Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 02:13:06 PM
Better source: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/24/third-ncaa-regional-ranking/ LOL

It looks like to me that Aurora is close to moving ahead of Chicago, but if I'm remembering correctly from last week that Aurora lost a win vs. RRO and Chicago gained one.

And, it looks to me that NCC has to be close to moving past St. Norbert.  I'm wondering if there are any scenarios where that would happen.....is it possible for NCC to overtake St. Norbert if both win out?

Dave, or anyone else, what are your thoughts?

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 24, 2016, 02:20:08 PM
Final public regional rankings are out: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/02/24/third-ncaa-regional-ranking/

It looks like to me that Aurora is close to moving ahead of Chicago, but if I'm remembering correctly from last week that Aurora lost a win vs. RRO and Chicago gained one.

And, it looks to me that NCC has to be close to moving past St. Norbert.  I'm wondering if there are any scenarios where that would happen.....is it possible for NCC to overtake St. Norbert if both win out?

Dave, or anyone else, what are your thoughts?

Quote from: markerickson on February 21, 2016, 09:58:00 PM
Last night at North Park I sat next to a non-CCIW referee who said he attends CCIW games along with a retired CCIW ref.  They attended two NPU games earlier this year when former NPC championship players were in attendance in the same seating section as I.  During last night's game, I lamented to the ref the lack of moving screen calls.  He replied, "Watch [Raridon], he's a dirty player, and I will tell you when."  The comment was not meant as a compliment.  Sure enough, with all three refs and the ball well ahead of Raridon and Robinson, the former underhooked the latter to impede progress and Robinson spun around to disengage.  When I expressed dissatisfaction, the ref turned to me and said, "Told you so."  Then the second whiniest CCIW coach started screaming and the refs inexplicably stopped play.  (I doubt they saw what happened, given their position on the court.)  The refs formed a circle and subsequently saddled Robinson with a foul, probably because the coach's son can't be guilty, right?  Watch the NCC freshman next year and you will see what I am talking about.  And I've noticed the NCC coach has a penchant for yelling at the refs while the opposing player is about to shoot a FT.  Bush league.

Instead of commenting on Raridon, maybe you should comment on the deliberate and blatant cheap shot by Hutchinson on Moten at the end of the game that was called a flagrant 1.

And, your description of how these events transpired is less an accurate, at best.

Quote from: Titan Q on February 11, 2016, 12:05:02 PM
Regarding IWU vs North Park for 4th place, basically thinking out-loud here...

If IWU beats NPU Saturday, both teams would be tied at 6-7 with 1 game to play.  On Feb 20, IWU hosts Elmhurst, NPU hosts North Central.  So from there...

* If IWU and NPU both win on Feb. 20, and both finish 7-7, the tie-breaker would come down to who has the better win - IWU's vs Elmhurst or NPU's vs North Central.  So, where Elmhurst and NCC finish in the standings comes into play.  In this scenario, IWU needs Elmhurst to finish higher...North Park needs NCC to finish higher. 

* If IWU and North Park both lose on Feb. 20, they would both finish 6-8.  Going through the CCIW tie-breakers:
   1. Head-to-head competition.  (Push)
   2. Record against team(s) above the tie beginning with the highest ranked team. (Push)
   3. Record vs. team or teams in 3rd place. If still tied, go to the next place for determination, et cetera. (Push)
   4. Road record against conference schools. (Push)
   5. Record in their last seven conference games.  I think IWU wins here? 3-4 IWU vs 2-5 NPU?
   6. The point spread of the tied teams' head-to head competition.
   7. Coin toss


Does this sound right?

Obviously if North Park beats IWU Saturday, the Vikings are in.

Sounds like IWU fans will be cheering for an Elmhurst win Saturday.  Then huge NCC fans the following weekend.......if they can beat NPU this weekend.

Quote from: AppletonRocks on January 27, 2016, 07:13:13 PM
Carroll will dominate this league next year.

Seems to me that a team that will dominate the CCIW should be ranked.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2016, 03:40:27 PM
I've said it a number of times... if you are going to put together a tremendous schedule, you have to win some games against that schedule - maybe half or close to half. If you are going to put together a sub-par schedule, you have to win vast majority of those games, nearly all of them. If you want flexibility, try and schedule a hybrid. One that allows you to win, but also take a few losses while boosting your SOS. Going for an outrageous SOS and not winning games doesn't work. We are also going to see a very interesting case in the East of a team with a horrible SOS (thanks mainly to their conference) who currently is undefeated and the situation is setting up that they might be left home if they only lose one game.

The problem with your comparison and your example that I see is you are just changing numbers that aren't that realistic. For someone to play seven regionally ranked opponents and be around .500 with those seven, I'd be surprised if their SOS was that low. Yes it happens, but not that often. It would be probably .530 or higher especially considering a number of those vRRO games are probably in conference. Even if they aren't in conference, it would boost up a .500 record.

The questions I have that the committee would break down:
- is the .500 SOS with that many vRRO games because their conference is poor and their out-of-conference scheduling boosted the SOS? If so, that might be a good thing for that team.
- is the .600 SOS with that many vRRO games because their conference is that strong and thus they either went hog-wild with their out-of-conference scheduling or they are getting an inrealistic SOS based on their conference. We have seen this example in the Northeast and elsewhere before. Jeff Burns, last year's committee chair, called these fake SOS numbers. Large numbers that in reality don't explain a true strength of a team, just who they played.

I would have to have KnightSlappy run numbers to see, but my argument to you is that North Central wouldn't plummet to a .500 SOS based on switching out a few out-of-conference games they could win. Basically to drop that number that far with out-of-conference games, they are NOT playing regionally ranked opponents. That just doesn't seem possible. As a result, I don't think this comparison works for a "what if" scenario.

Use the .530 SOS then.

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on February 09, 2016, 12:20:00 PM
The problem NCC is going to face at the selection/ranking table is simple - while they have a lot of vRRO games, they have a vast majority being losses. That isn't going to help them as much as people think. Sure, it shows they played a tough schedule, but their SOS shows the same thing. What it shows is they couldn't necessarily win against that schedule and the committee has taken that into account almost every year with some team out there.

If you have a weak SOS, you better win. If you have a strong SOS, you can't just lose. 2-7 vRRO and I suspect probably a 2-8 in that category assuming a loss in the CCIW tournament... and North Central is in the same place it has been before... thin ice.

NCC is an interesting case study this year with their SOS combined with the "lack of wins" with the teams that made their SOS what it is.

Let me ask you this, Dave.  Which of the following do you think is better for pool C?

18-8 record (.692 %)  3-8 vs. RRO and a SOS at .600    OR
22-4 record (.846 %)  3-4 vs. RRO and SOS at .500

The only difference between the two is switching 4 RRO's for 4 terrible teams (this difference may not lower the SOS that much)

Which is rewarded more in this scenario?  Winning against terrible teams or losing against very good teams.

I would say there isn't much difference between these two teams.

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2016, 01:19:47 PM
If they make the CCIW Final NC will have picked up at least one RRO win, with the 1.25 multiplier affecting 3 or 4 of their remaining games their SOS is going to be well above .600

Remaining schedule:

@ North Park
@ Elmhurst
@ Carthage
CCIW tournament Semi, likely vs Elmhurst
CCIW tournament Final, likely vs  @Augustana

Winning at Elmhust Saturday would help them greatly.  Esp if they beat North Park tomorrow.

If NCC wins out, I would think they're in regardless of what happens in the tournament.  Even if they lose game 1 of the tourney, they would be at .720 win % and SOS .600.  I wouldn't think a team with that resume would be left out.  A lot to be done yet, though.

NOTE:  NCC plays Carthage tomorrow and North Park after Elmhurst.

Quote from: GoPerry on February 09, 2016, 09:18:35 AM

Quote from: sac on February 09, 2016, 01:15:13 AM
Your region does the best job of putting "borderline" teams on the table in the best position better than any other region.  NCC would be under discussion for a long time with a strong resume.

Right now KS has them in Pool C position 3
http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/

They have a monster SOS and will have somewhere around 11 or 12 RRO games, keeping in mind other 'C' candidates will lose between now and 3 weeks from now as well, NCC will be still ranked very high relative to the other 'C' candidates from the Central.

With North Park and Elmhurst on the road plus one or two good CCIW tournament opponent that  SOS is likely to go over .600

An 8 loss NCC team means either .68 or .692 Win %.  Using the detroitjockcity data(and a lot can still change), their projected record vs RR would be 2-7 if they lose @ EC Saturday.  Wins over Mt Union, Elmhurst- Losses to Chicago, Aurora, Alma, BenU, Augie 2x, Elmhurst.  In that scenario it is still shaky in my opinion.  Will really depend on that final RR. On a quick glance, it looks like if Augie, BenU, and St Norbert get the AQ, then the Cards could get to the top of board pretty early even if they finish behind Elmhurst in the final ranking.

I don't think the 8th loss can happen in the first CCIW tournament game.  If that happens, the win % will be tough to overcome.  If the 8th loss comes in the CCIW championship (and this would mean another win vs. RRO in Elmhurst), the chances are certainly better.  If NCC and Elmhurst split the next two games, should NCC be ranked higher in the rankings?

Either way, as was pointed out, NCC will be below a .700 win % with an 8th loss.  Have there been many/any pool C teams below .700?

Quote from: Red and black on January 27, 2016, 11:31:33 PM
I read often but rarely post as I am a little more conservative with my comments than most.  Although after reading the past couple days I think it's safe to say anything on here! 

I was able to attend the Carthage @ North Park game and man was it exciting.  Both teams played well and fought hard all the way to the buzzer.  Not much more a fan can ask for. 

As we all know Henry was the difference in this game.  Only thing to question about his game tonight was his three he shot at the buzzer of overtime up 7!!!!   That didn't sit well with the Carthage bench nor should it.  To make things worse the NPU coaches didn't seem to be too concerned about it at all.  I couldn't believe a player showing up the opposing team like that and not having a coach yell at him or tell him not to shoot it to begin with!

Kind of put a sour note on a great game by him. 

Anyone else notice this or have an opinion on the matter?

Well, this means Jayme Moten will replace Henry for all-conference!

Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on January 28, 2016, 10:42:51 AM

Quote from: Rafi on January 28, 2016, 09:12:58 AM

Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2016, 07:37:45 AM
I am pretty confident North Central, with 11-3 in the CCIW and 1-1 in the conference tournament, would get in -- as long as they have a win over Augustana in their back pocket.  Wins over Augie and Elmhurst (who will be in the top 3 in the region), combined with NCC's volume of games vs regionally ranked opponents and great SOS, would probably be enough.  I think NCC has to win at home on Feb 3 vs Augie.

It is important to note here that if NCC does not get in at 11-3/1-1 it's because they scheduled NAIA Robert Morris (Chicago) instead of another D3 team. They played a game that didn't count, and lost out on a chance to add a 1-0 to their winning %.  The Cardinals had the same schedule-related (NAIA) problem last year.

Something else that would dramatically impact this is if North Park were to get into the regional rankings at some point.

It will only matter if they are in the final regional rankings... one ranked, always ranked no longer exists. So appearing in the first regional rankings in the grand scheme of things only matters for the second week for vRRO and then if they aren't there anymore... it's a moot point.

Dave - Do you know why that was changed?  I could understand not wanting a "once ranked, always ranked" process if there are rankings throughout the season where the early rankings may be way off.   But, when the first rankings are coming out 2/3rds of the way through the season, the rankings are generally indicative of the stronger teams in the region.

And if the purpose of tracking vRRO (assuming this is the case) is to show "quality" wins and losses, it seems like those games against teams that may have dropped out prior to the final rankings are still "quality"......especially if your team beating a RRO is the reason they dropped out.

Thanks

Quote from: Titan Q on January 28, 2016, 07:37:45 AM
I am pretty confident North Central, with 11-3 in the CCIW and 1-1 in the conference tournament, would get in -- as long as they have a win over Augustana in their back pocket.  Wins over Augie and Elmhurst (who will be in the top 3 in the region), combined with NCC's volume of games vs regionally ranked opponents and great SOS, would probably be enough.  I think NCC has to win at home on Feb 3 vs Augie.

It is important to note here that if NCC does not get in at 11-3/1-1 it's because they scheduled NAIA Robert Morris (Chicago) instead of another D3 team. They played a game that didn't count, and lost out on a chance to add a 1-0 to their winning %.  The Cardinals had the same schedule-related (NAIA) problem last year.

Something else that would dramatically impact this is if North Park were to get into the regional rankings at some point.

Quote from: sac on January 28, 2016, 02:49:39 AM

Quote from: Rafi on January 27, 2016, 06:17:05 PM

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2016, 05:04:37 PM

Quote from: Rafi on January 27, 2016, 03:48:59 PM
This may have been discussed in years past, but why did the CCIW start a conference tournament?  It's great for the fans, and gives a bubble team a chance to get the AQ.  But, it's really hard on the pool C candidates if they don't win it.  If a team doesn't win the tournament, their W% will always go down (going 0-1 or 1-1 in the tourney).

This year it looks like it might impact NCC unless they go 12-2.  Without the conference tournament, they would look better for Pool C at 11-3.

I'm sure it's impacted others in past years.

The CCIW has had 3 in the tournament (ie 2 Pool C's) every year since the 2009 tournament except 2011.  That year NCC tied for the league title but were just 15-11 overall.   Wheaton went 18-8 and were probably on the final table on selection day.  Augustana and IWU earned bids.

By having a tournament you are only losing ground on those conferences that don't have a tournament like the UAA.  You are actually gaining ground by using the 4 team format on most conferences that go 6 or 8 or larger like the ODAC because your top teams SOS components are not as impacted by having to play one of the bottom teams of your conference.

Valid points.  I guess I'm just not a fan of conference tournaments having such an impact on the prospects of getting into the national tournament (both positive and negative), after the teams having already played a full conference schedule.

It just seems to have a greater impact than at the D1 level because of fewer games being played at D3.

I actually think most people, in most leagues would be happy without a post-season league tournament.  Its just the way college basketball turned a couple decades ago.   But the fan side of me has enjoyed our tournament in the MIAA for 24 years, its a nice week/weekend of basketball with one or two teams playing desperate basketball, it can be a lot of fun and really has not impacted our leagues NCAA prospects much over those 24 years except maybe 2 or 3 times.

I would agree that most times the tournament doesn't impact a league as a whole, but does impact which teams will represent the league in the tournament.  (i.e. Who the AQ is and who the last pool C team is)

Quote from: sac on January 27, 2016, 05:04:37 PM

Quote from: Rafi on January 27, 2016, 03:48:59 PM
This may have been discussed in years past, but why did the CCIW start a conference tournament?  It's great for the fans, and gives a bubble team a chance to get the AQ.  But, it's really hard on the pool C candidates if they don't win it.  If a team doesn't win the tournament, their W% will always go down (going 0-1 or 1-1 in the tourney).

This year it looks like it might impact NCC unless they go 12-2.  Without the conference tournament, they would look better for Pool C at 11-3.

I'm sure it's impacted others in past years.

The CCIW has had 3 in the tournament (ie 2 Pool C's) every year since the 2009 tournament except 2011.  That year NCC tied for the league title but were just 15-11 overall.   Wheaton went 18-8 and were probably on the final table on selection day.  Augustana and IWU earned bids.

By having a tournament you are only losing ground on those conferences that don't have a tournament like the UAA.  You are actually gaining ground by using the 4 team format on most conferences that go 6 or 8 or larger like the ODAC because your top teams SOS components are not as impacted by having to play one of the bottom teams of your conference.

Valid points.  I guess I'm just not a fan of conference tournaments having such an impact on the prospects of getting into the national tournament (both positive and negative), after the teams having already played a full conference schedule.

It just seems to have a greater impact than at the D1 level because of fewer games being played at D3.

Quote from: Naperick on January 27, 2016, 04:15:34 PM

Quote from: Rafi on January 27, 2016, 03:48:59 PM
This may have been discussed in years past, but why did the CCIW start a conference tournament?  It's great for the fans, and gives a bubble team a chance to get the AQ.  But, it's really hard on the pool C candidates if they don't win it.  If a team doesn't win the tournament, their W% will always go down (going 0-1 or 1-1 in the tourney).

This year it looks like it might impact NCC unless they go 12-2.  Without the conference tournament, they would look better for Pool C at 11-3.

I'm sure it's impacted others in past years.

I would also like to see all 8 teams in it.  It would give a struggling team hope in the "rough days" of late January and February.  Carroll University joining next season would make that a bit tricky.

I wasn't really advocating an 8-team tournament because the best you can do in that scenario is 2-1, without winning it, and that would most likely lower the win% for the pool C contenders.

I was really thinking more about the regular season champion having slugged out a 14-game schedule and possibly not getting the AQ.  Add to that, the win% problem for pool C, and I'm really wondering what the advantage of the tournament really is.