BB: CC: Centennial Conference

[RSSmith]

Come on RSS - factor in all players on all teams. 

I left off a Pitcher.  Add Greg Harbeck

Okay, let's take it one or two positions at a time, starting with pitchers. Collectively, Hopkins' four starters are 23-1 with a 2.75 ERA, a strikeout to walk ratio of 2.6:1, and a WHIP of 1.21, and an OBA of .232.  Only one starting pitcher in the conference has better numbers than the entire Hopkins rotation.  Washington's Shane Mattingly is 5-1 with a 2.11 ERA, a strikeout to walk ratio of 3.5:1, a WHIP of 1.07, and an OBA of .227.  Head-to-head, Eagleson's numbers (8-0, 1.76 ERA, 2.5:1 K:BB, 1.02 WHIP, and .211 OBA) are better than Mattingly's.  Harbeck's numbers (5-0, 2.36 ERA, 4.6:1 K:BB, 1.12 WHIP, and .239 OBA) are comparable.  Therefore, the top three starting pitchers in the conference are Eagleson, Mattingly and Harbeck.  But let's not overlook Hopkins' three setup guys.  Pevsner, Platt and Scherick have a combined record of 4-0, a 2.10 ERA,  a 3.2:1 strikeout to walk ratio, a 1.08 WHIP, and a .201 OBA—at least as good as Mattingly.  And throw in the big closer, Schwartz with his 16:1 strikeout to walk ratio and his 0.82 WHIP and his .195 OBA.  How can you possibly pick which 1 or 2 of those 8 guys is an all star?  They all have better numbers than every pitcher in the league except, arguably, for Mattingly.  So, as of this moment, my first team pitchers are Eagleson, Mattingly and Harbeck.  My second team pitchers are Eliopoulos, Simmons and Pevsner, and my honorable mention pitchers are Scherick, Platt and Schwartz.  Pitcher of the Year is Eagleson.

[RSSmith]

Come on RSS - factor in all players on all teams. 

I left off a Pitcher.  Add Greg Harbeck

For catcher, the choices are John Rolewicz from Washington College who's hitting .400 with 3 home runs and 26 RBI or John Swarr from Hopkins who's hitting .419 with 3 home runs and 34 RBI.  Let's see; Rolewicz is only a sophomore and Swarr's a senior.  I'll give the tip to the kid who doesn't have any more opportunities—Swarr.

At first base, there's Jake Chaplin from Haverford who's hitting .397 with no homers and 17 RBI; Joe DiCecilia from Muhlenberg who's hitting .431 with 7 homers and 35 RBI;  and then there's Chris Huisman from Hopkins hitting .473 with 7 homers and 31 RBI.  Let's see, I want my first baseman to be a good fielder.  DiCecilia is fielding .966, and Huisman's fielding .984.  Huisman is my pick.

At second base, Brian Youchak.  Nuff sed!

At third base, we have F&M's Bill Murray hitting .339 with 5 home runs and 28 RBI.  Haverford's Make Galetta is hitting .402 with 5 homers and 25 RBI.  Gettysburg has Mike Backus hitting .372 with 7 homers and 35 RBI.  Rob Vogt at Ursinus is hitting .396 with 3 homers and 23 RBI.  Defensive numbers are pretty close across the board, so I'll take the guy with the power—Backus.

For shortstop, Ryan Normoyle from Washington is hitting .381 with 3 homers and 30 RBI, and a .917 fielding percentage.  Muhlenberg's Dan Fisher is hitting .413 with no home runs and 19 RBI.  Fisher's fielding percentage is .919.  Hopkins has been platooning at shortstop, so Teta and Rappazzo aren't racking up any numbers.  I'd like to see a better fielding percentage than .917, but I like the offense and I'll pick Normoyle.

[RSSmith]

Come on RSS - factor in all players on all teams. 

I left off a Pitcher.  Add Greg Harbeck

For outfielders, McDaniel's Brandon Kline is hitting .404 with 2 home runs and 15 RBI.  Gettysburg's Kevin Langhauser is hitting .375 with 5 homers and 26 RBI.  Jeff Butera, the All-American from Haverford is hitting .436 with 6 homers and 40 RBI.  For Swarthmore, Jimmy Gill is hitting .373 with 6 homers and 33 RBI.  At Ursinus, Tommy Clarke is hitting .396 with no homers and 20 RBI and Ben Gresh is at .404 with 2 homers and 19 RBI.  Hopkins has Dave Kahn hitting .495 with 12 homers and 51 RBI,  Jesse Sikorski hitting .431 with 8 homers and 50 RBI, and Matt Bernardi at .412 with 3 homers and 16 RBI (sharing duties in right field).  The homer in me wants and all-Hopkins outfield, but I'll say Kahn, Sikorski and Butera.

For designated hitter, I'd consider Joe DiCecilia from Muhlenberg, Chase Kennedy from Haverford hitting .396 with 1 homer and 14 RBI, or Swarthmore's Wiley Archibald hitting .429 with no home runs and 15 RBI.  Or I could take a look at the Hopkins bench and pick out Steve Bejsiuk hitting .393 with 7 home runs and 24 RBI in only 61 at bats.  I don't know if Bejsiuk has been in the lineup this year as a DH, but that's where I want him on my all-conference team.

Player of the Year:  Too close to call between Dave Kahn and Brian Youchak.  Ask me again after the Conference Tournament.

[Hammer Ball]

I can't really disagree too much with your picks. A few thoughts.

I do not know enough about the defense of the catchers but would rather see a Senior get the nod anyway.

Huismans numbers are huge but Chaplins .605 OBP with 31 BB's and 9 HBP and .996 fldg pct (1 error in 274 chances) make this choice very close.

The defense of the SS's is disappointing but I will leave the fldg pct to the Gold glove folks - All-star teams are about offense (I think).

[d3baseballnut]

How about Hopkins with a 13-2 thrashing of Montclair State tonight.

This game taught me two things:

1. Hopkins now has 4 quality starters. If Eliopoulos pitches like this down the stretch, JHU could be a very tough out at regionals.

2. The NJAC is no longer the dominant power they once were. Montclair threw their #1 tonight. They wanted this game. When JHU beats your #1 with their #3, that is a statement.

The NJAC is 100-76 out-of-conference, with their out-of-conference Win % down each year since 2006.

2006: 165-83 (.665)
2007: 147-75 (.662)
2008: 153-93 (.621)
2009: 129-90 (.589)
2010: 100-76 (.568)

My Point: NCAA Committee, stop handing out free tpurnament bids to NJAC teams with mediocre records. They are losing to the "mid-major" teams you are passing over for them.

[Ralph Turner]

How about Hopkins with a 13-2 thrashing of Montclair State tonight.

This game taught me two things:

1. Hopkins now has 4 quality starters. If Eliopoulos pitches like this down the stretch, JHU could be a very tough out at regionals.

2. The NJAC is no longer the dominant power they once were. Montclair threw their #1 tonight. They wanted this game. When JHU beats your #1 with their #3, that is a statement.

The NJAC is 100-76 out-of-conference, with their out-of-conference Win % down each year since 2006.

2006: 165-83 (.665)
2007: 147-75 (.662)
2008: 153-93 (.621)
2009: 129-90 (.589)
2010: 100-76 (.568)

My Point: NCAA Committee, stop handing out free tpurnament bids to NJAC teams with mediocre records. They are losing to the "mid-major" teams you are passing over for them.

I am confused about your post.

To which mid-major teams are the NJAC teams losing?  JHU?

The Pool C structure favors a large region such as the mid-Atlantic.  The OOWP/OWP numbers that intelligent scheduling by NJAC teams can arrange favors them in Pool C, just like the NESCAC or the UAA in Basketball.  Yes, they are good teams, and they know how to execute the principles described in the Handbook to attract the attention of the selection committee.

[CrashDavisD3]

Congratulations to the new #1 team in the nation...JHU

JHU looks like a earlier contender to win their regional and be a contender for the national championship with those bats they have

[d3baseballnut]

How about Hopkins with a 13-2 thrashing of Montclair State tonight.

This game taught me two things:

1. Hopkins now has 4 quality starters. If Eliopoulos pitches like this down the stretch, JHU could be a very tough out at regionals.

2. The NJAC is no longer the dominant power they once were. Montclair threw their #1 tonight. They wanted this game. When JHU beats your #1 with their #3, that is a statement.

The NJAC is 100-76 out-of-conference, with their out-of-conference Win % down each year since 2006.

2006: 165-83 (.665)
2007: 147-75 (.662)
2008: 153-93 (.621)
2009: 129-90 (.589)
2010: 100-76 (.568)

My Point: NCAA Committee, stop handing out free tpurnament bids to NJAC teams with mediocre records. They are losing to the "mid-major" teams you are passing over for them.

I am confused about your post.

To which mid-major teams are the NJAC teams losing?  JHU?

The Pool C structure favors a large region such as the mid-Atlantic.  The OOWP/OWP numbers that intelligent scheduling by NJAC teams can arrange favors them in Pool C, just like the NESCAC or the UAA in Basketball.  Yes, they are good teams, and they know how to execute the principles described in the Handbook to attract the attention of the selection committee.

No I do not mean JHU as the team getting passed over. I mean ANY team in country that is more deserving of an NCAA spot than NJAC teams with 15+ losses. That doesnt fly in any other conference, and personally, i dont think it should fly for NJAC teams.

Ex: Alvernia and Rowan may battle out a pool C bid in the Mid-Atlantic this year. Even with a better record, and a head to head thrasing (17-4) by Alvernia, Rowan (or Montclair) will still get in over them. Alvernia is 3-0 versus the NJAC, but the committee would still rather have a 25-16 NJAC team than a 32-10 Alvernia team (hypothetical records)

Montclair got into the tourny with a 26-17 in '09, 26-18 in '08, and 27-16-2 in '06. This is just unbelievable. A 30-15 ASC team wouldn't sniff the tournament.

(To me, it doesnt matter if Montclair won the regional in 2006. That doesn't justify their selection. We aren't selecting teams based on their forseen tournament performance, or even how talented "we know they are." We are judging them on their body of work during the current season. Otherwise, we could select an underachieving 15-11 Carthage team this year just because we think they might do well come regional time. Good performance in the tournament is not justification for selection.)

[Ralph Turner]

How about Hopkins with a 13-2 thrashing of Montclair State tonight.

This game taught me two things:

1. Hopkins now has 4 quality starters. If Eliopoulos pitches like this down the stretch, JHU could be a very tough out at regionals.

2. The NJAC is no longer the dominant power they once were. Montclair threw their #1 tonight. They wanted this game. When JHU beats your #1 with their #3, that is a statement.

The NJAC is 100-76 out-of-conference, with their out-of-conference Win % down each year since 2006.

2006: 165-83 (.665)
2007: 147-75 (.662)
2008: 153-93 (.621)
2009: 129-90 (.589)
2010: 100-76 (.568)

My Point: NCAA Committee, stop handing out free tournament bids to NJAC teams with mediocre records. They are losing to the "mid-major" teams you are passing over for them.

I am confused about your post.

To which mid-major teams are the NJAC teams losing?  JHU?

The Pool C structure favors a large region such as the mid-Atlantic.  The OOWP/OWP numbers that intelligent scheduling by NJAC teams can arrange favors them in Pool C, just like the NESCAC or the UAA in Basketball.  Yes, they are good teams, and they know how to execute the principles described in the Handbook to attract the attention of the selection committee.

No I do not mean JHU as the team getting passed over. I mean ANY team in country that is more deserving of an NCAA spot than NJAC teams with 15+ losses. That doesn't fly in any other conference, and personally, I don't think it should fly for NJAC teams.

Ex: Alvernia and Rowan may battle out a pool C bid in the Mid-Atlantic this year. Even with a better record, and a head to head thrasing (17-4) by Alvernia, Rowan (or Montclair) will still get in over them. Alvernia is 3-0 versus the NJAC, but the committee would still rather have a 25-16 NJAC team than a 32-10 Alvernia team (hypothetical records)

Montclair got into the tourny with a 26-17 in '09, 26-18 in '08, and 27-16-2 in '06. This is just unbelievable. A 30-15 ASC team wouldn't sniff the tournament.

(To me, it doesnt matter if Montclair won the regional in 2006. That doesn't justify their selection. We aren't selecting teams based on their forseen tournament performance, or even how talented "we know they are." We are judging them on their body of work during the current season. Otherwise, we could select an underachieving 15-11 Carthage team this year just because we think they might do well come regional time. Good performance in the tournament is not justification for selection.)

Thank you for the response.  Let's look at the selection criteria from the Handbook one more time.

Selection Criteria.

Primary Criteria

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA
championships); all criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
• Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition  my italics).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• See Appendix B for explanation of OWP and OOWP calculations.
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
• In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.
• Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at any time of the rankings/
selection process.
• Conference postseason contests are included.
• Contests versus provisional and reclassifying members in their third and fourth
years shall count in the primary criteria. Provisional and reclassifying members
shall remain ineligible for rankings and selection.
Weighted Scale. For a minimum of two championship seasons (2009-10 and 2010-
11), a weighted scale will apply. Once the OWP and OOWP are calculated, they are to
be combined on a weighted scale (e.g., 2/3 weight for OWP and 1/3 weight for OOWP)
and this combined number becomes the strength of schedule.

Secondary Criteria
If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be
reviewed. All the criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria
introduce results against out-of-region Division III and all other opponents including those contests
versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA, NCAA Divisions I and II).
• Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
• Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
• Results versus common non Division III opponents.
• Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
• Overall win-loss percentage.
• Results versus all common opponents.
• Overall DIII Strength of Schedule.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the men's
baseball committee. In order to be considered for selection for Pools B or C, an institution must play at
least 50 percent of its competition against Division III in-region opponents. Coaches' polls and/or any
other outside polls or rankings

If the NJAC is down, then we should see it in the criteria and the regional rankings.  However, relative to the other teams in the region they may still have several teams in the regional rankings, but may be determined to be of lesser quality when the Pool C selections are awarded.  

There will be 15 Pool C selections to be awarded.  There are 8 regions so the likelihood of the Mid-Atlantic Region, with 57 teams, make it and the New England Region, with 57, the largest regions.

The Regional Rankings will help us sort this out.

I have quoted this discussion and posted to the Pool C Board on the National Topics pages.

[d3baseballnut]

Okay-thanks, that makes sense.

I see there that SOS is more heavily weighted than head to head competition. I dont know if I agree with that, since we are trying to figure out which team is better since they didnt play each other. But if they did, that seems to get at the point of all the other criteria....who won when they played?

But i understand that Simpson isnt better than Hopkins just because they won their only contest. It has to be taken in balance. But i think the Alvernia/Rowan case is an interesing one.

Thanks again.

[HIP2HIP]

Hopkins = #1

It's about time right?
Let's see:
  they rake.
  they drop bombs (the little guy and centerfielder who's name slips my mind will combine for 30+ HRs by end of year)
  defense has improved tremendously (contributions by the juice-box guy = $)
  outstanding young pitching only getting better
  they rake.
 
If these aren't true statements I don't know what are.

[bulldozer]

Hopkins = #1

It's about time right?
Let's see:
  they rake.
  they drop bombs (the little guy and centerfielder who's name slips my mind will combine for 30+ HRs by end of year)
  defense has improved tremendously (contributions by the juice-box guy = $)
  outstanding young pitching only getting better
  they rake.
 
If these aren't true statements I don't know what are.

What are your picks for All-Conference Hip2Hip?

[HIP2HIP]

Hopkins = #1

It's about time right?
Let's see:
  they rake.
  they drop bombs (the little guy and centerfielder who's name slips my mind will combine for 30+ HRs by end of year)
  defense has improved tremendously (contributions by the juice-box guy = $)
  outstanding young pitching only getting better
  they rake.
 
If these aren't true statements I don't know what are.

What are your picks for All-Conference Hip2Hip?

All-Conference =

  C: John Swarr  --------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
1B: Chris Huisman ------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
2B: Stephen Bejsuik ----Johns Hopkins BlueJays
3B: Lee Bolyard --------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
SS: James Teta  -------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
LF: Jesse Sikorski ------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
CF: Dave Kahn ---------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
RF: Matt Bernardi ------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
DH: Brian Youchak--- --Johns Hopkins BlueJays

Player of the Year: Dave Kahn hands down...just look at the numbers, they don't lie.

Disagree if you want bulldozer but the Hopkins guys are dominant.

[HIP2HIP]

Woops! How could I forget the pitchers?!?!

P: Greg Harbeck ------Johns Hopkins BlueJays
P: Sam Eagleson ------Johns Hopkins BlueJays

[bulldozer]

As I can see you are quite the homer Hip2Hip...