MBB: Great South Athletic Conference

[Pat Coleman]

The NCAA doesn't do that with conference teams if it can avoid it. Matt, you gotta get out of your little box and look at the rest of Division III, man. Your worldview is extremely skewed.

If it's a non-conference team, all bets are off, they don't really care.

[old_lion]

Old Lion, you want to talk about me having a lack of class.  YOU are the one who keeps bashing stat people. (1) How does that make me the one with NO class?  Explain it to me. 

(2) Also, why would anyone who is not the official stat keeper sit in the stands and keep stats of the game?  Division 1 fans don't even do that.  Is it something you enjoy doing?  Just wondering.

(3) And no, I am not bashing you for doing it so don't get your panties in a wad!

(1) I'll be happy to explain. I just thought that after that great game last night for you to comment, "Great conference season!  It was all because of HC's stat people no doubt!" was sort of arbitrary and classless. Just my opinion ...

You miss my point in bringing up the atrocious stat keeping done at a couple of GSAC schools. It's nothing personal against those guys. For all I know they may be great guys. I'm just pointing out that they are terrible at keeping stats in hopes that it will somehow come to the attention of someone who has the power to do something about it. I don't expect anyone to be perfect. I just wish they'd find someone who can do a reasonable job.

(2) Fair question, there are a couple of reasons ...
*I'm strange. I already admitted I'm a "stats geek". I just enjoy keeping up with what my guys are doing.
*I have an intensity problem, I get pumped at the games. I try to keep myself occupied in hopes that it will help me keep my mouth shut re the officials. It's been only partially successful in that regard.

(3) No offense taken. Or maybe I should say, no panties wadded. 

[mattgrubb]

pat
MC/SCAD was not a conference game
Mississippi/Fisk was not a conference game

Would the tourney like to see a rematch i believe so, pat have you ever listened to one of their calls?

I do have a broadview of DIII, i know where the best ball is and do i follow it, not as much, b/c i am not in that part of the country.
Can i tell you many random facts on DIII, yes.
Yes, my view is skewed, I am a fan and alum of a very competitive DIII program, who is one of the winningest programs of the past 10 years, why wouldn't my view be skewed?   I was a player who dedicated myself to my teammates, my school, and basketball b/c i loved the game, not b/c i was getting paid or a scholarship.  The only national attention we ever got back then was a brand new website with a hardwood floor background called D3hoops.com.  We loved basketball and we loved being fighting scots. 
Can you give me one good reason why my view would not be skewed.

[ohyeah]

The NCAA doesn't do that with conference teams if it can avoid it. Matt, you gotta get out of your little box and look at the rest of Division III, man. Your worldview is extremely skewed.

If it's a non-conference team, all bets are off, they don't really care.

I think you missed Matt's point.  He was saying that the NCAA would love to send Fisk/Maryville up to Mississippi even if Fisk would be a rematch.  I dont think he was saying that MC and FU would play again.  He never said anything about two conference foes facing each other in the 1st round.  Also, I think someone was bringing up this exact point concerning the West with Occidental and others in the Bumblin B's.

[Urban Myth]

IMHO, the evidence clearly shows that there is not enough difference in talent to justify a 3 to 1 difference in representation on the all-GSAC teams.

The games might have been close, but look at conference records.  A 6-win and 5-win team compared to a 2-win team.  I would say the top 2 teams have 3 players (especially since they are co-champions), 2 for 3rd place, then 1 for the 4th and 5th place teams.

And no disrespect, PC is a good team, but HC played without White for the majority of the game (because Kendall shoved him after a box out and caused a double tech to be called), he also had the flu, and Babian got hurt before halftime.  I am not stating that as an excuse though, because you have to play with the cards that are dealt.  HC and MC could have been a completely different weekend had Calloway been playing.

But PC did play good, stats and %'s show that, and it was a tough fought game.  But even without that said, if Lagrange went winless and played each conference game close, only losing by a few points, should they get 2 all conference picks?  I think conference records justify that, so I go back to my first statement about the number of picks based on standings.

And I don't understand how some of you pick Calloway as POY being that he only played half the conference games.  No disrespect, Calloway is a tremendous player, but how can he be player of the year when he only played half the (conference) year?


And Grubby, you may want to reconsider about trying to stay in the girls' dorms, haha.

[Pat Coleman]

Ahh, gotcha. I was thrown off by the use of "MC" since there is an actual MC in this conference, which Matt is associated with. I believed him to be talking about Maryville.

My point still stands.

The NCAA doesn't do that with conference teams if it can avoid it.

If it's a non-conference team, all bets are off, they don't really care.

Matt, my apologies for not reading your mind better. No seriously, and the other stuff too. Glad someone remembers the parquet floor. Stole it from a Celtics fan site.

[old_lion]

IMHO, the evidence clearly shows that there is not enough difference in talent to justify a 3 to 1 difference in representation on the all-GSAC teams.

The games might have been close, but look at conference records.  A 6-win and 5-win team compared to a 2-win team.  I would say the top 2 teams have 3 players (especially since they are co-champions), 2 for 3rd place, then 1 for the 4th and 5th place teams.

I think conference records justify that, so I go back to my first statement about the number of picks based on standings.

And I don't understand how some of you pick Calloway as POY being that he only played half the conference games.  No disrespect, Calloway is a tremendous player, but how can he be player of the year when he only played half the (conference) year?

Urban,

You make some good points. And I wouldn't be surprised if your line of reasoning prevails. But my problem with it is that it seems to place too much weight on 8 conference games and ignores what these guys did the rest of the season.

The most obvious example of what I feel is the fallacy of your line of reasoning ... the POY award. Should Monte be penalized because he hurt his knee and missed the last few games? Or should he be rewarded with the POY award because he was the best player in the GSAC when he was injured. The answer seems obvious to me ... he is POY. But my logic won't fly if only conference games count and we are precluded from considering what these guys accomplished the rest (the majority) of the season.

So I stick by my original statement. The talent level of the players (the quality of the teams) simply does not fall into a 3,3,2,1,1 pattern. The pattern I suggested (3,2,2,2,1) is much more indicative of the actual quality of the teams/players involved. Isn't that what we are supposed to be recognizing?

Consider, not only the GSAC records, but also the south region and overall records ...

             Conf.     Region        Overall
School W L Pct   W L Pct      W L Pct
MC       6 2 .750 14 6  .700  19 6 .760
HC       6 2 .750 10 6  .625  17 7 .708
Fisk      5 3 .625  9 4  .692  14 10 .583
PC        2 6 .250  8 8  .500  13 11 .542
LC        1 7 .125  5 14 .263   7 17 .292


The facts clearly support a (3,2,2,2,1) distribution of slots on the all-GSAC team. The distribution of quality is actually a classic bell shaped curve ... as so many things in life seem to be. The make-up of the all-GSAC should reflect that.

I know. I realize the fact that it is logical and reasonable doesn't necessarily mean it's gonna happen.

[Urban Myth]

Consider, not only the GSAC records, but also the south region and overall records ...

             Conf.     Region        Overall
School W L Pct   W L Pct      W L Pct
MC       6 2 .750 14 6  .700  19 6 .760
HC       6 2 .750 10 6  .625  17 7 .708
Fisk      5 3 .625  9 4  .692  14 10 .583
PC        2 6 .250  8 8  .500  13 11 .542
LC        1 7 .125  5 14 .263   7 17 .292


The facts clearly support a (3,2,2,2,1) distribution of slots on the all-GSAC team. The distribution of quality is actually a classic bell shaped curve ... as so many things in life seem to be. The make-up of the all-GSAC should reflect that.

Old Lion, you do make very good points.  Region records are very similar, and overall records are pretty close.  I think your distribution is very logical, but with co-champions this year, I don't think Maryville should have 3 players represented and the other championship team only have 2.  This year should be an exception to your logic. 

But are these awards based solely on conference games, or is it the overall season?  If a player averages 25+ outside of conference games, but doesn't show up at all during conference, would he make all-conference?  Probably not.  That is why I made my reasoning based on conference records, but your points are valid and reasonable.

I also see your point about Monte.  I don't think he should be punished at all, but I would still be willing to argue White for POY, even with Calloway healthy.  I hope you wouldn't reward Calloway with POY, just because he was injured.  The two should still be judged fairly, without taking into consideration that it is Calloway's senior year and he got hurt.  He is still a 1st team All-Conference player.

[old_lion]

I also see your point about Monte.  I don't think he should be punished at all, but I would still be willing to argue White for POY, even with Calloway healthy.  I hope you wouldn't reward Calloway with POY, just because he was injured.  The two should still be judged fairly, without taking into consideration that it is Calloway's senior year and he got hurt.  He is still a 1st team All-Conference player.

I agree that there is a strong case to be made for White for POY. In my mind, it is a close race between the two of them and Monte's injury shouldn't be a factor, one way or the other. I give a slight edge to Monte ... consistency being a major factor.

Think about this. Besides being a personal tragedy for him, Monte's injury "muddied the water" re a lot of issues we are discussing.

For instance, had Monte stayed healthy, I doubt very seriously MC would have had to share the title with HC. There is no way to know, of course ... but, IMHO, MC, when Monte was healthy, was clearly the best team in the GSAC. It flies in the face of all logic if a ramification of Monte's injury is that HC gets 3 on the all-GSAC team, while PC is limited to 1.

Which brings me back to my "bell shaped curve" rational. The top of the curve should get 3, bottom of the curve should get 1, and the 3 bunched in the middle should get 2 each. It probably won't work out that way ... it makes way to much sense. 

I've enjoyed our discussion, Urban. It's nice to "talk" with a reasonable man. I take it you are a HC fan since you were at the game @ PC? Congrats on a great season, it's quite a ride you guys have had the last 10 games!

[ohyeah]

Alright, after hearing Urban Myth and Old Lion, I have revised my picks......may not be to Old Lion's liking, but hey, that is why all sports have controversy.

1st Team -
Monte Calloway- MC
Allen White - HC
Bobby Golden - MC
Jeremiah Williamson - FU
Cole Hairston - HC

2nd Team -
Bo Mason - MC
Jake Baldwin - PC
Corrie Jackson - LC
Marquis Patton - FU
Justin Babian - HC (tough to ignore him down the stretch)

POY - Allen White - HC
COY - Duckworth - HC
FOY - Kendall Wallace - MC (1st year coaching)

[old_lion]

Actually ohyeah, I like your picks a lot ... there is no one on your list who doesn't deserve to be there.

If it were up to me, I would only change one ...  or maybe two. And I honestly don't know which of my PC guys I would replace Babian and/or Baldwin with ... in my mind, it's that close. But I really don't expect my rational to prevail when the "powers that be" pick it either.

For POY ... you really can't go wrong with either White or Calloway.

Also, we apparently have similar enthusiasm for the FOY race.

Good job!

[Urban Myth]

Old Lion, I have also enjoyed our discussion, and yes, I follow Huntingdon.  Thank you for the congratulations, and it has been a nice streak we have been on.  It's been a long time coming for them, and for our seniors' sake I hope they can finish it out.

Ohyeah, I think your picks are right on target.  Babian and Hairston were very equal stat-wise on conference games, so in my opinion it's hard to leave one of them out, and which one deserves the 1st team depends on whose viewpoint it comes from.  Babian I think had better games against Fisk, Hairston against Maryville, and they both split the games against Piedmont and Lagrange.  Hairston was huge at Piedmont, and Babian was huge at Lagrange.  But who knows, I can't pick them, so it's not my decision.  I like your pics though.

[Pat Coleman]

For those interested, QOWI for Huntingdon through Thursday night was 8.375.

[Spencer Beaty]

A great Game on thursday in the smallest gym i have ever been in.  The bleachers were 6 rows deep.  Tyler Gasking a former maryville high school stand out had 23 stitches in his eyebrow after tangling up with JJ.  It really makes me feel good when i see a healthy Bobby Golden that is able to take over a game late like he did.  Weslyan got no second shots and bobby scored late down the stretch.

[Spencer Beaty]

I hope the MC pedigree is good enough to get them a tourney bid but i can say that we miss Monte really bad.  He is our clutch scorer on the perimeter.  Trey Brewer got quality minutes who hadnt played before the fourth quarter and sam has been a pleasant suprise.