inside out passes or sets where the 5 was the key distributor.

In terms of how our new players will integrate, I will be honest that I don't see Belibi being a great fit for the Princeton (at least yet), as she seems way more comfortable staying inside and is neither a great outside shooter nor a great distributor. And she can muscle her way to the basket really well, so I'm not even sure she needs the kinds of sets that make the Princeton offense shine.

Jones can do it all, so no worries there. I think Jump will fit in a 4 outside lineup well too. As for Prechtel, her play was so limited on offense during the Jordan Brand Classic that I didn't get a great sense of how we she'd work in a fluid offense, but my sense is that she, too, would prefer to be closer to the basket, like Belibi.

All that said, given that we have a lot of bigs to work with over the next few seasons (Belibi and Prechtel this season, then Brink, then Demetre), it'll be interesting to see if we stick with an offense that really only requires one big. That was a smart move by Tara for the past few seasons where most of our primary scorers have not been brobdingnagian in size (McPhee, Carrington, and Williams), but a universe where all of our best players are 6'1" or taller (Jones, Belibi, Brink, Demetre), I could easily see a return of the triangle. 

Incidentally: when did Stanford become the Cardinal instead of Cardinals? I found it so jarring to read an article in the Daily that kept referring to us as the "Cards" as if we were a football team in Arizona or a basketball team in Kentucky. I've spent my whole adult life chiding people for calling us that, so WTF?!

[BosCard]

I think we will see a lot of Jones facilitating in the Princeton or against a zone.  Part of being a great facilitator is being a great offensive threat yourself.  If the opponent is worried about Jones in the high post either hitting a mid-range jumper, slashing around a bigger defender or backing down a smaller defender then passes to open players become a lot easier.  And I do slightly disagree about Belibi in the Princeton because our version of the Princeton has a lot of handoffs and cutters through the lane.  In the halfcourt, Belibi isn't really a low-post player (yet).  She doesn't have those moves (yet) and big stationary defenders can block her.  Where most of her half court offense comes from (other than offensive rebounds) is when she receives the ball while she is slashing to the basket.  She is quite hard to stop then with her combination of size, strength and athleticism.  I anticipate the Princeton will try to generate a lot of passes to Belibi as she is cutting towards the basket.

[BosCard]

I think we will see a lot of Jones facilitating in the Princeton or against a zone.  Part of being a great facilitator is being a great offensive threat yourself.  If the opponent is worried about Jones in the high post either hitting a mid-range jumper, slashing around a bigger defender or backing down a smaller defender then passes to open players become a lot easier.  And I do slightly disagree about Belibi in the Princeton because our version of the Princeton has a lot of handoffs and cutters through the lane.  In the halfcourt, Belibi isn't really a low-post player (yet).  She doesn't have those moves (yet) and big stationary defenders can block her.  Where most of her half court offense comes from (other than offensive rebounds) is when she receives the ball while she is slashing to the basket.  She is quite hard to stop then with her combination of size, strength and athleticism.  I anticipate the Princeton will try to generate a lot of passes to Belibi as she is cutting towards the basket.

[81alum]

Clearly Tara has put her own stamp on the textbook Princeton, as she does on everything.

In the textbook Princeton, there is only one true post, who moves from Low to High depending on the set.  The post moves up to the elbow for distribution and elbow jumpers or cut to the low post as an offensive threat.   The other four players are cycling through each other's positions and always start 4-out.  

Tara always adjusts all offensive strategies to the personnel she has that year.  It may be hard to do at this point given she may not be quite sure what the college level capabilities of the 4 freshmen are going to be, but I would not be surprised to see something new--if only some transmogrification of the Princeton that evolves it into something quite different.

As clever as the Princeton is, and as well-suited as it is to very smart and disciplined players--I am not really convinced it is the right offense for our personnel.  But Tara has won 1067 games and I have won...0.

[81alum]

Clearly Tara has put her own stamp on the textbook Princeton, as she does on everything.

In the textbook Princeton, there is only one true post, who moves from Low to High depending on the set.  The post moves up to the elbow for distribution and elbow jumpers or cut to the low post as an offensive threat.   The other four players are cycling through each other's positions and always start 4-out.  

Tara always adjusts all offensive strategies to the personnel she has that year.  It may be hard to do at this point given she may not be quite sure what the college level capabilities of the 4 freshmen are going to be, but I would not be surprised to see something new--if only some transmogrification of the Princeton that evolves it into something quite different.

As clever as the Princeton is, and as well-suited as it is to very smart and disciplined players--I am not really convinced it is the right offense for our personnel.  But Tara has won 1067 games and I have won...0.

[82 Card]

Incidentally: when did Stanford become the Cardinal instead of Cardinals? I found it so jarring to read an article in the Daily that kept referring to us as the "Cards" as if we were a football team in Arizona or a basketball team in Kentucky. I've spent my whole adult life chiding people for calling us that, so WTF?!

According to this article, the switch from "Cardinals" to "Cardinal" was in November 1981:
What is the history of Stanford's mascot and nickname?

I vaguely remember that edict coming out. Many of us ignored it because we preferred "Robber Barons."

[82 Card]

Incidentally: when did Stanford become the Cardinal instead of Cardinals? I found it so jarring to read an article in the Daily that kept referring to us as the "Cards" as if we were a football team in Arizona or a basketball team in Kentucky. I've spent my whole adult life chiding people for calling us that, so WTF?!

According to this article, the switch from "Cardinals" to "Cardinal" was in November 1981:
What is the history of Stanford's mascot and nickname?

I vaguely remember that edict coming out. Many of us ignored it because we preferred "Robber Barons."