A day later

• TWEET
• SHARE
• SHARE

The quote of the day on this morning's Basketball Extra page bears repeating here, because it says a lot about the biggest flaw in Penn's offense this season.

"We took some shots that are successful maybe 10 to 20 percent of the time, and that's not good enough," Quakers coach Fran Dunphy said.

On the way up to the Bronx, David, Josh and I spent a while discussing the changes Fran Dunphy has made to Penn's offense this year. In particular, we noted how the Quakers have become far less reliant on three-point shooting than in years past. There's no question that this change has been made necessary by the fact that for the first time in a very long time -- perhaps as far back as the Matt Maloney-Jerome Allen era -- Dunphy doesn't have what I'd call a "purebred" three-point shooter on his team.

As a result, Penn has fed the ball inside a lot more often, and by and large this tactic has worked well. The backdoor cuts and layups we've seen from Steve Danley, Mark Zoller and Brian Grandieri have not only put points on the board for Penn, they have also forced opposing defense to adapt and force the Quakers to take more difficult shots from outside.

I think that's the right way to go for this team. Even though Zoller isn't the most graceful player on the floor, he has an impressive knack for getting the ball into the basket. Grandieri, with his big wingspan, has also been good at getting to the receiving end of backdoor cuts and missed jumpers -- as evidenced by his average of 4.9 rebounds per game, third-best on the team. That matters a lot in a season where Penn is shooting an astonishing 28.1 percent as a team from three-point range, including last night's game.

It's fair to say that most of those outside shots have had a better than "10 to 20 percent" chance of going in, but Dunphy is right that his team has to stick to the shots that work instead of those that don't. That means continuing to feed the ball inside instead of looking for threes as his team has done so often in recent years. There have been a couple of occasions this year where a Penn player in the paint has had a decent chance to get two points but instead kicked it out for a three-point shot by someone else. Those players might be better off being a little more selfish.

If that happens, Penn will probably force its opponents to commit more fouls, which will help counteract physical teams such as Fordham -- and, more than likely, whoever the Quakers face in the NCAA Tournament if they get there. The Rams were called for 13 fouls last night compared to Penn's 21, even though the home team was far more physical. I suspect the Ivy League will be a far different story, but that differential ought to be a focus of the Quakers' film studies this week.

If Penn can improve in this area, it will be very well-served in the weeks to come. It might also get the Quakers some in-game free throw-shooting practice, and they could certainly use some of that.