Quote from: All the Kingsmen on March 04, 2014, 02:34:07 PM
Lango at Cal Tech is tough but doesn't get much done. Runs around, looks like he is playing really hard but doesn't make plays.

Well, respectfully disagree.  As a freshman, Lango, who enrolled at Caltech as a 17 year old, went head to head against veteran point guards and managed to place 5th in league in assists, all the while playing with freshman teammates whose conversion rates will no doubt improve with experience.  Lango also had 18 against a nationally ranked defensive CMS team late in season.

The top three SCIAC freshman players had very similar statistics, considering their positions:
Johnson   11 ppg.      6.7 rebounds.   0.3 assists
Lee.        10.3 ppg.    6.2 rebounds.   2.3 assists
Lango.      8.6 ppg     3.1 rebounds.   3.2 assists


These players are young and still developing.  Hopefully, great things are in the making.  Interesting fact that all three freshmen have better numbers than Gaffney and Pinson had as freshman:
Gaffney.    6.7 ppg.   2.9 rebounds      1.4 assists
Pinson.     7.0 ppg.    2.2 rebounds      2.2 assists

A win tonight by Chapman is what this conference needs today.

Great discussion points about back to back games.  And perhaps valid about the NW teams being conditioned to go back to back.  It would be nice for the SCIAC to get the first night win in bracket play so we could have the opportunity to play the second night.  (I think Chapman WILL win tonight.)

But the logistics of the Tournament last weekend were difficult.  I am going to guess Cal Lu team was on a bus stuck on rain clogged freeways the majority of time between the two games.  Had Cal Lu won some important conference games earlier they would have been resting in their own beds.  I certainly do not want to detract from the Chapman team's success.  In fact I had lunch with four fellow SCIAC fans and called Chapman's win against CMS earlier in the the day.  My post was only about mY observation--Arik Smith, a phenomenal player, appeared to be "spent" and still played with abandon.

Back to back, Friday/Saturday would be a huge advantage for Caltech.  It would lead to an extra night sleep.  After away games, Caltech eats preordered Subway sandwiches on the bus, all the while working a set of homework problems and work through the night until class the next day.  It's quite simply an accepted way of life--no sleep on Wednesday night.  If games went back to back, Techers would get another day of sleep.

It's easy for me as a spectator to fail to fully comprehend how difficult the last month of conference play can be--for those at the top the competition grows exponentially--and for those at the bottom the disappointment is taxing.  Veteran coaches will take a day off.  When I played, I went back to back on weekend play, and it wasn't that taxing.  Why? Because nothing was expected of me academically! The SCIAC , fortunately, expects academics to be THE priority.

Can't wait for tip-off.  Calling for a SCIAC win tonight, and keeping the faith there are more to come.

I think the Conference nailed their selections for honors.

All of those honored players, and their teammates who pushed them at every practice, and their worthy opponents, deserve a shout out.

Remy was the heart and soul of the conference and has been a joy to watch for four years.

I love the passion Arik Smith has brought to the league.   His performance against CMS may be the best play I have witnessed in the SCIAC.  Love the way he plays the game, total commitment to his team.

I respectfully disagree with others.  I think the 26 hours turn around on games was quite taxing on Cal Lu.  After almost owning CMS on their own court the night before, Arik was a dismal 2 for 10 in the first half against Chapman and only 1 for 5 from threes for the entire game.  It was obvious to me, sitting behind the bench, his legs were exhausted.  Yet he continued to play with abandon.

Arik  is a junior, and a very young junior, having just turned 20 in December.  This is unusual given a common practice now is for parents to hold a player back a year or two in middle school to "game the system".  Of course, I will take the opportunity to point out that the exception is Caltech where a majority of the players have actually skipped grades and enroll at 16 and 17!

It would be grand if Chapman's success surfaces once again in Dallas.  Best wishes in another victory and in representing all of us.

individual work in the offseason could bring some surprises next year.  Still 'Embracing the Evolution' at Caltech.  The evolution, by mere definition, is simply taking more time than the biblical seven days. Patience is a virtue.

Best of luck to all the SCIAC, especially the graduating seniors.

Basketball is a grand game.

Caltech's loss to Cal Lutheran in overtime...yes, overtime.

Surprise to everyone except those of us, total number could be counted on one hand, whose primary focus has been on the Beavers' progress this season.

Caltech's defense last night was their best showing to date, especially off-ball.  Even their transition defense looked good.  CIT was persistent. Perhaps this led to the unbalanced foul calling by the referees.  CIT had 26 fouls called, while home team Cal Lutheran had only 12.  Not saying the calls were bad, simply emphasizing Caltech was aggressive.

Caltech had fabulous ball movement, especially the in-out game, hence the balanced box score; four starters and the sixth man all scored in double figures. Everyone was involved on offense.  (CIT: Lango 13, Hogue 12, LeBaron 11, Emezie 10, Lee 10).

Lango, played 44 minutes of intense basketball, and despite the cramping hit the big three at the start of OT.  Excellent stop defense on the part of Cal Lutheran's senior Jeremy Sulker-Hall at the overtime buzzer to seal the win for Cal Lutheran.

My belief in CIT is steadfast. CIT's freshmen, three who were 17 when they enrolled at Caltech, played 64% of Caltech's total minutes last night, and coincidentally, scored 64% of CIT total points.  Conversely, I don't think Cal Lutheran played any freshman, and 75% of their points came from upperclassmen (Jr./Sr.). 

These CIT freshmen, with the help of three sophomores, and a two juniors, are learning to compete against much older, stronger athletes. In time, they will become upperclassmen, and will be more than prepared to compete laterally against other athletes in the SCIAC.

And an obstacle Caltech must overcome, even more so than their abundant youth, is the mere fact that every SCIAC team gives Caltech their BEST game.  No one wants to loose to Caltech.

Chapman put together ten awesome minutes to bury Caltech last night.

Caltech had a great game going for almost three quarters.  The Beavers were within  3 points with 12 minutes to go.  Tech was playing the best ball they had all season. Bokosky was engaged enough to get a technical.

Bokosky took a timeout and hit the "reset" button.  The next ten minutes Chapman absolutely dominated in every aspect of the game.  Caltech's defense folded, getting outscored 30 to 10 (nearly half those points coming from Hamasaki). Caltech committed nine turnovers during the same ten minute span, had only four rebounds, and missed opportunities at the charity line.

I may be the Lone Ranger, but I continue to be optimistic about Caltech.  They have increased the time they are competitive in nearly every game.  Earlier in the season they were competitive for about a half.  Now they seem to compete for nearly 30 minutes, all the while allotting 75% of their playing time to freshman.  Hopefully they can learn to play 40 minutes of ball and take an interest in defense.  Maybe by the end of the season they will learn that the only statistic important in winning games is not a player's personal box score, but instead, how ugly you can make your opponent's box score appear.  Scali can teach everyone a lesson in that aspect of the game. Probably the main reason he has a case full of trophies.  Defense.

Chapman has some real talent and potentially could give both Claremont and Pomona real trouble down the stretch.  Both games are at home.  And if Chapman buckles down defensively, they have the talent to give both  Gafney and McAndrews a run for their money.

Bigcat, appreciate you sharing your "inside" comments about Bokosky.  But, I have learned to not believe everything I hear regarding coaches and practices.  Rarely will players and their parents own their side of the street.  Not saying that what you are hearing isn't true, just saying there might be another version of the same incident. I don't know too many athletic directors who would risk their own jobs by turning their heads to serious allegations.  The onset of electronic devices adds a whole new degree of scrutiny that didn't exist when I played ball.

Yes, indeed Coach Eslinger had a great recruiting year. And the statistics could be represented with even more awe. 

There are 162 "MALE" freshman at Caltech, and 10 of them are on the basketball team, all with SAT scores of 2300 and north.  LOL -- one of six males in the Caltech freshman class has a basketball jersey. (Unfortunately no seniors have a jersey, only one junior, and three sophomores).

Coach did a pretty thorough search of the universe to find candidates who meet the three criteria--scoring in the upper 99.9%, experience in science research and able to bounce a basketball. (To be totally candid, only two of the players had the time to play AAU ball.)

A much more interesting stat is that five players opted for Caltech over MIT, a team which during at least part of the application cycle was ranked number one, coming off the heels of a successful bid to the Final Four the previous year.

It certainly isn't Coach's fault this freshman team is shooting a dismal 27% from three, and aghast, 60% from the line. If Caltech is going to win another game the players will need to find a way to improve their shooting.

We can hope Coach Eslinger finds a player this year who can meet a 4th criteria -- one who can hit a three point shot with consistency!

The simple fact that the other coaches in the SCIAC are spending time scouting Caltech shows that there has been a turn in the dial, ever so slight, but a turn never-the-less.

On a more realistic note, Gaffney had 28 against Caltech.  He could have had 68 if he wanted.   He scored at will.  Truly a joy to watch such a talented player.

Hoping the Caltech boys can develop a physics program tonight which demonstrates a method to magically shoot threes against the colossal Pomona zone tomorrow night.

Madzilladg..that was hilarious. 

Bigcat, I for one enjoy your comments.

And your observations.

I also noted the fabulous chemistry that LaVerne brings to the court.  That team appears to be having a great time playing ball together even though playing time has to be divided amongst many players.

Caltech was down by twenty with 20 seconds to go and a guard dove from the elbow to half court for a ball.  Most of the entire gym gave the player a standing ovation.

Something is going right when a team is shooting 49% ...just saying.  Shouldn't coaches be allowed mulligans every once in a while?   Much more difficult job than it appears.  Coaches observe players behind the scenes ten hours a week at practice, fans see them for 40 minutes at most.

Caltech was scrappy the whole game and got to within 4 with a lay-up from freshman Lango with a little over ten minutes to go.

Whittier's athleticism forced Caltech into a 1-2-2 zone which was busted by the impressive shooting of sophomore guard Eric  Jennings who hit 5 of 8 threes.  Two of his threes were literally back to back -- within twenty seconds and proved to be back breakers for Caltech's second half surge towards the ever elusive (arguably) dream of a conference win.

Landrum and Irwin got into foul trouble early which allowed playing time to be spread.  Whittier is a pretty young team, too.   Good things in store for the Poets.

Only other thing worth mentioning is that Caltech held turnovers to 10, fewest this year.

Interesting discussion about how rigorous academic schools can sustain winning programs.

I believe that sustaining a winning program depends on the flexibility that the coach has negotiated with the admissions department.  At some schools, Coaches are allowed to write letters to help "push a student" through admissions.  Some of those athletes might be in the lowest quartile, or even lower, of the admission criteria. The amount of weight the admissions department assigns to the Coach's letter will directly correlate to the sustainability of a winning program.

In recent years parents and players have had avenues in which to exchange academic information prior to admission in hopes of allowing each parent to better game the admission process. I believe that the information parents share is truthful, and I have no reason to not believe it was truthful.  I could personally name over ten star athletes in the above named "sustained" programs who had lower gpas and much lower test scores than their classmates, and I am referring to below even the lowest published quartile.

An athlete attending a rigorously academic school does not necessarily imply that the athlete is on par academically with his classmates.

One could argue that the admissions rate is a good indicator of academic rigor.  Perhaps at some schools this is the case.  But the admission's rate statistic is skewed in that some students don't even bother to apply to schools after they review the quartiles.  In other words, at very high academic schools, especially STEM schools, students do the first major round of rejection themselves. Very few potential applicants at Caltech would even begin the lengthy application process unless they had already attained a perfect math SAT score and a perfect math SAT subject score.

To push the envelope I maintain:
"Sustainability of a winning program is determined by the adopted protocol each admissions department employs for processing athletic applications."

Along similar lines on analysis, exactly how many basketball players on the CMS team are enrolled from the thousand or so students attending Harvey Mudd?  None this year, and only a handful in years past.  The team name Claremont Mudd Scripps is a misnomer.

Yes.  Caltech has a ways to go, and with time, might do just that.

Currently 70% of playing time at Caltech is going to freshmen class.  Three starters just turned 18. 

With less than a few minutes remaining at Redlands, Caltech had five freshman  on the court and were down by only four. (The published report of six was wrong).  With better focus they should be able to convert on more than 4 for 14 from the line. Especially costly we're the eight missed front ends. 

Truth is Caltech gets everyone's best game because no school wants to have to live with the legacy that Occidental does.