MBB: NESCAC

[lefrakenstein]

By the way, I should have said this last night, but congrats to all the Williams and Midd seniors on amazing careers. Thompson put in one last incredible defensive performance. Wolfin and Lynch will also be sorely missed, even from an Amherst fan's perspective.For Williams, Klemm and Robertson were big time players. Williams has an article up about the graduating foursome:

http://athletics.williams.edu/sports/mbkb/2012-13/releases/20130322y6smf5

Didn't realize that they graduate as the second winningest class in Williams' history. Quite a feat

[Mr. Ypsi]

You guys are not even close to right about NCC's game.  At least by midwestern standards, they are not a particularly physical team.  Unfortunately tonight they could not have hit the ocean if they were standing on the shoreline!

(If you want to see a physical CCIW team, watch Augustana sometime! )

[Titan Q]

You guys are not even close to right about NCC's game.  At least by midwestern standards, they are not a particularly physical team.  Unfortunately tonight they could not have hit the ocean if they were standing on the shoreline!

(If you want to see a physical CCIW team, watch Augustana sometime! )

This is just not accurate at all, Chuck.  North Central was an incredibly physical team by any standards this season.  Illinois Wesleyan and NCC were the two most physical teams in the CCIW this year...probably in that order.  They were probably two of the most physical teams in Division III actually.

[old_hooper]

Ypsi, who said anything about physical, I said UGLY!

[Titan Q]

Ypsi, who said anything about physical, I said UGLY!

NCC is an exceptional defensive team.  On the season they allowed opponents just 58.5 ppg and .393 shooting.  Most teams with those kind of defensive stats don't look "pretty" on the floor.

Tonight I assume NCC's gameplan was to slow the fast-paced Lord Jeffs down and the turn the game into a halfcourt, grind it out-type of game.  They succeeded in controlling tempo...they just couldn't score with any kind of consistency against Amherst.

NCC had a lot of games this season where they got up and down the floor and looked very fluid offensively.

[toad22]

It really isn't fair for me to criticize NCC for their play. I only watched, in person, one game. They had a fine season. They certainly deserved all the success they had. My comment was more about the game, which played like an early 90s Big East game. That is the style of play that nearly drove me to give up the game!

[Titan Q]

It really isn't fair for me to criticize NCC for their play. I only watched, in person, one game. They had a fine season. They certainly deserved all the success they had. My comment was more about the game, which played like an early 90s Big East game. That is the style of play that nearly drove me to give up the game!

From the opening tip, the officials seemed to really let both teams play, allowing a ton of contact all over the floor without whistles.  In the 1st half, for example, NCC center Landon Gamble had several low post shots where there was quite a bit of contact without fouls being called.  Derek Raridon drew contact a few times as well without getting to the FT line.  The loose whistle went both ways - Amherst offensive players dealt with the same thing on the other end.

The way the officials called the game really turned it into a physical slugfest.

[lefrakenstein]

It really isn't fair for me to criticize NCC for their play. I only watched, in person, one game. They had a fine season. They certainly deserved all the success they had. My comment was more about the game, which played like an early 90s Big East game. That is the style of play that nearly drove me to give up the game!

From the opening tip, the officials seemed to really let both teams play, allowing a ton of contact all over the floor without whistles.  In the 1st half, for example, NCC center Landon Gamble had several low post shots where there was quite a bit of contact without fouls being called.  Derek Raridon drew contact a few times as well without getting to the FT line.  The loose whistle went both ways - Amherst offensive players dealt with the same thing on the other end.

The way the officials called the game really turned it into a physical slugfest.

I disagree with this. While at time the refs took a 'let them play' attitude, at other times they called absurd ticky-tack fouls. NCC had something like three moving screen fouls in the first half. There were instances where very little contact drew a foul (at one point, after Toomey's second foul w/ 9 min to play in the 1st half, the broadcasters even commented 'I guess we'll just chalk that up to a good-old-fashioned make-up call"). The issue was that the refs were not consistent at all.

[trixiep]

It really isn't fair for me to criticize NCC for their play. I only watched, in person, one game. They had a fine season. They certainly deserved all the success they had. My comment was more about the game, which played like an early 90s Big East game. That is the style of play that nearly drove me to give up the game!

From the opening tip, the officials seemed to really let both teams play, allowing a ton of contact all over the floor without whistles.  In the 1st half, for example, NCC center Landon Gamble had several low post shots where there was quite a bit of contact without fouls being called.  Derek Raridon drew contact a few times as well without getting to the FT line.  The loose whistle went both ways - Amherst offensive players dealt with the same thing on the other end.

The way the officials called the game really turned it into a physical slugfest.

I disagree with this. While at time the refs took a 'let them play' attitude, at other times they called absurd ticky-tack fouls. NCC had something like three moving screen fouls in the first half. There were instances where very little contact drew a foul (at one point, after Toomey's second foul w/ 9 min to play in the 1st half, the broadcasters even commented 'I guess we'll just chalk that up to a good-old-fashioned make-up call"). The issue was that the refs were not consistent at all.

At least the Referees didn't intercept any passes.

[nescac1]

Congrats to the Jeffs.  The first time they beat Williams, I thought it was a product of them playing out of their minds.  What I didn't realize is how much Kalema and Williamson improved since last season.  It brought Amherst from having three guys who are nightmares to match with up to five.  That's simply too much to deal with.  And Williamson has continued to improve to the point where he may now be the toughest cover on Amherst, which is pretty amazing considering that he started the season as the fourth option.  The rest of his game caught up with his always-scary athleticism, and now no one in D-3 can handle him.  I predict he ends up as the third player to make an all-Final Four team (after McLaughlin and Robertson) to have never made an all-NESCAC team.  If that doesn't provide testament to the depth of talent in NESCAC, nothing will.  Good luck to the Jeffs in Atlanta.  Here's my commentary on the CCIW board, which over the past week has been generally filled with disrespect or outright bile for NESCAC teams.  I am thankful Amherst won yesterday because we no doubt otherwise would continue hear for the next year about how overrated NESCAC teams are, had they lost.  We'll probably still hear it, but at least it will be a tad bit blunted:

As a Williams fan, it took this board to make me actually root for Amherst, so congrats.  I think the slow pace was to NCC's benefit, actually, I think Amherst would have beaten them handily had it been a wide open up-and-down game which far more favored Amherst's style of play.  I have never bashed the CCIW or WIAC, and neither do other NESCAC fans, at least until now.  I've always had the utmost respect for those teams, and I continue to think the WIAC is the best conference. Based on what I've seen of the CCIW, though, I've been underwhelmed, at least when you are claiming that it offers superior brand of hoops vs. the NESCAC.  I won't say, like the posters here claim about NESCAC (e.g., the NESCAC teams would lose regularly to CCIW if they played claim, which is ridiculous, stated earlier on this board) that North Central or IWU would not be NESCAC contenders.  They surely would have been this year, although I am confident Amherst would have swept either, and I give Williams the edge over either, too.  The top three in NESCAC have simply been consistently stronger than the top three of the CCIW for over a decade now.  If I'm not mistaken, it's now been more than FIFTEEN years since any CCIW team has played for the national title.  You can only blame bracketing for so much ... at some point in the tourney, you will have to play the best teams, and when they play the best teams, the CCIW teams lose.  I only say all of this because of all the bitterness I hear about NESCAC, over and over, both in person and on these boards, and really, it's time for it all to end.

In that same time span, SIX NESCAC teams have made the championship, with two victories in the bag and, I'm guessing a third imminent.  Until the CCIW sends at least a few teams to the championship game, can we please have a moratorium on the annual commentary, both on the boards and by many of the folks actually attending the games in Salem, about how the top NESCAC teams couldn't hang in CCIW or WIAC?  Because the best of CCIW this year would be in my view a third place NESCAC team this year, and North Central would not have beaten the 2010 Williams team or 2011 Williams or Midd teams, either.  And NESCAC looks loaded again next season with, I would expect, four pre-season all-American players returning plus a fourth team (Tufts) ready to reemerge on the national scene after a hiatus.  The top three NESCAC programs would all contend for a CCIW or even a WIAC title year in and year out, and they've proven as much by continually advancing, not just to the Final Four, but all the way to the championship game, in SIX out of the last eleven years.  And I note that Williams had to beat Amherst during three of its final four runs, so it's not like the teams are always separated into opposing brackets.   Unless you are saying an entire half of the bracket, or heck, the whole damn tournament including the title game, is set up to give NESCAC teams a series of gimmes, just please, quit the annual whining.  It's unbecoming.  At the very least, wait until y'all win another title!

[cardinalpride]

Congrats to the Jeffs.  The first time they beat Williams, I thought it was a product of them playing out of their minds.  What I didn't realize is how much Kalema and Williamson improved since last season.  It brought Amherst from having three guys who are nightmares to match with up to five.  That's simply too much to deal with.  And Williamson has continued to improve to the point where he may now be the toughest cover on Amherst, which is pretty amazing considering that he started the season as the fourth option.  The rest of his game caught up with his always-scary athleticism, and now no one in D-3 can handle him.  I predict he ends up as the third player to make an all-Final Four team (after McLaughlin and Robertson) to have never made an all-NESCAC team.  If that doesn't provide testament to the depth of talent in NESCAC, nothing will.  Good luck to the Jeffs in Atlanta.  Here's my commentary on the CCIW board, which over the past week has been generally filled with disrespect or outright bile for NESCAC teams.  I am thankful Amherst won yesterday because we'd no doubt otherwise would continue hear for the next year about how overrated NESCAC teams are, had they lost.  We'll probably still hear it, but at least it will be a tad bit blunted:

As a Williams fan, it took this board to make me actually root for Amherst, so congrats.  I think the slow pace was to NCC's benefit, actually, I think Amherst would have beaten them handily had it been a wide open up-and-down game which far more favored Amherst's style of play.  I have never bashed the CCIW or WIAC, and neither do other NESCAC fans, at least until now.  I've always had the utmost respect for those teams, and I continue to think the WIAC is the best conference. Based on what I've seen of the CCIW, though, I've been underwhelmed, at least when you are claiming that it offers superior brand of hoops vs. the NESCAC.  I won't say, like the posters here claim about NESCAC (e.g., the NESCAC teams would lose regularly to CCIW if they played claim, which is ridiculous, stated earlier on this board) that North Central or IWU would not be NESCAC contenders.  They surely would have been this year, although I am confident Amherst would have swept either, and I give Williams the edge over either, too.  The top three in NESCAC have simply been consistently stronger than the top three of the CCIW for over a decade now.  If I'm not mistaken, it's now been more than FIFTEEN years since any CCIW team has played for the national title.  You can only blame bracketing for so much ... at some point in the tourney, you will have to play the best teams, and when they play the best teams, the CCIW teams lose.  I only say all of this because of all the bitterness I hear about NESCAC, over and over, both in person and on these boards, and really, it's time for it all to end.

In that same time span, SIX NESCAC teams have made the championship, with two victories in the bag and, I'm guessing a third imminent.  Until the CCIW sends at least a few teams to the championship game, can we please have a moratorium on the annual commentary, both on the boards and by many of the folks actually attending the games in Salem, about how the top NESCAC teams couldn't hang in CCIW or WIAC?  Because the best of CCIW this year would be in my view a third place NESCAC team this year, and North Park would not have beaten the 2010 Williams team or 2011 Williams or Midd teams, either.  And NESCAC looks loaded again next season with, I would expect, four pre-season all-American players returning plus a fourth team (Tufts) ready to reemerge on the national scene after a hiatus.  The top three NESCAC programs would all contend for a CCIW or even a WIAC title year in and year out, and they've proven as much by continually advancing, not just to the Final Four, but all the way to the championship game, in SIX out of the last eleven years.  And I note that Williams had to beat Amherst during three of its final four runs, so it's not like the teams are always separated into opposing brackets.   Unless you are saying an entire half of the bracket, or heck, the whole damn tournament including the title game, is set up to give NESCAC teams a series of gimmes, just please, quit the annual whining.  It's unbecoming.  At the very least, wait until y'all win another title!

Congrats to Amherst! You guys are the best!

[lefrakenstein]

I guess I'll re-post my CCIW board post since both nescac1 and cardinal pride have re-posted theirs:


I do think that the CCIW is the better conference top-to-bottom, but it's hard to argue with nescac1 for the top three NESCAC teams. On the NESCAC board we get to hear every year how the NESCAC has trouble holding it's own against midwest teams and how the CCIW and WIAC are the superior conferences. The WIAC, fine. They've had an incredible run and I think are clearly the best conference in the country, challenged only by maybe the UAA. The CCIW, though, I can't agree with. The CCIW has had a much tougher time against elite competition than the top NESCAC teams have. To take a look at the performance this millennium in the sweet 16 and beyond:

Sweet 16:
NESCAC: 19 appearances, 14-5 overall, 13-4 against other conferences, .764 winning percentage.
CCIW: 17 appearances, 9-8 overall, 7-6 against other conferences, .538 winning percentage.

Elite 8:
NESCAC: 14 appearances, 10-4 overall, 8-2 against other conferences, .800 winning percentage.
CCIW: 9 appearances 5-4 overall, 5-4 against other conferences, .555 winning percentage.

Final 4:
NESCAC: 10 appearances, 6-4 overall, 5-3 against other conferences, .625 winning percentage
CCIW: 5 appearances, 0-5 overall, 0-5 against other conferences, .000 winning percentage

Finals:
NESCAC: 5 (soon to be 6) appearances, 2-3 overall, 2-3 against other conferences, .400 winning percentage.
CCIW: no appearances.

You can discount the NESCAC's sterling record in the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 somewhat by saying they've played easier teams, which is at least somewhat valid. But the NESCAC's record in the Final Four and Finals (7-6) is the same as the CCIW's record in the Sweet 16. So basically the NESCAC has the same success rate against the best teams that come out of the midwest side of the bracket that the CCIW has against the teams that just make the third round.  The NESCAC's semi-final record is better than the CCIW's record in either the Sweet 16 or Elite 8. And of course the CCIW's semifinal record is worse than the NESCAC's record in finals, showing that the NESCAC has at least some success against largely the same level competition that has stopped the CCIW in its tracks. 

Looking at the tournament results, it's tough not to come to the conclusion that the top NESCAC teams are just better than the top CCIW teams.

Thanks cardinalpride! After all the crap the NESCAC took from midwest posters on the NESCAC board over the last few days, even sarcastic praise is a welcome change. 

Update: It's also worth noting that in that time span, NESCAC teams have eliminated each other more times (4) than CCIW teams have (2). So inadequate 'protection' isn't really the issue.

[Titan Q]

Here's my commentary on the CCIW board, which over the past week has been generally filled with disrespect or outright bile for NESCAC teams.  I am thankful Amherst won yesterday because we'd no doubt otherwise would continue hear for the next year about how overrated NESCAC teams are, had they lost.  We'll probably still hear it, but at least it will be a tad bit blunted:

I think you are being extremely misleading about what has actually been said by CCIW fans.  I haven't followed a lot of the conversation this past week that closely on this board or the CCIW's (I was out of town for work all week and just didn't have time), but I think you are really exaggerating.

I don't think the average CCIW fan/poster has questioned the strength of the NESCAC at all, or that of the top NESCAC teams.  I think the frustration has simply been with the Division III bracketing process year in and year out.  It's hard to argue with the fact that the CCIW's road to Salem is just a lot more difficult than the NESCAC's.  Consider that last night was the 1st game Amherst played against a ranked team in the tournament...it was NCC's 3rd.  The Cardinals had to face #5 UW-Whitewater in Round 2, and then the CCIW champion IWU, #10, in Round 3.  IWU had to play @ UAA champ Wash U (#17) in Round 2 and then @ #3 North Central in Round 3 just to get to Salem.  That's all the frustration is about. 

You are right, the CCIW has not gotten the job done in Salem.  Since IWU won the national title in 1997, the Titans failed to win in the national semi-final game in 2001, 2006, and 2012.  As did Carthage in 2002 and NCC obviously lost last night.  But I think you'd agree that conference strength goes well beyond national titles, or appearances in the title game.  It has a lot to do with the number of tournament caliber teams and depth...in these areas the CCIW always stacks up well.  This year was no exception with Illinois Wesleyan (1st place), North Central (2nd place), Wheaton (3rd), and a pretty good Augustana (4th place) team.

Did a poster here or there, or someone in Salem, make disparaging comments about the NESCAC?  I'm sure that happened.  But your post seems directed at all CCIW fans, and the generalizations you are making about what CCIW posters have actually said and think is just really unfair as I see it.

[lefrakenstein]

It's hard to argue with the fact that the CCIW's road to Salem is just a lot more difficult than the NESCAC's.  Consider that last night was the 1st game Amherst played against a ranked team in the tournament...it was NCC's 3rd.  The Cardinals had to face #5 UW-Whitewater in Round 2, and then the CCIW champion IWU, #10, in Round 3.  IWU had to play @ UAA champ Wash U (#17) in Round 2 and then @ #3 North Central in Round 3 just to get to Salem.  That's all the frustration is about. 

But I think you'd agree that conference strength goes well beyond national titles, or appearances in the title game.  It has a lot to do with the number of tournament caliber teams and depth...in these areas the CCIW always stacks up well.  This year was no exception with Illinois Wesleyan (1st place), North Central (2nd place), Wheaton (3rd), and a pretty good Augustana (4th place) team.

Did a poster here or there, or someone in Salem, make disparaging comments about the NESCAC?  I'm sure that happened.

I completely agree with these parts of the post. +k

I think NESCAC fans are just frustrated because so many posters had to rush to our board to let us know that we had an easier road to getting three teams into the Elite 8. That's almost certainly true, but couldn't you just let us enjoy it anyway?

Also, as someone who has been to Salem before and followed for a fair amount of time now, there's no question that in general the midwest fans have a pretty disdainful view of the NESCAC. That was probably warranted 10 years ago. And the WIAC has probably earned the right to look down on everybody else. But times have changed. The top NESCAC teams can compete with anyone. that's been proven, regardless of what happens in Atlanta in 2 weeks.

[nescac1]

Titan Q, I certainly don't think all CCIW fans are guilty of this.  I can't recall you, for example, every saying anything problematic.  But trust me that the frustration level of NESCAC fans on this point is widely shared.  We've all heard enough comments, either in person or on the boards, over the years to have earned our frustration.  I'm sure it's not a majority of CCIW / fans from the Midwest, but it's more than  just one or two, and importantly, I've never seen anyone from their conference / region call them out.  On the other hand, when someone bashed the caliber of play in the CCIW on this board, I and I believe others called them out on that.  It really is an annual occurrence to complain about the path NESCAC has to the finals.  Some years, the path has been easier than others.  But the biggest source of my frustration is that whether NESCAC teams are placed in the same quarter of the draw folks complain, and when NESCAC teams are separated, folks also complain.  I think there is a general lack of respect for NESCAC teams in particular, and New England teams in particular, that is bred by lack of familiarity.  There are a LOT of really good teams and players that aren't on the national radar at all in New England, which, if they were, say, a mid-tier CCIW team, would garner a lot more respect.  Instead, folks see a team from a conference they've never heard of and assume, oh, yeah, that must be a cakewalk game.  And it really does not run both ways.  I've never once seen a NESCAC fan complain that a CCIW team does not belong in Salem.  I wish that the few bad apples would stop giving the majority of good folks like you a bad name.  But it would help a little if y'all occasionally called them out on the comments. 

By the way, lefrankenstein's excellent post above is dispositive, once and for all, of the issue of whether CCIW is stronger at the top than NESCAC, and also whether the NESCAC teams who play in Salem belong there (and really, that issue is at the root of this all -- regardless of the path they've taken, when NESCAC teams get to Salem, they inevitably show that they belong).  I'd agree that CCIW might go a little deeper, but the elite teams from NESCAC have consistently performed substantially better later in the tournament.  And NESCAC was unusually thin this year, but is going to be MUCH deeper next year, a lot of teams with recent massive coaching or personnel transitions.  But even the bottom-tier teams in NESCAC have a lot of talent right now, it just tends to be on the young side.   Can we just agree that these are two of the top five conference in Division III, and leave it at that? 

BTW, just read lefrankenstein's latest post after posting mine.  Basically said what I said, only more tersely.  I agree completely.