Posters' Poll

[frodotwo]

Williams doesn't have the strongest schedule in D3, but I also think it's unfair to brand their schedule as weak.  I know Massey doesn't smile upon the New England teams but Massey in my view has often severely underrated New England teams relative to their performance in the post-season.  Perhaps I am wrong, but I am just guessing, for example, that Amherst wasn't ranked first for most of last year ... computer ratings in D3 hoops are not irrelevant, but they also aren't all-relevant -- if they were, why even bother to have a D3hoops Top 25, and just post computer rankings instead? 

And I think it's ridiculous to have the Ephs totally unranked, as one voter did.  The Ephs have essentially not had a healthy top five guys for the entire season, yet they are 17-3 and have a proven record of success, including a very narrow loss in the Elie 8 last year following an impressive tourney run.  They just beat a very solid Stevens team on the road down two starters for almost the entire game.  They have lost to one team they should not have, but that was a one point loss in the first game of the season played under really strange conditions.  Their only other two losses are to a top-10 Amherst squad.  They've handed a top-20 Bowdoin team one of its only two losses.  They have solid road wins at Hampden-Sydney and at Midd (two teams who are a bit down, but still very talented squads which are tough outs at home).  They beat a very good Springfield team which has been a top-40 caliber team all year.  They have a few other solid wins vs. NESCAC teams, most notably Colby and Wesleyan.  And the Ephs have loads of talent -- including the best freshman in the country in Duncan Robinson, who gets better and better each week, an all-American caliber center who is just now playing his way into shape following illness and injury, and several other top-notch players. 

I will grant that the Ephs have not played like the top-5 team that I thought they would be heading into the season.  But they have most certainly played like a top-20 team, and I think that once they get a few guys back from injury, they have as much talent as anyone outside of Stevens Point. 

Ultimately, I think Williams deserves to be in the 10-12 range right now, as most voters seems to have them.  I do think the team has potential for a lot more, depending on how fast injured guys can return.

OK, Williams' schedule has improved over the last several games, but the first 10 or so had been pretty weak. There is no denying that the top NESCAC teams have done very well the past several years as Amherst/Midd/Williams are certainly part of the D3 elite year in and year out. Sorry, but just not real impressed with Bowdoin yet, who other than beating Babson at home early in the year, have not beaten anyone of note. 

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

And you never know what other factors will affect things either.  Coming into the year, I thought Williams and St. Mary's were returning the two best rosters in the country.  Clearly neither has played to that level.  Chemistry, conditioning, circumstances all factor into what's expected and what's delivered.

I also happen to think we've got a strange occurrence with the CAC being so good this year.  Wesley and Mary Washington have the gaudy records, St. Mary's has the talent and experience - even Christopher Newport and Marymount have put up some good wins, and I got to see Salisbury play in the Hoopsville tournament.  They're full of freshmen, so erratic results make sense, but I suspect, talent-wise, they're a Top 40 team nationally and they're sitting 6th in the conference with a losing record and 10-10 overall.  We may have questions about the top teams, but there's no conference in the country whose 4th, 5th, and 6th best teams are as good as the CAC.

Having this talent in the Mid-Atlantic is just not normal.  It throws off our perceptions of all the other schools in the region and no one is really sure exactly who is good and who isn't.  I expect the Mid-Atlantic to have three or four good teams and not much else; it's all over the map this year.  It's tough to navigate my preconceptions and historical biases with what I see.  Add in the relatively low cross-regional overlap and it's a total crap shoot.

We all had Point #1, pretty solidly, but I don't think even their most ardent UWSP supporter would call that a "championship team" by any traditional measure.  We've just got a nation of flawed teams this year.  To use an awkward double negative, there's nothing I've seen to indicate a healthy Cabrini can't win the title, but when I look at them actually playing, my mind immediately says, "that's a #15 team out there."

Maybe the numbers will prove correct this year, because I just don't think human reasoning is going to figure anything out.

[mwcsid]

I also happen to think we've got a strange occurrence with the CAC being so good this year.  Wesley and Mary Washington have the gaudy records, St. Mary's has the talent and experience - even Christopher Newport and Marymount have put up some good wins, and I got to see Salisbury play in the Hoopsville tournament.  They're full of freshmen, so erratic results make sense, but I suspect, talent-wise, they're a Top 40 team nationally and they're sitting 6th in the conference with a losing record and 10-10 overall.  We may have questions about the top teams, but there's no conference in the country whose 4th, 5th, and 6th best teams are as good as the CAC.

LIKE. UMW 67, at St. Mary's 61 tonight. I agree, the top six in the CAC very strong, very well said.

[smedindy]

  I know Massey doesn't smile upon the New England teams but Massey in my view has often severely underrated New England teams relative to their performance in the post-season. 

of course, you must admit there's an awful lot of dross on the NE region, which affects SOS and power rankings a bit since teams play a lot of interlocking schedules.

Williams' SOS in Massey is 72, which isn't bad by any means. Upper quartile even. I think there are a lot of people who tend to be provincial on schedules and not understand the entire D3 universe.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

  I know Massey doesn't smile upon the New England teams but Massey in my view has often severely underrated New England teams relative to their performance in the post-season. 

of course, you must admit there's an awful lot of dross on the NE region, which affects SOS and power rankings a bit since teams play a lot of interlocking schedules.

Williams' SOS in Massey is 72, which isn't bad by any means. Upper quartile even. I think there are a lot of people who tend to be provincial on schedules and not understand the entire D3 universe.

You also get thrown off by the non-d3 opponents that are more prevalent in the Midwest.  If the WIAC and CCIW schools are playing NAIA-1 and D1 and D2 opponents, that drastically improves strength of schedule (Not a MW school, but Wilmington is way higher than they should be because of a win over a D1 program.)

With the plethora of terrible teams in the NE, you're just going to get watered down SOS numbers - even if you avoid playing the worst teams, the teams you play can't always do the same.

We're just not going to get super accurate computer rankings without more cross-region play.  I doubt that will really happen (nor should it).

Plus the NorthEast region is way down this year talent-wise, relative to the rest of the country.  It's a down year overall, but even more so in the NE.

[smedindy]

  I know Massey doesn't smile upon the New England teams but Massey in my view has often severely underrated New England teams relative to their performance in the post-season. 

of course, you must admit there's an awful lot of dross on the NE region, which affects SOS and power rankings a bit since teams play a lot of interlocking schedules.

Williams' SOS in Massey is 72, which isn't bad by any means. Upper quartile even. I think there are a lot of people who tend to be provincial on schedules and not understand the entire D3 universe.

You also get thrown off by the non-d3 opponents that are more prevalent in the Midwest.  If the WIAC and CCIW schools are playing NAIA-1 and D1 and D2 opponents, that drastically improves strength of schedule (Not a MW school, but Wilmington is way higher than they should be because of a win over a D1 program.)

With the plethora of terrible teams in the NE, you're just going to get watered down SOS numbers - even if you avoid playing the worst teams, the teams you play can't always do the same.

We're just not going to get super accurate computer rankings without more cross-region play.  I doubt that will really happen (nor should it).

Plus the NorthEast region is way down this year talent-wise, relative to the rest of the country.  It's a down year overall, but even more so in the NE.

I don't think the CCIW or WIAC are playing a plethora of D-1 and D-2 schools. A handful, maybe, at most, but not enough to tip the ratings scale that much. It seems that a lot of teams in the South play more upper level teams because of the lack of teams in D3 down there.

And shouldn't Wilma get credit for beating Miami? They haven't really lost any clinkers except for Transylvania (which is down for whatever reason) and almost bested Marietta last time out.

[John Gleich]

We all had Point #1, pretty solidly, but I don't think even their most ardent UWSP supporter would call that a "championship team" by any traditional measure. 

Ardent UWSP supporter I am and ardently disagree with this statement I do!

We've just got a nation of flawed teams this year.

Just like every other year.

We haven't had an undefeated National Champion since Platteville in '97-98. And even though they went 30-0 (and had an average margin of victory of 22.2 per game, won all but 5 of their games by double digits) they weren't without weakness. No team is, no matter how good they can look at times.

Since the the '01-02 season (as far back as the top 25 archives currently go) there have only been 3 seasons where the preseason #1 ended up as the National Champion (UWSP in 2005, Wash U in 2008 and 2009). UWSP was the closest at being ranked from start to finish (Wash U was knocked out of the top spot before the first reg season poll and achieved the top spot just once before the final poll in 07-08 and got knocked out of the top spot after week 3 in 08-09, not to return until after Salem). Other teams that have come close to leading from start to finish (Carthage in 01-02, Wash U in 02-03) didn't finish the job.

I just don't think human reasoning is going to figure anything out.

To quote theologian and Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias:

"God has put enough into this world to make faith in him a most reasonable thing. But he has left enough out to make it impossible to live by reason alone."

He's talking about the Christian faith, but this is transferable to our beliefs about certain basketball teams as well.

The evidence from the past can only take us so far. It can make "belief" in the quality, talent, and veracity in a team a most reasonable thing. But in the end, we must take the final step of faith, in believing that a team is, indeed, of the quality that we ascribe to them by ranking them in a certain spot.

[7express]

Looks like another week with the poll's being a mess.
WPI loses at home to Emerson, Wesley loses at 4-16 York, Virginia Wesleyan & St. Mary's both suffer home losses (though St. Mary's was to a top 12 opponent), Wittenberg a team that had dropped out of almost every person's poll wins @ Ohio Wesleyan who has been steading climbing.  AMC gives up 104 points to Anna Maria and narrowly advances with a win.  And this is all before Saturday!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

We all had Point #1, pretty solidly, but I don't think even their most ardent UWSP supporter would call that a "championship team" by any traditional measure. 

Ardent UWSP supporter I am and ardently disagree with this statement I do!

You're saying, if you looked at this team in complete isolation, without knowing anything about any of the other squads out there, you'd say, "this is a team likely to win a championship?"

I'm fine if you do say that, but I'd be surprised.  Whoever wins this year is going to go down as among the weakest champions of the last decade.  I just don't see any team out there I'd like to even make a Final Four in most other years.

[smedindy]

Or, conversely, there's more parity and that makes the strongest teams look 'weaker' by comparison because they aren't throttling the mid-pack teams.

[madzillagd]

Whoever wins this year is going to go down as among the weakest champions of the last decade.  I just don't see any team out there I'd like to even make a Final Four in most other years.

I think that's painting with a pretty broad brush.  I know a few of the Williams supporters that have been around awhile were saying this is the most talented team at Williams in many years if not ever in their time following the team.  But, as often happens Williams has been hit with injuries that have knocked key players out for long stretches.  Their AA center Mayer missed 5 games and has been playing his way back into shape, the starting PG Rooke-Ley has missed the last 5 games and is still out, now the other AA player Epley is out with an injury and will likely miss several games, Wohl has been playing hurt all year.  It will be interesting to see if tonight they actually start all 3 of the freshmen on their roster.  With all that being said they are still 17-3 on the year and if they were to get everyone back and make a deep run, I would not think of them as a weak team at all. 

That's just one example, I think the IWU year has been very similar as well - a team with a lot of talent that has gone through some ups and downs that I wouldn't consider a 'weak' team if they are able to pull it all together for a tournament run. 

[sac]

I bet if we looked around and compared to past seasons, more of the top teams are playing more games against the top teams.

As an example
Wheaton v Wooster
Wheaton v Wittenberg

Doesn't happen in past seasons.

[John Gleich]

We all had Point #1, pretty solidly, but I don't think even their most ardent UWSP supporter would call that a "championship team" by any traditional measure. 

Ardent UWSP supporter I am and ardently disagree with this statement I do!

You're saying, if you looked at this team in complete isolation, without knowing anything about any of the other squads out there, you'd say, "this is a team likely to win a championship?"

I'm fine if you do say that, but I'd be surprised.  Whoever wins this year is going to go down as among the weakest champions of the last decade.  I just don't see any team out there I'd like to even make a Final Four in most other years.

It's impossible to look at any team in complete isolation.  All teams (and our perception of them) are based on the results of who they've played.

I mean, if you really want isolation, just go back and look at the preseason poll. It won't ultimately be completely helpful, though, because those teams are a mashup of past success and perceived potential. But that potential isn't always ultimately realized.


I don't get how isolation helps though. You're comparing (potential) champions to past champions. Doesn't that necessitate comparison, instead of isolation?


And what are you looking to compare, ultimately? A team's high when they're playing their best? How they're playing when they're at their lowest? Their general consistency over time?

Every team has ups and downs.


Personally, I think this Stevens Point team is better than the 2010 version that brought home the Walnut and Bronze.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

We all had Point #1, pretty solidly, but I don't think even their most ardent UWSP supporter would call that a "championship team" by any traditional measure. 

Ardent UWSP supporter I am and ardently disagree with this statement I do!

You're saying, if you looked at this team in complete isolation, without knowing anything about any of the other squads out there, you'd say, "this is a team likely to win a championship?"

I'm fine if you do say that, but I'd be surprised.  Whoever wins this year is going to go down as among the weakest champions of the last decade.  I just don't see any team out there I'd like to even make a Final Four in most other years.

It's impossible to look at any team in complete isolation.  All teams (and our perception of them) are based on the results of who they've played.

I mean, if you really want isolation, just go back and look at the preseason poll. It won't ultimately be completely helpful, though, because those teams are a mashup of past success and perceived potential. But that potential isn't always ultimately realized.


I don't get how isolation helps though. You're comparing (potential) champions to past champions. Doesn't that necessitate comparison, instead of isolation?


And what are you looking to compare, ultimately? A team's high when they're playing their best? How they're playing when they're at their lowest? Their general consistency over time?

Every team has ups and downs.


Personally, I think this Stevens Point team is better than the 2010 version that brought home the Walnut and Bronze.

I'm not going to argue.  You would know better than me.

[madzillagd]

I'm not going to argue. 

Is that allowed?