MBB: NEWMAC

[WPI89]

This is surely the first #1 (I think).  MIT has been in top 5.  WPI top 10 a number of times.  Babson was I think 6 at one point (maybe even before NEWMAC).  Coast Guard was top 15 (maybe 10) during their run.

I am sure this is the first number 1 - pre-season or otherwise.

Dave/Nerd - any data to back that up?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

From everything I have been able to look at, this is the first #1 for any NEWMAC men's program.

[NEWMACJACK]

Clark was top 15 a number of times as well.  They finished 2 seasons in a row in the top 15.  The last poll is the only one that matters.

[Hugenerd]

If they want shooting, then Jimmy Burke is a lights out shooter (think a 5'11" Jamie Karraker) and there may be some other potential players.Looking forward to the season!

I would in no way equate Jimmy Burke to Jamie Karraker, other than them both shooting well from deep.  Karraker is a very savvy player, but really thrives solely as a spot up shooter, setup by his teammates.  Burke is a dynamic guard who can play the point or the shooting guard positions.  He can make his own shot and is actually a better shooter creating his own shot than standing in one spot and receiving the ball.  He is also quicker and a better defender, in my opinion.  Both are very good players, but very different in their skill set.  When Burke was a freshman, Coach could give him the ball at the end of games and he could take over (ie, both WPI games that year), Karraker has never been that kind of player.  He can and has made huge shots, but they are always setup by a teammate or on an inside out pass.  In any case, I heard Burke is back this season and that will be a huge asset to the team (he is the same class as Kates and Tashman).

If Noel is out, then the leading replacements are between three 6'8" players, Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield (who is a leaper) or the physical Andrew Acker.

Don't forget 6'10" Lampros Tsontzos from the Greek U18 national team.  He has a ton of size and also a pretty nice touch.  I haven't heard anything about Noel being out for an extended period, but even if he is, it may give some of these younger guys time to get some experience, which could be huge later in the season.  Noel is going to make the same contribution whether he plays in game #1, #10, or #20.  He's not one of these overly athletic guys that needs to be playing a long time to get into game shape and jump out of the gym to make an impact.  His style is slow and deliberate, so whenever he plays he will be effective.

With the academic burden of MIT student athletes, it is understood why many will decide to leave if they do not anticipate playing much.

I was a assistant coach or around the program for about the last 6-7 seasons, and I have never seen a player quit because of academic reasons.  Lack of playing time maybe, but these guys are brighter off the court than they are on, and anyone admitted to the program is more than capable of handling both basketball and the classroom if they want to.

Hugenerd.......puzzled a bit about your comments wrt practice starting on Monday.  This past Friday was "Midnight Madness" for the Div. 1 big boys....so that they can start formal practice with coaches involved.  Did your comment mean the NEWMAC of the Div.3 or even Div.3 in general?  I'm aware that the "CAC" starts about two weeks after other Div. 3 schools.  In the case of Amherst, it follows the end of football season which ends Nov. 10.  Three Amherst football players are listed on the BB team....so there is a practice handicap for the NESCAC in general and Amherst in particular. 

When I was a player at Carnegie Mellon, I always remembered the first day of practice being October 15.  I dont know if that date changes now year-to-year, but thats why I made the comment.

This is surely the first #1 (I think).  MIT has been in top 5.  WPI top 10 a number of times.  Babson was I think 6 at one point (maybe even before NEWMAC).  Coast Guard was top 15 (maybe 10) during their run.

I am sure this is the first number 1 - pre-season or otherwise.

Dave/Nerd - any data to back that up?

The NEWMAC has only been sponsoring sports for men since 1998-99, so I am pretty certain this is the first time a men's basketball program has been ranked #1 while an active member of the NEWMAC.

The full preseason D3hoops.com MBB Top 25:
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/preseason

Good News!

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

October 15th is the date every year for Division III, at least... D1 starts a little earlier. Now, if you are in the Centennial you start a week later and if you are in the NESCAC you start two weeks later.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

October 15th is the date every year for Division III, at least... D1 starts a little earlier. Now, if you are in the Centennial you start a week later and if you are in the NESCAC you start two weeks later.

For d1 it's the Friday preceding October 15th - so they don't have to do midnight madness on a school night, I guess.

[BBallers]

If they want shooting, then Jimmy Burke is a lights out shooter (think a 5'11" Jamie Karraker) and there may be some other potential players.Looking forward to the season!

I would in no way equate Jimmy Burke to Jamie Karraker, other than them both shooting well from deep.  Karraker is a very savvy player, but really thrives solely as a spot up shooter, setup by his teammates.  Burke is a dynamic guard who can play the point or the shooting guard positions.  He can make his own shot and is actually a better shooter creating his own shot than standing in one spot and receiving the ball.  He is also quicker and a better defender, in my opinion.  Both are very good players, but very different in their skill set.  When Burke was a freshman, Coach could give him the ball at the end of games and he could take over (ie, both WPI games that year), Karraker has never been that kind of player.  He can and has made huge shots, but they are always setup by a teammate or on an inside out pass.  In any case, I heard Burke is back this season and that will be a huge asset to the team (he is the same class as Kates and Tashman).

If Noel is out, then the leading replacements are between three 6'8" players, Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield (who is a leaper) or the physical Andrew Acker.

Don't forget 6'10" Lampros Tsontzos from the Greek U18 national team.  He has a ton of size and also a pretty nice touch.  I haven't heard anything about Noel being out for an extended period, but even if he is, it may give some of these younger guys time to get some experience, which could be huge later in the season.  Noel is going to make the same contribution whether he plays in game #1, #10, or #20.  He's not one of these overly athletic guys that needs to be playing a long time to get into game shape and jump out of the gym to make an impact.  His style is slow and deliberate, so whenever he plays he will be effective.

With the academic burden of MIT student athletes, it is understood why many will decide to leave if they do not anticipate playing much.

I was a assistant coach or around the program for about the last 6-7 seasons, and I have never seen a player quit because of academic reasons.  Lack of playing time maybe, but these guys are brighter off the court than they are on, and anyone admitted to the program is more than capable of handling both basketball and the classroom if they want to.

Hugenerd.......puzzled a bit about your comments wrt practice starting on Monday.  This past Friday was "Midnight Madness" for the Div. 1 big boys....so that they can start formal practice with coaches involved.  Did your comment mean the NEWMAC of the Div.3 or even Div.3 in general?  I'm aware that the "CAC" starts about two weeks after other Div. 3 schools.  In the case of Amherst, it follows the end of football season which ends Nov. 10.  Three Amherst football players are listed on the BB team....so there is a practice handicap for the NESCAC in general and Amherst in particular. 

When I was a player at Carnegie Mellon, I always remembered the first day of practice being October 15.  I dont know if that date changes now year-to-year, but thats why I made the comment.

This is surely the first #1 (I think).  MIT has been in top 5.  WPI top 10 a number of times.  Babson was I think 6 at one point (maybe even before NEWMAC).  Coast Guard was top 15 (maybe 10) during their run.

I am sure this is the first number 1 - pre-season or otherwise.

Dave/Nerd - any data to back that up?

The NEWMAC has only been sponsoring sports for men since 1998-99, so I am pretty certain this is the first time a men's basketball program has been ranked #1 while an active member of the NEWMAC.

The full preseason D3hoops.com MBB Top 25:
http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/preseason

Good News!

Great comments, as always.  My comment on Burke being like Karraker was only to compare his great shooting percentage as I believe they are both pure shooters in every sense of the word.  Burke can definitely play point and dribble.  Jamie has never been a great defender and the condition of his knees will not help this either.  I don't expect Jamie to actually play until late December or early January, but I continue to root for him.  I do not have the same recollection of Burke creating his own shot (except he can dribble well) and defending well and I don't believe he is close to the same class as Kates or Tashman, but is a better shooter and I hope I'm wrong.  Either Kates or Burke would be able to play the point or shooting guard positions and I will definitely be rooting for Burke and am excited at his return after the concussions he incurred.  With Jamie out initially, his shooting will be even more valuable.  Besides his valuable basketball skills, he is a great kid.

I didn't forget 6'10" Lampros Tsontzos and believe he has some good skills, but I just believe Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield, and Andrew Acker are better prospects at this point, but give Lampros some time and he may catch up.  He certainly has a lot of overseas experience and I'm confident he will get acclimated as the season and practice progresses.  Just an opinion, but I hope he becomes a Hollingsworth type of player.

Appreciate the clarification on academics.  If a student has a lot of disposable time and are not getting playing time, they may still choose to stay on the team, but because of the academic burden on players, it may not be worth their limited disposable time to stay with the team.  The primary reason is what you mentioned, i.e., playing time.  MIT had their Beaver Madness on Friday night after their football game (MIT won, upsetting a ranked opponent) where the girls basketball team scrimmaged each other followed by the men's team.  As you could expect, MIT has a lot of height and depth and it ended up being a dunk fest.  I also noticed that 6'8" Will Dikson was in the stands, so I assume he quit the team.

Despite losing one starter and 2 other starters (at least initially), I still think MIT will be really strong.  My concerns remain defense, chemistry, overconfidence and injuries.  Can't wait to start watching games!

[WPI89]

At least right now I am more into this MIT team than even WPI - thanks for the info guys.

BBallers - what is the story with Hollingsworth and Karraker - are they both out for a while?

[rlk]

Appreciate the clarification on academics.  If a student has a lot of disposable time and are not getting playing time, they may still choose to stay on the team, but because of the academic burden on players, it may not be worth their limited disposable time to stay with the team.  The primary reason is what you mentioned, i.e., playing time.  MIT had their Beaver Madness on Friday night after their football game (MIT won, upsetting a ranked opponent) where the girls basketball team scrimmaged each other followed by the men's team.  As you could expect, MIT has a lot of height and depth and it ended up being a dunk fest.  I also noticed that 6'8" Will Dikson was in the stands, so I assume he quit the team.

*Ahem*.  That's women's basketball, not girls' basketball.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

October 15th is the date every year for Division III, at least... D1 starts a little earlier. Now, if you are in the Centennial you start a week later and if you are in the NESCAC you start two weeks later.

For d1 it's the Friday preceding October 15th - so they don't have to do midnight madness on a school night, I guess.

That makes it the Thursday night into Friday for Midnight Madness .

[Hugenerd]

Great comments, as always.  My comment on Burke being like Karraker was only to compare his great shooting percentage as I believe they are both pure shooters in every sense of the word.  Burke can definitely play point and dribble.  Jamie has never been a great defender and the condition of his knees will not help this either.  I don't expect Jamie to actually play until late December or early January, but I continue to root for him.  I do not have the same recollection of Burke creating his own shot (except he can dribble well) and defending well and I don't believe he is close to the same class as Kates or Tashman, but is a better shooter and I hope I'm wrong.  Either Kates or Burke would be able to play the point or shooting guard positions and I will definitely be rooting for Burke and am excited at his return after the concussions he incurred.  With Jamie out initially, his shooting will be even more valuable.  Besides his valuable basketball skills, he is a great kid.

Let me refresh your memory on Burke:

http://mitbasketball.blogspot.com/2010/05/2010-player-highlights-jimmy-burke.html

He is absolutely a player at the level of Kates, and I am sure Mitch would tell you that himself if you asked him.  This guy tore it up his freshman year, when his number was called.  Kates is undoubtedly a better point guard and distributor, but Burke is not only a better pure shooter, but a better scorer/finisher as well.  That isnt to say Kates isn't a good scorer, which he is, but I just think Burke is that good on the offensive side of the ball.  With that said, I think Kates is a better overall player, and would be my choice for National Preseason Player of the Year, but Burke is a very good player (again, see referenced video above for highlights).

I didn't forget 6'10" Lampros Tsontzos and believe he has some good skills, but I just believe Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield, and Andrew Acker are better prospects at this point, but give Lampros some time and he may catch up.  He certainly has a lot of overseas experience and I'm confident he will get acclimated as the season and practice progresses.  Just an opinion, but I hope he becomes a Hollingsworth type of player.

I'm not going to say Lampros is as good as Hollingsworth, because he isn't there yet, but he is one heck of a talent.  He is a more athletic player than Hollingsworth (will finish with a dunk around the basket) and has a more traditional looking outside stroke than Hollingsworth as well (Hollingsworth still shoots a real high percentage with his approach). Both of them are very similar in that they can finish with both hands around the basket, both have a variety of post moves, and both are capable of finishing with a hook shot from either hand.  Further, Lampros not only has European, but International, basketball experience playing against very high level players, which can not be discounted (Dennis Levene, a wing for MIT, also has some international experience playing for youth Danish teams).  Hollingsworth is a smart player, has a ton of experience, has a superior sense of how to position himself on the court to give himself an advantage, gets the most out of the talent he has more than any player I may have ever seen, and deserves all the recognition he receives.  However, I think Lampros has the potential to even surpass him, as his game develops.

Here are some of his highlights from last year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65fbFJxNZ7I

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

Appreciate the clarification on academics.  If a student has a lot of disposable time and are not getting playing time, they may still choose to stay on the team, but because of the academic burden on players, it may not be worth their limited disposable time to stay with the team.  The primary reason is what you mentioned, i.e., playing time.  MIT had their Beaver Madness on Friday night after their football game (MIT won, upsetting a ranked opponent) where the girls basketball team scrimmaged each other followed by the men's team.  As you could expect, MIT has a lot of height and depth and it ended up being a dunk fest.  I also noticed that 6'8" Will Dikson was in the stands, so I assume he quit the team.

I'm sure Dickson looked around and saw all the talent around him and decided there were other things he would rather do.  As evidenced by the fact that he was still in the stands, the players on the team have great chemistry which continues off the court.

Despite losing one starter and 2 other starters (at least initially), I still think MIT will be really strong.  My concerns remain defense, chemistry, overconfidence and injuries.  Can't wait to start watching games!

I'll just be blunt and say I don't agree with your concerns. 

1) This team was top 5 nationally last year in team defense (57.4 ppg) and #2 in scoring margin.  On top of that, they have essentially upgraded and/or added depth at every position.

2) I have no idea why chemistry would be a concern.  The players are not only friends on the court, but off as well, as nearly everyone on the team is a member of the same fraternity.  Further, you have a core of 5 seniors who are extremely strong, respected, and focused leaders of this team. Everyone single person in that locker room has one goal this year and they all know their roles in reaching that goal.  I don't think there are a lot of other teams out there that can say that.

3) Overconfidence - see point (2).  I could see how this may be an issue with a young team, but the leaders on this team have been through this before and I don't see them letting anyone get satisfied with themselves.  They have one goal.

4) Injuries.  Obviously injuries are a concern with every team, but MIT is better equipped to handle that than in any year in my memory of the program.  This is the deepest and most talented team that Coach Anderson has ever had.

[mass_d3fan]

Good Evening Fellow NEWMACers

I have not been here much due to personal issues, but I did finally get the chance to jump on and see what has been posted from all of you.

First off - Very Large Congratulations to MIT for garnering the NEWMAC's first ever #1 ranking!

Second, My best wishes to any of the MIT players who may be hurt.  May they heal quickly and be able to contribute soon.
Does anyone have any real details about any of these rumored injuries?

Third, after looking at MIT's schedule, it was great to see they finally decided to schedule another good NE team in RIC.  Still, very disappointed they did not work more of the region's top teams in.
This is the 3rd post season after they reached the NCAA's with this group, seems to me they could have and should have found a way to drop a couple more of the doormats and pickup more teams that year in and year out are considered top teams.

HN - I do have to take exception to the idea that Burke is "absolutely a player at the level of Kates, and I am sure Mitch would tell you that himself if you asked him.  This guy tore it up his freshman year, when his number was called.  Kates is undoubtedly a better point guard and distributor, but Burke is not only a better pure shooter, but a better scorer/finisher as well."

I would completely expect Kates as a teammate to say that.  However, Burke is a great deep ball 3-pt shooter.  That is what I remember of the times I saw him.  I looked back at the video you referenced.  It is almost toally long distance 3's and spot up shots off others penetration.  I think there were 2 or 3 plays where he drove near the paint at all.  If you go back and look at his stats, he took 184 shots, 151 of which were 3's.  He is no doubt a better deep shooter than Kates, but from what I have seen, he is nowhere near the finisher that Kates is. I am not saying that he can't finish, just that Kates is much better AND has proven that he can game after game for 3 years. Burke does have a nice jab step and a quick release.  Also, I am not sure how much time he really would have gotten given Karraker's play.  Karraker took nearly 500 3's in the last two years.  Given he was shooting 43%, it is hard to believe that Burke would have seen the 24 mpg he saw in 09-10.  Coach Anderson has clearly made a decision to play his top players 30 mpg, even with what everyone says are extremely talented players gathering a lot of splinters on the bench.

I have not been around Worcester much in the past couple of months, so unfortunately I have no insight on how WPI is coming along.  My initial thoughts right now are that winning 20 this year will be an extremely difficult task. I do think that this may be the year other teams surpass the Engineers. I hope that the WPI players step it up and have a very successful year

[Hugenerd]

This is just my opinion, but I think Burke is an elite guard and scorer.  Kates is a bigger and more athletic guard, which gives him advantages on the court, and an exceptional player overall, but I think Burke is a better pure scorer.  I am not trying to take anything away Kates, I have been a huge advocate for him his entire career and I think he deserves to be the Preseason National Player of the Year this year, but Burke is as good an outside and off the dribble scorer as MIT has.  As a freshman, he filled the role the team needed, which was primarily outside shooting, but you saw in that video that when he was given the ball in a situation where the team needed a basket, he could get it done off the dribble, pulling up or finishing around the basket.

With respect to playing time, I am sure Kates, Tashman, and Hollingsworth will play the typical 30+ minutes a game, but Burke will be a consistent member of the rotation, if not a starter.  I would not be surprised at all to see him play around the 24 mpg he did as a freshman.

[BBallers]

Great comments, as always.  My comment on Burke being like Karraker was only to compare his great shooting percentage as I believe they are both pure shooters in every sense of the word.  Burke can definitely play point and dribble.  Jamie has never been a great defender and the condition of his knees will not help this either.  I don't expect Jamie to actually play until late December or early January, but I continue to root for him.  I do not have the same recollection of Burke creating his own shot (except he can dribble well) and defending well and I don't believe he is close to the same class as Kates or Tashman, but is a better shooter and I hope I'm wrong.  Either Kates or Burke would be able to play the point or shooting guard positions and I will definitely be rooting for Burke and am excited at his return after the concussions he incurred.  With Jamie out initially, his shooting will be even more valuable.  Besides his valuable basketball skills, he is a great kid.

Let me refresh your memory on Burke:

http://mitbasketball.blogspot.com/2010/05/2010-player-highlights-jimmy-burke.html

He is absolutely a player at the level of Kates, and I am sure Mitch would tell you that himself if you asked him.  This guy tore it up his freshman year, when his number was called.  Kates is undoubtedly a better point guard and distributor, but Burke is not only a better pure shooter, but a better scorer/finisher as well.  That isnt to say Kates isn't a good scorer, which he is, but I just think Burke is that good on the offensive side of the ball.  With that said, I think Kates is a better overall player, and would be my choice for National Preseason Player of the Year, but Burke is a very good player (again, see referenced video above for highlights).

I didn't forget 6'10" Lampros Tsontzos and believe he has some good skills, but I just believe Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield, and Andrew Acker are better prospects at this point, but give Lampros some time and he may catch up.  He certainly has a lot of overseas experience and I'm confident he will get acclimated as the season and practice progresses.  Just an opinion, but I hope he becomes a Hollingsworth type of player.

I'm not going to say Lampros is as good as Hollingsworth, because he isn't there yet, but he is one heck of a talent.  He is a more athletic player than Hollingsworth (will finish with a dunk around the basket) and has a more traditional looking outside stroke than Hollingsworth as well (Hollingsworth still shoots a real high percentage with his approach). Both of them are very similar in that they can finish with both hands around the basket, both have a variety of post moves, and both are capable of finishing with a hook shot from either hand.  Further, Lampros not only has European, but International, basketball experience playing against very high level players, which can not be discounted (Dennis Levene, a wing for MIT, also has some international experience playing for youth Danish teams).  Hollingsworth is a smart player, has a ton of experience, has a superior sense of how to position himself on the court to give himself an advantage, gets the most out of the talent he has more than any player I may have ever seen, and deserves all the recognition he receives.  However, I think Lampros has the potential to even surpass him, as his game develops.

Here are some of his highlights from last year:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65fbFJxNZ7I

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

Appreciate the clarification on academics.  If a student has a lot of disposable time and are not getting playing time, they may still choose to stay on the team, but because of the academic burden on players, it may not be worth their limited disposable time to stay with the team.  The primary reason is what you mentioned, i.e., playing time.  MIT had their Beaver Madness on Friday night after their football game (MIT won, upsetting a ranked opponent) where the girls basketball team scrimmaged each other followed by the men's team.  As you could expect, MIT has a lot of height and depth and it ended up being a dunk fest.  I also noticed that 6'8" Will Dikson was in the stands, so I assume he quit the team.

I'm sure Dickson looked around and saw all the talent around him and decided there were other things he would rather do.  As evidenced by the fact that he was still in the stands, the players on the team have great chemistry which continues off the court.

Despite losing one starter and 2 other starters (at least initially), I still think MIT will be really strong.  My concerns remain defense, chemistry, overconfidence and injuries.  Can't wait to start watching games!

I'll just be blunt and say I don't agree with your concerns. 

1) This team was top 5 nationally last year in team defense (57.4 ppg) and #2 in scoring margin.  On top of that, they have essentially upgraded and/or added depth at every position.

2) I have no idea why chemistry would be a concern.  The players are not only friends on the court, but off as well, as nearly everyone on the team is a member of the same fraternity.  Further, you have a core of 5 seniors who are extremely strong, respected, and focused leaders of this team. Everyone single person in that locker room has one goal this year and they all know their roles in reaching that goal.  I don't think there are a lot of other teams out there that can say that.

3) Overconfidence - see point (2).  I could see how this may be an issue with a young team, but the leaders on this team have been through this before and I don't see them letting anyone get satisfied with themselves.  They have one goal.

4) Injuries.  Obviously injuries are a concern with every team, but MIT is better equipped to handle that than in any year in my memory of the program.  This is the deepest and most talented team that Coach Anderson has ever had.

Great and well-supported points.  Overall, if I were going to make a bet, I would bet against MIT having as good of a record as last season or improving their NCAA finish of last year.  Since I am an MIT fan, I would never consider making this bet.  I still believe that MIT will be one of the best teams in the country and has as good of a shot as any D3 team of winning a national championship.

I guess we will agree to disagree with Burke and Kates comparison.  If Burke is on the same level as Kates/Tashman (who both have All-American skills), then there he will unquestionably be starting and playing 35 minutes a game.  I appreciate your website and Burke highlights.  It was very enjoyable watching it again.  However, IMHO, these highlights still depict Burke as a catch and shoot player.  Without analyzing each and every highlight, I remember one layup when the team was playing strict man coverage and the defender was playing Burke too close where Burke dribbled past him for a layup.  There was another time where he dribbled past a defender for a jumper around the foul line, but the remaining highlights were open 3-pointers and with 2 or 3 lateral dribbles for a 3-pointer.  In comparison with Kates, I believe Kates is taller, more athletic, better passer, better defender, better rebounder, better dribbler, better shot blocker, better driver and finisher, better shot creator, better leader, etc.  Jimmie is a better shooter as your video confirms.  This is not to say that Jimmie is a bad player in any of these areas, as he is definitely not.  I believe he will be an integral player for the MIT team and a great kid!  He will be even more valuable with Jamie's injuries.  I will continue to root for him and his teammates.

I agree that Lampros may be more athletic than Noel, but I believe he is less athletic than Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield, and Andrew Acker at this point.  Athleticism isn't everything and this is merely my opinion at this juncture.  I am confident Lampros will improve and I am rooting for him to improve.  I know Dennis played some wing (small forward) position last season, but I thought the majority of his minutes were at the power forward position.  Dennis is very athletic with size and an excellent player, but not sure if he is a better 3 than a 4.

I agree with your points on Dickson and how all the players get along, support each other and most are also fraternity brothers.

I appreciate your being forthright in your comments as I respect your opinion.  I hope my opinions are not annoying to you.  Some clarification is as follows:

1) I agree with your comments on the statistics on team defense and scoring margin and hope it continues.  An argument could be made to the level of competition where these statistics were derived, but stats don't lie.  Kates and Tashman are great defenders, but Kates may have to defer his defense for all of the efforts he puts into setting up plays as a point guard and scoring.  Same could be true for Tashman as he takes a larger role on offense with Noel out.  I am concerned about the lateral movement of small forward position with Levene or Reinier against smaller and quicker opponents and Burke getting posted (he can more than make up for it by his great shooting).  My hope is that the scoring defense and scoring margin statistics continue like last year.  If a lesser talented team takes advantage of some defense matchups, that is the only scenario where I can see MIT losing and that would still have to be coupled with MIT missing shots.  IMO, 3 for 20 in 3-pointers was the primary reason for MIT losing in the NCAA.

2) My apologies for not specifying my definition of chemistry in this context.  You are absolutely correct that all of the players are friends on and off the court, fraternity brothers with a strong senior base.  My concern with chemistry is primarily who will be able and willing to defend against the opponents top scorer, turnovers and shot selection because we have so many scorers on the team.  I agree they are well coached and team oriented and that MIT's chemistry is better than most teams, including possibly every NEWMAC team.  My hope is that MIT wins the national championship and this chemistry concern only relates to the other nationally ranked teams that they will play in the NCAA's.  Paul Dawson may be the answer to the lock down defender.

3) You are correct in your points with the senior leadership and one goal.  My only concern is just human nature and with MIT not playing as competitive of a schedule as most of the other ranked teams.

4) Losing Noel (feet problems) is a huge loss for MIT for his almost automatic post scoring plays.  Same for Jamie (knee problems) and his outside shooting in the early part of the season.  I agree with you that MIT has possibly more depth than possibly any D3 team, but losing these players will have an impact.  I also agree that this is the deepest team Coach Anderson ever had.

I am trying to be objective (I recognize this is difficult for me) and want to reiterate that my concerns only relate to MIT winning a national championship, not just being a good team.  The bar is raised.  I also want to clarify that this is only my opinion based on limited viewing of players and I recognize that I could be wrong and often hope I am wrong.  I sincerely hope that my concerns are not taken out of context or irritating to anyone.

BTW, if Noel and Jamie were playing along with Tashman and Mitch, who do you believe would be the fifth starter?  My guess would be Jimmie Burke, with Jamie moving to the small forward spot.  I'm assuming you would agree, but coach may want to go big.  If Noel and Jamie are out, who do you think would start along with Tashman and Mitch?  I'm assuming Acker (or Redfiled) along with Dennis and Jimmie.  Again, appreciate your comments and look forward to this season.

[Hugenerd]

I agree that Lampros may be more athletic than Noel, but I believe he is less athletic than Dennis Levene, Matt Redfield, and Andrew Acker at this point.  Athleticism isn't everything and this is merely my opinion at this juncture.  I am confident Lampros will improve and I am rooting for him to improve.  I know Dennis played some wing (small forward) position last season, but I thought the majority of his minutes were at the power forward position.  Dennis is very athletic with size and an excellent player, but not sure if he is a better 3 than a 4.

In MITs system, there is no differentiation to that detail.  There are wings, who play the same role, and post players.  Levene is capable of playing on the wings or in the post, but he is a more natural fit on the wings.

1) I agree with your comments on the statistics on team defense and scoring margin and hope it continues.  An argument could be made to the level of competition where these statistics were derived, but stats don't lie.  Kates and Tashman are great defenders, but Kates may have to defer his defense for all of the efforts he puts into setting up plays as a point guard and scoring.  Same could be true for Tashman as he takes a larger role on offense with Noel out.  I am concerned about the lateral movement of small forward position with Levene or Reinier against smaller and quicker opponents and Burke getting posted (he can more than make up for it by his great shooting).  My hope is that the scoring defense and scoring margin statistics continue like last year.  If a lesser talented team takes advantage of some defense matchups, that is the only scenario where I can see MIT losing and that would still have to be coupled with MIT missing shots.  IMO, 3 for 20 in 3-pointers was the primary reason for MIT losing in the NCAA.

MIT may play primarily man-to-man, but they play very strong help defense, so even if there is a quickness matchup at one position, the team will adjust.  Also, there is nothing to say that lineups wont vary with the situation.  MIT has the option of playing big or going smaller if they want to this year.

2) My apologies for not specifying my definition of chemistry in this context.  You are absolutely correct that all of the players are friends on and off the court, fraternity brothers with a strong senior base.  My concern with chemistry is primarily who will be able and willing to defend against the opponents top scorer, turnovers and shot selection because we have so many scorers on the team.  I agree they are well coached and team oriented and that MIT's chemistry is better than most teams, including possibly every NEWMAC team.  My hope is that MIT wins the national championship and this chemistry concern only relates to the other nationally ranked teams that they will play in the NCAA's.  Paul Dawson may be the answer to the lock down defender.

I don't know what team chemistry has to do with guarding the other teams best player.  In any case, if that player is a post scorer, Tashman would guard them (remember the job he did against AJ Matthews last season in the tourney? He held him to 4 points and 1 board in the first half when the game was close, he came in averaging 23 and 17).  If it is a perimeter player, it could be Kates (he did a great job against Milligan last year in the tourney), Burke, or Dawson.  A taller wing could also emerge as a defensive stalwart.

3) You are correct in your points with the senior leadership and one goal.  My only concern is just human nature and with MIT not playing as competitive of a schedule as most of the other ranked teams.

I guess we will agree to disagree on this point.

4) Losing Noel (feet problems) is a huge loss for MIT for his almost automatic post scoring plays.  Same for Jamie (knee problems) and his outside shooting in the early part of the season.  I agree with you that MIT has possibly more depth than possibly any D3 team, but losing these players will have an impact.  I also agree that this is the deepest team Coach Anderson ever had.

I am trying to be objective (I recognize this is difficult for me) and want to reiterate that my concerns only relate to MIT winning a national championship, not just being a good team.  The bar is raised.  I also want to clarify that this is only my opinion based on limited viewing of players and I recognize that I could be wrong and often hope I am wrong.  I sincerely hope that my concerns are not taken out of context or irritating to anyone.

What is irritating to me is not your views, you are absolutely entitled to those and whatever those may be, they are fine.  However, I know who you are, your ties to the program, and how you are getting information about the program, and what is irritating me is that you are sharing information that is very speculative and not something to be shared freely in a public forum.  The health of a given player, especially before any games are played, is the matter of the medical staff, the coaching staff, and that players family.  For us to speculate on these injuries, especially extrapolate and say they are potentially season ending is a complete disservice to that player and the program.  Trust me, I am aware of these players situations, but I will not post on here that a player is out for a given number of games even before they know for certain how serious an injury it is or how long they will be out.  Are some of the players rehabbing from injuries right now? Yes.  Does anyone know for certain how long those injuries will take to heal? No.  And until I do know for certain, I will not sepculate about that player's condition because that is not fair to them.  Go on any other board right now and see if anyone else is listing specific injuries about specific players.  It just isn't happening.  Its fine to say your heard someone may be hurt, but to go into specific details about locations of the injury and speculate timetables at this point in the season doesn't help anyone, especially if you are a supporter of the progam.

BTW, if Noel and Jamie were playing along with Tashman and Mitch, who do you believe would be the fifth starter?  My guess would be Jimmie Burke, with Jamie moving to the small forward spot.  I'm assuming you would agree, but coach may want to go big.  If Noel and Jamie are out, who do you think would start along with Tashman and Mitch?  I'm assuming Acker (or Redfiled) along with Dennis and Jimmie.  Again, appreciate your comments and look forward to this season.

It will all depend on matchups.  I think there are a number of players in the mix and, to be honest, I am not that familiar with all the newcomers yet (I am no longer on campus so I havent seen any practices or anything).  There is also no certainty that Jimmy will start.  He played 25 mpg as a freshman as the 6th man, so maybe coach wants to keep him in that role, but I am sure he is the frontrunner for the off guard spot at this point, with Dawson as the 3rd guard in the mix.  On the wings you have Strobos, Levene, Cramer, Karraker, along with some younger players who may be in the mix for playing time (Pedley, Simpri, Prus, Johnson) and in the post you have Acker, Redfield, and Tsontzos (they also have another freshman big who is pretty good, Miles Nolting).

In any case, it should be an exciting year to watch MIT basketball.  I just prefer to talk about things I do know about the team currently, than speculate about injuries that may or may not have an affect on the long term goals of this year's team.