MBB: NESCAC

nescacobserver · August 28, 2014, 02:22:18 PM

OK Amh63, I will go easy on the coaches! Yes I watch a lot of Nescac games, primarily on my computer, but will not be shy to share my thoughts. I do think Bowdoin has a lot to offer, with Shields and a healthy Hurley. With Madlinger gone, it will be interesting to see where they get their scoring from. Williams still has a tough lineup, although they have lost ALOT. The key to me will be how Killcullen can match up with the other bugs in the league. What other big guys does Williams have if Killcullen gets into foul trouble? And isn't Killcullen more of a "face the basket" big? Lot's of questions in Williamstown. I'll save my thoughts on Middlebury, Colby, etc for another post.

amh63 · August 28, 2014, 03:00:37 PM

Nescacobserver.....do you ever get to a live game? Live games can provide a different perspective.
Another bit of advice....last one. This board as you may have found out are full of posters that are most clever and some that are "sensitive" to tHe posted word. I smiled when you spelled "big" as "bug"....trying at first to figure out what you may mean. also, I believe you mean Bowdoin's 7 footer...Swords...vice Shields....thougH both words have a sort of link. Also Toomey is with two "o"'s.
I am uneasy about giving spelling advice being one that makes many errors...so many that it has become a family joke among my kids. They want to publish my mental lapses in a book.
In any case, an error can cause a misreading....and a possible poster's ire.
Still...like "bug" for a position..counter to a front court player though...better than a "horse".

madzillagd · August 28, 2014, 04:25:42 PM

Quote from: nescacobserver on August 28, 2014, 02:22:18 PM
The key to me will be how Killcullen can match up with the other bugs in the league. What other big guys does Williams have if Killcullen gets into foul trouble? And isn't Killcullen more of a "face the basket" big? Lot's of questions in Williamstown.

Yes Kilcullen is a face up big but that's to his advantage on offense against bigger guys. He shoots the 3 well and can put the ball on the floor. The bigger concern is how he will defend and rebound against bigger guys. 6'10 Flynn should be back and I'd expect him to make the most of his 5 fouls most games in a back up role.

jayhawk · August 28, 2014, 08:39:18 PM

Amherst has two freshman recruits this year
Johnny McCarthy from Massachusetts who has now grown to a full 6'5" who will likely play 2 guard

Also have Michael Riopel another 6'5" guard from Virginia

Look for good things from these two over time-

amh63 · August 28, 2014, 08:58:37 PM

Jayhawk...thanks for the update. Amazing how the kids of today grow. If I'm counting correctly...Amherst has over five guards around 6' 5". Hope some will step into the SF position, the one Tom Killian played so effectively.

P'bearfan · September 01, 2014, 09:35:50 AM

I had a little extra time this summer so I pulled together data for each NESCAC team from the 2013-14 season. I wanted to see what made the winners tick and who lost the most coming into this year. As the summer wore on this second question became a more interesting with the transfers of Matt Hart and Duncan Robinson.

I've written a series of posts to try to answer these questions and to provide a point of view of each team's relative strengths and challenges for the upcoming season. I'll post 1 or 2 per week with the goal of completing them by the end of October to help get us primed for basketball season.

Many of the summaries are 1 page in length but some are a full 2 pages – a bit long for this forum so apologies in advance.

Just to clarify – I used the data provided on each school's website for their 2013-14 season. Any statistics refer to the team's performance across the entire season – even though I may refer to a team or individual as "best/worst in the conference". The stats, observations and conclusions are all based on the full season.

P'bearfan · September 01, 2014, 10:39:15 AM

As we get ready for the start of a new school year I wanted to take a look back at the 2013-14 season. Specifically, I wanted to answer the question: "What did it take be one of the best teams in the NESCAC last season?" The tables below provide some interesting answers.

Scoring Defense

Team Points For PPG PPG - %FT PPG-%3FG PPG-%2FG Points Against PAPG Point diff per game

Amherst 2,605 84.0 21.7% 34.1% 44.2% 2,224 71.7 12.3

Williams 2,783 84.3 21.2% 32.7% 46.1% 2,374 71.9 12.4

Middlebury 2,035 78.3 22.5% 29.3% 48.2% 1,870 71.9 6.6

Bowdoin 1,763 70.5 16.5% 30.6% 52.9% 1,455 58.2 12.3

Trinity 1,719 66.1 22.0% 23.7% 54.2% 1,597 61.4 4.7

Hamilton 1,888 75.5 18.7% 22.7% 58.6% 1,831 73.2 2.3

Tufts 1,882 75.3 19.3% 29.0% 51.6% 1,757 70.3 5.0

Colby 1,879 75.2 19.1% 28.3% 52.7% 1,737 69.5 5.7

Wesleyan 1,639 68.3 20.3% 32.6% 47.1% 1,677 69.9 -1.6

Conn Coll 1,594 69.3 19.8% 35.8% 44.4% 1,682 73.1 -3.8

Bates 1,809 75.4 18.4% 28.9% 52.7% 1,694 70.6 4.8

1) You win often and you win handily.

While the top teams did have close games – many with each other - on average they dominated their opponents as opposed to squeaking out victories.

The top 4 teams in the conference had an average point differential per game of at least 6.6 – almost a full point better than anyone else in the conference. What really stands out is that Amherst, Williams and Bowdoin all had PDPG of 12.3. That's effectively double the point differential of any other team in the conference.

2) How you score makes a difference.

Last year relying too heavily on 2 pt FGs was a losing strategy. The best teams rely more on 3 pointers and foul shots to win than other teams.

The top 3 teams scored differently than the rest of the conference: 29 – 34% of their points came from behind the arc AND at least 21% of their points came from the foul line.

Teams that relied on 2pt FGs for 50% or more of their scoring just didn't fare as well. Bowdoin is an exception here because of their incredible stingy defense – 58.2 points allowed per game – and very efficient scoring in the paint (see table below).

Team FT % 3FG% 2FG%

Amherst 75.2% 37.5% 54.1%

Williams 76.7% 39.2% 59.0%

Middlebury 72.8% 38.6% 53.7%

Bowdoin 73.1% 39.0% 60.7%

Trinity 67.0% 33.3% 42.7%

Hamilton 74.3% 34.4% 50.5%

Tufts 70.1% 34.7% 49.0%

Colby 75.1% 35.8% 50.5%

Wesleyan 74.0% 34.9% 45.4%

Conn Coll 70.2% 34.9% 45.4%

Bates 68.2% 33.7% 46.8%

3. You need to shoot well – especially from behind the arc.

This may sound self-evident but the top 4 teams in the conference were distinctly better shooters. None of the top 4 teams shot less than 37% from behind the arc AND none of them shot less than 53% from inside it.

What is especially interesting is the importance of shooting well from long range. The top 4 teams averaged 38.6% while the remaining 7 teams averaged just 34.5% with no team shooting even 36%. That's a pretty stark contrast.

The lesson is clear: it is difficult to win unless you emphasize 3 point scoring and are accurate from behind the arc. This combination is a big part of what drives points per possession. This approach also stretches the defense and provides for higher percentage shooting inside the arc.

So now that we know what it took to win in the NESCAC last year a couple of questions come to mind:

- Which teams lost the most in the off-season through graduation and transfers?
-What challenges does each team face and who needs to step up to fill the gaps?
-What are each team's relative strengths going into the 2014-15 season?

I'll try to answer these questions in a series of posts – one on each NESCAC team.

amh63 · September 01, 2014, 04:28:47 PM

P'Bear......Thanks and can not wait! +K for your quality posts.

madzillagd · September 02, 2014, 01:55:24 PM

Hoop Dirt article on Williams assistants

http://www.hoopdirt.com/news/8798767e/williams-college-staff-update/

P'bearfan · September 03, 2014, 06:25:24 AM

As we start the new school year, I wanted to look at the statistical impact that the graduating seniors and transfers will have on each NESCAC team. This should give a view into each team's strengths and challenges for the coming season.

Bates

Summary
The Bobcats return their major contributors this season and could be poised to move up the conference standings.

Departing players
Luke Matarazzo
Derek Murphy
Sean Cunningham

Offense
Matarazzo, Murphy and Cunningham combined for 21% of the minutes and only 14% of the points scored so Bates should be well positioned to maintain, if not improve on, their 75.4 ppg output from last year. Last season Bates relied heavily on 2 pt FG's (53% of their scoring) and while Bates' young athletic front court is clearly their strength, there's a question as to whether they can win with that strategy. The top 3 teams from last year relied far less on 2 point scoring than Bates did (44-48%) and more on 3 pointers and foul shots.

As a team, Bates only shot 33.7% from behind the arc last season which was 10th in the NESCAC. With 3 returning players who shot 35-41% from long range (assuming at least 10 made shots) you might think the Bobcats are poised to improve their 3 point scoring. However, that may not happen.

What hurt Bates last season was that Safford only shot 30% from downtown but he took 26% of the total 3 point attempts (most on the team). The Bobcats also hurt themselves at the charity stripe shooting only 68% as a team for the season. The loss of Matarrazzo (78% from the line) will not help them in this department.

Rebounding
Bates very athletic front line generated 40.4 rpg (2nd in the conference). That stellar performance should continue as the departing players only accounted for 12% of the rebounds.

Ball control
Bates did a solid job of taking care of the ball last year with an average assist to turnover ratio of about 1 which should continue this season.

NothingButNESCAC · September 03, 2014, 10:48:19 AM

This has nothing to do with basketball so I apologize for clogging this feed up somewhat, but I wanted to share the link to our latest article. Young Guy, Peter Lindholm, talked to Middlebury student Calvin McEathron about his run for the state legislature of Vermont. Really nice article that is the type of human interest story we love about the NESCAC.

http://nothingbutnescac.com/2014/09/03/middleburys-mceathron-puts-his-athletic-career-on-halt-to-run-for-state-office/

P'bearfan · September 04, 2014, 09:49:27 AM

QuoteThis has nothing to do with basketball so I apologize for clogging this feed up somewhat, but I wanted to share the link to our latest article. Young Guy, Peter Lindholm, talked to Middlebury student Calvin McEathron about his run for the state legislature of Vermont. Really nice article that is the type of human interest story we love about the NESCAC.

http://nothingbutnescac.com/2014/09/03/middleburys-mceathron-puts-his-athletic-career-on-halt-to-run-for-state-office/

Great article - thanks for posting. McEathron is another example of the great student-athletes that set the NESCAC apart from big time athletics.

NEhoops · September 04, 2014, 11:32:44 AM

Pbearfan, impressive recap on the Bobcats, excited to see your thoughts on the other teams as well. The league will be very competitive this year and its clear to see that the Bobcats will be a tougher out. I try to watch each team equally and its seemed with Bates, especially late, that they couldn't get in a rhythm. The talent is there, but playing as a team is most important. Sometimes its hard to get out of funk, but we'll see if they learned from it. A few good wins, but also a few close losses.

W at Col (non-conference)
L at Bow by 3 (non-conference)
W at Mid
L Tufts by 4
L at Wes in OT

Impressive to realize how great Trinity was defensively and rebounding based on their low offensive averages.

madzillagd · September 04, 2014, 05:06:44 PM

Bates has been a bit of a mystery to me the past couple of years. I really thought they'd be a bit more middle of the pack than they have been but the reality is they just don't shoot the ball very well. The shooting #s are interesting to me because you mention how they relied on 2s for their points, but if you look at it they shot 21 3s a game compared to Williams at 23 3s a game. Not a huge difference especially if you factor in Bates shot 10 more 2 ptrs than Williams did a game. But the difference in scoring is huge - despite 8 more shots a game Bates was outscored 75.4 to 84.3 to Williams.

Makes me wonder if it's a personnel issue for Bates or a system issue? Are they getting good shots and not making them or does the system they run just not produce the types of looks they need to be successful?

toad22 · September 04, 2014, 08:39:21 PM

Williams' shooting numbers are the result of a relentless pursuit by Coach Maker of no shots except open lay ups, or low post shots by Mayer, open three point shots by specific shooters, and foul shots. Maker's goal was always to make more foul shots than their opponent's took. His team achieved that all six years he was coach.