WBB: Northwest Conference

Started by swiss, March 07, 2005, 12:40:48 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pat Coleman

Quote from: parklandpride on December 22, 2005, 10:40:41 PM
What i will do is encourage everyone to actually attend a game that your favorite team ISNT playing in. If you put yourself in another gym and don't have team bias on your mind, it is amazing how much you can witness and learn about this conference and it's teams. I have found the overall experience more enjoyable.

This is a great point. This is how I view every game, of course, and it's beneficial to my understanding of Division III.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

swiss

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 26, 2005, 02:36:06 PM
Quote from: swiss on December 20, 2005, 05:31:39 PM
GFU moved up to number 2 in the WBCA poll behind Washington U.  Seems to me the WBCA has a clearer notion of the top 10 than D3Hoops but, of course, that's debatable.

They have a notion you agree with. That doesn't make it more clear or more correct. :)

We both have west coast voters, different people of course. The WBCA poll has 12.5% of its voters from the Pacific Time Zone, a bit disproportional considering that only about 4% of the Division III women's basketball teams are on the west coast. So you can expect the NWC to do disproportionately better in the WBCA poll.

Thanks for your response, Pat.  Actually, my thought regarding the polls had more to do with Washington U replacing Southern Maine than anything to do with the NWC.  I know the East Coast is pretty blind to the NWC and that will change only when we consistently put teams in Final Four.  However, It does seem to me that SM getting beat by 10 by a previously unranked team ought to drop them out of first.  Washington U, on the other hand, has beaten a ranked team (DePauw) by 11 and crushed everyone else they've faced.  I'm looking forward to seeing how they do against Lewis & Clark on the 28th.  L&C is certainly the surprise of the NWC this year but I would think that Washington U should win.  They have the coach, the tradition, the current streak... I didn't see how D3Hoops could pass them by while leaving SM in first. 

Pat Coleman

Wash U beat a ranked team, sure, the current #13. Did you look at who Southern Maine has beaten? The current #5.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

swiss

Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 26, 2005, 08:39:45 PM
Wash U beat a ranked team, sure, the current #13. Did you look at who Southern Maine has beaten? The current #5.

I'm not sure how helpful it is for either one of us to compare the rankings when it is the rankings that are in question.  But, either way, the issue for me wasn't who they beat (Theoretically, a number one team is supposed to beat a number five, right?), but rather, who beat them, and under what circumstance.  You  probably know the details and maybe if I was able to see SM play I would change my mind; but, in principal, I wouldn't rank a team that lost to an unranked team over a team like Washington U that is still perfect.

Which, btw, I am not.  I noticed after my last post that it was DePauw that is playing L&C in AZ, not Wash U.  I had switched schedules without realizing it.

Pat Coleman

Quote from: swiss on December 26, 2005, 09:30:38 PM
Quote from: Pat Coleman on December 26, 2005, 08:39:45 PM
Wash U beat a ranked team, sure, the current #13. Did you look at who Southern Maine has beaten? The current #5.

I'm not sure how helpful it is for either one of us to compare the rankings when it is the rankings that are in question.

I suppose not, but you used it in your defense of Wash U, so I figured we should compare apples to apples. :)

It's hard to disagree with your last point re Wash U, and I suppose that's why they got seven No. 1 votes. However, simply being unbeaten doesn't mean they are automatically better than any team with a loss. In the end, they are rankings, not standings, so opinion is paramount when there's no head-to-head or common opponents to work with.
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

parklandpride

So do the National Ranking conversations come to a complete stop on the NWC board? I hope so. The bottom line is what you do in conference play is what really matters. If you want to get technical, on games days Fox has faced opponants with a combined 24 - 42 record. At tip off, 3 of the teams and 4 of the games (they played Westner Oregon twice) were 0-3, 0-8, 0-3, 0-7.

Stopping short of kicking the Bruins while they are down, the NWC offers more real quality caliber competition from top to almost bottom than several of the other more nationally recognized conferences. Historically, the non-conferece shcedules NWC teams play are nothing more than feasting on the lack of regional options. 8 of the 9 teams in the NWC this year can get a win against another team not named Willamette. Some of you would argue Pacific wont get a win, I don't agree. Arnall is too good and that to happen. I think they will be primed to cause some trouble when it counts the last two weekends of the season when LC, WM and WHW play in the Grove. If GFU can't pick themselves up after the loss last night Pacific could sneak another one.

No one in the SCIAC would finish in the top 4 of the NWC, Chapman has never had much success against the NWC, and the MIAC is always top heavy, allowing St Ben's, Carleton, and typically Gustavus to bloat their records beating up Augs, Olaf, Hamline, St. Mary's and St. Kate's.

You can't fault Fox for any of this, they are doing what they are supposed to do, come off a good national title run and continue to win (until UPS). Also to their credit, the Bruins are the only NWC team to ever be ranked in the top 5 nationally (holding #1 in 2001) again, until another NWC team caught them (Willamette) in what was really the closest thing to wire to wire conference dominance as the Katie Lacey led Bruins dominated the league all year.

So lets put the national rankings to rest (don't make me break out the #7 Carelton or #4 Simpson references again). Put the USA Today back on the coffee table, skip over the Rankings tab and click to the D3 Posting boards. Grab your rain coat and trusty bleacher cushion and head to the local NWC gym to find out what is really going on.

A loss like this, might make Fox even more dangerous, more hungry. It also gives a UPS team that on Tuesday might have been thinking it is over already, new life and belief they are still very much in it. And as long as teams have to travel to Eastern Washington, there is no automatic winner in this league.

Three big games tonight. Can Fox bounce back at Pacific, Will Whitworth complete the LC East side shut out and the two conference leaders clash in Parkland with a chance for 4-0 on the line.
2006 NWC Champions, NWC Tournament Champions, Sweet 16

rimshot

Hey parkland,
kind of a long posting with a great deal of information.  need to check on a couple of things---

did you see UPS vs. GFU  (or swiss did you see the game?)--just curious of your thoughts.

top 5 nationally ranked by who (didn't PLU and UPS get ranked in top 5 by DIII hoops?)

you are correct UPS was out of the race if they didn't bounce back from the loss against PLU---(1-3 start in conference is not going to get you to the top 3)

as far as the SCIAC and MIAC couldn't agree more---but you forgot to write your thoughts on the IIAC--

as far as the other questions
GFU will rock Pacific
both eastside W's will be 2-2
Linfield will once again take a hearbreaking loss at PLU

parklandpride

You know...UPS might have been ranked #4 2 years ago, PLU has never been in the top 5 national rankings as far as i know. I believe #9 is the highest they have been ranked nationally at any point.

Looks like Fox bounced back....havent seen any other scores yet
2006 NWC Champions, NWC Tournament Champions, Sweet 16

swiss

Quote from: rimshot on January 07, 2006, 07:55:10 PM

did you see UPS vs. GFU  (or swiss did you see the game?)--just curious of your thoughts.

I was there, and it was a painful sight for Bruin fans!  Fortunately, the students weren't back in school yet so the fan response to knocking off a highly-ranked opponent was relatively polite.  The Bruins were obviously not ready for prime time, but not because they lack the talent.  They have more than enough of that (I will admit it was barely recognizable Friday night).  But this team is still young and not yet greater than the sum of its parts.  To really fill out as a team, they will need a clear floor-leader to develop who will hold them together during those stretches when the wheels seem to be falling off... or when the other team goes on a tear.  Both were happening to them Friday.  A coach has only so many timeouts, so every team needs someone (or several "someones") who can elevate and adjust her own game while at the same time calming the nerves and channeling the energies of the other players (e.g. by giving encouragement, providing needed direction, changing the tempo when needed, etc.)  It's a very difficult task but, obviously, teams that have that type of floor-leader always do well.

Not surprisingly, UPS didn't just hear the Bruins were coming and forfeit.  What they did do was shoot the lights out.  They shot the lights out in both halves (68% and 53%).   What the Bruins did in the first 11 games they did not do at UPS (except for the first couple of minutes in the game and a very brief run in the second half).  Their prior success has come because they attack you on defense, force you out of your comfort zone and then capitalize on your mistakes.  Their offense is good because it is multifaceted with lots of firepower, inside and outside, but mostly it feeds off their defensive effort (tipped balls, blocked shots, steals, etc).  They also use their speed well on the offensive boards and chase down loose balls.  But not Friday.  They appeared to play sluggishly, safely, more "behind the ball than in front of it."  They just didn't look like the same team to their fans, and probably not to themselves.

By the way, my impression of the first half at Pacific tonight was similar, although not quite as disappointing.  There were some very good individual efforts.  BUT... in the second half they were back, playing just like they had all year prior to UPS.  It was "team defense" again and it showed.  (They won 69 to 50 after being up by just 1 at the half)

There aren't many opportunities in life to be a part of something really special.   Friday night was a reality check.  It can easily slip away.   And PP is certainly right about the NWC.  Nobody is going to give anybody anything...especially the Bruins.  But, I've been around a lot of basketball in my life, and I still believe in this team (No surprise there, huh?).  It was pretty clear they haven't "found" themselves as a "team" yet... but if they do, it will be a lot more fun than Friday!

parklandpride

"as far as the SCIAC and MIAC couldn't agree more---but you forgot to write your thoughts on the IIAC--"

I don't think this is too much different. Basically been the Buena Vista and Simpson show for the past few years, otherwise the rest of this small league is available to bloat your record. I think Buena Vista went 25-3 and 27-3 the past two years, and that is nothing to shake a stick at by any means. They also went 16-0 and 15-1 in conference those years....To give you perspective the best anyone has done in NWC play the past 4 years is 14-2 (2005 GFU). Those two losses came At Whitworth and at home against Whitman. Whitworth finished 2nd last year (and lost both games to 3rd place PLU) and Whitman was 9-7 in conference that year.

PLU finished in 3rd place and lost both games to 4th place UPS, a game to 4th place Whitman and to 3-13 Pacific.

Remember in 2004 when UPS and Whitman tied for the conference title? Whitman lost at UPS and PLU the 2nd weekend of the season, then went on a 9 game winning streak only to get whacked by 7-9 Linfield. The co-champs UPS lost early to 7-9 Pacific, let PLU come into Memorial and steal a win, and split with Whitman to split the NWC title.

Games like that dont happen in the MIAC, IIAC, SCIAC. The top 3 or 4 feast on the bottom feaders and then just focus on getting wins against the other 2 or 3 contenders. Not in the NWC, the bottoms bring it and get wins all the time. I believe it was in 2003 when Whitworth and PLU were battling for the NWC title and #1 seed, and Whitworth had just defended home court beating UPS and PLU on back to back nights. The Pirates flew to Linfield and were blown out by 23 to the 8-8 Wildcats. The Pirates looked like they had let another NWC title slip away until PLU lost at home to 10-6 GFU and at 12-4 UPS to tie for 2nd place giving Whitworth the NWC crown and #1 tourney seed.

6 days later #2 seed PLU would knock off #3 seed UPS in OT, then travel to NWC champs Whitworth for the tourney title game and smoke them in their own gym, earning the National Title bid. Another interesting point. Whitworth's Tiffany Speer was named NWC player of the year twice, was an All-American, had an amazing supporting cast in Shogren and Belic, won the NWC regular season title once, was nationally ranked in the top 25 every year and never once made the national tournament. Not once.....

All this to show, the NWC is one of the best, top to bottom. You can't just go into a game in this conference and expect to win. Already this year, L&C goes to UPS and blows them out, yet UPS defends home and smokes undefeated GFU. LC takes 2-0 to the east side and comes back 2-2. Anyone that thinks the NWC is a cake walk is only kidding themselves, and this battle tested run through the NWC does one thing, it prepares the NWC tourney team for the big dance. FOX, UPS and PLU have all made the Elite 8 and have all been within 1 hoop of the final 4. It hasn't happened yet, but it will.

-PP
2006 NWC Champions, NWC Tournament Champions, Sweet 16

Pat Coleman

#4 Simpson? If you want to go back to Jan. 23, 2000, Simpson was #2.

Of course that was six years ago.  Might be better to let somet things go. :)
Publisher. Questions? Check our FAQ for D3f, D3h.
Quote from: old 40 on September 25, 2007, 08:23:57 PMLet's discuss (sports) in a positive way, sometimes kidding each other with no disrespect.

parklandpride

I don't want to let that go. PLU knocked them off and they were a #1 seed...that was a great day for PLU and the NWC...


Live in the glory of 2000
2006 NWC Champions, NWC Tournament Champions, Sweet 16

arforbes

PP, I always enjoy your analysis and your great knowledge of history of the conference. 
I certainly did not enjoy the Bruins getting spanked by UPS, but I do concur with  the thought that this should and probably will wake them up and stimulate a more concentrated defensive team effort.  There cerrtainly are nights when any team can light up the board and make you look bad, but PP does make a good point in regard to the general quality of the preseason schedule potentially not preparing GFU for the NWC.  However, now we are in it, and it would seem that the Bruins do have upper class leadership in some very key spots to help settle and mature an otherwise pretty young team.  Scott also has a history of getting a lot out of his players.  And as predicted and expected, don't forget about the Lutes.                           

parklandpride

I think i am going to see my old friend Ted Wilson Tuesday....I think this is going to be a fun game. Hard not to enjoy a game in one of the best basketball facilities i have ever seen...

See ya there.

-PP (I should have thought my screen name through before people started calling me PP...)
2006 NWC Champions, NWC Tournament Champions, Sweet 16

arforbes

Mr. Parkland Pride,
too late.  Besides, PP has such a nice tinkle, er ah , ring to it.