MBB: NESCAC

[AO]

You have to agree with Pat C.  The evidence is there that shows teams of 'unathletic looking guys' from the flat lands usually win the D3 championship.  Even in a close defeat you could see where the Ill. Wesleyan team played exceptionally well together.  They also have some big physical players, an asset that few NESCAC teams can claim. 
My sense was that while both teams were deeper than Amherst, they were far less talented.
Williams and Middlebury would be interesting match ups against either North Central or IW.  And, it's possible we could see that in the coming weeks.

I'm betting the tournament committee gives the NESCAC the usual "easier side of the bracket" and makes the very athletic Tommies take care of the CCIW teams.

Can't remember the last time the NESCAC got an "easy" bracket and this year certainly won't be it. Last year Amherst had to beat F&M to make it to the Elite 8 on the Diplomats home court... and that didn't happen. Had they won they would have faced MIT which clearly showed they belonged at the Final Four. This year the NESCAC will have to deal with some tough teams just in their region let alone Rochester, Ramapo, Catholic and others in the neighboring regions.

I am not saying those in the Midwest won't have a battle either - I just don't see an easy side of the bracket this year. As Titan Q has stated... parity.

Furthermore, with the Elite 8 at a neutral site this year, the committee could get really creative on these brackets and easily have possible NESCAC-CCIW or Northeast-Midwest or West-South or any other kind of combination set up for those games. It could be a really exciting bracket.

"Easier", not "easy"  St. Thomas championship in 2011 vs #3 Stevens Point. and then at #7 Augustana before facing Middlebury in the final four who had #17 Rochester and #13 St. Mary's.   Pretty big difference.

With 6 of the top 10 coming from the West/Midwest, it's going to take a lot of creativity to allow 4 of those teams to advance to the elite 8.

[grabtherim]

Just saw the Regional and D3 National Rankings.  On the D3 site national poll, Amherst stays at #2 and Middlebury drops down one spot to #4.  Williams moves up to #7 from #10, maybe someone can tell us all why.  On the Regional Midd is #5, (previously #4?).  Does that strike anyone else as strange given a 3 OT loss to the #1 team in the region/ #2 in the national poll?  At the end of the day I guess I really dont care if there is a solid feeling that the Big 3 in the NESCAC all have locked up bids or should Midd fans be concerned?  Perhaps Pat and D-Mac can chime in with their two-cents on this? 

[Pat Coleman]

Everything I would tell you would be drawn directly from the NCAA data sheet which is already linked on our regional rankings page:

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2013/02/20/ncaa-regional-rankings-week-3-2013/

[lefrakenstein]

Just saw the Regional and D3 National Rankings.  On the D3 site national poll, Amherst stays at #2 and Middlebury drops down one spot to #4.  Williams moves up to #7 from #10, maybe someone can tell us all why.  On the Regional Midd is #5, (previously #4?).  Does that strike anyone else as strange given a 3 OT loss to the #1 team in the region/ #2 in the national poll?  At the end of the day I guess I really dont care if there is a solid feeling that the Big 3 in the NESCAC all have locked up bids or should Midd fans be concerned?  Perhaps Pat and D-Mac can chime in with their two-cents on this?

It's my understanding that the regional rankings are entirely formula based, so the 3 OT aspect wouldn't make a difference at all. Also, I think they stopped using margin of victory a few years back, so Midd might as well have lost by 50. When you're at the top of the rankings any loss is going to be costly.

[WPI89]

Maybe the "formula method" is somehow more scientifically accurate but it all seems kind of silly to have a team ranked lower regionally than nationally.  I also know we have discussed this in the past and there is no answer.

I guess like rim said - as long as the right teams get in the dance - then it all is really just for us to have fun discussing.  No teams ahead of Midd to act as "blocks" - so should all be fine.  Maybe if somehow someone other than the "big 3" won your tourney (now would have to be Tufts of course) - then you start thinking about the psychology of being the "4th" team in?

[madzillagd]

In region games vs ranked...

Amherst 6-1  .857
WPI  4-2  .667
Williams  3-3  .500
RIC 3-3 .500
Midd  1-2   .333
MIT  3-3  .500

Based on that and their SOS I don't think Midd has an argument to be higher.  That could all change on Saturday of course.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

There is no "formula method" on how the regional rankings are done. There is certainly criteria that uses data like SOS, winning percentage, results versus regionally ranked opponents, results versus common regional opponents, and head-to-head... but the regional committees decide how to weigh all of those primary criteria per each individual scenario of Team A and Team B as they rank.

[Hugenerd]

I posted about this on the 'Ranking the Northeast Teams' board before the rankings even came out.  The NCAA rankings are not an opinion poll, like the d3hoops poll, they committee has to use strict criteria (primary and secondary).

When you look at Midd, they had not played anyone in the NE region rankings until Tufts was ranked this week.  Therefore, although we know that based on their results they should be ranked below Williams and Amherst (their two losses), there was no lower bar for them.  RIC has lost to Amherst and WPI, but they have wins over teams that are just slightly below them in the rankings, like MIT, Brandeis, and East Conn.  So its easy to say RIC should be below Amherst and WPI, but above MIT, Brandeis and East Conn.  Then you look closely at the numbers to see what breaks the close call.  Looking at the primary criteria for each team, we have:

Midd - 19-2 (0.905); 0.536 SOS; 1-2 vRRO
RIC - 22-3 (0.880); 0.530 SOS; 3-3 vRRO

Both teams have only lost to ranked teams, and have similar winning percentages, and the SOS numbers are basically a wash.  I think the additional wins vRRO is what gave them the nod.

[cardinalpride]

If anyone is online and wants to see what a couple of top 10 teams in the Midwest look like:    http://www.nctv17.com/schedule/

Thus far, they appear less athletic than the top NESCAC teams.

They both look so unathletic and slow. How are they ranked in the top 5? Wow.

Oh, my!  I am SO pumped to see either IWU or NCC to face a NESCAC team!  My hunch is that you will see why they are ranked in the top 5.

And this is from a guy who has Amherst and Midd both in the top 5, and Williams in the top 10, on the Posters' Poll.  (Charles, I will not reveal where YOU voted IWU and NCC vs. the NESCAC teams in the Posters' Poll! )

Mr. Yipsi, Illinois Wesleyan has already played a NESCAC team. They beat Tufts 71-62 in November at a tournament at Wash U. Tufts led that game by 7 with 5:40 to play, but only made one more field goal the rest of the way, and IWU outscored them 19-3 over that period. The Titans looked even better in the loss last night against North Central. Going into that game they were 13-0 in the CCIW and trying to become the first CCIW team to go undefeated in conference play since Augastana in 1973.

No idea why Charles thought either team looked unathletic. No doubt he thinks Wesleyan would make easy work of the Titans or North Central. To compare IWU to another midwest school, I thought the Titans resembled a more talented version of last year's (and possibly this year's) Scranton team, which knocked Middlebury off in the Sweet 16. Both teams have/had great balance offensively: nobody averages more than 11.5 points per game for Illinois Wesleyan, but they have six players who average between 8 and 12 points per game. They're a really good passing team (15.3 assists per game) and they had great ball movement yesterday.

Teams that can get consistent scoring from multiple players, play good defense (IWU allows 61 ppg to opponents) and know how to win are tough outs. I wouldn't want to see this team until late in the tournament, if at all.

Very hard to tell from one part of the country to the other, but from watching the 2nd half last night I actually think that Willliams, Amherst, and Tufts would all match up very well with them. I can only assume that since they hadan early season high ranking and haven't really lost that they just seemed to stay highly ranked, where a school like MIT which was highly ramked and lost some games really dropped. Early season rankings tend to be the team from last year until voters can watch more games.

Charles, you're right Tufts would (and did) match up really well with IWU. As for Williams, Amherst (and Middlebury), top 10 teams do tend to match up well against other teams.

As for the voters, you couldn't be further off. IWU was one minute away from achieving something no CCIW school had achieved since 1973. If you want some kind of context for that, visit the d3hoops website where readers voted the CCIW as the most impressive conference to go unbeaten in the regular season. (Keep in mind that unlike the NESCAC all CCIW teams play each other twice, once at home and once on the road). Finally, IWU is 21-3 on the season while MIT is 20-4. The voters clearly distinguished between two schools that were both highly ranked and lost games early in the season.

Uh, IWU is now 21-4. While, NCC is now 22-3! .

[Panthernation]

If anyone is online and wants to see what a couple of top 10 teams in the Midwest look like:    http://www.nctv17.com/schedule/

Thus far, they appear less athletic than the top NESCAC teams.

They both look so unathletic and slow. How are they ranked in the top 5? Wow.

Oh, my!  I am SO pumped to see either IWU or NCC to face a NESCAC team!  My hunch is that you will see why they are ranked in the top 5.

And this is from a guy who has Amherst and Midd both in the top 5, and Williams in the top 10, on the Posters' Poll.  (Charles, I will not reveal where YOU voted IWU and NCC vs. the NESCAC teams in the Posters' Poll! )

Mr. Yipsi, Illinois Wesleyan has already played a NESCAC team. They beat Tufts 71-62 in November at a tournament at Wash U. Tufts led that game by 7 with 5:40 to play, but only made one more field goal the rest of the way, and IWU outscored them 19-3 over that period. The Titans looked even better in the loss last night against North Central. Going into that game they were 13-0 in the CCIW and trying to become the first CCIW team to go undefeated in conference play since Augastana in 1973.

No idea why Charles thought either team looked unathletic. No doubt he thinks Wesleyan would make easy work of the Titans or North Central. To compare IWU to another midwest school, I thought the Titans resembled a more talented version of last year's (and possibly this year's) Scranton team, which knocked Middlebury off in the Sweet 16. Both teams have/had great balance offensively: nobody averages more than 11.5 points per game for Illinois Wesleyan, but they have six players who average between 8 and 12 points per game. They're a really good passing team (15.3 assists per game) and they had great ball movement yesterday.

Teams that can get consistent scoring from multiple players, play good defense (IWU allows 61 ppg to opponents) and know how to win are tough outs. I wouldn't want to see this team until late in the tournament, if at all.

Very hard to tell from one part of the country to the other, but from watching the 2nd half last night I actually think that Willliams, Amherst, and Tufts would all match up very well with them. I can only assume that since they hadan early season high ranking and haven't really lost that they just seemed to stay highly ranked, where a school like MIT which was highly ramked and lost some games really dropped. Early season rankings tend to be the team from last year until voters can watch more games.

Charles, you're right Tufts would (and did) match up really well with IWU. As for Williams, Amherst (and Middlebury), top 10 teams do tend to match up well against other teams.

As for the voters, you couldn't be further off. IWU was one minute away from achieving something no CCIW school had achieved since 1973. If you want some kind of context for that, visit the d3hoops website where readers voted the CCIW as the most impressive conference to go unbeaten in the regular season. (Keep in mind that unlike the NESCAC all CCIW teams play each other twice, once at home and once on the road). Finally, IWU is 21-3 on the season while MIT is 20-4. The voters clearly distinguished between two schools that were both highly ranked and lost games early in the season.

Uh, IWU is now 21-4. While, NCC is now 22-3! .

The discussion was about rankings so W-L after the last poll came out wouldn't make sense in that context

[middhoops]

In the structure of the D3 NCAA tourney, how many play-in versus at large berths are there? 

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

There are 62 total bids... 42 automatic qualifiers (Pool A)... 1 independent or conference w/o AQ bid (Pool B)... 19 at-large bids (Pool C).

I am not sure what you mean by play-in bids... but I hope that helps.

[Charles]

There are 62 total bids... 42 automatic qualifiers (Pool A)... 1 independent or conference w/o AQ bid (Pool B)... 19 at-large bids (Pool C).

I am not sure what you mean by play-in bids... but I hope that helps.

Kink in the armour? 

[Titan Q]

Illinois Wesleyan had two big fat guys, "unathletic" in the conventional sense certainly.

I assume one of the guys you are calling fat is forward Andrew Ziemnik?  Ziemnik is a 6-4/230 pound, big, strong kid -- basically a tight end body, who can really play basketball.  He can play either forward spot, last year primarily playing the 4 off the bench, and this year starts at the 3.  He is matchup problem for opponents at whatever forward spot he mans.

A recent article from the Chicago Tribune:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-31/sports/ct-spt-0131-prep-college-catchup-20130131_1_andrew-ziemnik-jordan-zimmer-illinois-wesleyan

Six-foot-4 and stocky with hair down to the middle of his back, Andrew Ziemnik looked more like a bouncer or a roadie than a basketball player while leading Oswego to the Class 3A state final as an Oswego junior in 2009.

Four years later he's still flunking every eye test and exceeding every expectation at Illinois Wesleyan.

"Andrew Ziemnik is a unique guy," Wesleyan coach Ron Rose said. "He is a very intelligent young man, he has a terrific perspective and he is not afraid to be himself. He has been one of those guys you love coaching.

"Last year he came off the bench, and I had several people come up to me and say, 'I was wondering why you put him in the game, but after I watched him for a minute or two, I understood.'"

-----

Carthage head coach Bosko Djurickovic recently was quoted in the Kenosha Daily News as saying:

"If you take Kevin Reed and Andrew Ziemnik, you could have a how-to tape of how to play college basketball. From the physical play to being in the right spot at the right time to never stopping to work on any given possession..."

Ziemnik is the most valuable player on a team that just went 13-1 in one of the nation's best leagues.  He is a safe bet to make the all-CCIW 1st team.

As the Trib article says, he flunks the eye test but can really play.  Pretty unfair assessment here, Old Guy.

[middhoops]

Yes, in my original post I guess I was thinking of Ziemnik.  I apologize for judging a book by its cover.  In the first few minutes of the game I saw this kid who looked big and soft and tried to picture him guarding some of the bigger or faster NESCAC forwards (Allen Williamson comes to mind).
By the end of the game I could see that he is a smart, crafty player who knows the game.  Really know the game.
Had I written that post after the game, it would have been different.
IW plays exceptionally well as a team, regardless of what they look like on a live stream feed at first glance.

Having said that, I'm intrigued at the prospect of watching them play a top 3 NESCAC team.