MBB: Conference of New England

[tcccfan2010]

Yes Gordon's weakness is certainly the guards. I can assume coach Murphy has a strong 2011-2012 class coming in, if not they are in big trouble.

[high flyer 21]

Eastern Nazarene lost to CalTech on Monday night 87-53 in Pasadena, CA.  Not only did they lose by 34 points to a team whose record is 1-31 in the past two seasons, but they also made history as it was CalTech's first back-to-back victory (beat non-NCAA American Sports University (2-9 record) last saturday) since the late 20th century. 

I'm hoping ENC's 10% three-point shooting, 32% field goal shooting, 50% free throw shooting on the night is somewhat of an excuse for this, but they only had 12 turnovers compared to CalTech's 13.  Chima Ezeibo got T'd up during the game.  Not trying to beat a dead horse but honestly this CCC showing is equally as bad if not worse than Gordon's 85-37 loss to Bates earler this month.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

ENC never had a chance in that game.  Flying from cold NE to sunny SoCal, plus the time change.

CalTech is not that bad; they just don't have bad teams to play on a regular basis.

People are making more of this than it is.

[Hugenerd]

ENC never had a chance in that game.  Flying from cold NE to sunny SoCal, plus the time change.

CalTech is not that bad; they just don't have bad teams to play on a regular basis.

People are making more of this than it is.

It may not be just that they lost, but how they lost.  Going down double-digits 7 minutes into the game (they never cut it to single digits thereafter), trailing by 25 at halftime, trailing by as many as 38 points, and losing by 34 to a team that hadnt won a d3 game in years probably opens you up to some criticism.

With that said, I do think Caltech is much improved, and they will pickup some more wins this season.  I know you have mentioned several times that there are not as many bad D3 teams in SoCal for Caltech to schedule, but in many of the years where they lost a ton of games, they had a roster filled with guys who didnt even play in high school.  With those types of rosters I think they still would have lost to pretty much any team in NE.  However, a lot of the credit for them improvement has to go to Coach Eslinger and his recruiting.  They are bringing in more talented players, which is evidenced by their play on the court.  They arent at a level where they can keep up with better teams in D3, but I am sure that is what Coach Eslinger has in mind for the future as he continues to build the program and try to get better players to come to Pasadena.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I feel like I'm in an awkward position here.  I've been making the Caltech argument for years and now, when there's some decent proof, it comes against the school I went to.

I doubt there's any way I can come off looking like a homer here.

I just don't think the "haven't one a d3 game in years" thing is overplayed.  I'm not saying they've been good, just that there hasn't been a huge disparity between them and the lowest tier of d3 school.

That's been a point I've been trying to make for years.

[Hugenerd]

I feel like I'm in an awkward position here.  I've been making the Caltech argument for years and now, when there's some decent proof, it comes against the school I went to.

I doubt there's any way I can come off looking like a homer here.

I just don't think the "haven't one a d3 game in years" thing is overplayed.  I'm not saying they've been good, just that there hasn't been a huge disparity between them and the lowest tier of d3 school.

That's been a point I've been trying to make for years.

Here is a blog entry from a former Caltech player after last nights game.  He compares recruiting before and after Coach Eslinger's arrival:

http://mahalonottrash.blogspot.com/2010/12/beavers-win-beavers-win.html

Which echos my sentiment that the teams are much better now because they have players who actually played in high school.

[Hugenerd]

Here is another video from 2007.  In this video, the former coach (before Eslinger) openly admits he doesnt have talented players and they arent going to win a lot of games.  I guess he just wasnt recruiting that hard:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDBXctFlWTA

[tcccfan2010]

Here is a question for everyone. What is more important a head coach who knows his X's and O's or a head coach who can recruit?

[CCC Talk]

You need both to win a championship generally, but overall the recruiting is far more important.

[leelowlang]

Recruiting...

[Hugenerd]

Here is a question for everyone. What is more important a head coach who knows his X's and O's or a head coach who can recruit?

You can have the best system or plays in the world, but they wont mean anything if you dont have anyone to execute them.

[tcccfan2010]

At this level which position is the most important to have your star player? I say point guard

[Hugenerd]

At this level which position is the most important to have your star player? I say point guard

1 and 5.

[CCC Talk]

Guards. The better your guards the better your team. If you have an elite post player it gives you a big advantage but you can't win without top flight guards.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

At this level which position is the most important to have your star player? I say point guard

The most important place is in the post, but, in d3, and especially d3 in NE, if your post player is your best player, you're going to lose.  Post players with that much talent go to scholarship schools for the most part (and definitely where the CCC is concerned).  Academically high calibre schools can sometimes get them - that's why you see the UAA and the NESCAC doing well often.

I would have said PG a few years ago, but now I think if your best player is a combo guard, who can bring the ball up the floor and also score from the post when necessary, you're better off.  One player can win games in this league, maybe not the championship, but one player can get you into the playoffs.