All Americans

[ronk]

Matt Mancuso - Scranton,  for 1

If Zac O'Dell couldn't get on the All-America list, Mancuso wasn't going to get there, either. I liked what Mancuso was able to bring to the table this season and I know he put up some pretty nice numbers, but a lot of those numbers were thanks to the early part of the season when he averaged 20-plus points a game against Stevenson, Houghton, William Paterson, Wilkes and Cabrini - a combined 40-76 this season. His numbers then went down steadily from December through January. He definitely had an uptick in February, but at that point guys like Logan Bailey were driving the Scranton team.

We can't fit everyone on the teams, but consider who else we left off the list ... it was going to be a tough sell to get Mancuso on it.

what about the games in that same period(York,DeSales,Bates,Mass-D,Susquehanna,Drew-a combined 110-54) when he averaged 16.3 pts, 11.5 rebs, 1.5 assists, 1.2 steals, 2 blocks/game?

[Greek Tragedy]

I suppose I'm in a boat by myself because I don't even think positions really matter. It's interesting how All-Region teams can have four guards and a forward/Center, but the All-American teams need a 2/3 or 3/2 formation of guards and forwards/centers. Now-a-days teams can play five guards or "go big" with 3 or 4 big men. Even rosters seem so vague with G/F, Post, Wing, etc positions now listed. ESPN made a big deal about the Houston Rockets not playing anyone taller than 6'5" and called it small ball.

The Stevens Point Pointers' back to back championship had Jason Kalsow, 6'7" running the point sometimes. As someone eluded to,a point forward. Point's championship team in 2015 didn't even have a guy above 6'4" in their regular rotation, I believe. Everyone shot the ball, everyone could shoot the 3.

I guess I don't understand the need for positions. Why should Player A not be able to make the AA 1st team simply because there's already 3 guards on the first team, even if Player A is better than one of the forwards on the 1st team?

Never has there been a time in a game-time situation where a coach told a player he wanted him to be on the floor but couldn't because, "Oh, we already have 3 guards on the floor. Sorry dude."

Having 1st team, 2nd team etc should simply be there to designate the top 5 players, the next top 5 players, in my opinion. Why should it have to be the top 3 guards and the top 2 forwards, and then the next top 3 guards and the next top 2 forwards. If there are 5 guards that are truly the best 5 players in the nation, why not have all five on the 1st team?

Another question, if Yeshiva lists 6'7" Ryan Turell as a guard, why do you list him as a forward, so you can get him on the 1st team? Height shouldn't play into what position a player is. As I previously stated, Stevens Point basically didn't have anyone above 6'4". So, are they all guards?

The NEWMAC's All-Conference team doesn't even list positions.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Matt Mancuso - Scranton,  for 1

If Zac O'Dell couldn't get on the All-America list, Mancuso wasn't going to get there, either. I liked what Mancuso was able to bring to the table this season and I know he put up some pretty nice numbers, but a lot of those numbers were thanks to the early part of the season when he averaged 20-plus points a game against Stevenson, Houghton, William Paterson, Wilkes and Cabrini - a combined 40-76 this season. His numbers then went down steadily from December through January. He definitely had an uptick in February, but at that point guys like Logan Bailey were driving the Scranton team.

We can't fit everyone on the teams, but consider who else we left off the list ... it was going to be a tough sell to get Mancuso on it.

what about the games in that same period(York,DeSales,Bates,Mass-D,Susquehanna,Drew-a combined 110-54) when he averaged 16.3 pts, 11.5 rebs, 1.5 assists, 1.2 steals, 2 blocks/game?

You might notice that I selected the November games ... those were the early part of the season.

And to your point, here is his split:
November   20.6 ppg   11.2 rpg   2.8 apg   2.2 spg   1.2 bpg
December   17.4 ppg   10.8 rpg   1.6 apg   1.0 spg   1.6 bpg
January   16.3 ppg   11.0 rpg   2.1 apg   2.0 spg   2.9 bpg
February   18.4 ppg   10.0 rpg   4.2 apg   1.4 spg   1.2 bpg

He had a decent game against York with 21 points but surprisingly only 6 rebounds.

I don't buy into the stats for blocks too much because I have found recently there are a number of stat takers who apparently miss blocks far too much. His January number seems to be bouyed by an abnormally high number of blocks against Catholic - but I can't speak for that game as I wasn't able to watch that particular one.

So ... again ... feasted on the November schedule which was his best set of numbers in three of the five categories and second in a third category. I appreciate his scoring was up in February and he certainly threw out a number of assists, though I have no idea why.

Again ... worthy candidate and as Ryan and Pat have indicated in many places ... we had 40 players worthy of being in the 25 slots. Mancuso was one who didn't make it and I'm not sure he would have made it over O'Dell (though, I can't even remember how the vote totals finished in the Mid-Atlantic Region between those two).
So again, feasted on the teams I listed, then lost over four points a game until February. Nice recovery, but the point remains...

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I suppose I'm in a boat by myself because I don't even think positions really matter. It's interesting how All-Region teams can have four guards and a forward/Center, but the All-American teams need a 2/3 or 3/2 formation of guards and forwards/centers. Now-a-days teams can play five guards or "go big" with 3 or 4 big men. Even rosters seem so vague with G/F, Post, Wing, etc positions now listed. ESPN made a big deal about the Houston Rockets not playing anyone taller than 6'5" and called it small ball.

The Stevens Point Pointers' back to back championship had Jason Kalsow, 6'7" running the point sometimes. As someone eluded to,a point forward. Point's championship team in 2015 didn't even have a guy above 6'4" in their regular rotation, I believe. Everyone shot the ball, everyone could shoot the 3.

I guess I don't understand the need for positions. Why should Player A not be able to make the AA 1st team simply because there's already 3 guards on the first team, even if Player A is better than one of the forwards on the 1st team?

Never has there been a time in a game-time situation where a coach told a player he wanted him to be on the floor but couldn't because, "Oh, we already have 3 guards on the floor. Sorry dude."

Having 1st team, 2nd team etc should simply be there to designate the top 5 players, the next top 5 players, in my opinion. Why should it have to be the top 3 guards and the top 2 forwards, and then the next top 3 guards and the next top 2 forwards. If there are 5 guards that are truly the best 5 players in the nation, why not have all five on the 1st team?

Another question, if Yeshiva lists 6'7" Ryan Turell as a guard, why do you list him as a forward, so you can get him on the 1st team? Height shouldn't play into what position a player is. As I previously stated, Stevens Point basically didn't have anyone above 6'4". So, are they all guards?

The NEWMAC's All-Conference team doesn't even list positions.

I think positions still matter even if people would argue otherwise. Playing the shift so much in baseball the same could be true. In soccer, same argument even though there are still positions (guy could be a forward midfielder, but he's still a midfielder).

I appreciate positions because then we are putting together a team we think would actually take to the floor. As Ryan has pointed out a few times, I am not sure if we just went with "best players with no regard for where they are playing" (which is FAR too simplistic and disregards the fact we do put who we think are the best players on the respective teams) then I think we end up putting together teams that a coach wouldn't realistically put on the floor (all five small guards aren't going to be as much of a threat if the defense doesn't have to worry about any of them going into the paint).

Per your comment, I don't think it is relevant. If a coach had the talent we are putting together I think you might find a lot of them trying to find as much balance as possible and then rotating other guys to fill the positions. The All-Star Game comes to mind where this takes place. They split their subs up to balance the teams when they are on the floor as much as they can - or what works best (believe it or not, those games may be fun but they get serious quick).

And sometimes we will go with 2G 3F or 4G 1F when we feel it necessary. The second team is 3G 1F 1C if member serves.

Per Turell, I think we have a typo somewhere. One place we have him listed as a Guard and the other as a Forward. I've been meaning to check that and I keep forgetting. But height has never been part of the equation. We take what the nomination has been presented to us which usually mirrors what the coach has dictated on rosters already during the season. I don't know if we have ever changed the designation formally ... but I know we have discussed often if a person is properly labeled, whether it is our purview to change it, and if there are other ways we can accomplish the same end-goal without making a change - a change I think we have made rarely if ever.

BTW - per your UWSP point, I remember their last championship they weren't all that tall, but they still listed guys as forwards.

And we don't tend to follow conference examples or decisions ... because usually there is more going on in some conferences that we rather keep from controlling what we do (the amount of politics is pretty ... interesting let's just say).

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I suppose I'm in a boat by myself because I don't even think positions really matter. It's interesting how All-Region teams can have four guards and a forward/Center, but the All-American teams need a 2/3 or 3/2 formation of guards and forwards/centers. Now-a-days teams can play five guards or "go big" with 3 or 4 big men. Even rosters seem so vague with G/F, Post, Wing, etc positions now listed. ESPN made a big deal about the Houston Rockets not playing anyone taller than 6'5" and called it small ball.

The Stevens Point Pointers' back to back championship had Jason Kalsow, 6'7" running the point sometimes. As someone eluded to,a point forward. Point's championship team in 2015 didn't even have a guy above 6'4" in their regular rotation, I believe. Everyone shot the ball, everyone could shoot the 3.

I guess I don't understand the need for positions. Why should Player A not be able to make the AA 1st team simply because there's already 3 guards on the first team, even if Player A is better than one of the forwards on the 1st team?

Never has there been a time in a game-time situation where a coach told a player he wanted him to be on the floor but couldn't because, "Oh, we already have 3 guards on the floor. Sorry dude."

Having 1st team, 2nd team etc should simply be there to designate the top 5 players, the next top 5 players, in my opinion. Why should it have to be the top 3 guards and the top 2 forwards, and then the next top 3 guards and the next top 2 forwards. If there are 5 guards that are truly the best 5 players in the nation, why not have all five on the 1st team?

Another question, if Yeshiva lists 6'7" Ryan Turell as a guard, why do you list him as a forward, so you can get him on the 1st team? Height shouldn't play into what position a player is. As I previously stated, Stevens Point basically didn't have anyone above 6'4". So, are they all guards?

The NEWMAC's All-Conference team doesn't even list positions.

Turell seems to be listed as a guard in the graphic and a forward in the text, so I guess he's both.  Problem solved.

[Greek Tragedy]

Well, the experts actually did a pretty good job this year in predicting the 25 AAs. Of the 25 preseason AAs, 12 made the post-season AA list. Underwood and Carius were both hurt, either the whole year or most of it. So, that's two more that the experts could have gotten right (and probably would have). ***golf clap***

1st	Team	Pre- Season
Schimonitz	NWU
West	LeTourneau	3rd
Ross	Springfield	1st
Turell	Yeshiva
Raridon	NCC	1st
2nd	Team
Cameron	Wesley	HM
Bower-Malone	Mt Union
Anthony	RMC	4th
Fravert	Oshkosh	HM
Flynn	Oshkosh	1st
3rd	Team
Nolan	Wash U
Voelker	Platteville
Delaney	JHU
Brown	SUNY Potsdam
Rogers	Tufts
4th	Team
Rhode	Elmhurst	3rd
College	Whitworth	2nd
Bruton	Nichols
Shafer	Swarthmore	HM
Leifer	Yeshiva	4th
HM	Team
Demers	Gordon
Coplin	Augsburg	1st
Jefferson	Colby
DeVries	Calvin
Hanson	Carleton
		O'Dell-Swarthmore-1st
		Toney-NJCU-2nd
		Seipel-Wittenberg-2nd
		Carius-Monmouth-2nd
		Gilmour-Hamilton-2nd
		Underwod-Texas-Dallas-3rd
		Summers-Brockport-3rd
		Dennis-Morrisville St-3rd
		Robinson-Amherst-4th
		Davidson-Wabash-4th
		Crumly-Covenant-4th
		Williams-Emory-HM
		Bublitz-Stevens Point-HM

[SpringSt7]

Turell seems to be listed as a guard in the graphic and a forward in the text, so I guess he's both.  Problem solved.

Ryan, in your article on Yeshiva's Sweet 16 run, you quote Dan Katz as referring to Ryan Turell as "the best point guard in the country". Did that come up in conversation at all?

[magicman]

Well, the experts actually did a pretty good job this year in predicting the 25 AAs. Of the 25 preseason AAs, 12 made the post-season AA list. Underwood and Carius were both hurt, either the whole year or most of it. So, that's two more that the experts could have gotten right (and probably would have). ***golf clap***

1st	Team	Pre- Season
Schimonitz	NWU
West	LeTourneau	3rd
Ross	Springfield	1st
Turell	Yeshiva
Raridon	NCC	1st
2nd	Team
Cameron	Wesley	HM
Bower-Malone	Mt Union
Anthony	RMC	4th
Fravert	Oshkosh	HM
Flynn	Oshkosh	1st
3rd	Team
Nolan	Wash U
Voelker	Platteville
Delaney	JHU
Brown	SUNY Potsdam
Rogers	Tufts
4th	Team
Rhode	Elmhurst	3rd
College	Whitworth	2nd
Bruton	Nichols
Shafer	Swarthmore	HM
Leifer	Yeshiva	4th
HM	Team
Demers	Gordon
Coplin	Augsburg	1st
Jefferson	Colby
DeVries	Calvin
Hanson	Carleton
		O'Dell-Swarthmore-1st
		Toney-NJCU-2nd
		Seipel-Wittenberg-2nd
		Carius-Monmouth-2nd
		Gilmour-Hamilton-2nd
		Underwod-Texas-Dallas-3rd
		Summers-Brockport-3rd
		Dennis-Morrisville St-3rd
		Robinson-Amherst-4th
		Davidson-Wabash-4th
		Crumly-Covenant-4th
		Williams-Emory-HM
		Bublitz-Stevens Point-HM

Justin Summers from Brockport was another preseason All-American that would probably have made the post-season AA team if he hadn't been injured. He missed 9 games and saw limited action in 8 other games.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Turell seems to be listed as a guard in the graphic and a forward in the text, so I guess he's both.  Problem solved.

Ryan, in your article on Yeshiva's Sweet 16 run, you quote Dan Katz as referring to Ryan Turell as "the best point guard in the country". Did that come up in conversation at all?

I think I mentioned, maybe on on this thread, but Turell does perhaps bring the ball up the floor most for Yeshiva, but they've got three or four guys who share that responsibility.  He might technically be their PG, but that role doesn't look the same for Yeshiva as it does a lot of places.  They're all passing and movement and Turell's size allows him to score a lot in the paint and at the rim.  He's definitely a guard in that he doesn't do a bunch of post moves and is confident as an outside shooter and ball handler, but he's very much a presence in the paint.  He'd probably average a double-double if Leifer weren't such a preternatural rebounder and always in the right place to get the ball.

When we talk about positionless basketball, Turell is right at the top of that list.  Perhaps if he'd gone D1 (where he definitely had offers), he would've been more of a perimeter player.  We felt comfortable putting him in that fourth position because of the versatility of his game.  Jake Ross is much more of a ball handling forward, too.  He can shoot and drive, but he's also pretty big and a presence in the post.

Honestly, as much as I've been a Yeshiva stan this year, I had Turell on the second team and it was the rest of the group that pushed to move him up and felt comfortable with him in that fourth guard/forward spot.  This may be one of those instances where ability trumps position - or where the diversity of his abilities allows for a broader understanding of position.  That might be a better way to put it.

[SpringSt7]

Great points. Will be interesting to see how they look next year without Halpert who probably fit the billing of at least looking the most like a PG, he was certainly their best ball handler. I would guess Turell will have the ball in his hands a lot more

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Great points. Will be interesting to see how they look next year without Halpert who probably fit the billing of at least looking the most like a PG, he was certainly their best ball handler. I would guess Turell will have the ball in his hands a lot more

Eitan Halpert will likely take over his brother's role.  He's not quite as good a shooter, but his ball handling is probably better.  He'd really rounded into an offensive threat by the end of the season.  I don't think they'll lose much with him in the lineup.  The big question will be whether they replace Dani Katz with the big man, Milovsky, or if they go a little smaller and insert Ofek Reef.  Reef's done really well as the sixth man/ energy guy off the bench - it might be smart to keep him in that role.  We'll see.  I don't see them changing too much.  I also assume they'll have a strong recruiting class in again, so we'll have to see how the freshmen change things.

[ronk]

Stats of AA forwards vs Mancuso in pts/40 min g/rebs/assists/steals/blocks  # of 5 categories < Mancuso

Hanson - 22.2/8.3/56/29/5   5/5
DeVries - 30.3/8.3/95/22/13  3/5
Shafer - 17.2/7.6/62/32/63    4/5
Flynn - 24.1/6.6/37/6/22       5/5
Fravert - 22.4/8.8/102/25/44  4/5
Raridon - 16.3/7.0/148/23/16  4/5

Mancuso - 24.3/10.7/77/45/48

Looks like some other criteria was used to put those on the AA list ahead of Mancuso.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Stats of AA forwards vs Mancuso in pts/40 min g/rebs/assists/steals/blocks  # of 5 categories < Mancuso

Hanson - 22.2/8.3/56/29/5   5/5
DeVries - 30.3/8.3/95/22/13  3/5
Shafer - 17.2/7.6/62/32/63    4/5
Flynn - 24.1/6.6/37/6/22       5/5
Fravert - 22.4/8.8/102/25/44  4/5
Raridon - 16.3/7.0/148/23/16  4/5

Mancuso - 24.3/10.7/77/45/48

Looks like some other criteria was used to put those on the AA list ahead of Mancuso.

I don't use the per 40 minute stuff because ... they don't play 40 minutes and the stat can be misconstrued. We are assuming a player keeps the same stamina and teams don't adjust? That they don't get in foul trouble that changes their approach to a game? The per 40 minute is a bell and whistle Presto likes to throw around to hide the fact they have issues with their stats package overall. BTW if we used that state for players in the "system," could you imagine their numbers? Does that mean they should be AAs automatically, too? Based on just stats?

Sorry ronk ... he didn't make the list. I'm moving on.

[jmcozenlaw]

Stats of AA forwards vs Mancuso in pts/40 min g/rebs/assists/steals/blocks  # of 5 categories < Mancuso

Hanson - 22.2/8.3/56/29/5   5/5
DeVries - 30.3/8.3/95/22/13  3/5
Shafer - 17.2/7.6/62/32/63    4/5
Flynn - 24.1/6.6/37/6/22       5/5
Fravert - 22.4/8.8/102/25/44  4/5
Raridon - 16.3/7.0/148/23/16  4/5

Mancuso - 24.3/10.7/77/45/48

Looks like some other criteria was used to put those on the AA list ahead of Mancuso.

I don't use the per 40 minute stuff because ... they don't play 40 minutes and the stat can be misconstrued. We are assuming a player keeps the same stamina and teams don't adjust? That they don't get in foul trouble that changes their approach to a game? The per 40 minute is a bell and whistle Presto likes to throw around to hide the fact they have issues with their stats package overall. BTW if we used that state for players in the "system," could you imagine their numbers? Does that mean they should be AAs automatically, too? Based on just stats?

Sorry ronk ... he didn't make the list. I'm moving on.

I've always found the per 40 to be meaningless for the most part.

If my 12 year old son runs a 5:00 mile......................I promise that he is not running an 10K in 31:06855

[ronk]

 When ppg is compared and the min/g for those ppg varies +/- 10-15% among the data, a standard such as p/40 min
is applied equally and is more meaningful than not.