MBB: NESCAC

[amh63]

So much chatting/debating on the board as August approaches!  I do have some bystander type comments to make though.
First...Nescac1 and NEhoops  brought up the key to All-conf selections, whether it be players or coaches, in MBB or any sports.  I believe that the Conference coaches make the selections vice a combo of coaches, SIDS or whomever.  I have read on other boards that certain coaches after a great season can get "overlooked" so to speak due to all sorts of reasons including "dislike" being one...is that a noun?  Coaches tend to hold to personal rules and grudges it seems.
Now, I have a simple question to ask any poster.  What type of "system" does the esteem HBC of the Un. Of Mich use?  Does he pick/recruit players to fit his preferred BB system/style or does he adjust his style to the talent on hand?
I ask this question to see if his attraction to DR is due in part to the fact that Duncan's talents fit well in the system used at Michigan....will complement the players on hand, etc.  Another way to ask the question....does Maker's Williams offense somehow copy the present Michigan offense?
If so, then, IMO, it provides another reason for the Blue & Gold offer.

AmhStud05...based on personal experience and seasons past, any "debate" online with PN (whether it be one or more persons) can become endless! . Me thinks this and possible future debates be best done in a Pub somewhere over a brew.  I may even join you all and pick up the tab...as a bystander...truly!

[nescac1]

To answer your question, amh63, yes, the Williams and Michigan offenses were very similar.  Coach Beilin was Maker's mentor for a number of years, and Maker has adopted many of his offensive principles.  Both certainly emphasize ball movement, off-ball cuts to the basket for layups, and three point shooting, more than individuals beating guys off the dribble or posting up.  Not coindientally, DR's greatest attributes are those which Michigan (and Williams) emphasize.   

[amh63]

Thanks Nescac1,...it helps my line of thought.

Today's WSJ had a most interesting sports article....yes Sport.....dealing with what the NEW HBC of the NBA team that has LeBron James ..brings to the table.  It seems that the head coach has been coaching professional BB players on European teams for decades but
has never coached in the NBA.
He has been quite successful and his last gig was in Jerusalem (..Willy missed him it seems).  It seems that he brings the system that most Teams overseas are going to.  In fact it was pointed out that the Champion SA Spurs won because they played like the European teams.  the offense uses outside ball movement for 3-point shots and allows for quick drives to the net, etc.
The new coach played at Princeton under the legendary coach that brought us the noted "Princeton Offense"....yes the one that has back cuts, constant player movement and smart ball movement/passing. 
The new coach likes to use a "stretch four"...seems this means a power forward that can play and shoot outside..3-point shooter.  Really learning the lingo in the NBA.  Anyway, seems mr. James likes it and that is a reason that the Cleveland team is going after...loves...Mr Love.
The article led me to ask about the Wolverine style...which is like the European style of the better teams, etc, etc.  Of course the article goes on to state that the New coach has had to often adjust to the talent he had available..as any good coach does, IMO.

[jayhawk]

 While Williams is  a tremendous academic institution I respect Duncan Robinson's desire to live out his dream. It appears his dream maybe to play on  a DI team and if Michigan, a highly ranked team at that.  Robinson's ability to create space for his shots and his tremendous accuracy could be a great fit for Michigan's offense. Bellein historically even before at West Virginia thrived on using players who can score from the outside. Robinson is apparently growing and has potential to get stronger. To me Robinson reminds of a Kyle Korver type of player.

Robinson committed to Wiliiams in September of his postgrad year at Phillips Exeter (see New England Recruiting Report).  I don't believe he was rated as high at the beginning of that year by NERR as he was at the end of the year when he won MVP in private school playoffs.  His obvious talents became more evident in the year at Exeter. It seems to me that if he had not committed so early in that postgrad year and waited to later on in the year he would have more DI offers when he became more of a known commodity.Of course with these offers in hand he may have still decided to attend Williams. I know he had some offers but it is clear that his stock increased tremendously during his year at Exter

[NothingButNESCAC]

This whole argument between GrabtheRim, AmherstStudent05, and PantherNation is all very academic and I don't entirely understand how we got to counter-factuals or debating whether Duncan Robinson deserved to make the first team. Overall I agree with AmherstStudent in his arguments and his incredulity at Robinson being offered a scholarship at such an outstanding basketball school. However I also think Duncan has shown enough and Beilein isn't crazy in offering a scholarship but I'll talk about that later.

PantherNation, this may sound crazy but I don't know if Beilein offers the scholarship if Robinson posts the numbers Killian posted. You have been the strongest proponent for how incredible the season Robinson had was so for you to then turn around and say that actually his production wasn't that far away from a second team All-NESCAC season is surprising. Even if Robinson had demonstrated in flashes his ability and put up Killian's numbers then we wouldn't be talking about him in the same way. He would be a freshman who came in and had a very fine season and would be primed to dominate the NESCAC next year. Instead we rightly look back at his season as one of the best we have seen in terms of efficiency if not sheer numbers. Beilein would also have a hard time looking at Robinson in the same light if he put up Killian's numbers. Yes tape is what Beilein is looking at, but if he puts up Killian numbers then he isn't looking at the same tape!

And look I think Robinson could have put up even better numbers and not been pursued by Michigan if Maker wasn't a former assistant of Beilein's just because Beilein wouldn't have trusted the D3 numbers.

But ultimately all of that talk doesn't really matter. What is more interesting and EXCITING is that a FREAKING NESCAC PLAYER HAS BEEN OFFERED A D1 HIGH MAJOR SCHOLARSHIP! And I think Duncan deserves it also. Everything about this is a perfect storm including the fit of style of play. The shooting ability that Duncan has is ridiculous in large part because of the range and ability to get shots off from a less than perfect position. The fact he put up such great numbers while not being the focal point (Michael Mayer was their best player down the stretch of the season) bodes well at the D1 level where he won't be working on the ball too much.

I've gone on for too long considering I'll probably be writing something about this once Duncan makes his decision, but I think Duncan actually has a great chance at doing well at the D1 level

[P'bearfan]

While we may never know, I think Duncan Robinson needed every inch of his stellar performance last year to get Coach Beilein's attention.

I tend to agree.  A college coach may pass on a high school player for a variety of reasons (i.e. the kid's on the bubble relative to what you need for your program and you're not sure how they'll develop). 

A few things may have aligned here - DR proved that he can perform at a very high level in college and that he has real NBA range when facing college competition.  Also based on the articles I've read DR appears to be still growing.  The last point makes a big difference because a 6'-8" kid who could grow to 6'9", who has NBA range, who can also score from anywhere inside the arc and is going to fill out is a pretty attractive prospect.   

[middhoops]

NBN got it right.  #k to you.

[jayhawk]

updated article about Robinson indicated who recruited originally and where he stands
Not definite leaving
http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/07/30/duncan-robinson-of-d-iii-williams-college-considering-transfer-to-michigan-davidson/

But still a strong possibility

[Panthernation]

This whole argument between GrabtheRim, AmherstStudent05, and PantherNation is all very academic and I don't entirely understand how we got to counter-factuals or debating whether Duncan Robinson deserved to make the first team. Overall I agree with AmherstStudent in his arguments and his incredulity at Robinson being offered a scholarship at such an outstanding basketball school. However I also think Duncan has shown enough and Beilein isn't crazy in offering a scholarship but I'll talk about that later.

PantherNation, this may sound crazy but I don't know if Beilein offers the scholarship if Robinson posts the numbers Killian posted. You have been the strongest proponent for how incredible the season Robinson had was so for you to then turn around and say that actually his production wasn't that far away from a second team All-NESCAC season is surprising. Even if Robinson had demonstrated in flashes his ability and put up Killian's numbers then we wouldn't be talking about him in the same way. He would be a freshman who came in and had a very fine season and would be primed to dominate the NESCAC next year. Instead we rightly look back at his season as one of the best we have seen in terms of efficiency if not sheer numbers. Beilein would also have a hard time looking at Robinson in the same light if he put up Killian's numbers. Yes tape is what Beilein is looking at, but if he puts up Killian numbers then he isn't looking at the same tape!

And look I think Robinson could have put up even better numbers and not been pursued by Michigan if Maker wasn't a former assistant of Beilein's just because Beilein wouldn't have trusted the D3 numbers.

You're right the conversation has been academic, but academic conversations should be gotten right. So let's try to do that.

First, we were the biggest proponents of Duncan Robinson's First-Team All-NESCAC candidacy. There's an important distinction here between what he did during NESCAC play (what we used as our primary determinant for our All-NESCAC picks) and what he did over the entire season, including NCAA Tournament play (which is what John Beilein could consider). Understanding that, there is no contradiction in pushing DR's First-Team qualifications when his NESCAC stat line (18.9 ppg, on 61/53/83) is significantly better than Killian's (14.8 ppg on 48/36/80). But while Duncan Robinson considerably outperformed Killian in NESCAC play, their season-long stat lines (Killian: 15.1 on 51/39/80 and Robinson: 17.1 on 56/45/87) are not all that different. Which gets us to the counterfactual: given that Robinson and Killian have similar season-long stats it's not that difficult to imagine a counterfactual scenario where Robinson's performances are distributed in a different way such that his great NESCAC performances took place out of conference and he is, in fact deserving of his Second-Team All-NESCAC selection. All this is to say that AS05's assertion that because John Beilein recruited Duncan Robinson makes him an automatic First-Team selection is misguided. It's just poor logic. His NESCAC stats already accomplished that. (And yes, AS05 argued DR was a snub from the get-go. That doesn't give him immunity to make bad arguments in the future).

And secondly, many people, including you, are contending that Duncan Robinson needed "every inch" of his statistical performance (and in your case, Maker's connection) to gain Beilein's attention. And yet, Beilein is far from the only powerhouse Division I coach to take notice. By Robinson's own admission, several ACC and Big 12 teams also expressed interest, but he narrowed it down to Michigan and Davidson. So DR has at least five major D1 programs interested in him and many of you still think not only did he need to have the same stat line, but also in the same order of games? That's simply not tenable.

[AmherstStudent05]

It is clear that most of the Board is sick of this particular line of discussion, so I hope that this might be my last post on the matter, but if we are going to get things "right" then there is a lot to clean up from PN's latest post.

First, I did point out that I had argued before the All-Conference selections were announced that I thought DR absolutely deserved First-Team All NESCAC honors.  However, contrary to the implication of your most recent post, I did not raise this bit of recent history in the hopes of earning "immunity" for my current or future arguments.  I was merely refuting your completely erroneous assertion that my (unchanging) view that DR should have been First Team All-NESCAC "rel[ied]" on his recent scholarship offer rather than his statistical accomplishments.  I argued back in February -- based on stats and my own observations -- that DR should have been a First Teamer.  Subsequent scholarship offers had nothing to do with it.  To assert or imply otherwise was an obvious error on your part.  This most recent comment only compounded this error.

To be clear, I have never asserted that John Beilein's interest in DR makes him an automatic First-Team selection.  Indeed, we all know that DR was not a First Team All-NESCAC selection.  Again, what I have said is that one would expect any NESCAC player offered by a Michigan to have displayed objective and subjective excellence at the NESCAC level (in addition to other traits) and that such excellence one would also expect to be rewarded with First Team honors.

Your Tom Killian example seems to rest on shaky assumptions.  As we seem to debate every February, it is not at all clear that NESCAC coaches base their all-conference selections only on regular season conference play. I think it is a fair assumption that conference play is the dominant factor, but I do not believe there are any formal directives in this regard. Indeed, as I have argued previously, I am pretty sure that, at the very least, NESCAC Tournament play is included in these deliberations.  As I believe I corrected you at the time, my understanding is that the final ballots are due after the NESCAC Championship game (whether some or all coaches actually wait till then is anyone's guess).

Also, I am no statistician, but I am not sure that the simple reordering  of games is as statistically plausible as you suggest given the sample sizes involved.  There are a lot of factors to consider here: disparity in playing time, competition, etc. 

However, one key aspect that you seem to be completely overlooking is that the conference games are not randomly distributed throughout the season but rather strategically concentrated towards the end of the season (but not the very end -- at least not for Amherst and Williams!).  In my mind, a sudden, sustained drop off in play by DR in January and February undoubtedly would have seriously affected my overall evaluation of him (even if he did turn things around during the NCAA Tournament).  My Exhibit 1, sadly, is Connor Green.  Connor finished the year with a 17.9 ppg on splits of 43.9/34.8/76.  But Connor struggled mightily (by his lofty standards at least) in conference play: 14.3/36.3/24.5/81.2.  I don't think you could argue that this drop off had a detrimental impact on our collective perception of Connor.  Again, don't get me wrong, I am thrilled that CG is a Jeff and I look forward to him lighting up the Conference next year, but this late season swoon unquestionably hurt his stock.  Part of what made Duncan's season so remarkable is that, for the most part at least, he steadily improved and rarely, if ever, had a prolonged slump.

Finally, speaking of poor logic, this idea that the fact that multiple top tier D1 programs were interested in offering DR renders my argument "untenable" is just plain strange.  This fact is in no way inconsistent with what I have been saying (not that it proves it either, to be sure).  To recap (and simplify) my view: In the ordinary course of life, top tier D1 programs don't even think about any NESCAC players.  Once in a blue moon, the NESCAC lands an individual with exceptional size, athleticism, and talent.  If that individual can prove his worth by establishing himself as a dominant d3/conference player on the hardwood, then some number of these coaches MIGHT offer him.  However, this is not some sliding scale.  That is, if 10 coaches offer DR, that does not mean, or really even suggest, that DR could have been 10% less efficient and walked away with 9 offers.  There is a (incredibly steep) threshold one needs to cross.  Once you cross it, you might attract offers.

[middhoops]

Moderator? Please!

[ziggy]

This has made repeated appearances on the MIAA board and could be of use to you:

[P'bearfan]

Moderator? Please!

...or as we say in the South when we want to change to topic of conversation...."How 'bout them Braves?!"

[Panthernation]

This is an incredibly special achievement worthy of an incredibly special talent -- the kind of talent that simply COULD NOT fly under the radar come ALL NESCAC selection time.

My contention though is that no big time D1 college coach would offer a scholarship to a NESCAC player unless that player demonstrated (by NESCAC standards) outstanding size/athleticism, talent, and production.  I would further say that anyone who has demonstrated such traits would be an obvious First-Team All-NESCAC selection.

To be clear, I have never asserted that John Beilein's interest in DR makes him an automatic First-Team selection.

There is clearly little interest in moving this discussion forward so we can drop it. Not least because you seem to have either forgotten the genesis of this discussion or can see how your changing argument makes it very difficult to reason with you.

[TheHerst2and4]

First off, congratulations to Duncan (no matter what he decides); outstanding player, from all accounts a great kid, and someone who is giving the NESCAC the further credibility.
My question is does he have to sit out a year? It is my understanding that if you transfer up you have to sit out a year to create disincentives for D1 programs to poach from D2 and D3 athletes. However, I know the NCAA will grant waivers to student-athletes who transfer programs in unique situations (ie with coaching changes)
Do we know what the situation will be here? Probably not a terrible thing for him to sit out and take some time to adjust to a big time program.