Quote from: nescac1 on March 25, 2014, 07:23:14 AM
Nah, not at all.  I actually look forward to next year when NESCAC will, for the first time in ages, be WIDE open.  I could see any of seven teams -- Williams, Amherst, Midd, Colby, Tufts, Trinity, Bowdoin -- with a legit shot of winning the NESCAC title, and even Wesleyan, Hamilton, or Bates have enough talent to surprise some teams.  Williams will probably be the slight favorite going in with the Robinson/Wohl/Rooke-Ley/Greenman core returning, but Mayer did SO much for the Ephs down the stretch and no one can replace what he brought on both ends.  Amherst loses a ton and doesn't have a strong senior class to rely on, for the first time seemingly in eons.  Midd and Bowdoin lose strong senior classes, too, so the top four teams in NESCAC from this year could all struggle at times next year, and all will have major question marks heading into the season.   Meanwhile Colby, Tufts, and Trinity each defeated, or at least came very close to doing so, the top teams last year, and all look like they should be MUCH improved on paper.  Wesleyan also brings everyone back and will be a sleeper.  It's going to be a battle every game in conference play, and the days of two or three teams steamrolling everyone else are long gone.

100% ditto here, actually, despite how it sometimes may appear.

Am especially fascinated by Tufts if Palleschi returns. Sabety, Palleschi, Haladyna, Ferris. . . . Jeezuz. (But why does Tufts lately always seem like less that the sum of their parts?) And what if Swords takes another developmental leap; he'll have Hurley fully recovered, and that's a good point/center start. VERY curious about young Midd backcourt of Brown/St. Amour (though I realize that St. Amour, like Pollack, could have major/slow recovery ahead; not everyone has access to the, um, "training" methods of Adrian Peterson). And of course the whole league is right now wondering whether D. Robinson has much Alpha Dog in him, as should become apparent with Mayer and Epley gone. If he doesn't have much, he'll just be your basic run-of-the-mill all-NESCAC all-American. If he does. . . . Well, there should be laws against that.

Quote from: grabtherim on March 25, 2014, 06:16:04 AM
I really enjoy the back and forth between the LJ and Eph posters.  Excellent rivalry and the fight for bragging rights is very funny. Interesting how many of them see the world beginning and ending at Amherst and Williams, all the rest of us being interlopers. So be it, no big deal. That said, if someone else wins the league next year or heaven forbid a championship we would be well advised to remove their belts and shoelaces and put them on a 24 hour watch

Quote from: gordonmann on March 24, 2014, 11:59:19 PM

Quote. . . I bet the non-Williams/Amherst posters LOVE this stuff.

Other than a couple active contributors from Middlebury and outsiders who follow the conversations in several rooms, there haven't been many consistent non-Amherst/Williams posters in this room in years.

"Next year??" Hey, grabtherim, what makes you think I didn't already have my belt and shoelaces removed and out-of-reach by approximately halftime last FRIDAY NIGHT?

(I've got a wife and son to think about.)

Quote from: nescac1 on March 24, 2014, 03:27:28 PM
. . . So I think we Ephs are entitled to bask in the glow of victory (in particular, the nature and setting of that victory) for at least a FEW days. 

Yeah, you're right, n1. Can't begrudge you some basking.
Take the whole week. 

Quote from: nescac1 on March 24, 2014, 03:27:28 PM
I would, however, put Williams 2004 right there with Amherst 2014 -- tourney apperances their final three season, two all-Americans, a huge part of an NCAA-record home winning streak (which ended early in 2005), a national title, a second place finish by two points to one of the elite D3 squads of recent memory, a win on the road vs. D1 Holy Cross, two NESCAC title game wins over Amherst, a total of THREE losses in their final two years, and best of all, wins over Amherst in the Elite 8 and Final Four in back-to-back years.  I'd say Amherst 2014 vs. Williams 2004 is a true toss-up in terms of overall achievement, but in my TOTALLY unbiased opinion, I give the slight edge to Williams 2004, just because of the stark difference in how their careers ended. 

Well played, n1. But I see your Williams Class of '04 and raise you an Amherst Class of '08 (the Olson years, which I've been scolded off-board for overlooking). Overall 111-12 (compared to Williams '04's 104-15); two NESCAC titles; four NCAA tourney appearances, one to Sweet 16, three to Final Four, two to national final; one national championship. Oh, and an 8-1 record against the Ephs.

. . . I bet the non-Williams/Amherst posters LOVE this stuff.

Quote from: nescac1 on March 23, 2014, 11:12:14 PM
The Williams-Amherst rivalry seems to swing back and forth every few months.  That's why it is such an awesome rivalry.  But today, the Ephs own the upper hand.  The Amherst seniors have had an incredible string of accomplishments over the past four years.  But so did the Eph seniors, national title or no.  And by the way, I would LOVE to see, just once, Amherst run into the WIAC buzzsaw in Salem .

Whoa, n1! I'd have expected the endorphins to have regulated back to normal levels by now. (OK, maybe not. If I'd been in your shoes Friday night, I'd probably still be having neurotransmitter issues, too.)

Of course I get the argument for an Eph upper hand; they won the last meeting, in the next-to-last-game of the D3 year, in a performance for the ages—and I'm sure the final D3 rankings will reflect that.

But it would be tough to argue that the resume of the Williams outgoing class matches the one belonging to Toomey's bunch. In fact, is this Amherst class's resume not the best in NESCAC's 15-year history? (I could be wrong; if so, I'm sure folks will point it out.)

-- 3 straight NESCAC championships ('12, '13, '14)
-- 31 straight wins in NESCAC regular season and tourney play (and that doesn't even count their wins during that stretch over Williams and Wesleyan in the designated non-conf games)
-- 108-13 overall record (.901)
-- 64-1 at LeFrak
-- 8 straight wins over Williams (pretty good club, I hear!); I mean, who'd have even THUNK that would be possible
-- And of course a national championship along with other final four and tournament appearances. And the nat'l championship required going through Aaron Walton-Moss and the CCIW—though clearly you judge the CCIW inferior to the WIAC. (See what I did there? TROLLING. Maybe we can we incite some CCIW-on-WIAC crime.)

But hey, the Ephs were spectacular in that last one on Friday night.

Anyway, I'll admit that this note is more for the Amherst kids and their parents and fans than for anyone else. No doubt Friday night stung, but a little perspective helps. They didn't just put up an incredible four-year record. They may have put up the best ever in NESCAC. They deserve to feel enormously proud of it. (As I fully realize you would agree.)

Quote from: nescac1 on March 22, 2014, 11:31:41 AM
After sleeping on it, I'm convinced that last night was the best I've ever seen an Eph team play.  The top three games that come to mind are last night, the 2010 Guilford game in Salem, and the 2003 Elite Eight victory over Amherst, in that order.   But I'm not sure last night can ever be topped in terms of execution on both ends.

Not remotely surprised to hear this.

Upon further review (of last night's game): Wow.

I know some of my fellow LJ board members hate it when one says anything appreciative about Williams, but if a man is unmoved by beauty when he sees it, what is life? (As Mike Tyson once said.) (It was Mike Tyson who said that, yes?)

People keep using the word "clinic," but honestly even that seems insufficient. When a team in high-volume, high-speed attack (not bothering to use the whole shot clock looking for the easiest, highest percentage shot) throws down a shooting line of 63/46/92, with 24 assists on 38 buckets, and just 9 turnovers, the opponent is basically baked. (Especially when the opponent goes 39/31/64 in comparison.) So some of last night was about what Doc Rivers used to call a "make-or-miss" result. The other blokes make. You miss. You lose. Williams is a great shooting team, as the yearlong numbers show. But of course they're not THAT great a shooting team (as the yearlong numbers and three prior Amherst games also show)--but no one is. It's too tall an ask to hope they match last night's shooting line tonight, but I hope they do. Because that shooting made that offense a glorious thing to behold. Yes, painful as all get-out for some of us (i.e., me), but glorious nonetheless.

Random notes:

-- When an offense works like that, obviously it works because everybody's clicking, in concert. But though I agree with other posters that Mayer played an almost flawless all-around game (GREAT interior passing to find cutters), I think it was Robinson who made the biggest difference. He had most of his points in the first 22 minutes, and he (along with Greenman, remarkably) just stretched the LJ defense too far. Those two cats can shoot from deep, and after so many balls had fallen through, you could see the Jeffs cheating all the way out, with their feet actually beyond the arc, to try to prevent Robinson's next 3-ball. (Epley helped too, clearly.) That just leaves too much space in the half-court for all those weakside cutters and ball rotation. Defenders are too far apart to help and recover. And of course without George in the middle, the Jeffs couldn't control anything around the rim, either. Perfect storm for one side, perfect dream for the other.

-- An overlooked aspect of Mayer's performance: he avoided foul trouble beautifully by frankly playing very differently from George (or typical rim protectors). Mayer hardly jumps, seems like. He more often just anchors his position and stays vertical with his arms instead of swatting. One consequence is that he gives up stuff that you'd think he might contest--Killian and Green both made a bunch of layups around him, but also missed a bunch, too. I'd expect Evans tonight to get his share of layups, too. But the upside for Mayer/Williams is that he stays in the game and remains in decent rebound position. And he's big enough to present at least some problems even when not aggressively contesting. Smart player. (Or smartly coached, or both.)

-- The zone took Toomey out of the game (don't know if there were other factors, as some have speculated). The most interesting thing about the zone was how far Williams extended it--which, with their length, makes it near impossible to shoot over. On the other hand, it left HUGE space in the key, which Amherst simply couldn't exploit (and yes, Pollack would've helped there, but let's not pretend it would have made up the difference last night). That'll be different tonight against Whitewater; Whitewater has a mid-range, 15-foot game, whereas Amherst has none. (Neither does Williams, really. Jeffs and LJs are both "modern" teams, focused on 3s and rim.) Whitewater actually seeks 12- and 15-footers. If Ephs play their zone like last night, they'll give up a ton of 'em. But. . . I don't expect they'll play their zone the same way as last night.

-- A surprise: I wonder why Toomey himself didn't try to penetrate into the foul-line area more, and then pass when picked up. That was the aspect of his play that seemed least characteristic of him. Puzzling.

-- Last thing: the zone helped expose Amherst's weaknesses as a passing team (which their failures against full-court zones have exposed all season). Toomey, obviously, is gifted, but in standard man-to-man attacks he has the ball all the time, and the other Jeffs really aren't asked to pass that much. They're willing passers, but not good ones. The open space in the middle of the Eph zone could have been exploited by multiple interior passes, or by initial penetration and then passes--but the Jeffs apart from Toomey just aren't good at that, maybe in part because they've so rarely had to do it. Williams, on the other hand, has an entire offense predicated on team-wide passing ability (instead of a dominating point guard). As was painfully evident last night, they've become really really good at it. Kudos to them.

I like Williams over Whitewater tonight, and I don't think it'll be that close (though nothing like last night) unless Williams' shooting numbers fall off the table--which, of course, can happen. "Make-or-miss." I'll be pulling for them. (Sorry, Amherst friends.)

Quote from: AncientSonOfHixon on March 22, 2014, 09:52:59 AM

Quote from: grabtherim on March 22, 2014, 09:40:13 AM
  Also can someone please post the CBS NCAA link for  the final. Thanks.

just go here: http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/basketball-men/d3 Then go to the Williams/Whitewater game at the center of the bracket and click it. You'll see a tab to click "watch" at the top.

OOPS, i'm sorry, my bad--did that too fast. Game is on CBS Sports Network, channel 56 (or 856 in HD) on my Comcast system. The "watch" tab DOES exist on the NCAA web site, but may be disabled as folks here have said. sorry for earlier post

Quote from: grabtherim on March 22, 2014, 09:40:13 AM
  Also can someone please post the CBS NCAA link for  the final. Thanks.

just go here: http://www.ncaa.com/interactive-bracket/basketball-men/d3 Then go to the Williams/Whitewater game at the center of the bracket and click it. You'll see a tab to click "watch" at the top.

Well, i expected epic. Just never expected an epic schooling.

Congrats to Ephs. Brilliant game. Jeffs couldn't solve the zone, and had no hope of stopping that offense.

I feel absolutely awful for the LJs--nothing more painful than going out like that. Not sure what else to say except to congratulate them on a great, great season and promise them that time will put this one in some perspective, eventually. This crew has given me and their fans an astonishing amount of pleasure, though. That's not diminished by this one.

Tomorrow I hope the Ephs represent the NESCAC the way they did today. I think they'll do it fairly easily.

Quote from: Panthernation on March 19, 2014, 10:49:35 AM
The final episode of The Road to Salem: http://sites.middlebury.edu/panthernation/2014/03/19/road-to-salem-part-8-the-road-ahead/

P'nation & collaborators: Serious, heartfelt kudos again to you all for this episode and the entire series. Very clever conceptual choice to lead with St. Amour, whose season, like Middlebury's, ended gradually and then suddenly, and who was deliberate about learning from great predecessors (Kizel) while also doing what every athlete does: thinking constantly about what's next, believing it will be better. (The darkened gym sequences were superb.)

Obviously, this whole project took a ton of work. But work wouldn't have been sufficient; it took a ton of talent, too. Whatever you do next, good luck. Though I'm not sure you'll need it.

Quote from: madzillagd on March 18, 2014, 11:32:25 AM
Both have played 30 games and here's where they stand on the defensive side of the ball...

George:  174 rebs, 66 PF,  11 stls, 79 blks

Robinson: 200 rebs, 70 PF, 35 stls, 36 blks

Well, this is slightly misleading, only because George played 23.7 min/gm while D-Rob played 34.5 min/gm--so you'd need to multiply George's #s by 1.5 to get a productivity comparison.

But, man, I'm not in here trying to argue anything against Robinson. (I'm already on record as maybe his biggest tire-pumper outside Eph Nation--so much so that my compadre Amh63 once accused me of being a Williams fan in disguise.) (And by the way, Amh63, that's not just plunging the knife, that's twisting it!)

I agree w/your overall take, though, madz.

Quote from: nescac1 on March 18, 2014, 11:43:28 AM
When folks look at "upside" I think they see certain things that George has that Robinson never will -- he is two inches taller and is significantly stronger and more athletic, and has good footwork for a young big guy.  If he can polish / refine his offensive game quite a bit and develop a few go-to moves in the low post, the sky is the limit -- he could be a taller version of Troy Whittington, which is a scary thought.

Not scary, nes1, not scary at all!

Quote from: nescac1 on March 18, 2014, 11:43:28 AMThen again, George is never going to be able to handle the ball, pass, or drive like Robinson, and it's highly unlikely that he suddenly develops 26-foot range on his shot, or shoots over 85 percent from the line ... I'd say the maximum upside potential for George is around 18 ppg, 12 rpg, and 5 bpg, but it's going to take a few years to get there.  Meanwhile, I expect that Robinson will be producing at that level (fewer blocks and boards, but more points, assists and steals) as a sophomore. 

NOW we're talking scary.  Dammit. . . .

Quote from: middhoops on March 18, 2014, 10:26:31 AM
AncientSon,  it's only one old fool's opinion, but from what I've seen of his athleticism, David George is still relatively timid offensively even though he has the skills to be terrifying.  Given his size and great physical gifts, he could be a contributor at a higher level and that is very rare among D3 bigs.  When his offensive confidence catches up with his D, look out!
Your team is graduating significant talent and we all expect Hixon to 'reload'.  David George is the best young building block I can think of to do that around because he prevents scoring.  To be certain, Duncan Robinson is a superior basketball player but his skills are primarily offensive and given how good he already is, his upside is mostly just giving him the ball more often. 
Sorry if it seemed like I was trying to raise the imaginary bar.

Looking forward to an epic game on Friday.

Midd, don't get me wrong, LOVE how you think. Feel free to keep raising that bar! (And: from your typewriter to God's ear, please.)

And couldn't agree more re "epic". . . .

Quote from: middhoops on March 17, 2014, 07:37:06 AM
George may have more upside than any other player in D3 basketball.

Whoa, Middhoops, I'm not sure even we LJ loyalists can subscribe to this. (It's juuuuuuust possible that he doesn't even have more upside than a certain other player in Friday night's D3 basketball game. . . .)

BUT I love your Kool-Aid! And I want to drink some pronto. Will make it my only beverage between now and Salem.

Quote from: AmherstStudent05 on March 16, 2014, 09:16:32 PM
I also agree with you that our first two wins over the Ephs were quite convincing and perhaps even more comfortable than the final score might otherwise suggest.  Unfortunately, I cannot say the same for the NESCAC Championship game.  In fact, I think that game was MUCH more competitive than the final score indicated. (I also think that was the closest Williams came to giving us their best shot.)

Other than George, who did a masterful job guarding Mayer, I think our defense really struggled a great deal against the Eph offense.  I know that this might be uncharitable on my part considering we "held" Williams to 1-12 3 point shooting in the second half, but from my vantage point, many of those looks were not ones I would be comfortable giving Epley or Robinson.  Also, even with those misses, Williams did a great job getting to the rim against us.  Bottom line, Williams can definitely hurt us with their offense.

AmStud: Due respect, brother, but my biggest fear about the Ephs isn't on the perimeter--it's still Mayer. George has come a long way, as many have noted, but it's still a huge ask to expect him to check Mayer without help (which the LJs won't give) at this point in their respective careers. Any time I've seen Williams over maybe the last quarter of their season including the tournaments, it seems like they do a better job of exploiting Mayer's match-ups than they ever have. Or maybe it's just that Mayer is playing at his highest level now, I'm not sure. But the most notable thing about that third Amherst win was that Mayer never really got in the game. And I'm not sure how much of it was George "holding" him down. Mayer missed some early looks that he usually makes, and he got in early foul trouble that had him up and down all game. He ended with 4 fouls, played just 25 minutes, had just 5 rebounds, and posted just 10 points on 3/9 shooting.

Quote from: AmherstStudent05 on March 16, 2014, 09:16:32 PM
. . . [George] has been simply outstanding for us the past few weeks as he is really starting to come into his own.  Most noticeably he has made tremendous strides in his conditioning.  Anyone who watched the Emerson game -- the first time George was asked to play 30+ minutes with Pollack out -- could see how obviously George got fatigued in the second half (absolutely not the reason we lost that game by the way).  When Pollack went down, I was naturally very worried that George would not be able to pick up most of those additional minutes.  I am happy to say that he has proved me wrong big time.  For the most part now, George's minutes seem to be almost entirely dictated by foul trouble, not conditioning.

Great observation here. (Man, that Emerson game was brutal--and George was both gassed and overwhelmed. As you note, he wasn't the only one.) So when I think about The Mayer Problem, I keep fingers crossed that George's leaps in stamina, experience, and flat-out confidence will help him carry the day. The core question, as I bet most Jeff fans would agree, isn't even Mayer's point total as much as it will be George's foul total. Jeffs simply must find a way to keep George on the floor, yes?

Quote from: AmherstStudent05 on March 16, 2014, 09:16:32 PM
. . . Speaking of which, Amherst was very fortunate this weekend that neither game was called all that tightly.  Given our depth concerns, we simply cannot afford a lot of foul trouble -- particularly with George and Toomey.  As we saw last year, the officiating in Salem can be quite erratic as players, coaches and refs try to familiarize themselves with one another.  Our starters really can't afford the usual "feeling out" period to see how the game will be called.  Last year, we had some serious foul trouble in Salem -- fortunately, Kalema, Green, and Pollack each stepped up BIG TIME for us when called upon (in fact, Kalema did so well for us off the bench that some informed posters argued that he should be starting for Toomey!).  We may well need Mussachia, Gach, and Nabatoff to do the same this weekend.

Agree here, too, AmStud, re Salem officiating wild card. IMHO, fouls will be the single strongest predictor of how Friday night's game turns out. If all the Jeffs avoid foul trouble, I like Amherst's chances just fine. If they don't, I don't.

p.s.  --  And, alas, if we need Muss/Gach/Nab to do anything like what Kalema/Green/Pollack contributed last year, I think we're outta luck, even though they give everything they have. Gotta remember that Kalema and Green had each registered regular season games when he was Amherst's leading scorer, and Pollack had spent an entire season getting meaningful minutes behind Pete. By NCAA's end, Pollack was even able to hold his own against Landon "Suffer-My-Caboose-On-Your-Narrow-Ass-And-Weep" Gamble, the most physical old-school post player I've seen lately. (OK, that's probably not his real nickname.) Those guys were already proven threats.

Quote from: Pat Coleman on March 16, 2014, 03:42:49 PM

Quote from: AncientSonOfHixon on March 16, 2014, 12:23:44 PM
Morrisville played extremely well after both clubs calmed their early adrenaline overflow, and they used a tactic I can't remember seeing against Amherst in the 21st Century: they intentionally burned the first 25 seconds of each possession, using a high double stack and freeing their three scoring guards in turn off the picks, passing the ball back and forth 30 feet from the hoop, until starting their offense with 10 seconds left. Then they were able to shake one of those guards free for a 3 in the last seconds, and they hit 'em. Can anybody else remember seeing such a shorten-the-game strategy lately?

Dickinson used it all tournament.

Interesting, thanks Pat (and Dave, for Scranton/Middlebury note; maybe some Midd posters will follow up). And I should point out that I knew nothing about Morrisville before the game, so maybe the approach isn't unusual for them and wasn't particularly designed for Amherst.

In the end, I don't know whether it helped or hurt Morrisville. Maybe it helped them keep the game even until late in the first half, but it also kept them from exploiting any of Amherst's depth issues (though who knows if they'd have been able to). One thing it did do, for better or worse: it made for a very choppy-feeling, no-flow game. Buddy next to me said it was as if the game had to keep starting over. If that's what Morrisville was after, it worked.