MBB: NESCAC

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Fair enough -- I certainly know nothing about the talent Babson is bringing in!

I don't know a lot of the details either, but I have been told the success last year really improved their profile for basketball talent.  Maybe it's a year away (which is fine since Flannery is only a Junior this year), but I expect them to be pretty good again.  The system they run is both a plus and a minus, though - it's a little easier to plug guys in, but it also gives them less margin for error.  If Flannery keeps improving, though, that margin will certainly increase.

[JEFFFAN]

Why are we talking about Babson?

Thoughts on the NESCAC schools in the top 20?   Ones that are not in the top 20?

[P'bearfan]

Thoughts on the NESCAC schools in the top 20?   Ones that are not in the top 20?

My initial reaction is that Amherst is certainly a top 10 team.  They will be especially tough this year.

[grabtherim]

My initial thought is to not read much into or give much value to a D3 pre season poll given the unknown about on many factors much more than a D1 poll. That said, if anyone has details/data, I would be interested to know how the top 10 pre season picks over the past 10 years have fared at the end of the season poll or better yet in the tournament.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

My initial thought is to not read much into or give much value to a D3 pre season poll given the unknown about on many factors much more than a D1 poll. That said, if anyone has details/data, I would be interested to know how the top 10 pre season picks over the past 10 years have fared at the end of the season poll or better yet in the tournament.

I went back and looked.  There's not a lot of patterns.  Some years, it's pretty accurate, other years its way off.  I suspect it has more to do with how much top teams bring back from season to season.  In years where teams stay the same, it's easier to predict - in other years, more difficult.  This seems like a year that's more difficult, for sure.

If I recall correctly, the last time a CCIW squad brought back a really great team they struggled to stay in the Top Ten, so who knows?  I wouldn't at all be surprised if the tournament champion ends up being a team that got no votes in this poll.

[P'bearfan]

I went back and looked.  There's not a lot of patterns.  Some years, it's pretty accurate, other years its way off.  I suspect it has more to do with how much top teams bring back from season to season. 

I agree.  I think it's hard for the voters to understand the full impact of some departing players and whether or not new players can fill the voids created.  For instance last year, Amherst was ranked #2 in the pre-season poll.  That ranking had the LJ faithful crowing. However, the loss Toomey went far beyond his ppg and Amherst was not an elite team early last year.  To Coach Hixon's credit he was able to get all his pieces to gel when it counted and they were a much stronger team at the end of the season.

[JEFFFAN]

Agree completely.  The pre-season pools are meaningless because the judging is based on last year and not much on this year.   The Amherst point is exactly right.   They had nice talent last year but a team doesn't lose a generational player, a two-time first team All-American, and think that all is going to be well the following year.

[nescac1]

Unlike the other pre-season polls (which I agree are virtually worthless), the D3hoops.com poll is generally a very good predictor.  Now, there are always surprises at any level of basketball, unforeseen stars emerging, injuries, impact frosh, or teams that just collectively exceed the individual potential of their players (like last year's Stevens Point team, which played basically perfect basketball in the NCAA tourney despite lacking any one mega-star).  But typically most of the teams in the final 16 are teams that were highly-ranked in pre-season, and few of the teams that start in the top five end up missing the tourney and they usually do end up as legit title contenders.  With its top four guys led by Hunter Hill (who's a first-team AA type dude) and some talented depth returning from its NCAA finalist team, barring a major spate of injuries I'd be stunned if Augustana wasn't in the top 5 or so teams all season.  After Augustana, as the poll reflects, this year there is a TON of uncertainty. 

Amherst was definitely overranked last year after losing Toomey (plus two other important starters) and playing no seniors in its rotation.  Much of that was based on the assumption that Jayde Dawson would immediately replace much of Toomey's production, which obviously did not happen and was totally unrealistic.  But that doesn't mean its ranking is inflated this year (I'd actually put them second, in fact), as much as I wish it would be.  All those frosh and soph who were forced into action last year are now seasoned vets.  Amherst's SECOND five of Dawson, Riopel, Racy, Conklin and Schneider (that's my guess) includes two D1 transfers and another guy who had multiple D1 scholarship offers -- that's just unfair.  Amherst is loaded with more D1 level athletes (in addition to Dawson, Schneider and Conklin, I'd include Green, McCarthy and George in that category, Riopel also has crazy upside and would be a star already virtually anywhere else) than any NESCAC team I can recall.  Now, it's possible it doesn't all come together, especially if they don't figure out their PG situation, but Reid Berman made great strides in last year's NCAA tourney and figures to be even better after a year of starting experience.  Dawson's destiny is as a scoring combo-guard off the bench rather than a starting PG, and Amherst improved once it figured that out last year.

PG is really the only question mark on the team, other than whether there are enough shots to go around for so many players with a scorers' mentality.  But Hixon I'm sure will figure it out.   Amherst doesn't have any one player as good as an Olson or a Toomey, but this team is probably deeper in talent than any Amherst team that has made it to Salem. 

[Pat Coleman]

Here's a breakdown of the past five years someone else put together on the Top 25 board. Some years it's easy and some years it's not. And Stevens Point was highly rated in the preseason and the final regular season poll last year.

2015 Final Four - Preseason Poll - Final Regular Season Poll
Babson - 23 - 4
Augustana  - 3 - 6
UWSP - 7 - 8
VWC - 19 - 9

2014- Pre - Final
Whitewater - 13 - 3
IWU - 2 - 6
Amherst - 1 -7
Wiliams -3 - 9

2013
St. Thomas - 11 - 1
MHB - ORV - no votes
Amherst - 5 - 2
North Central - 6 - 3

2012
Cabrini - 14 - 5
IWU - ORV  - ORV
MIT - 10 - 3
Whitewater - ORV  - 8

2011
Wooster - 6 - 5
Williams - 8 - 4
St. Thomas - 13 - 8
Middlebury - 9 - 2

It is indeed nearly impossible to gauge the value incoming players will bring to a team in D-III. And it's also very hard to keep people from voting for a team that clearly should not be voted for (Albertus Magnus 2015-16).

[Academic Cyclist]

Amherst certainly belongs in the top 10, and 5 feels about right. Both Trinity (#12) and Bates (75 votes) seem overrated to me.  I think the losses of Papadeas and Stafford respectively are HUGE. However, what I'd like to discuss is the fact that my Colby Mules are a clear (but expected) oversight, getting zero votes.

For the first time since Adam Choice's senior year, I am FIRED UP about the roster. Coach Strahorn has his first recruiting class entering their senior year, and that group is as talented and well-balanced as they come:

• Westman and Hudnut are first team all-nescac talents playing the most critical positions (PG and C)
• Jann is able to score in bunches and (more importantly) stretch the defense. He's also an underrated rebounder
• Stewart is a key asset that missed all of last season due to injury. He adds a lot of toughness inside, but is also a GREAT shooter (43% from 3 and 84% from the line his sophomore year)
• Wilson will likely round out the starting lineup. He's a high energy, athletic guy who is a proven scorer (12 ppg last year) and logged a lot of minutes in Stewart's absence
• Gallego and Loginoff both logged some quality minutes last year, but, more importantly, they provide even more veteran leadership to the younger guys

I also think you'll see Joe Connelly (Jr., Wesleyan transfer), Pat Dickert (So.), Tony Karalekas (So.) and Steven Daley (an impressive incoming frosh from Roxbury Latin) competing for minutes in the rotation. All-in-all, this team definitely has the talent, experience, leadership and coaching to compete for the NESCAC crown, and I CANNOT WAIT for the season to get started.

It's also worth noting that we seem to have a stronger than usual out of conference schedule this year, playing Staten Island, Regis, Mount Union and two TBA opponents that could be strong (e.g., WPI). Additionally, the non-NESCAC Maine teams (namely Husson and Thomas) are always "up" when they play Maine NESCAC foes and can put up good fights. It will be interesting to see if these hard fought games will make the team more "battle tested" entering NESCAC play or if they will hurt the team's confidence and/or chances of getting a Pool C bid.

[nescac1]

Good to see a contribution from a Colby fan!  I agree with your assessment, assuming that Stewart and Hudnut are both 100 percent healthy, I think Colby is right there with Wesleyan a half-notch behind Amherst.  I'd but Trinity and Bates as the next two teams, behind those three.  And Colby will be playing with a sense of urgency since as noted they have a GREAT senior class but fairly little behind them ...

[jumpshot]

amHerst's admissions and athletic policies are coordinated and explicitly, publicly stated to compete for national championships in a few select sports, obviously including men and women's basketball, soccer, etc. As long as the present key coaches, athletic director, president, and several influential trustees are around, the ljs will continue to pursue this policy, in part for "marketing" benefits and in an effort to compensate for the longstanding success of broader, deeper approaches deployed by Williams, Middlebury, Washington University, Emory, and a few others.

While my own view is that the broader, deeper, more participative approach is in the best interests of more students and aids in creating a better campus culture, each enterprise is certainly free to make its own choices ....

[nescac1]

Jumpshot, while I appreciate your disdain for Amherst, this refrain is getting a bit tired.  And while I'm loathe to come to the Jeffs' defense, it's just not accurate to say that Amherst cares only about a few high-profile sports.  Much like Williams, they have excellent and consistently successful programs in lower-profile sports like cross country, tennis, swimming and diving, and field hockey (among others) as well.  I'd rather focus on kicking their butts on the playing field in EVERY sport rather than whining about their emphasis on whatever sports they choose to emphasize, which is totally up to them and again, hasn't seemed to hurt them any in lower-profile sports.  Back when Williams was dominating NESCAC in athletics across-the-board in the 1990s, we heard the same type of constant griping about us.  Let's not now return the favor now that Amherst has been similarly successful, across-the-board, in athletics. 

On another note, nice article on the Williams hoops team's off-season local clinic, including an interview with frosh Bobby Casey.  As the article notes, Casey's uncle is a U.S. Senator.  Perhaps he will make an appearance in the stands at the tournament in D.C. in December ?  Lest anyone think Casey was admitted thanks to nepotism, based on what I've seen of his hoops skills, that is most certainly not the case ... kid can ball.  He reminds me of a D3 version of Steph Curry, a baby-faced assassin who compensates for lack of height, a slight frame and so-so athleticism with a quick release, deadly accuracy from deep, flashy passes, and a tricky array of unconventional ball-handling maneuvers to create space in traffic.  I predict he is an early crowd favorite, especially for the local kids, as he is fun to watch despite not sticking out in the layup line.  And just one of several Williams frosh who I imagine will by necessity be cast into the fire early on given the small number of rotation players returning! 

http://www.berkshireeagle.com/sports/ci_29012481/williams-brings-its-basketball-team-boys-and-girls

[JEFFFAN]

amHerst's admissions and athletic policies are coordinated and explicitly, publicly stated to compete for national championships in a few select sports, obviously including men and women's basketball, soccer, etc. As long as the present key coaches, athletic director, president, and several influential trustees are around, the ljs will continue to pursue this policy, in part for "marketing" benefits and in an effort to compensate for the longstanding success of broader, deeper approaches deployed by Williams, Middlebury, Washington University, Emory, and a few others.

While my own view is that the broader, deeper, more participative approach is in the best interests of more students and aids in creating a better campus culture, each enterprise is certainly free to make its own choices ....

An obvious Jeff fan here to comment ... and with thanks to nescac1 for the compliments toward the Amherst athletic program, which I wholeheartedly agree is in a far better place than it was 10-15 years ago ... but I do not concur with jumpshot that it is marketing purposes and/or an effort to compensate for the "broader, deeper approaches deployed by [others]"   My thinking is as follows.

First, Amherst has, in reality, chosen some core sports to seek to excel in largely because it is smaller than the other NESCAC schools mentioned.   The student body is 14% and 25% smaller than Williams and Middlebury, respectively.   I think that smaller schools have no choice than to be strong in niches and not more broadly.   Recognizing that Williams alumns are likely not very happy about the school's performance in "major" sports, the Ephs continue to utilize their depth to win the D3 cup every single year.  Kudos to them - it is an extraordinarily strong athletic program.   But I don't think that Amherst can or does realistically aspire to win that D3 cup - the population numbers are just too different.

Second, I know that Amherst believes that it has a stronger, richer, more interesting, and happier campus with the combination of strong sports and strong academics than not.   This, too, might change over time, but frankly the current president and her two predecessors were hardly sports enthusiasts (although Biddy Martin may like sports more than most) and so if they had wanted to push a different agenda they could have.   They haven't because the administration and the Board believes that they are in a good place.

Finally, I don't believe for a second that Amherst is seeking to "compensate" for long-standing successes of other schools.   If that was their goal, then - yes - they might try to go even harder at Williams.   But they don't and they won't.   I don't believe for one second that they are looking at Emory or Washington University as models.   They are looking at Williams (harder than most!), Haverford, Swarthmore, Bowdoin and Middlebury.   Then they are looking at the schools that they lose the most accepted applicants to - Harvard, Yale, Princeton.  My strong suspicion is that Williams has a remarkably similar vantage point.

As an Amherst alumn, I am pleased with where the school is.   Strong academically, good culture but not without challenges, nice diversity, good athletics.   All good right now.

[P'bearfan]

And while I'm loathe to come to the Jeffs' defense.....

This might very well be the single greatest dependent clause ever written in the history of this message board!