Young Crimson Squad Shows Poise in Loss to Princeton

After a layup by Princeton guard Will Venable with just 2:22 remaining in regulation trimmed the Harvard lead to two, the Crimson was determined to engage in a measured game of keep-away to attempt to seal the victory.

And it almost worked.

On its next possession Harvard let the shot clock wind down to just eight seconds—1:55 remained on the game clock—before junior guard Kevin Rogus missed a heavily-contested layup. Crimson sophomore forward Matt Stehle grabbed the rebound and pulled the ball back out as the offense reset.

The rebound gave Harvard a fresh start, and it took full advantage as it worked the shot clock, draining all but two seconds off of it before Rogus launched up a three with just 1:21 left. The three was off-target, but Stehle was there for another crucial rebound. He didn’t look to put the ball back up, but rather showed the poise of a veteran as he pulled the ball back out, letting the offense reset once again.

The nerves never showed, as the Crimson bled the 35-second clock dry for the third time during that long possession. This time, however, the Crimson could not find on open look as the shot clock approached zero. The ball came to Rogus, who attempted a jumper in heavy traffic that never found its way to the rim—a shot clock violation and a Harvard turnover.

“Getting the second shots impressed me,” Crimson coach Frank Sullivan said. “We weren’t one-and-done. I thought our organization got good, but then as the clock got down, we really couldn’t be effective. Certainly the next step is finishing off plays when you get in that situation, but we thought we showed probably as good a poise as we’ve had all year.”

The Harvard possession lasted a total of 1:40 seconds—a show of tremendous focus and self-control unexpected of a young team in a pressure situation. With only 42 seconds remaining in the period, the Tigers would only get one chance to tie or take the lead—an opportunity that Princeton was able to capitalize on to force overtime.

Top Performers

Stehle and Harvard captain Jason Norman continued their strong offensive play, scoring in double-figures in each contest for the second weekend in a row.

Norman led the Crimson in scoring at both Penn and Princeton, recording 27 points on the weekend. He also led the team in minutes played with 87—just fewer than 50 of those spent on the court during the double-overtime game against the Tigers.

“I thought [Norman] showed good character tonight,” Sullivan said. “I think he was in rhythm with his shot. He had the energy after last night to find the adrenaline to keep going. I thought he had a good, strong presence on the court and we like that.”

Stehle’s contribution was not limited to scoring as he had 20 boards—13 of those on the offensive end—to go along with his 25 points over the two games. He registered game-highs in rebounds both nights.

Crème Puff to Tenacious ‘D’

If the mentality of the Harvard defense ever needed to change overnight, that night would have been Friday.

One night after allowing the most points to an opponent all season—104 to Penn—and the most since giving up 108 at home against Cornell on March 6, 1993, the Crimson only allowed Princeton to score 42 points in all of regulation.

“It’s critical for us to guard because we really labor scoring,” Sullivan said. “We labor with turnovers every game. We labor with scoring every game. If we can guard in games, we can hang around, and tonight was a good example for our team.”

The differences are far more drastic than just the final scores. On Friday night, the Quakers shot 66 percent from the field and 67 percent from behind the arc. But on Saturday, Harvard’s defense clamped down, only allowing the Tigers to hit 36 percent from the field and a dismal 13 percent behind the arc.

The amazing shooting of Penn was a by-product of great ball movement coupled with shooters who couldn’t miss. The less impressive Princeton numbers were caused by a hungrier Crimson defense that was more effective in getting to open shooters and by the lack of a Tiger shooter with a hot hand.

“They did a very good job of taking [shots] away, and not just our threes,” Princeton coach John Thompson III said. “As much as I feel we did a pretty good job on defense, I think that Harvard did a very good job on defense in disrupting and making sure we didn’t have any open, any clear looks.”

—Staff writer Michael R. James can be reached at mrjames@fas.harvard.edu.