Top 25 talk

Started by Lurker, March 23, 2005, 09:02:04 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ElRetornodelEspencio

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
ELR you clearly don't know much about D3 history.  New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994.  Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England.  Enough said.  Also I guess you weren't paying attention during, say, the last two weeks of play.  Sheesh.

So what teams would have won the national title from there before 1994? You think they had something for an Ohio Northern teams with 3 D-1 transfers?

Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Pat Coleman

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:42:49 PM
Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Clearly there's no way to prove anything like this but considering the NESCAC's success in the postseason since they've been allowed to participate, it's more than just trivia or a footnote -- it's a significant fact that is worth bringing forward. Knocking New England for winning three titles in 42 seasons is disingenuous when the best teams have only been eligible for about half of those.

If we're arbitrarily cutting off, it's worth throwing out there that in the automatic bid/pools era (2000 and beyond), New England has won three titles and the Great Lakes two.

And if we're talking about the current state of New England basketball, I'm not sure how relevant 1975-1994 (or 2004) is anyway.
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.

ElRetornodelEspencio

#10532
Quote from: Pat Coleman on January 01, 2017, 04:49:26 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:42:49 PM
Unless you prove that the NESCAC would have won something in those years they didn't participate, this is just trivia.

Clearly there's no way to prove anything like this but considering the NESCAC's success in the postseason since they've been allowed to participate, it's more than just trivia or a footnote -- it's a significant fact that is worth bringing forward. Knocking New England for winning three titles in 42 seasons is disingenuous when the best teams have only been eligible for about half of those.

If we're arbitrarily cutting off, it's worth throwing out there that in the automatic bid/pools era (2000 and beyond), New England has won three titles and the Great Lakes two.

And if we're talking about the current state of New England basketball, I'm not sure how relevant 1975-1994 (or 2004) is anyway.

It's not disingenous if you didn't know, but no one has showed any reason to think it mattered. If there was some undefeated team or well tested 1-2 loss team that spanked the eventual national champ or something, that might be compelling. It should be easy for the NESCAC historian to bring those forward.

But if nothing before 2004 is relevant, then pretty much the NESCAC history becomes Amherst anyway.

Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Region has really lost all meaning with how the brackets are done now, but I certainly wouldn't the OAC side by side with the CCIW or WIAC (another truly ridiculous statement by the NESCAC propagandist, putting that league above the CCIW). Never mind that Babson's not in the NESCAC, not that that really matters much with the NESCAC playing such a gimmicky schedule anyway.

The New England teams have mostly just gamed the system better.

nescac1

Yeah. I have no clue, and I'm sure you don't either, about how New England would have done prior to 1994.  I will say that the early 1990s Colby teams were legendary, led by a national POY.  But in all events it's totally irrelevant. I'm talking about right now: and New England just proved itself as totally legit.  Or did you forget when Marietta just lost to a team that finished in the bottom half of NESCAC last year?  Either Marietta stinks or New England is a lot better than you claim.  There is no option c. 

Pat Coleman

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:55:22 PM
Point is for all the bluster about New England, there's not a lot of reason to think they're actually the best, especially if you're not talking about Amherst being that standard-bearer.

Are there people here saying New England is the best? I think the current status of the discussion is as follows:

ElRetornodelEspencio: Babson plays a bunch of tomato cans.
Others: New England is better than that.

I'm sure others have read more about this than I have, but I think the 1981-82 Hamilton team is the one that had the best shot at a national title, had the NESCAC presidents allowed them to play.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/statsPDFArchive/MBB2/C/Men's%20Basketball_Men's_Division%20III_1982_267_Hamilton%20College.pdf
http://www.d3hoops.com/archives/men/1982
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.

nescac1

Ummmm, dude, learn to read.  1994.  Since that time, Williams has played in seven final fours, four title games, and has one title.  In other words, better than any other league combined saved for WIAC.  Amherst only?  Get a clue dude. 

nescac1

Also, Midd, Trinity, and Conn have all appeared in final fours, Tufts in the elite eight.  Babson and MIT have recently made final fours from NEWMAC.  There is good D3 basketball played outside of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Illinois.  Which everyone save for one dude seems to acknowledge.

Ryan Stoppable

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:25:55 PM
3 New England champs in the history of D3, two the same school.

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994.  Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England.

I feel like this is oversimplifying the discussion. There's a lot more to a conference's strength than just its elite team(s), depth also matters as well. Otherwise, you'd be saying the NACC was just about the best conferences in the country last year! (And as someone who follows it closely, the NACC was not one of the best conferences in the country last year.)

And with as little inter-regional play as there is, it's hard to really get data to measure that. Sometimes you do just have to use the eye test.
Lakeland Muskies: Fear the Fish!

NCAA Appearances
Football: 17, 16, 15, 09, 05
MBB: 04
WBB: 17, 10, 06, 04, 02, 01, 99
Baseball: 03, 02 (College World Series)

Gregory Sager

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:19:42 PMMy fault. I thought it was 1.5. Richardson only plays 20 mpg, though. He's good. 2.5 made per game is kind of a lot. Seems like that penalizes some really good shooters for just not chucking it enough or their team using them differently. But it is what it is.

Nobody on that list ought to have the verb "chuck" or the participle "chucking" used in connection with their three-point shooting. I've never seen "chuck" or "chucking" used in connection with a shooter in a way that has anything but a negative connotation.

Any cutoff point is arbitrary on a rate stat (holy cow, I'm dipping my toe in KnightSlappy waters!), but I'd argue that 2.5 treys per game is a good spot to place the boundary. At this point of the year, D3's top 100 is still well above 41% with that cutoff point in use, and the common consensus is that if you can knock down two out of every five trey attempts, you're really good at it. If you can knock down two out of every five while attempting them in high volume, you deserve to have your name on the NCAA's leaderboard.
"To see what is in front of one's nose is a constant struggle." -- George Orwell

Gregory Sager

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:36:34 PM
Basically, over the last fifteen years it's been (1) WIAC (2) NESCAC (3) everyone else.

Disagree. The CCIW has been in the Final Four for four out of the past five years, and over the course of the fifteen-year period that you mentioned the CCIW has made it to Salem as many times as the WIAC has. What's more, four different CCIW programs -- Augustana, Carthage, Illinois Wesleyan, and North Central -- reached the Final Four during that fifteen-year time frame, while the NESCAC and WIAC were only represented by two programs apiece, demonstrating the overall strength of the league. While you can argue that the CCIW doesn't measure up because that league hasn't hauled home the Big Doorstop in any of those six trips to Salem over the last decade and a half, look at the margins in those Final Four games in which the CCIW team was eliminated. The CCIW entrant in Salem lost by four in 2002, by two in 2006, by three in 2012, by eight in 2013, by eight in 2014, and then the aberration of a 16-point loss in the 2015 national championship game. In every case but one, the team that beat the CCIW team was the team that cut down the nets on Saturday in the Salem Civic Center.

No other league aside from the MAC has ever been represented in the Final Four for four straight seasons (and the CCIW's now done it twice) -- and when the MAC did it in the late '70s, that league's ranks were so swollen that it seemed as though half of all of the institutions of higher learning in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania were in that league. (It had three compass-point divisions back then, before being re-shaped into the MAC Freedom and the MAC Commonwealth divisions.)
"To see what is in front of one's nose is a constant struggle." -- George Orwell

Gregory Sager

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PMI think IWU is quite good, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together. Beating Wash U on the road is a better win than any that Babson has, and none of IWU's losses are anything to be embarrassed about. When you play good teams, sometimes you're going to lose because someone has to and you can't play an A game every time (otherwise an A game would be your C game!).

Illinois Wesleyan is quite good. The Titans are a legit contender for the CCIW title, and the CCIW champion is annually in the national-title picture practically by default. But the Titans aren't better than Babson. Yes, if the Beavers and the Titans were to meet up, the Titans would have a fair chance of winning on any given night, because, again as Bob said, the second-tier teams this year (of which I agree IWU is one) aren't that far off from the top-tier teams (a category in which everybody who posts here except for you includes Babson). But in an NBA-style seven-game series, the smart money would go on the Beavers, because they're simply the better team of the two. If you don't want to take my word for it, take the word of a former broadcaster for the Titans, an IWU alumnus who's been running a blog about his alma mater's men's basketball program for two decades now:

Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 10:21:56 AMFor example, Greg mentioned #1-Babson vs #18-Illinois Wesleyan. I agree that Babson is better overall than Illinois Wesleyan and certainly should be ranked higher, but if those two teams played on a neutral court I believe that would be an incredibly close and competitive game that IWU could absolutely win.

Moving right along ...

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PMBabson usually loses to the first proven and tested team they run into, and I imagine it'll be the same this year after their walk through their conference.

Chicago is a good team, and the Beavers decisively beat the Maroons on Chicago's floor. I wouldn't classify Chicago as the favorite to win the UAA, but it would not shock me if the Maroons beat out Rochester, Wash U, and Emory for that league's title -- and the UAA is an eminently respectable D3 league. The reason why I say that Chicago has a shot at the UAA title is because the team's biggest problem is free throws; the Maroons shoot a ghastly 61% from the line. But that's the Achilles heel of Rochester (63.5%) and Wash U (65%) as well, which may nullify the problem for the Maroons when they meet those two league foes. It's also a fixable problem, to a certain degree (although it's just as fixable for Luke Flockerzi at Rochester and Mark Edwards at Wash U as it is for Mike McGrath at the U of C).

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:30:39 PM
Quote from: Titan Q on January 01, 2017, 12:17:57 PM
Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 10:57:27 AM
Whitewater (who I admittedly haven't seen) MIGHT emerge as a team on a whole different level just because of all the transfer and frosh talent they have added to a core of some other solid players.  On paper (both statistically and looking at roster talent) they appear scary.  But that is speculative right now. 

Yes, UW-Whitewater is extremely talented.  They have 4 key transfers:

* Chris Jones, 6-0 Jr. G, 21.7 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.7 apg, .529 3-point (Wabash Valley JC, Iowa Lakes JC)
* Scotty Tyler, 6-8 Jr. F, 16.3 ppg, 7.1 rpg (D1 Idaho State, D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Derek Rongstad, 6-5 So. G/F, 8.5 ppg (D1 UW-Milwaukee)
* Demetrius Woodley, 6-4 Jr. G/F, 7.2 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 2.1 apg (Mid Plains JC,  Iowa Lakes JC)

In terms of pure talent, the Warhawks are probably at a different level than the other top teams...just a matter of seeing if all those new parts mesh with the returning parts over the course of a full season.

UW-Whitewater operates with a much different personnel model than most Division III schools.

This is a great argument for them being D-2.

Oh, is this the week for that argument again? ::)

Quote from: Ryan Stoppable on January 01, 2017, 05:12:26 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:25:55 PM
3 New England champs in the history of D3, two the same school.

Quote from: nescac1 on January 01, 2017, 04:35:18 PM
New England's best conference was only eligible to participate in the tourney starting in 1994.  Since then: seven title game appearances and three titles for New England.

I feel like this is oversimplifying the discussion. There's a lot more to a conference's strength than just its elite team(s), depth also matters as well. Otherwise, you'd be saying the NACC was just about the best conferences in the country last year! (And as someone who follows it closely, the NACC was not one of the best conferences in the country last year.)

And with as little inter-regional play as there is, it's hard to really get data to measure that. Sometimes you do just have to use the eye test.

Two excellent points, Ryan.
"To see what is in front of one's nose is a constant struggle." -- George Orwell

Darryl Nester

How They Fared (Complete)

As I added in the final result* (today's only game), I decided to re-post the whole report here (at roughly the time it would usually show up) -- so that some future historian, examining the archives of this discussion board while writing a treatise on D3 basketball, will not mistakenly think that there was no report just before the January 2 poll.

And also so that sac won't have to bump it. (Well, he still might, but I'll take a shot.)

*I'm reasonably confident in the result, but not 100% sure the score is really final; the live stats are stuck at 0:08. I suppose that it's possible that VWC staged a miracle comeback in those final eight seconds, but I'm not going to wait for further confirmation.

Top 25

Rank   Pts   TeamW-L   Results
#1609Babson10-1won at #26 Chicago, 82-70
#2597Whitman11-0def. (n) King's, 80-62; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 72-71; def. Crown, 105-57; def. Buena Vista, 103-90
#3573Amherst9-1def. Keystone, 119-69
#4549Marietta8-3LOST to (n) #17 Wesleyan, 65-81; LOST to (n) #2 Whitman, 71-72
#5480Salisbury8-2LOST to (n) T#33 Ramapo, 65-66; LOST to (n) Hardin-Simmons, 70-84
#6474Rochester10-0IDLE
#7471St. Norbert7-2LOST at UW-Oshkosh, 45-58; def. Finlandia, 88-35; def. UW-Platteville, 63-56
#8449Whitworth10-1won at Chapman, 78-69; def. (n) Alma, 99-72; def. (n) Buena Vista, 90-80; def. (n) Crown, 95-62
#9422Christopher Newport9-2def. Pitt-Greensburg, 96-43; def. SUNY-Old Westbury, 86-41; def. #32 Virginia Wesleyan, 86-75
#10392Tufts8-2IDLE
#11351UW-Eau Claire10-1def. (n) Gustavus Adolphus, 78-57; def. (n) UC Santa Cruz, 77-57
#12318Benedictine8-3LOST to (n) Menlo, 70-72; def. Concordia (Wis.), 81-64
#13241North Park9-1 won at Albion, 84-65; def. Manchester, 93-84
#14230Susquehanna9-1def. (n) Eastern, 82-76
#15219Hope7-4def. Spalding, 79-51; def. Johnson and Wales, 100-75; LOST to (n) #37 Williams, 85-91 OT;
LOST to (n) Wilkes, 74-76
#16212UW-Whitewater11-0def. Trine, 85-60; def. T#41 Ripon, 109-96; def. (n) Lawrence, 97-71; def. (n) Central, 79-68
#17209Wesleyan11-0def. (n) Washington and Lee, 66-61; def. (n) #4 Marietta, 81-65
#18191Illinois Wesleyan9-3def. #26 Chicago, 72-54; LOST to (n) T#29 Middlebury, 75-77; def. (n) Bridgewater (Va.), 79-60
#19173Wartburg10-2def. (n) SUNYIT, 70-56; LOST to (n) #20 North Central (Ill.), 91-94 2OT; won at Waldorf, 92-90
#20149North Central (Ill.)8-4def. (n) #19 Wartburg, 94-91 2OT; def. (n) Wheaton (Mass.), 89-77; LOST at UW-Stevens Point, 63-65
#21136Swarthmore9-1won at Hood, 72-63 OT
#22113UW-River Falls10-1def. St. Olaf, 66-51
#2368Neumann9-0def. Scranton, 89-66
#2467Denison8-1IDLE
#2560Washington U.8-3def. (n) Ohio Wesleyan, 82-66; won at T#43 Wooster, 94-91 OT


Others receiving votes
Rank   Pts   TeamW-L   Results
#2653Chicago8-3LOST at #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 54-72; LOST to #1 Babson, 70-82
#2750New Jersey City11-1def. (n) Gettysburg, 61-57; def. (n) T#45 Misericordia, 87-72
#2839Emory8-2def. Berry, 91-80; def. Hampden-Sydney, 87-64
T#2935Lycoming12-1def. Fredonia, 65-47; def. Delaware Valley, 65-63
T#2935Middlebury9-1def. (n) #18 Illinois Wesleyan, 77-75; won at Staten Island, 70-59
#3126Keene State6-4LOST at #40 WPI, 67-72; LOST to University of New England, 69-95
#3225Virginia Wesleyan8-3def. Mary Washington, 100-85; LOST at #9 Christopher Newport, 75-86
T#3320Brockport8-1IDLE
T#3320Ramapo11-0def. (n) #5 Salisbury, 66-65; def. (n) Gustavus Adolphus, 77-62
#3519Endicott8-2def. (n) Southern Maine, 73-62; def. (n) Regis (Mass.), 79-67
#3611Claremont-Mudd-Scripps8-1def. Emerson, 84-73; def. Oberlin, 60-57
#379Williams10-1def. (n) #15 Hope, 91-85 OT; won at Mount Union, 70-67
#388Bethel8-1def. UW-Superior, 97-57
#396Carroll6-5won at Milwaukee Engineering, 87-70; LOST at Loras, 78-85; LOST at University of Dallas, 67-72;
LOST at Austin, 60-75
#404WPI9-2def. #31 Keene State, 72-67; def. Eastern Nazarene, 88-72
T#413Capital8-3IDLE
T#413Ripon8-1LOST at #16 UW-Whitewater, 96-109; won at Willamette, 87-57; won at Pacific, 75-72
T#432UW-La Crosse8-3won at Northland, 62-45; def. Coe, 74-67
T#432Wooster6-6LOST at Lewis and Clark, 82-87; def. Hobart, 85-72; LOST to #25 Washington U., 91-94 OT
T#451Misericordia9-2won at Albright, 87-78; LOST to (n) #27 New Jersey City, 72-87
T#451St. Thomas6-3IDLE

Bucket

Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on January 01, 2017, 04:14:36 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 09:14:07 PM
Quote from: ElRetornodelEspencio on December 31, 2016, 08:03:54 PM
Quote from: Gregory Sager on December 31, 2016, 07:56:25 PM
Don't get caught up in the comparative scores game. Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

So one game result matters when it's Babson but not IWU.

The hypocrisy surrounding this school just grows and seemingly knows no bounds.

Why is everyone so hot on Babson that they're willing to throw logic and argumentative integrity out the window? Does anyone other than someone on a propaganda mission really think that Chicago is the measuring stick for Midwestern programs?

I've seen Illinois Wesleyan multiple times. I've seen Babson multiple times, and today I saw the Beavers in person.

Babson is better than Illinois Wesleyan.

It's not that complicated, Spence. It isn't a conspiracy, willful blindness, groupthink, or any other excuse. And I am not using Chicago as a measuring stick. In fact, I'm the one who just pointed out that Chicago shouldn't be a measuring stick when I warned against putting too much stock in comparative scores.

You're the Massey cheerleader who thinks that the D3 men's basketball championships committee should be using the Massey Ratings for its Selection Monday determinations. Well, as of this moment, Babson is #8 and Illinois Wesleyan is #16, according to Massey. And that's without taking today's Babson win at Ratner into consideration.

I didn't say you were using Chicago as a measuring stick. The Babson cheerleader (I can't remember the name) was, as if Chicago was comparable to Whitewater or IWU.

I think IWU is quite good, actually. Wouldn't surprise me if they were better than Babson if you actually got them on a court together. Beating Wash U on the road is a better win than any that Babson has, and none of IWU's losses are anything to be embarrassed about. When you play good teams, sometimes you're going to lose because someone has to and you can't play an A game every time (otherwise an A game would be your C game!).

Babson usually loses to the first proven and tested team they run into, and I imagine it'll be the same this year after their walk through their conference.

Middlebury beat IWU, and I don't think the Panthers are as good as Babson right now. And I say this as a Panther diehard! FWIW.

(And Midd did so without it's second-leading scorer and leading rebounder, whose athleticism would have given IWU further fits.)

sac

2 point margin doesn't really make anything definitive.

nescac1

#10544
Greg, in the last fifteen years three (Midd!) NESCAC programs have made the Final Four. In three different years, two NESCAC teams were represented.  Three titles total, seven title game appearances (two of which were lost on final possession). I think 13 final fours total in that period of time.  Granted NESCAC has often had an easier path but averaging nearly one final four per year and one title game every other year over 15 years is pretty solid.  WIAC is number one easily but that resume speaks for itself.  And I think two other programs have made elite 8 during that timeframe showcasing the league's depth. 

This is all a tangent.  My whole original point is that Babson's schedule was unfairly maligned which I think is now uncontroversial.