Author Topic: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin  (Read 6813964 times)

Offline kiko

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Karma: +197/-67
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50955 on: March 21, 2019, 12:30:10 am »
I'd swap him with Sorenson.

The choices I posted were listed in the order in which I would have taken the players.  That is, Sorensen was the last person I put on the first team, and Robinson was the first person to go on the second team.  So they're close in my mind.  But I think your argument is selling Sorensen a bit short.

One of the deciding factors for me was that Sorensen was a unanimous first-teamer for each of the three years in his career.  Even if Robinson got the Kienan Baltimore treatment from the coaches one year, he still had a season as a third-team all-conference pick.  (And the Baltimore treatment meant that multiple coaches left him off the first team that season.  None ever left Sorensen off the first team.)  Robinson has the MOP in his favor, but Sorensen has a longer span of consistency at a higher level, at least if you judge that by his receiving first team recognition each year.

Robinson's career scoring and rebounding numbers over his three seasons are only slightly below those of Sorenson over the course of his three seasons

So Sorensen's numbers were better.

Robinson didn't have the luxury of spending his freshman season playing and practicing on a D2 team, or of playing as a senior.

Neither of these is really part of the consideration set.  Had Robinson played as a senior at a similar level as the prior year, he'd certainly be on my first team list.  But he didn't play, so he gets no more credit for that than Connor Raridon gets for the year he missed due to injury.

Nor did Sorenson ever have to share the ball with someone like Juwan Henry; Sorenson took more shots than any other Cardinal all three of his seasons by a wide margin, while Henry took a whole lot more shots than did Robinson over the course of their three years as NPU teammates.

It's true that Henry took a boatload of shots, but the two teams distributed their opportunities differently.  Sorensen was sharing the ball with more than one player, so his numbers actually look not too different than Robinson's.  Sorensen took 22.7% of North Central's shots in his three-year career, while Robinson took 21.9% of NPU's looks.

Robinson was the more multi-faceted player of the two. Does anybody remember that Jordan Robinson led the league in assists two seasons ago?

I do remember that.  I also remember that Sorensen, who was a post player,

did lead the league in trey shooting percentage as a sophomore in 2015-16

That's not to say that Robinson wasn't multi-faceted... just that you are not giving Sorensen and his feathery touch the credit he deserves.  He was a very versatile player.

Sorenson also benefited from limiting himself to fewer than three trey attempts per CCIW game that season.

Probably because he was a center.

An intangible factor here is that Sorensen led his team to three tournament berths in his three years.  He was surrounded by more talent than Robinson was (not better talent, as Juwan Henry was in the house, but more depth of talent), and team success does play a role on the margins in a choice like this.

Again, I think Robinson was a tremendous player.  But I'd give the split decision to the guy whom every coach every year of his career said was a first-teamer.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2019, 12:32:23 am by kiko »

Offline Gregory Sager

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 22461
  • Karma: +2579/-815
  • North Park Vikings: Nat'l champs, 1978-79-80-85-87
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50956 on: March 21, 2019, 01:36:15 am »
I'd swap him with Sorenson.

The choices I posted were listed in the order in which I would have taken the players.  That is, Sorensen was the last person I put on the first team, and Robinson was the first person to go on the second team.  So they're close in my mind.  But I think your argument is selling Sorensen a bit short.

One of the deciding factors for me was that Sorensen was a unanimous first-teamer for each of the three years in his career.  Even if Robinson got the Kienan Baltimore treatment from the coaches one year, he still had a season as a third-team all-conference pick.  (And the Baltimore treatment meant that multiple coaches left him off the first team that season.  None ever left Sorensen off the first team.)  Robinson has the MOP in his favor, but Sorensen has a longer span of consistency at a higher level, at least if you judge that by his receiving first team recognition each year.

Disagree. First of all, Robinson, like Baltimore, was a classic example of the coaches hewing tightly to their hard-and-fast rule that you don't apportion first-team credit to players whose teams didn't make certain markers. Because NPU didn't make the top half of the league in 2015-16, that unwritten rule meant that the Vikings could only be allotted one first-team slot, and that went to Juwan Henry, the league's leading scorer. Say what you will about their unwritten rule, but there's no reason why any of us should have to adhere to it when making an all-decade team.

Second, Robinson had a comparatively modest freshman season (16 ppg and 6.5 rpg, with 15.7 and 5.6 numbers in CCIW play). But his sophomore and junior seasons, when he was in direct competition with Sorenson (who was the same eligibility year as Robinson), he put up better numbers. So in two out of the three seasons -- the two that matter most, in fact -- Jordan had the "longer span of consistency at a higher level".

Robinson's career scoring and rebounding numbers over his three seasons are only slightly below those of Sorenson over the course of his three seasons

So Sorensen's numbers were better.

In terms of counting stats, yes -- largely because Sorenson played eight more games over the course of his three seasons than Robinson did in his. But Robinson's per-game numbers were higher.

Robinson didn't have the luxury of spending his freshman season playing and practicing on a D2 team, or of playing as a senior.

Neither of these is really part of the consideration set.

Why not? I didn't see any rules for a "consideration set" posted here.

  Had Robinson played as a senior at a similar level as the prior year, he'd certainly be on my first team list.  But he didn't play, so he gets no more credit for that than Connor Raridon gets for the year he missed due to injury.

Again, where's the rules that cover that? Raridon's numbers from his truncated season are officially part of his overall career numbers. Someone could make a good case that any official numbers ought to count in a "consideration set" for team of the decade.

Nor did Sorenson ever have to share the ball with someone like Juwan Henry; Sorenson took more shots than any other Cardinal all three of his seasons by a wide margin, while Henry took a whole lot more shots than did Robinson over the course of their three years as NPU teammates.

It's true that Henry took a boatload of shots, but the two teams distributed their opportunities differently. Sorensen was sharing the ball with more than one player, so his numbers actually look not too different than Robinson's.

Robinson shared the ball with more than one player, too. Let's not forget that Colin Lake, who was Robinson's teammate all three seasons, took enough shots to end up as NPU's all-time leader in made treys. But that's not my point. My point is that, given the disparity in shot attempts over the course of his three seasons at NCC, Sorenson was clearly the undisputed focal point of his team's offense, no matter how good his teammates were. That was not the case with Robinson.

Sorensen took 22.7% of North Central's shots in his three-year career, while Robinson took 21.9% of NPU's looks.

Robinson was the more multi-faceted player of the two. Does anybody remember that Jordan Robinson led the league in assists two seasons ago?

I do remember that.  I also remember that Sorensen, who was a post player,

did lead the league in trey shooting percentage as a sophomore in 2015-16

... and never came anywhere close to duplicating his numbers from downtown as an upperclassman.

That's not to say that Robinson wasn't multi-faceted... just that you are not giving Sorensen and his feathery touch the credit he deserves.  He was a very versatile player.

I never said that he wasn't. On the contrary, I'd be the first to agree with you on that point. But Robinson was in a completely different class in terms of the things that he could, and did, do on a basketball court.

Sorenson also benefited from limiting himself to fewer than three trey attempts per CCIW game that season.

Probably because he was a center.

I've seen plenty of centers jack up truckloads of trey attempts over the course of a season. Heck, NPU's got one of 'em right now. Matt Szuba took 150 shots from behind the arc this past season.

An intangible factor here is that Sorensen led his team to three tournament berths in his three years. He was surrounded by more talent than Robinson was (not better talent, as Juwan Henry was in the house, but more depth of talent), and team success does play a role on the margins in a choice like this.

Now you sound like one of the coaches with that hidebound rule of theirs. ;) Team success doesn't play any role at all in my "consideration set" for all-decade.

Again, I think Robinson was a tremendous player.  But I'd give the split decision to the guy whom every coach every year of his career said was a first-teamer.

And I give the decision to the guy whom d3hoops.com made a first-team All-American, one of only six that the CCIW had in the decade ... the only CCIW player in this millennium who has averaged 20 and 10 over the course of a season (and almost did it twice) and the only CCIW player in who knows how long who finished in the top two in the league in points, rebounds, and assists in the same season in CCIW play.
"Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful.. -- John Wooden

Offline kiko

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Karma: +197/-67
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50957 on: March 21, 2019, 03:27:38 am »
Your consideration set has some interesting rules...


Robinson didn't have the luxury of spending his freshman season playing and practicing on a D2 team, or of playing as a senior.

Neither of these is really part of the consideration set.

Why not? I didn't see any rules for a "consideration set" posted here.

  Had Robinson played as a senior at a similar level as the prior year, he'd certainly be on my first team list.  But he didn't play, so he gets no more credit for that than Connor Raridon gets for the year he missed due to injury.

Again, where's the rules that cover that? Raridon's numbers from his truncated season are officially part of his overall career numbers. Someone could make a good case that any official numbers ought to count in a "consideration set" for team of the decade.



An intangible factor here is that Sorensen led his team to three tournament berths in his three years. He was surrounded by more talent than Robinson was (not better talent, as Juwan Henry was in the house, but more depth of talent), and team success does play a role on the margins in a choice like this.

Now you sound like one of the coaches with that hidebound rule of theirs. ;) Team success doesn't play any role at all in my "consideration set" for all-decade.


If I am following this correctly, you seem to be wanting to give Jordan Robinson credit for what he would have accomplished in a senior season in which he did not play.  It seams reasonable to me that we not consider fictitious performance in games where the player did not participate, but YMMV.

Meanwhile, you don't want to consider actual accomplishments that Alex Sorensen achieved on the court.

Your Connor Raridon comment is a bit of a head fake.  Of course his stats for the games he played in his truncated season count.  They were games in which he actually played.  That's a very different situation than Jordan Robinson's senior year.

First of all, Robinson, like Baltimore, was a classic example of the coaches hewing tightly to their hard-and-fast rule that you don't apportion first-team credit to players whose teams didn't make certain markers. Because NPU didn't make the top half of the league in 2015-16, that unwritten rule meant that the Vikings could only be allotted one first-team slot, and that went to Juwan Henry, the league's leading scorer. Say what you will about their unwritten rule, but there's no reason why any of us should have to adhere to it when making an all-decade team.


I can't speak for you, but I'm not adhering to any unwritten rules around how to select players.  (Exhibit 'A' is that I put two Wheaties on my first team.)  I don't doubt that this practice exists and that coaches can sometimes make choices with ulterior motives in mind.  But I don't believe someone would get quota'ed down to the second team if they would have otherwise been a unanimous first team selection.  That's what Sorensen was, that year and every other year.  So it's a stretch to explain this away completely by pointing to coaching politics.

My point is that, given the disparity in shot attempts over the course of his three seasons at NCC, Sorenson was clearly the undisputed focal point of his team's offense, no matter how good his teammates were. That was not the case with Robinson.

Robinson may not have been focal point #1 in the NPU offense, but he was certainly focal point #1B.  Over the course of their careers, Jordan Robinson took 13.4 shots per game, and Alex Sorensen took 13.3.


the only CCIW player in this millennium who has averaged 20 and 10 over the course of a season (and almost did it twice) and the only CCIW player in who knows how long who finished in the top two in the league in points, rebounds, and assists in the same season in CCIW play.

I'll ignore the fact that you're wanting to recognize Robinson for something he almost did.  I look at the top two in points/rebounds/assists in the same season as a good season.  That's a mountain peak rather than a mountain range.  And as I assess things, when considering recognition over a longer period of time, I lean more heavily into multiple four-star years over individual five-star years.  We're comparing a guy who had two great years, one of which saw him recognized as a top-five player in the country versus a guy who had three great years, one of which saw him recognized as a top-fifteen player in the country.

That's a pretty close call, and again: from my POV, it's a debate over who is #8 on that list and who is #9... and certainly not an argument that Jordan Robinson shouldn't be part of the conversation.

Offline Gregory Sager

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 22461
  • Karma: +2579/-815
  • North Park Vikings: Nat'l champs, 1978-79-80-85-87
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50958 on: March 21, 2019, 01:40:29 pm »
If I am following this correctly, you seem to be wanting to give Jordan Robinson credit for what he would have accomplished in a senior season in which he did not play.  It seams reasonable to me that we not consider fictitious performance in games where the player did not participate, but YMMV.

Meanwhile, you don't want to consider actual accomplishments that Alex Sorensen achieved on the court.

No, that's not what I'm saying, and I apologize if I wasn't clear enough. I'm not talking about the phantom back end of Robinson's career at all. I'm talking about the differing circumstances under which the two of them came into the league. Robinson came into the CCIW green, as all non-redshirted freshmen do. Sorenson came into the CCIW with 649 minutes' worth of D2 game experience and an entire season's worth of D2 practices under his belt from his 2014-15 stint at Northern Michigan. I don't think anyone can argue that this disparity in experience had a very real effect upon their initial performances their respective first seasons in the league.

Your Connor Raridon comment is a bit of a head fake.  Of course his stats for the games he played in his truncated season count.  They were games in which he actually played.  That's a very different situation than Jordan Robinson's senior year.

Not really a head fake; more like a sidebar. Your sentence:

Neither of these is really part of the consideration set.  Had Robinson played as a senior at a similar level as the prior year, he'd certainly be on my first team list.  But he didn't play, so he gets no more credit for that than Connor Raridon gets for the year he missed due to injury.

... implied that Raridon didn't deserve credit for the seven games in which he played in the 2016-17 season. I simply said that it could be argued that those are valid numbers to add in when considering his qualifications for anything. It really had nothing to do with Robinson at all.

First of all, Robinson, like Baltimore, was a classic example of the coaches hewing tightly to their hard-and-fast rule that you don't apportion first-team credit to players whose teams didn't make certain markers. Because NPU didn't make the top half of the league in 2015-16, that unwritten rule meant that the Vikings could only be allotted one first-team slot, and that went to Juwan Henry, the league's leading scorer. Say what you will about their unwritten rule, but there's no reason why any of us should have to adhere to it when making an all-decade team.


I can't speak for you, but I'm not adhering to any unwritten rules around how to select players.  (Exhibit 'A' is that I put two Wheaties on my first team.)  I don't doubt that this practice exists and that coaches can sometimes make choices with ulterior motives in mind.  But I don't believe someone would get quota'ed down to the second team if they would have otherwise been a unanimous first team selection.  That's what Sorensen was, that year and every other year.  So it's a stretch to explain this away completely by pointing to coaching politics.

I don't think that it's a stretch at all. Look at Jordan Robinson's CCIW-only numbers from the 2015-16 season:

19.4 ppg (2nd in the league behind Juwan Henry)
9.4 rpg (1st in the league, a full rebound and a half per game ahead of 2nd-place Alex Sorenson)
.500 FG% (10th in the league)
1.00 spg (tied for 9th with Hunter Hill)
1.64 made treys per game (8th in the league)
0.86 bpg (tied with Sean Valentine of Carthage for 7th)
2.29 orpg (5th in the league)
7.14 drpg (1st in the league by nearly a full rebound over Michael Berg of Wheaton)

Go back through league history, and you will never find another example of a player finishing in the top two in the CCIW in both scoring and rebounding who did not make the first team. In fact, the list of players who've achieved that dual feat over the past two decades is pretty small:

2019: Aston Francis, WC (1st in scoring, 2nd in rebounding)
2017: Jordan Robinson, NPU (2nd in scoring, 2nd in rebounding)
2016: Jordan Robinson, NPU (2nd in scoring, 1st in rebounding)
2012: Tim McCrary, WC (2nd in scoring, 1st in rebounding)
2007: Zach Freeman, IWU (1st in scoring, 1st in rebounding)
2005: Chris Martin, EC (1st in scoring, 1st in rebounding)
2004: Joel Kolmodin, WC (1st in scoring, 2nd in rebounding)
2004: Chris Martin, EC (2nd in scoring, 1st in rebounding)
2003: Joel Kolmodin, WC (1st in scoring, 1st in rebounding)

In every case, these players were first-teamers ... except for Jordan Robinson in 2015-16.

There is no possible explanation for a player to put up 19.4 and 9.4 per game and still not make the first team other than the inflexibility of the coaches' spoils system.

My point is that, given the disparity in shot attempts over the course of his three seasons at NCC, Sorenson was clearly the undisputed focal point of his team's offense, no matter how good his teammates were. That was not the case with Robinson.

Robinson may not have been focal point #1 in the NPU offense, but he was certainly focal point #1B.  Over the course of their careers, Jordan Robinson took 13.4 shots per game, and Alex Sorensen took 13.3.

Yes, but the point remains that Sorenson was still his team's most-used offensive weapon. Robinson wasn't.

the only CCIW player in this millennium who has averaged 20 and 10 over the course of a season (and almost did it twice) and the only CCIW player in who knows how long who finished in the top two in the league in points, rebounds, and assists in the same season in CCIW play.

I'll ignore the fact that you're wanting to recognize Robinson for something he almost did.

I think that a 22.4 ppg and 9.3 rpg season merits an "almost did" mention -- especially since it was that season, and not the 21.2 and 10.2 season that preceded it -- that got Robinson his first-team All-American honor.

  I look at the top two in points/rebounds/assists in the same season as a good season.

You have a gift for understatement, kiko. ;)

Know how many other players over the past two decades have finished top-two in points, rebounds, and assists in CCIW play in a season? Zero. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if we had to go back a very, very long way before that to find another player besides Jordan Robinson who had achieved that feat ... if, indeed, anybody ever did.

That's a mountain peak rather than a mountain range.  And as I assess things, when considering recognition over a longer period of time, I lean more heavily into multiple four-star years over individual five-star years.  We're comparing a guy who had two great years, one of which saw him recognized as a top-five player in the country versus a guy who had three great years, one of which saw him recognized as a top-fifteen player in the country.

Yes, and my point is that he likely would've had two years as a top-five player in the country, or at minimum top ten, if the coaches and their ridiculous "spoils system" means of choosing the All-CCIW team hadn't screwed him out of a first-team All-CCIW placement that produced the domino effect of keeping him off of the All-Region team, which in turn kept him off of the All-American team.

A 20 and 10 season is considered to be the acme of performance by a forward in this sport, even on the NBA level where they play an extra eight minutes per game. Only four players out of the 420-odd D3 men's basketball teams in 2015-16 had a 20 and 10 season. Jordan Robinson was one of those four players -- and he was the only one of the four who played in one of D3's better leagues. And yet he didn't make first-team All-CCIW due to the spoils system. That should not in the least be held against him when assessing his career; the blame should be placed where it belongs, with the CCIW's head coaches.

His sophomore and junior seasons match up favorably as back-to-back campaigns with anybody else's in this league over the past decade who didn't hail from Tyler, Texas. And it's not as though his freshman season was such a disaster, either. I'm more than comfortable matching his better-than-modest freshman season and his two mountain-peak seasons thereafter against Sorenson's three very impressive seasons.
"Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful.. -- John Wooden

Offline Gregory Sager

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 22461
  • Karma: +2579/-815
  • North Park Vikings: Nat'l champs, 1978-79-80-85-87
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50959 on: March 21, 2019, 02:22:27 pm »
Tough way to lose that one, but Wheaton College could not be more proud of this basketball team. Oshkosh was just way too good both inside and out in the second half for the Thunder to make a comeback. It was an absolute blast watching Aston Francis play these last three years, and this senior class of Peters, Eichelberger, Winowieki, Jones, and Gunter who where there just 4 years ago when the program only managed 5 wins are leaving this program in much better shape than they found it.

Really cool to see those 5 guys on the floor together to end their careers, and Im going to miss this group of 6 seniors a lot. They stuck with the program when just about anyone else would have quit or transferred (there were a few of those). Cannot say enough how proud I am and Wheaton is of this team and it was an absolute joy to watch them play this season.

The funny thing is that there were no expectations for that Wheaton freshman class at all at the end of that 5-20 campaign in 2015-16. One of our most veteran Wheaton posters, izzy stradlin, had this to say about the Wheaton class of 2019 at the conclusion of the 2015-16 season:

I said it at the end of last year and I'll say it again.  The cupboard is bare at Wheaton. Owen Handy and for a short time Nate Frank were a big part of Mike Schauer's early recruiting (well really, his first and only solid class in Peters, Kvam, Haynes, DeMoss).  With Owen and Nate long gone (Owen has had two great recent recruiting classed at Anderson), as Greg Sager outlined a few weeks ago, Wheaton/Schauer hasn't been landing quality recruits. It's not even that Wheaton has young talent-- non of the freshman had particularly strong showings with plenty of opportunity.  I'm thinking of previous good freshman campaigns at Wheaton (Rob Hamann, Luke Moo, Kevin Blomstrom, Joel Kolmodin, Kent Raymond, Tim McCrary, Tyler Peters) and it isn't on the roster right now.

... and GoPerry basically conceded the point about the Class of 2019:

Don't disagree with any of that - especially the Nate and Owen shout-out.

True indeed, I was expecting much more from this team - never expected them to finish 1-13.  I don't remember saying that they might compete for fourth, but I'll take your word for it that I did- (you don't have to re-post it).  Clearly, they had the talent to do much better than 5 wins.  Came close to beating Augie twice, took Hope to OT in Holland(definitely should've won that one)  and looked decent in Nov/Dec.  Even in their losses they were pretty competitive.  Now, what does that get you?  Answer: nothing this year.  I probably did not appreciate their lack of experience overall to finish out games.  But it's enough for me to say that yes, I think they will be better next season.  Further explained, I'm not saying they will be among the top teams or compete for #1-#4. Taking for granted another tough non-con schedule, a .500 season might be the best one can hope for.  But I don't expect them to finish dead last again.  Berg and Berntsen were solid players, but I don't see them as talent so difficult to replace like the players you mentioned above.

By the way, I believe Mike Schauer used the 2nd half of the season to experiment a little to see what he has for next year.  He got pretty creative in his rotation with Christian Simpson, Mike Winowiecki, Kobe Eichelberger, and a few others seeing true game minutes- not just at slop time.

Lest anyone think that I'm throwing ol' iz  and GP under the bus, here's how I replied to izzy:

It's not even that Wheaton has young talent-- non of the freshman had particularly strong showings with plenty of opportunity.  I'm thinking of previous good freshman campaigns at Wheaton (Rob Hamann, Luke Moo, Kevin Blomstrom, Joel Kolmodin, Kent Raymond, Tim McCrary, Tyler Peters) and it isn't on the roster right now.

As I've said before, I think that Trae Masten and Troy Morrison have some potential ... but it's certainly more long-term potential than was the case with the players you mentioned above, all of whom were basically stars from the moment that they donned orange-and-white togs.

"Trae Masten and Troy Morrison"? So much for my prognosticating abilities. ;)

As is the case in other sports, Wheaton has always seemed to counteract smaller recruiting classes in the men's basketball program with better buy-in; Wheaton's attrition levels are typically lower than they are for the teams that bring in more players. But that wasn't the case over the past few seasons. Wheaton lost a lot of players along the way from 5-20 to the Final Four. But, as it turned out, there was more to that class than met the eye back then, even discounting the arrival of Aston Francis the next season. Luke Peters turned into a two-time All-CCIW player and the league's best perimeter defender, and both Kobe Eichelberger and Trevor Gunter became valuable role players on a team that reached the Final Four. I think that the players that I respect the most from that group, however, are Mike Winowiecki and Reagan Jones. Both of them played a whole lot less as upperclassmen than they did as underclassmen. It takes a special kind of player to stick with it when new players come into the program and take away his playing time, even when it's turning the team from a loser into a winner.
"Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful.. -- John Wooden

Offline kiko

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Karma: +197/-67
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50960 on: March 21, 2019, 08:38:49 pm »
I'll leave most of this in the agree-to-disagree column, but will push on this:

Yes, and my point is that he likely would've had two years as a top-five player in the country, or at minimum top ten, if the coaches and their ridiculous "spoils system" means of choosing the All-CCIW team hadn't screwed him out of a first-team All-CCIW placement that produced the domino effect of keeping him off of the All-Region team, which in turn kept him off of the All-American team.

If we play out the theory that coaches would only recognize one player from a second-division finisher on the first-team all conference, then it stands to reason that they chose Juwan Henry over Jordan Robinson.  I don't pretend to know if that's a good idea or a bad idea as you would know the two players better than I would.  Henry was first team, so presumably the coaches thought he had a better year.

You are suggesting that Jordan Robinson would have been a first- or second-team All American if he had been named to the all conference first team.  But Juwan Henry eventually finished second-team all-region, and honorable mention (essentially fifth team) All American.  I think an argument that suggests Robinson would have been first or second team, when the player on his own team who was selected over him for individual recognition was on the fifth team, is not really credible.

The all-region teams aren't selected by the CCIW coaches.  NPU's SID needs to nominate players, and then the braintrust here chooses who to recognize.  I'm sure they look at all-conference selections as they whittle things down and make their choices, so that may have played a part in how they assessed Jordan Robinson.  But if you are blaming his absence from the all-region team on the CCIW coaches, they are at best only part of the reason he was shut out from national honors.

By the way, know who else was second-team all-region that year?  Alex Sorensen. :)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2019, 08:42:39 pm by kiko »

Offline Gregory Sager

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 22461
  • Karma: +2579/-815
  • North Park Vikings: Nat'l champs, 1978-79-80-85-87
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50961 on: March 21, 2019, 09:53:29 pm »
I'll leave most of this in the agree-to-disagree column, but will push on this:

Yes, and my point is that he likely would've had two years as a top-five player in the country, or at minimum top ten, if the coaches and their ridiculous "spoils system" means of choosing the All-CCIW team hadn't screwed him out of a first-team All-CCIW placement that produced the domino effect of keeping him off of the All-Region team, which in turn kept him off of the All-American team.

If we play out the theory that coaches would only recognize one player from a second-division finisher on the first-team all conference, then it stands to reason that they chose Juwan Henry over Jordan Robinson.  I don't pretend to know if that's a good idea or a bad idea as you would know the two players better than I would.  Henry was first team, so presumably the coaches thought he had a better year.

I don't think that reason plays any part in it at all, but ... whatever.

You are suggesting that Jordan Robinson would have been a first- or second-team All American if he had been named to the all conference first team.  But Juwan Henry eventually finished second-team all-region, and honorable mention (essentially fifth team) All American.  I think an argument that suggests Robinson would have been first or second team, when the player on his own team who was selected over him for individual recognition was on the fifth team, is not really credible.

I think it's more than credible, because of the numbers Robinson posted. Some players have what I would call "visual appeal" and other have what I call "numbers appeal". They're not mutually-exclusive categories, of course -- I hate to keep bringing up Aston Francis all the time, but he definitely had both -- but there are certain players that go about their business without drawing forty minutes' worth of oohs and aahs. Juwan Henry had visual appeal; he was electric, he was fun to watch, he was a skinny 5'10 kid who could nevertheless completely take over the entire game for stretches, and he had a penchant for the big play at the big moment. Other players have more numbers appeal than visual appeal; you watch a North Central game and towards the end of it the announcer points out that Connor Raridon has 18 points, seven rebounds, and five assists, and you say, "How did he accumulate all that?" Or you think that Jeremy Ireland has maybe eight points and a half-dozen rebounds, because the announcer's talking nonstop about that amazing play that Jake Rhode did three minutes ago, and then you check the live stats and to your surprise you discover that Ireland's already well over a double-double. Brad Kruse was a classic numbers-appeal guy, too; it felt like you were watching a role player when you watched him, and then afterwards you were astonished at how much he filled up the box score.

That's not to say that Jordan Robinson had no visual appeal at all; to a connoisseur of basketball he was a pleasure to watch, because of his high motor, his fearlessness, his skill level, and because he was a positional hybrid that was hard for an opponent to match up. People who watched North Park play tended to be wowed by Juwan Henry. But at the end of the day, the numbers that Jordan Robinson put up were astonishing. And I think that, given exposure to those numbers, people who selected All-Region and All-American teams might've sat up and taken notice of them. Again, only four players in D3 averaged 20 and 10 that season, and the other three (Egzon Gjonbalaj of Brooklyn, Andre Norris of Dubuque, and Mitch Ford of Nazareth) were from leagues that were on a significantly lower level than the CCIW. And, again, finishing in the top two in scoring, rebounding, and assists in an elite league like the CCIW is not only astonishing, for all anybody this side of Dennis Prikkel knows, it may be completely unprecedented.

The all-region teams aren't selected by the CCIW coaches. NPU's SID needs to nominate players, and then the braintrust here chooses who to recognize.

NPU's SID told me that he nominated both Henry and Robinson.

  I'm sure they look at all-conference selections as they whittle things down and make their choices, so that may have played a part in how they assessed Jordan Robinson.

A major part. I can't remember the last time I saw an All-Region first-teamer who didn't make his conference's first team.

  But if you are blaming his absence from the all-region team on the CCIW coaches, they are at best only part of the reason he was shut out from national honors.

I will concede this much: Robinson was only a sophomore, and, given the sentimental incentive to honor seniors that is typical of postseason awards, that may have held him back had he been All-Region. But, by and large, Robinson was victimized by a domino effect caused by the spoils system favored by the CCIW's head coaches.

By the way, know who else was second-team all-region that year?  Alex Sorensen. :)

I had no problem with that. But Robinson should've been first team instead of Austin Stuecke of MSOE, who should've been on the second or third team. Kyle Wuest of Elmhurst, who should've been flipped with Robinson on the All-CCIW first and second teams, shouldn't have been on the All-Region team at all.
"Talent is God-given. Be humble. Fame is man-given. Be grateful. Conceit is self-given. Be careful.. -- John Wooden

Offline Titan Q

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 11970
  • Karma: +1105/-522
    • View Profile
    • http://www.iwuhoops.com/
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50962 on: March 22, 2019, 05:12:37 pm »
Ron Rose and the Titans have landed Sam Painter, a 6-3 G/F from Litchfield. As a senior averaged 19 ppg, 7 rpg, 4 apg. Made 54 3-pointers, shot .397 from 3. Painter was named 3rd team 2A all-state by IBCA. Athletic, versatile, multi-sport kid.

http://www.maxpreps.com/athlete/sam-painter/Yu76vwo1EeWrOKA2nzwY6g/videos.htm?videoid=69197405-4f65-4249-a7f6-2c9f218f3b59

https://app.box.com/s/eyv8irovgywg6ieng66i04njt784pz1x

Offline Titan Q

  • Hall of Fame
  • All-American
  • ********
  • Posts: 11970
  • Karma: +1105/-522
    • View Profile
    • http://www.iwuhoops.com/
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50963 on: March 22, 2019, 05:15:56 pm »
IWU's recruits I am aware of...

* Lucas Heflen, 6-3 G, St. Charles North HS
* Cole Khoury, 6-8 F/C, Columbia HS
* Cody Mitchell, 6-6 F, St. Charles East HS
* Tommy Nelson, 6-5 F, Bloomington Central Catholic
* Sam Painter, 6-3 G/F, Litchfield HS
* Keondre Schumacher, 6-0 PG/SG, D1 Winthrop U./Normal U High
* Ryan Verhulst, 6-3 G, Hersey HS
* Luke Yoder, 6-0 PG, Bloomington Central Catholic

Offline iwu70

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4272
  • Karma: +181/-257
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50964 on: March 22, 2019, 11:25:24 pm »
Sure looks like the Titans are stocking up on perimeter players, trey shooters, and hopefully some worthy successors to Bonnett and Rose.  Wolfe and Lambesis in line, but likely others needed.

Happy Spring -- when it comes -- to all. 

IWU'70

Offline bbfan44

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: +25/-14
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50965 on: March 23, 2019, 12:17:08 pm »
Any school besides IWU have any recruits? 

Offline AndOne

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 5999
  • Karma: +2612/-1228
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50966 on: March 23, 2019, 06:00:05 pm »
Any school besides IWU have any recruits?

Nope. Everyone is going green. 🤢
Next year, they are going with a radical new game plan. 🏀 😯
They are going to play 20 guys for 10 minutes a game! 🤫 😏
You don't always have to win every game. You just have to win the right ones. 😏 (AndOne)

There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys----there's only you and me, and we just disagree. ✌️
(Dave Mason)

You gotta lose 👎, to know how to win. 🏆 (Aerosmith)

So who's the hunter 🐅, .....and who's the game 🐃? (Scandal)

Offline bbfan44

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: +25/-14
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50967 on: March 23, 2019, 06:15:28 pm »
lol....I hope they save a player or two for someone else.

Offline kiko

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1145
  • Karma: +197/-67
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50968 on: March 23, 2019, 07:28:14 pm »
Any school besides IWU have any recruits?

Nope. Everyone is going green. 🤢
Next year, they are going with a radical new game plan. 🏀 😯
They are going to play 20 guys for 10 minutes a game! 🤫 😏

Isn't that what Grinnell does?

The Titans are going to implement the system!!! :)

Offline iwu70

  • All-American
  • ******
  • Posts: 4272
  • Karma: +181/-257
    • View Profile
Re: MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin
« Reply #50969 on: March 24, 2019, 04:32:55 am »
Gotta solve the admissions/recruitment problems some way . . .  LOL

Lacrosse, e-sports . . . can ping pong or badminton be far behind? 

:)


'70