Dartmouth has hired Brett MacConnell to be their next head coach. Former Princeton Associate HC and most recently an assistant at Stanford. Seems like a great hire. His tenure at Princeton saw a sweet 16 run, a few POYs, and some elite recruits that transferred up to Power 5.

There was interesting dialogue on here a few days ago about how lower-level head coaches tend to get overlooked in comparison to D1 assistants, and from the trends I see, it appears to be true. As a recent player, I am not privy to the minds of Athletic Directors and University Presidents who make hiring decisions. But in my opinion, prioritizing a D1 assistant over a D2 or D3 head coach makes no sense. Winning HCs have a proven skillset to develop and lead a system, culture, and program--the same thing required at the higher level. Who cares if they did it with less athletic and smaller players? I'd argue that makes their success more impressive and indicates elite basketball knowledge, not just the ability to recruit high level talent.

Look at Ben McCollum's jump to Drake and then Iowa. He was one of (if not the?) winningest coaches at the D2 level. Imagine if last year Drake had opted for some 35 year old MVC assistant coach with no experience in building a program! McCollum is an extreme example as he's proven to be a truly special coach. But I still think the principle applies. It'd be very hard to convince me that any D1 assistant would be a better person to lead a mid-major program, regardless of division, than Landry Kosmalski in 2025. A D3 head coach has more overlap with a D1 head coach than a D1 assistant does in terms of the necessary skillset and experience.

Correct me if I'm wrong or if there are plenty of counterexamples, but I just don't think the talent gap between the divisions is a reason to not hire a coach. Just because the rosters he won with are not as long and athletic, doesn't mean his coaching is inferior. The one argument I'd understand is the unfamiliarity with the recruiting timeline and basically full-year training schedule at the D1 level. But again, it could be argued that working around the D3 restrictions and limitations makes guys like Landry's accomplishments all that more impressive.

Congratulations to Trinity on an utterly dominant NESCAC championship win. It was mentioned that the asterisk in Trinity's 3-year resume is that they never won a regular season title, but winning back-to-back-to-back NESCAC titles on the road is more impressive than any possible regular season feat. It's a shame for Vetter that dagger shots in high-stakes games isn't a measured statistic, because he truly always steps up when they need him most. As a team, they just have that championship DNA that allows them to rise to a different level on the biggest stage and that obviously bodes well for them going forward.

Looking towards the tournament, ironically, I think Trinity has the toughest first weekend pod. Both Babson and St. Joseph's (ME) have tournament pedigree and are peaking at the right time (both won their conference championship by 25+ points), and Redlands is a scary matchup for anyone. That being said, I am not worried about Trinity -- they rise to the occasion. The level of experience their top guys have in big games is remarkable and maybe unprecedented? Vetter, Okorougo, Lazarre, Berry, McDonald, and even Davis all played significant minutes in both the '24 Final Four run and last year's title run. Some older D3Hoops historians can correct me on this, but I can't imagine there have been many teams heading into any NCAA tournament with this level of experience playing in March.

I am relatively confident that we will see the Wesleyan vs. Tufts matchup in the sweet sixteen, especially if Gyimesi is healthy. If he is, I could see that game going either way. If not, Wesleyan's path to Fort Wayne looks promising. I am going to attribute their abysmal second half performance in the NESCAC championship to Trinity's smothering defense; I remain optimistic about their chances. If Wolinski can put up 18 in a half on Trinity's defense, he can do it against anyone. In March, it's not the X's and O's, but the Jimmy's and Joes.

I think Yeshiva beats Bates in the first round. For one, Pouye has been largely underwhelming in big games (possibly injury-induced). Yeshiva is on a 14-game win streak, were undefeated in conference, and are battle tested with one of the toughest non-conference schedules in the country (including the top 3 NESCAC teams). Zevi Samet is an elite scorer and I don't see Bates containing him. Not to mention that the game in New Jersey will essentially be a home game for one of the most dedicated fandoms in the country.

All in all, I think Trinity is the only team with a real chance at cutting down the nets (and a strong one at that). Tufts' fate is largely decided by Gyimesi's status, but I'd put my money on Wesleyan making it to the Elite 8. Best of luck to all!

We really are talking in circles here. For one, I have played against all of these players multiple times, including jumbomumbo. That doesn't make my opinion any more valid than anyone else's on these boards, but mumbo isn't some insider with more information than me.

I think mumbo and others make a strong case for Gyimesi. Of the top teams, Tufts is the only one with a clear best player who makes the engine go. They are second in the league with a win over Trinity and if Gyimesi has an off day, Tufts is in trouble. The same cannot be said about the other candidates who have elite sidekicks.

I still stand by the fact that Cuevas is the best player in the league and if Bowdoin got to 6 or 7 wins, he would be a no brainer. I haven't seen any of the Cuevas deniers address a key distinction which is the level of defensive attention that he receives. As a result of his special offensive capabilities and his teammates relative mediocrity, Cuevas is keyed on and usually double-teamed most games yet still finds a way to produce. None of the other candidates received close to this level of defensive attention. I know because my team scouted all of them. Alas, defensive attention is not a metric I would use to decide POTY, but I think it highlights that Cuevas is a step above the rest when we are talking about the 'best player.'

I would be happy with any of the candidates that have been named besides Pohlman. He has had an incredible season and the trajectory of his career has been impressive. However, his most notable stats are his assists, and as has been mentioned earlier, those numbers were massively exaggerated in all of Wesleyan's home games. My team used to always joke when we played at Wesleyan we would try to buff our assist numbers--the inflation is real. I think it would be tough to argue that Pohlman is the best guard on his team, let alone in the league. He has been excellent this year, and this isn't a knock. I mean to compliment Wesleyan's well-roundedness.

This will probably be my last post on POTY debate. It's a unique year in that I could see 5 guys realistically winning it. I'm excited for it to release. At the very least, it will spark some more interesting debate. Best of luck to the teams competing this weekend and hopefully we get 5 teams in the NCAA.

I'm a recently retired NESCAC player and long time reader of these boards who has played against most guys in these conversations.

D3BBALL - your claim that no coach would take Cuevas over Gyimesi, Okorougo, or Vetter is pretty ridiculous. If all teams were to disband and there was a redraft, Cuevas would go first overall 99/100 times. As someone who has played against all these players and teams, Cuevas is a special talent and every coach in the league treats him as such. Also, your constant references to Hank Morgan are silly. He was the best player in the league last year and won POTY, probably by a wide margin. If anything, Morgan winning POTY last year strengthens nescac1's argument that elite production can override team success (or lack thereof). Insisting that Cuevas is undeserving because Morgan had a better season last year is a moot point. Sobel in 2023 was better than Murray in 2024, who were probably both stronger than any candidate this season. That didn't make Murray undeserving nor does it have anything to do with the current season.

At the end of the day, the POTY debate, to me, should come down to a simple question: Who was the best player in the league? Most people around the league would agree that Cuevas separated himself from the pack  by this metric. I understand the team success argument, and would not disagree with Vetter, Okorougo, Gyimesi, or even Wolinski as POTY, but none of those guys are the best player in the league. Cuevas is.

The POTY usually comes from one of the top teams, and for a good reason, but as nescac1 points out there really isn't a definitive 'best player' among the top few teams. Gyimesi is clearly Tufts' best player, but Wesleyan and Trinity are really 2 (and arguably 3-4) headed snakes. For that reason, my vote would be Cuevas. Maybe you will be right, only time will tell. But the Cuevas slander is silly.