Top 25 talk

[Mr. Ypsi]

Augie falls at home to Carthage, 65-58.  Whitworth may be the unanimous #1!  (Unless someone sticks in a NESCAC vote.)

[nescac1]

Pretty amazing that Whitworth will be, potentially, a unanimous number one with basically a six, at most seven, guy rotation.  As good as their top six players are, you definitely need some depth / bench contributions in back-to-back situations in the tournament, and they could be in big trouble in the event of foul trouble, injuries, etc., when they play against deeper teams come NCAA time.  It seems like their starting five can beat any other starting five, but I think they could be a prime upset candidate, especially if they have to play a WIAC team (and Stevens Point's scoring margins have been downright scary of late, crazy to think how good they would be had Jenkins played).  

It is hard to put Steven Point at number one with three losses, but I'd bet they would easily rank first in a coach's poll of "who I don't want to play right now or in the tourney."  As a Williams fan, I have seen more then enough of them to last a lifetime, certainly!    

If Amherst sweeps Midd and Williams next weekend on the road, as much as I hate to say it, I think they deserve to leapfrog Whitworth and move to number one, with three wins over top-ten teams.  If Williams can win its next two, including a convincing win over Amherst, I'd say they are deserving as well, considering their only loss came in OT, on the road, against a top-five team, and without their best player.  Hard to know just how good Whitworth is when they haven't beaten anyone in the current top 30, and where their signature win over Carthage is a lot less impressive than it seemed at the time.    If Amherst loses to Midd but beats Williams, then and only then should, in my view Whitworth hang on by default -- undefeated is, after all, undefeated.  

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

[Ralph Turner]

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

[John Gleich]

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are?  When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

[KnightSlappy]

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are?  When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

• By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

• By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

[sac]

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are?  When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

• By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

• By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

5th in the South? or nationally?

[KnightSlappy]

One other thing: I noticed that Birmingham-Southern is receiving no love in either regional rankings or the Top 25 despite a gaudy record ... are then ineligible or something?  Because it seems like, after this week certainly, they deserve to be ranked over Centre ...

Birmingham-Southern is in Year #4 of its move to full member. They shall be eligible for NCAA playoffs in 2011-12.

Anybody know how good (or not good) they really are?  When they're eligible, will they make a splash in their first year?

Here's what I have on Birmingham-Southern (in-region games):

WP: 0.9383
SOS: 0.417
versus regionally ranked: 0-1

• By RPI they'd be 14th in the south.

• By using a convoluted formula that I created last week that matched the NCAA's rankings relatively well, they'd be ranked 5th.

5th in the South? or nationally?

South, sorry.

[Darryl Nester]

How They Fared--Complete

In case you want to get caught up on what happened in the world of D3 Hoops before heading off to that Ronald Reagan Centennial party ...

Top 25

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#1	620	Wooster	20-1	def. Hiram, 70-64; LOST to #15 Wabash, 68-69
#2	589	Whitworth	21-0	def. Puget Sound, 89-76; def. Pacific Lutheran, 85-59
#3	573	Augustana	20-1	def. North Park, 76-66; LOST to Carthage, 58-65
#4	540	Williams	21-1	def. Bowdoin, 85-66; def. Colby, 79-50
#5	509	Amherst	20-0	02/01 at Rhode Island College postponed; def. Tufts, 96-77; def. Bates, 74-68
#6	489	Virginia Wesleyan	19-1	def. Roanoke, 92-60
#7	471	St. Thomas	18-2	LOST to St. Olaf, 68-73; def. St. Mary's (Minn.), 75-66
#8	467	Middlebury	18-1	def. Colby, 73-52; def. Bowdoin, 74-59
#9	443	UW-River Falls	19-3	def. UW-Eau Claire, 76-70; LOST to UW-Whitewater, 66-70
#10	400	UW-Stevens Point	18-3	def. UW-Stout, 101-50
#11	352	Randolph-Macon	19-3	def. Christopher Newport, 67-49; def. Washington and Lee, 72-41
#12	341	St. Norbert	16-4	def. Monmouth, 62-42; LOST at Grinnell, 65-79
#13	314	WPI	18-3	def. Wheaton (Mass.), 78-46
#14	305	Western Connecticut	19-2	def. Connecticut College, 71-66; def. Plymouth State, 87-69
#15	290	Wabash	17-4	LOST at Denison, 62-65; def. #1 Wooster, 69-68
#16	236	St. Mary's (Md.)	18-4	def. Hood, 71-67; def. York (Pa.), 82-75; def. Marymount, 82-52
#17	190	Centre	15-4	LOST to DePauw, 63-65
#18	171	Eastern Mennonite	16-4	def. Lynchburg, 88-79; def. T#39 Randolph, 85-50
#19	150	Ferrum	19-2	def. Greensboro, 78-67
#20	123	Marietta	19-2	def. Wilmington, 76-70; def. Ohio Northern, 68-58
#21	119	Chapman	18-3	def. La Sierra, 86-64
#22	112	Franklin and Marshall	17-4	def. Ursinus, 69-61; def. Muhlenberg, 80-73
#23	81	Ramapo	17-4	def. Montclair State, 78-68
#24	71	Illinois Wesleyan	15-5	def. Elmhurst, 72-68
#25	29	Wittenberg	15-5	02/04 vs. Kenyon canceled (see note below); def. Allegheny, 90-60

Others receiving votes

Rank	Pts	Team	W-L	Results
#26	24	Rochester	16-4	def. New York University, 78-70; def. Brandeis, 77-57
T#27	20	Becker	17-3	def. Wheelock, 72-70
T#27	20	Ithaca	15-5	LOST to Utica, 89-94
#29	19	Anderson	14-6	LOST to Franklin, 91-94
#30	11	Concordia (Wis.)	17-3	IDLE
T#31	8	Lewis and Clark	15-6	def. Linfield, 86-71; LOST at George Fox, 70-71
T#31	8	Manchester	15-6	def. Defiance, 72-64; def. Rose-Hulman, 67-59
T#31	8	Mary Hardin-Baylor	17-4	def. Howard Payne, 115-69; def. Sul Ross State, 75-70
#34	7	Emory	16-4	def. Brandeis, 85-70; def. New York University, 93-85
T#35	3	North Carolina Wesleyan	15-6	def. Christopher Newport, 70-68
T#35	3	Penn State-Behrend	18-2	def. D'Youville, 57-39; def. Pitt-Greensburg, 67-65
T#37	2	Hope	16-5	def. Trine, 81-64; def. Alma, 85-71
T#37	2	Oswego State	16-3	def. Oneonta State, 81-70; def. Cortland State, 69-53
T#39	1	Elizabethtown	16-4	LOST to Messiah, 62-66; def. Albright, 84-82
T#39	1	Randolph	15-6	def. Washington and Lee, 68-60; def. Johnson & Wales (NC), 67-45; LOST at #18 Eastern Mennonite, 50-85

The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played.  It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record.  Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."
...
The game was scheduled according to conference rules, and Kenyon chose not to play it.  Thus it goes down as a 2-0 victory for Wittenberg on the conference books.  

(italicized portion of above quote restored Monday morning for clarity.)

[nwhoops1903]

Pretty amazing that Whitworth will be, potentially, a unanimous number one with basically a six, at most seven, guy rotation.  As good as their top six players are, you definitely need some depth / bench contributions in back-to-back situations in the tournament, and they could be in big trouble in the event of foul trouble, injuries, etc., when they play against deeper teams come NCAA time.  It seems like their starting five can beat any other starting five, but I think they could be a prime upset candidate, especially if they have to play a WIAC team (and Stevens Point's scoring margins have been downright scary of late, crazy to think how good they would be had Jenkins played).  

Whitworth has a demanding conditioning routine so stamina is not an issue outside of a 90+ point trackmeet on back to back games.  After the first 6, at least 4 guys have assignments they are prepared for and capable of accomplishing in the event they are needed.  Just because they don't play 15+ minutes in a game doesn't mean they aren't there.  The next 6 play about 100 minutes a week against the best first 6 in D3.

If Amherst sweeps Midd and Williams next weekend on the road, as much as I hate to say it, I think they deserve to leapfrog Whitworth and move to number one, with three wins over top-ten teams.  If Williams can win its next two, including a convincing win over Amherst, I'd say they are deserving as well, considering their only loss came in OT, on the road, against a top-five team, and without their best player.  Hard to know just how good Whitworth is when they haven't beaten anyone in the current top 30, and where their signature win over Carthage is a lot less impressive than it seemed at the time.    If Amherst loses to Midd but beats Williams, then and only then should, in my view Whitworth hang on by default -- undefeated is, after all, undefeated.  

I smell something iffy?     If Amherst goes 3-0 in the next 2 weeks, we can debate if they deserve the #1.  Not gonna happen!  WW will then be the only undefeated team left and  "undefeated is, after all, undefeated."

[David Collinge]

Darryl, Wittenberg is 14-5, not 15-5.  They do not get credit for a victory over Kenyon in their overall record.  In the eyes of the NCAA, that game never took place and had no result (which is, in fact, what happened, or didn't happen.)  Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."

(See my earlier post:

Darryl, I'm not sure how your program is going to handle this.  The Wittenberg/Kenyon game, scheduled for 2/2, postponed until 2/3, and then re-scheduled for 2/4, has been canceled and (evidently) will not be played.  It does not go down as either a win or loss for Wittenberg, just a non-game for purposes of their overall record (they do get credit for the victory from the standpoint of the league's seeding for the conference tournament, since Kenyon was responsible for the cancellation.)

emphasis added.)

[Darryl Nester]

Darryl, Wittenberg is 14-5, not 15-5.  They do not get credit for a victory over Kenyon in their overall record.  In the eyes of the NCAA, that game never took place and had no result (which is, in fact, what happened, or didn't happen.)  Witt did get credit in their conference record for a victory, making them 10-1, but from an NCAA perspective, the game was not a forfeit, it was a "no contest."

I was going to edit my post to correct for this, and then point out that Witt's page at d3hoops.com has them at 15-5 (which is where my program got the information).  Then I decided to double-check their record and found that they ARE 15-5.  Their basketball front page (which you linked to) has them at 14-5, but they are correctly listed at 15-5 on the schedule following their win over Allegheny.

(I did, however, edit the report to restore the portion of your earlier quote that I had removed, since it specifically notes the NCAA's view of the game.)

[David Collinge]

That's what I get for having faith in Witt's website.    You're right, they're 15-5, and that does not include a result for the Kenyon anti-game.  I've scratched my head so many times over this craziness that I have some gray matter under my fingernails.

[nescac1]

NWHoops1903, I don't care how good your starting five is (unless it is WORLDS better than other starting fives, which probably isn't the case for anyone in the top ten), you need substantial production from the bench at some points late in the tourney, and it seems like that could be Whitworth's undoing.  I can't think of any National Champion in recent years that didn't have several starter-caliber reserves, could be wrong and most, at least, have been really deep.  (The closest counter-example is the first Wash U. title team, but that team had three all-American starters, and while its bench didn't play a ton, the guys who did play were very talented players that showed could step up when needed and several would later start for some very strong Wash U. teams). 

Williams last year had a tremendous top seven, but really, only went seven deep, and that was ultimately what hurt them against a really deep Steven Point team when Stevens Point took control in the second half.   You could just see the Ephs run out of just a TINY bit of gas, and that was enough to lose a very tight game against an equally talented, but slightly deeper, team.  

I guarantee the Ephs have just as demanding a conditioning routine as Whitworth, but when you play intense games against elite compeition back-to-back, especially in the Final Four where it is evening then the next day, I don't care how conditioned you are, you can't play 37-40 minutes at an intense / effective level for both games in less than 20 hours in that climate.  And that is what it SEEMS like Whitworth asks of its top 4-5 guys in close games.  And of course, if you get into foul trouble, then that becomes an even bigger problem.  

Obviously, we'll see what happens come tourney time, but I really do think it is hard to win five or six straight against top tier teams with essentially a seven man rotation where the seventh guy doesn't play much, and scores only 2.4 ppg, and I'm surprised given how many blow-outs it has had that Whitworth hasn't managed to establsih  a deeper rotation.  

[nwhoops1903]

NWHoops1903, I don't care how good your starting five is (unless it is WORLDS better than other starting fives, which probably isn't the case for anyone in the top ten), you need substantial production from the bench at some points late in the tourney, and it seems like that could be Whitworth's undoing.  I can't think of any National Champion in recent years that didn't have several starter-caliber reserves, could be wrong and most, at least, have been really deep.  (The closest counter-example is the first Wash U. title team, but that team had three all-American starters, and while its bench didn't play a ton, the guys who did play were very talented players that showed could step up when needed and several would later start for some very strong Wash U. teams). 

Williams last year had a tremendous top seven, but really, only went seven deep, and that was ultimately what hurt them against a really deep Steven Point team when Stevens Point took control in the second half.   You could just see the Ephs run out of just a TINY bit of gas, and that was enough to lose a very tight game against an equally talented, but slightly deeper, team.  

I guarantee the Ephs have just as demanding a conditioning routine as Whitworth, but when you play intense games against elite compeition back-to-back, especially in the Final Four where it is evening then the next day, I don't care how conditioned you are, you can't play 37-40 minutes at an intense / effective level for both games in less than 20 hours in that climate.  And that is what it SEEMS like Whitworth asks of its top 4-5 guys in close games.  And of course, if you get into foul trouble, then that becomes an even bigger problem.  

Obviously, we'll see what happens come tourney time, but I really do think it is hard to win five or six straight against top tier teams with essentially a seven man rotation where the seventh guy doesn't play much, and scores only 2.4 ppg, and I'm surprised given how many blow-outs it has had that Whitworth hasn't managed to establsih  a deeper rotation.  

I am wondering, since this is the top 25 board, if you are suggesting Whitworth shouldn't be #1 because of their depth?  Depth ALWAYS plays out in the tournament, no question.  Will Whitworth win the tournament?  That might be a question for a different board or a later post.

Are voters voting who is #1 to date or as nescac1 might be suggesting, who they feel is most likely to win the Championship?

[nescac1]

I just felt like this is a good place to discuss relative prospects of elite teams nationally, if this is the wrong place, then apologies! 

I think number one is a toss-up right now between Whitworth, Amherst and Williams, even though I am skeptical of Whitworth, as all three have one signature wins (although Amherst and Williams hae much better signature wins).  But I think if Amherst and Williams don't lose again before Saturday, I'd put the winner of that game at number one and Whitworth at two. 

If I were saying who is most likely to win the tournament, that would have to be Stevens Point -- just dominating lately in the best conference in D-3, defending champs, tons of talent and depth, play killer defense, plenty of big game experience, etc.   I'd probably put Whitworth somewhere around sixth or seventh in terms of odds of winning, even though they've earned a higher ranking than that ... I'm just a bit skeptical because of the lack of competition they face, but as one of the few remaining undefeateds, and clearly a very talented team, they've earned their ranking, I don't begrudge them that.