Top 25 talk

[Ralph Turner]

My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four!  Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team.  The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team.  I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer.  I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

[Gregory Sager]

It's a big step forward for Cabrini, but I don't know if I'd characterize it as a quantum leap forward. Remember, the Cavaliers made the Sweet Sixteen last season. (They also made the Sweet Sixteen back in 2002.)

[Knightstalker]

My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four!  Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team.  The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team.  I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer.  I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

I agree with the bolded statement from Ralph, the NJAC has not done as well in the tournament since they moved to the 2 division format and don't play every conference team twice a season.  The NJAC regular season used to be a meat grinder and most NJAC teams were a tough out in the NCAA tournament.

[Hugenerd]

Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it.  If you look at the final score in isolation, yep.  If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter?  Did it help them win the game?  Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game.  And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes.  I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were.  What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game.  Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half?  Did that matter?  They still ended up losing.  I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

My thought about Cabrini is that they have now been to the Final Four!  Next year, they will have that experience and the 'wow" may be gone.

I will give UWW the credit that a WIAC season builds into a team.  The murderers' row that is a WIAC schedule really tests a team.  I submit to you that Cabrini has now been "baptized". They know what to expect and will more diligent.

Can you imagine what watching those last 14 minutes of video on October 15, 2012, does for Cabrini practices next season?

You always hate to predict dynasties, but Cabrini is in good shape to build one.

I am now a believer.  I had never voted them higher than 10th in the Posters' Poll.

They are losing two key starters next year (Lemons and Boyd).  It will be interesting who fits into those roles next year.

[Ralph Turner]

I would think that Cabrini is getting to the position that they just re-load.

They are becoming the best D3 program in the mid-Atlantic.

As they say, winning cures cancer, even the cancer that may be lurking from a difficult relationship between the past Cabrini "baggage" and the associated parties and the new national semi-finalist, comprised of a whole new cast of characters.

[Pat Coleman]

It's a little early to anoint reload status. It's two trips to the tournament, with a lot of the same cast.

[r.w. mcnickels]

It's a big step forward for Cabrini, but I don't know if I'd characterize it as a quantum leap forward. Remember, the Cavaliers made the Sweet Sixteen last season. (They also made the Sweet Sixteen back in 2002.)

The Cavs also had two stellar years in 1994-95 and 1995-96. I think they were knocked out in the second round of NCAAs both years, but were good enough to go deeper. Cabrini does have some good history, and for the sake of Mid-Atlantic hoops, I hope the program continues on this upward trend.

They are becoming the best D3 program in the mid-Atlantic.

I think F&M would have to be in the discussion as well, considering the Dips' NCAA runs of the past 4 years and overall success since the '70s.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I tend to give greater weight to tourney games, but do not discount regular season either.  But occasionally posters surface who give ALL the weight to tourney games, saying FF should be 1-4, Elite Eight should be 5-8, etc.  While the NCAA seems to have corrected a bit in recent years, do NOT forget 2009, the true 'bracket of death'!

7 of the top 8 d3hoops.com poll teams were in the west quadrant (and, though I didn't confirm it for sure, I believe there were at least 4-5 other top 25 teams in that quadrant).  In the first round, poll positions prevailed, so the second round saw #1 St. Thomas ousting #4 UWSP, #2 WashU ousting #8 UWW, #3 Wheaton over #5 UW-Platteville, and #7 Puget Sound downing #21 Whitworth.  The West sectional thus consisted of #1, #2, #3, and #7!

This was MUCH tougher than the Final Four, which saw WashU taking the title over #6 Richard Stockton (with them having beaten #23 Guilford and #28 F & M).

Most results happen on the floor; SOME happen with the schedulers!

(BTW, the d3hoops.com voters recognized this.  The final poll for 2009 had WashU #1, Richard Stockton #5, Guilford #8, and F & M #11.)

[rlk]

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate).  I believe they scored only 54 points until then.  I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%).  And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates.  He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

[Gregory Sager]

Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it.  If you look at the final score in isolation, yep.  If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter?  Did it help them win the game?  Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game.  And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes.  I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were.  What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game.  Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half?  Did that matter?  They still ended up losing.  I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

You're missing the point, Hugenerd. Your second question, "Did it help them win the game?", is not germane to this discussion. My definition of "matter" is predicated upon the initial premise of this conversation. What we're discussing here, as indicated by the quote-nesting above, is D-Mac's original comment:

Cabrini came damn close...

After rlk cast aspersions upon that statement of D-Mac's by insinuating that the first 25 minutes didn't really matter, I corrected him. It did really matter, because it explains why D-Mac is right ... Cabrini did come damned close to winning the game. After all, is anybody disputing that? Because that's what this argument is all about, not whether or not the last 14 minutes were more important than the first 26 minutes.

[Hugenerd]

Cabrini came damn close...

Depends on how you look at it.  If you look at the final score in isolation, yep.  If you look at crunch time -- the final 15 minutes of the game -- they got blown off the court when it really mattered.

Cabrini had an 18-point lead with the clock under 14 minutes remaining in the game. Are you seriously telling me that those initial 26 minutes didn't really matter?

What is your argument that it did matter?  Did it help them win the game?  Whether they were up by 18 or 1 point at the 14 minute mark, they still lost the game.  And since the final score is the only thing that matters in any sport, their first 26 minutes didnt matter enough to make up for their last 14 minutes.  I am not arguing that they are or are not the #2 team in the country for this year, thats fine with me, they deserved to be where they were.  What I was saying is that an 18 point lead at any point doesnt matter if you get outscored by more than that in the rest of the game.  Did you watch the D1 game where Iona was beating BYU by 25 in the first half?  Did that matter?  They still ended up losing.  I guess you may have a different definition of 'matter', but in terms of the final result of the game: No, the first 26 minutes did not matter.

You're missing the point, Hugenerd. Your second question, "Did it help them win the game?", is not germane to this discussion. My definition of "matter" is predicated upon the initial premise of this conversation. What we're discussing here, as indicated by the quote-nesting above, is D-Mac's original comment:

Cabrini came damn close...

After rlk cast aspersions upon that statement of D-Mac's by insinuating that the first 25 minutes didn't really matter, I corrected him. It did really matter, because it explains why D-Mac is right ... Cabrini did come damned close to winning the game. After all, is anybody disputing that? Because that's what this argument is all about, not whether or not the last 14 minutes were more important than the first 26 minutes.

I guess we were arguing about different comments, because my response was based on the assumption that you were responding to my original post on this topic, which, in a nutshell, stated that both Cabrini and MIT were buried by UWW with big 2nd half runs (against MIT it was  earlier in the half, and against Cabrini it was to close out the game). Prior to those runs, both teams were winning (I know Cabrini led by more), but what they did up to that point didn't really matter because they both ended up losing: a loss is a loss ( I  don't think there are moral victories in the national championship game). Nobody said Cabrini didn't play a close game, they just aren't a championship team because they lost...

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate).  I believe they scored only 54 points until then.  I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%).  And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates.  He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on

[rlk]

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate).  I believe they scored only 54 points until then.  I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%).  And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates.  He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on

She wasn't specific about what aspect she liked more, now that I think about it.  I know she liked the overall broadcast, and she specifically mentioned your point about the MIT D.  So, let's just say kudos to both of you.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I'll take it! Thanks.

[Ralph Turner]

BTW, my wife told me that the video announcers were very impressed with how low we were able to hold Whitewater's scoring total (until the last 4 minutes, of course, when things got desperate).  I believe they scored only 54 points until then.  I don't think our D was too bad (Whitewater's own shooting percentage wasn't very good), but they got entirely too many second chances, and Davis of course was unstoppable (although it's interesting that he actually shot only 50%).  And I do think Dawson had a very nice game indeed spelling Kates.  He fouled out with only 11 minutes, but he got 5 points and zero turnovers, and it looked like a lot of his role was to play very tight defense and accept those fouls.

That was me on the call... and I did make a point of showing how low MIT kept UWW's offense.

And yes, in those 10 minutes, UWW was the better team... but Cabrini got a decent look at a 3 late... and nearly tied the game after all of that.

Oh, forgot to mention...my wife was watching the MIT-UWW video (didn't make the trip with me), and she liked your play-by-play.

I was on color... so if she liked the PBP, that was Scott... so I will pass her comments on

She wasn't specific about what aspect she liked more, now that I think about it.  I know she liked the overall broadcast, and she specifically mentioned your point about the MIT D.  So, let's just say kudos to both of you.

She probably liked your dulcet tones and thought you had a sexy voice.