MBB: NESCAC

[division3]

ac08...is the ability for a special player to ride the bench for most of their career inherently a character attribute?. "ridiculous" depth seems like an appropriate way to put it when discussing a special player (not a phenom...phenoms don't ride the bench) that ends up on the bench for much (or most) of their career. real players need to play. when a player sits for too long, usually it ends up being a disappointing college athletic experience and an acknowledgement that they didn't make the right athletic choice. that said, i think the school decision is far more important than the basketball decision and the high quality of one's school is an appropriate trade off for a good player who has a disappointing college sports career.

[walzy31]

ac08...is the ability for a special player to ride the bench for most of their career inherently a character attribute?. "ridiculous" depth seems like an appropriate way to put it when discussing a special player (not a phenom...phenoms don't ride the bench) that ends up on the bench for much (or most) of their career. real players need to play. when a player sits for too long, usually it ends up being a disappointing college athletic experience and an acknowledgement that they didn't make the right athletic choice. that said, i think the school decision is far more important than the basketball decision and the high quality of one's school is an appropriate trade off for a good player who has a disappointing college sports career.

ac08 is probably referring to teams like Williams '03 or Amherst '07. In both cases, the depth on the rosters was "ridiculous," and "phenoms" weren't on the court in their first two years.

-Tucker Kain barely got burn when Williams won the National title. He turned out to be a phenom.
-Steve Wheeler played sparingly his Freshman year when Amherst won it all and he is pretty damn good. Before that, the likes of Fletcher Walters and Brandon Jones didn't get in the real rotation until Junior year.

These types of situations make everyone on the team better since the guys in the rotation are facing serious talent, day in and day out, in practice.


I came to the forum to post a spread that I am nervous about:

Amherst -3.5 @ Curry
Over/Under: 147.5

[TheHerst2and4]

 

real players need to play. when a player sits for too long, usually it ends up being a disappointing college athletic experience and an acknowledgement that they didn't make the right athletic choice. that said, i think the school decision is far more important than the basketball decision and the high quality of one's school is an appropriate trade off for a good player who has a disappointing college sports career.

I wouldn't call it disappointing. I think AC08 and Walzy are measuring success in W's and L's. Do good players want to play? Of course, heck do mediocre players want to play? I can attest to that, but as long as they are competing day in and day out in practice and the team experiences success then it can't really be a disappointing career. I mean the guys who sat at Amherst then walked out with a national championship weren't too disappointed.
I remember a second unit that had hopkins basukauskus walters and jones that loved taking it to the first team in practice.
It seems, if anything, sitting makes you appreciate every second you get on the court. You usually see the difference in players who sat then get their chance than those who get in right away.
Players that produce on the court will find their way there, but no matter if their path takes 2-3 years or the second they step on campus they shouldn't measure their career's success by the time it took.
Kids can go to a school and play right away and not win many ball games or go to a more competitive school and fight their way onto the court, which career ends up being more "disappointing"?
Sorry if I beat a dead horse, PETA wouldn't approve

[Old Guy]

I played at Middlebury when we won very few games, but I enjoyed a great team experience amid the disappointment, made friends for life, and learned a lot of basketball from a terrific coach who turned things around at Midd after I left (the old addition by subtraction). I could go literally anywhere after graduation (i.e. Army bases) and hold my own on the court - and enjoyed the fullness of my experience at Middlebury outside hoop. PT and Ws & Ls are important but not everything.

[ac08]

real players need to play. when a player sits for too long, usually it ends up being a disappointing college athletic experience

I guess my point is that the timetable for "too long" is different for "special" players, and that they are critical components of championship teams.

that said, i think the school decision is far more important than the basketball decision and the high quality of one's school is an appropriate trade off for a good player who has a disappointing college sports career.

I concur with school choice being paramount, though I'm inclined to agree with Old Guy with regards to "disappointing" college sports careers.

[walzy31]

Amherst -3.5 @ Curry
Over/Under: 147.5

Amherst 87
Curry 69

Amherst -3.5 @ Curry (Amherst Covers +14.5)
Over/Under: 147.5 (Over +10.5)

[division3]

i like the conversation we are all having. i think what we might be saying is that a great and meaningful college experience makes the difficult parts less important. we would all agree that it is not what happens that is most important, but how we deal with it. so...one can be a terrific high school player, not have nearly the college career they were hoping for, yet still be quite happy with their overall experience. it also seems fair to say that one can be happy to be part of a championship team but wish they contributed more on the floor and/or feel that coach didn't give them enough opportunity. dissatisfaction occurs, sometimes to a substantial degree. coaches have preferences, ie.kids sometimes play behind someone and resent it. positive and negative feelings  co-exist and to imply that quality players are satisfied by just being a part of it seems like the truly unusual kid or a polarization. but...these high end liberal arts and ivy schools do have many unusual kids. there are many that find  their college athletic experience to be disappointing, and some have gone to williams, amherst, etc...it happens in all programs. certainly many athletes have complex feelings about their sports experiences that stay for life,though i hope that the majority (which i believe is the case) have great, fond memories.  

[Hugenerd]

Here are some of the over/unders for Tufts University this year.

Jon Pierce PPG @ 22.5.

Jon Pierce Tech Foul @ 3

Tufts Leauge Wins @ 2.5.

Tom Selby leaving bench for no particular reason @ .5


More to come........ please give me some feedback

Thanks Guys

Looks like:

Pierce's Points: Under

Tech's: could end up being a push (he currently has two)

Wins: looks like under

Beyel:  not sure

[walzy31]

Hugenerd,

Thanks for the updates on the preseason Tufts prop bets. If I were a fan or alum of Curry, I would have had some great props having to do with how generic their names are. Of the 14 guys who played in last night's game against Amherst, their name attribution was as follows:

Michael - 5
Chris - 2
John, Mark, Paul, Andrew - 1 Each
Other - 3

Imagine if all five Mike's were on the court at the same time... ... ... chaos.

If anything, this should affirm division3's point that there are plenty of unusal kids who go to NESCAC schools.

[walzy31]

NESCAC Spreads - 1/22/2010

Williams -17.5 @ Wesleyan
Over/Under: 174.0

Bowdoin -8.0 @ Bates
Over/Under: 138.0

Colby -11.5 @ Tufts
Over/Under: 121.5

Middlebury -15.5 @ Conn College
Over/Under: 152.0

All home teams are dogs.

[nescac1]

Wow, those are some big spreads for road teams ... other than maybe Tufts (that looks spot-on), I'd take the dogs in all of those games. 

Turning away from NESCAC, Walzy, what's the over/under on Super Bowl III / Namath references during the Jets / Colts game?

[walzy31]

Wow, those are some big spreads for road teams ... other than maybe Tufts (that looks spot-on), I'd take the dogs in all of those games. 

Turning away from NESCAC, Walzy, what's the over/under on Super Bowl III / Namath references during the Jets / Colts game?

Over/Under SBIII/Namath references during the 2010 AFC Championship Game*: 4.0

*Not the number of times Namath's name or the words "Super Bowl Three" are spoken, but the number of times either is brought up as a new topic of conversation, flashback video footage, or statistical graphic. Halftime coverage is included.

nescac1, you're going to have to keep track and report back letting us know the true tally.

[Hugenerd]

Wow, those are some big spreads for road teams ... other than maybe Tufts (that looks spot-on), I'd take the dogs in all of those games.  

Turning away from NESCAC, Walzy, what's the over/under on Super Bowl III / Namath references during the Jets / Colts game?

Over/Under SBIII/Namath references during the 2010 AFC Championship Game*: 4.0

*Not the number of times Namath's name or the words "Super Bowl Three" are spoken, but the number of times either is brought up as a new topic of conversation, flashback video footage, or statistical graphic. Halftime coverage is included.

nescac1, you're going to have to keep track and report back letting us know the true tally.

Does the pregame, halftime, and postgame count?

[walzy31]

Kickoff until end of game. Halftime counts (as I said), but pre and post game commentary does not.

[Old Guy]

Walzy: I'm in Lewiston on family matters - have you been in the Bates gym? Hoosiers, and then some. The place will be jumpin'. I'm going to the game tonight. I'd take your spread in a minute - a Bates win is hardly out of the question. These Maine teams are fierce rivals. Bates is different, historically, from Bowdoin (more public school kids, Boston orientation, etc.) and just hate to lose to the Polar Bears.

I hope you're right about Midd-CC, though I'm apprehensive given that Amherst-CC score (at Amherst!) last week.