KnightSlappy has been a busy boy the last couple of days. He has added some interesting and worthwhile insights on his blog and I recommend them to your reading. I particularly enjoyed his analysis labeled "Predicting the MIAA Race." I can't compete with his technical expertise but for those exasperated with Calvin it's worth pointing out that this year's team is incredibly young. I thought I would compare this year's team with the last one we all thought very young--the 2005-06 squad that included freshmen Caleb Veldhouse. If I've done my math correctly that team had approximately 37% of all minutes played provided by those in their freshmen or sophomore years. The 2010-11 squad has had almost 55% of all minutes contributed by players in those two classes. That's really young and explains why Calvin has been so inconsistent--not so much from game to game as within games.

The recent contest against DePauw is a perfect demonstration of that inconsistency. Calvin led 26-10 early but gave up almost all of that lead by being outscored 19-6 over the last 8 minutes of the half. Then after taking a 44-37 lead in the second half, the Knights gave up 14 straight to go down seven. The Knights then outscored DePauw 31-6 the rest of the game to win by 18. The last part was an incredible stretch of good play--the best ten minutes we've seen this season from Calvin. I got a kick out of the clueless paragraph in the Grand Rapids Press mentioning that Calvin cruised to an easy 75-57 victory because I was in attendance and I walked out of Faganel Hall thinking I had been on a roller coaster. Any team will have ups and downs during the course of 40 minutes of play but until the Knights reduce their variation within games they will continue to give their coach palpatations.

With league play starting tomorrow, there doesn't seem to be much talk yet about the games, especially the Calvin/Hope rivalry.    It is pleasantly refreshing this year that the typical media rehash of how long the Calvin/Hope rivalry has been going on, what the scoring margin is throughout the years, and all the other blah, blah, blah seems to be missing in action.  And over on the pickem page, I'm surprised how little confidence is being expressed for Albion.  I wouldn't count them out.  Way too much tradition and pride for the Brits to just roll over.

Regarding the game at the Dick, both teams have shown balanced scoring this year.  One player may get a few more opportunities or show a hot hand, but I suspect  both teams will have four or five players in double digits.  Expect a game of scoring runs by both teams and another nail biter to the finish.   I really don't know which team has had the more difficult schedule nor do I care.  But, we'll find out tomorrow who is playing better in early January.  Long way to go for both teams.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 03, 2011, 11:25:16 PM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 11:04:53 PM
Mostly the point I was making about Olivet is their game with Grand Valley, a significantly better team they had little chance to win impacted their stat ratings much greater since they were beaten 79-45.......in other words skewing their stats a little bit to make it appear they aren't quite as efficient on offense and defense as maybe they are vs like competition, no one else in that group of teams I pointed out played a more lopsided matchup.......and for Trine a significantly weaker schedule vs the other MIAA's may have done the same for them in the opposite direction.

But couldn't they have made up for that by playing Case Western Reserve, a much worse team than Calvin played?

I think most can tell the inherent differences between a game vs a scholarship school a division above you, and a game vs a team in your own division.


PS~ this was never a statement or argument about who played a tougher schedule

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2011, 09:32:46 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 03, 2011, 11:25:16 PM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 11:04:53 PM
Mostly the point I was making about Olivet is their game with Grand Valley, a significantly better team they had little chance to win impacted their stat ratings much greater since they were beaten 79-45.......in other words skewing their stats a little bit to make it appear they aren't quite as efficient on offense and defense as maybe they are vs like competition, no one else in that group of teams I pointed out played a more lopsided matchup.......and for Trine a significantly weaker schedule vs the other MIAA's may have done the same for them in the opposite direction.

But couldn't they have made up for that by playing Case Western Reserve, a much worse team than Calvin played?

I think most can tell the inherent differences between a game vs a scholarship school a division above you, and a game vs a team in your own division.


PS~ this was never a statement or argument about who played a tougher schedule

Kinda like UM vs. Concordia.

I agree that Olivet's schedule has been a bit more variable, but a schedule is a schedule. My point wasn't a "who's had it harder" debate either. Just pointing out that if you "adjust" OC up a bit, you probably should do something similar for Calvin (and Hope, to an extent, too).

Quote from: wiz on January 04, 2011, 07:50:28 AM
With league play starting tomorrow, there doesn't seem to be much talk yet about the games, especially the Calvin/Hope rivalry.    It is pleasantly refreshing this year that the typical media rehash of how long the Calvin/Hope rivalry has been going on, what the scoring margin is throughout the years, and all the other blah, blah, blah seems to be missing in action. 

Through 176 games, Hope leads the series 90-86.


Just 99 points separate the teams over 176 games, a difference of only 0.562 points per game!
Hope has scored 11,913 points, an average of 67.687 per game.
Calvin has scored 11,814 points, an average of 67.125 per game.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2011, 09:39:38 AM
Kinda like UM vs. Concordia.

We can throw out examples all day in both directions, or just concede that the original point of the original post was missed......badly.

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 05:08:27 PM
A look at efficiency,  numbers are points scored per 100 posessions.


Offense
Hope     114.3
Calvin    107.5
Trine      106.4
Olivet    103.8
Albion    101.8
Alma      96.2
Kzoo      93.1
Adrian    91.8

Hope is the only team that has performed at what I might call a high offensive efficiency.  That number is probably on the low end of avg. for most NCAA teams.

Average is actually pretty close to 100.

Looking at Ken Pomeroy's Division I offensive efficiency numbers (his are "adjusted", but let's assume similar magnitudes), Hope's 14.3 is the same as Marquette, and they rank 23rd in that category.

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2011, 09:45:27 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2011, 09:39:38 AM
Kinda like UM vs. Concordia.

We can throw out examples all day in both directions, or just concede that the original point of the original post was missed......badly.

Not conceded. It was understood, and agreed with.

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2011, 09:52:53 AM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 05:08:27 PM
A look at efficiency,  numbers are points scored per 100 posessions.


Offense
Hope     114.3
Calvin    107.5
Trine      106.4
Olivet    103.8
Albion    101.8
Alma      96.2
Kzoo      93.1
Adrian    91.8

Hope is the only team that has performed at what I might call a high offensive efficiency.  That number is probably on the low end of avg. for most NCAA teams.

Average is actually pretty close to 100.

Looking at Ken Pomeroy's Division I offensive efficiency numbers (his are "adjusted", but let's assume similar magnitudes), Hope's 14.3 is the same as Marquette, and they rank 23rd in that category.

Good God man, from my experience doing this in the past few years, I remember 114 being around the low end of D3 NCAA Tournament teams.  I don't have all my data in front of me, and this was never intended to be a statement of fact, it was just a general observation that I made.

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2011, 10:55:43 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2011, 09:52:53 AM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 05:08:27 PM
A look at efficiency,  numbers are points scored per 100 posessions.


Offense
Hope     114.3
Calvin    107.5
Trine      106.4
Olivet    103.8
Albion    101.8
Alma      96.2
Kzoo      93.1
Adrian    91.8

Hope is the only team that has performed at what I might call a high offensive efficiency.  That number is probably on the low end of avg. for most NCAA teams.

Average is actually pretty close to 100.

Looking at Ken Pomeroy's Division I offensive efficiency numbers (his are "adjusted", but let's assume similar magnitudes), Hope's 14.3 is the same as Marquette, and they rank 23rd in that category.

Good God man, from my experience doing this in the past few years, I remember 114 being around the low end of D3 NCAA Tournament teams.  I don't have all my data in front of me, and this was never intended to be a statement of fact, it was just a general observation that I made.

If you actually meant "average for NCAA tournament teams" when you said "average for NCAA teams", then your disagreement with KnightSlappy disappears...

This is a D3 board, no?

I was thinking this morning how both Hope and Calvin are without the guys they would try to get the ball in the hands of at the end of last years games.  John Mantel, Matt Veltema for Calvin and Peter Bunn for Hope(actually maybe even the last 2 years).  Even Andy Venema is probably out and he hit some big FT's in Holland last year.


Should the game be close at the end, it will be interesting to watch who both teams feel confident to handle the ball and take the key shots down the stretch.

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2011, 11:44:04 AM
This is a D3 board, no?

Yes. I didn't understand your statement to mean tournament teams. If that was the case, then you may be right about 114 being around average. Tournament teams are likely much more efficient than the population of D3 in general. I assumed general population.

I mentioned the D1 numbers, because they're readily available. I would guess the numbers aren't much different between the divisions.

Quote from: sac on January 04, 2011, 10:55:43 AM

Quote from: KnightSlappy on January 04, 2011, 09:52:53 AM

Quote from: sac on January 03, 2011, 05:08:27 PM
A look at efficiency,  numbers are points scored per 100 posessions.


Offense
Hope     114.3
Calvin    107.5
Trine      106.4
Olivet    103.8
Albion    101.8
Alma      96.2
Kzoo      93.1
Adrian    91.8

Hope is the only team that has performed at what I might call a high offensive efficiency.  That number is probably on the low end of avg. for most NCAA teams.

Average is actually pretty close to 100.

Looking at Ken Pomeroy's Division I offensive efficiency numbers (his are "adjusted", but let's assume similar magnitudes), Hope's 14.3 is the same as Marquette, and they rank 23rd in that category.

Good God man, from my experience doing this in the past few years, I remember 114 being around the low end of D3 NCAA Tournament teams.  I don't have all my data in front of me, and this was never intended to be a statement of fact, it was just a general observation that I made.

PLEASE

Since the Detroit Tigers have come up as an occasional topic, I thought this might be of interest to some people around here: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Georgia-Peachbasket-Cobb-s-great-grandson-plays;_ylt=AjME.IX.ElQAqjgJgjvs2jmpu7YF?urn=mlb-302943

Fully realizing this is a d3 board, I should also post this link to validate this post's relevance: http://www.oxyathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/bios/TyCobb

Quote from: ziggy on January 04, 2011, 12:35:50 PM
Since the Detroit Tigers have come up as an occasional topic, I thought this might be of interest to some people around here: http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Georgia-Peachbasket-Cobb-s-great-grandson-plays;_ylt=AjME.IX.ElQAqjgJgjvs2jmpu7YF?urn=mlb-302943

Fully realizing this is a d3 board, I should also post this link to validate this post's relevance: http://www.oxyathletics.com/sports/mbkb/2010-11/bios/TyCobb

#40? I understand that they probably can't allow you to be numberless, but you can at least try to get 0 or 00. Come on man!