MBB: NESCAC

[AmherstStudent05]

A few things I've been meaning to post in response to some of the past team comparisons.

(1) AmherstStudent2005, I still take Williams 2003.  I think the statistical dominance of that team speaks to how powerful of a squad they were.  And they really did pass the eye test.  Combining two all-American players with simply tremendous depth and loads of three points shooters (Tim Folan in particular is a guy who could have started on virtually any NESCAC team, including Amherst 2013), and having two elite post players, would have made that Eph team a handful for anyone.   Continuing the dominance into 2004 is in my view relevant, because the core of the team proved its dominance over a longer period of time.  When we speak of truly elite teams in any sport, we almost always look at teams that won convincingly for a long period, not just one truly spectacular three month run like 2013 Amherst.  [And while 2013 Amherst dominated in the NCAA's, they did have several VERY narrow escapes vs. Williams and Midd late in the season, in addition to two losses to mediocre teams early, before they really started clicking].   Thus, if 2014 Amherst made it back to the Final Four, I think that would strengthen their argument a bit.  Finally, in my view they had a tougher path than Amherst 2013 in the tourney, although granted they did not win games as convincingly.  The Elite 8 win over Amherst WAS convincing and that was over a pretty loaded Amherst team.  Wooster in the semis was really strong and featured an all-American post player, although granted the Ephs did require a few breaks to win that game. 

I really take issue with your assessment of that Gustavus Adolphus team.  First, I watched them, and that was if not the most organized, among the most organized offensive teams I've ever seen in D-3.  Incredible movement off the ball and screening, and tons of ace shooters. The were just clicking on all cylinders and were nearly impossible to guard, with a very unconventional offensive attack, just played with a degree of precision and timing which probably took much of the season to develop.  Although they perhaps had a similar record, in my view they were MUCH better and certainly far more skilled than Mary Hardin Baylor.  In fact, that Gustavus team was on a roll similar to Amherst 2013 when Williams played them ... after some early season struggles, they had won 15/16 games with the only loss a 2-pointer vs. St. Thomas (which they avenged two weeks later with a 26 point victory).  In the tourney, they beat, by double digits, a series of national powers, including a Stevens Point squad that won the next two titles and a loaded Hampden Sydney team.  They were absolutely legit. 

(2) I've noted them before, but in response to the best NESCAC team NOT to make it to Salem, my (again, probably biased ) view is 1996 Williams.  The team had two all-Americans in Nogelo and Chapin, and two of the best defenders I've seen in NESCAC play in John Botti and Mike Humphreys.  Those four, plus a very solid point guard in Jim Frew, composed a really, really solid starting five, particularly defensively, and they had decent (although not spectacular) depth behind them.  They lost on the road (or perhaps it was a neutral site) to a Rowan team which went on to win a national title and which featured, I believe, two D-1 transfers who were virtually unstoppable.  That Rowan team is, I still think, the most talented I've seen in D-3 (not the most disciplined, but the top three players were ridiculously good).  And the Ephs were about even in that Rowan game until Chapin had to leave the game with a migraine.  Less talented, in my view, Williams teams made it to Salem in 1997 and 1998, and I doubt either of those teams could have hung with Rowan.

Sorry, all, but I simply cannot help myself.

Nescac1, you raise some interesting points, and I will try to take each in turn.

(1) As for the statistical dominance of Williams 2003, again, yes it is impressive, but you did not seem to address my argument that it came at the expense of relatively weak competition.  In minimizing the importance of Amherst 2013's relative dominance in the NCAA Tournament, you cite its relatively weaker competition (in your estimation) as a mitigating factor.  Shouldn't then Williams 03's regular season schedule also demand similar scrutiny.  To be fair, I did not think that, top-to-bottom, the NESCAC was particularly strong this year, but the NESCAC was unquestionably more competitive this year than it was in 2003.  This year, the NESCAC had three dominant teams ranked in the top 10. In 2003, the third best NESCAC team only had 16 wins (I think it is quite possible that 2013 Tufts would have been the third best NESCAC team in 2003).  Also, from what I can tell, Williams's non-conference schedule wasn't that robust either (at least according to contemporary d3hoops polls).  It seems that Williams consistently dominated weak teams (no small feat to be sure) and then barely edged out the few good teams it played (with two Amherst exceptions – Williams undoubtedly dominated Amherst in the Elite Eight, but also lost to Amherst in the regular season).

(2) As far as your eye test comment goes, if you meant merely that Williams 2003 passes the eye test, then I agree with you wholeheartedly.  However, if you meant that Williams 2003 passes the eye test in a way that Amherst 2013 does not, then I have to disagree strongly.  A few more points in this vein.  You say that Williams had two All-American players in 2003.  To be clear, I went back and checked and it appears that Crotty, who made the Third Team, was Williams's only All American in 2003 according to d3hoops (Coffin didn't make the team until 2004).  Now, if you meant merely that Coffin was deserving of All-American recognition in 2003, there I probably have to agree with you. It is difficult for me to separate out Coffin 2003 and Coffin 2004 in my mind, but I know that I was deeply impressed by both and consider both years to be at All-American levels (although, even now, I have a very limited understanding of the d3 talent outside of NESCAC, and in 2003 I had no such understanding, so far be it for me to criticize the choices actually made by d3hoops).  I will note however that, on the subject of All-Americans, Amherst 2013 actually had two official all-americans.  Aaron Toomey made the first team (and was the NABC player of the year and was the unofficial runner up in the d3hoops voting) and Workman made the third team. A separate player (Williamson) was our NCAA MOP, and yet a fourth player (Kaasila) made an All NESCAC team.  That seems to pass the eye test to me.

Also, on the issue of depth.  Again, I cannot dispute your comments regarding Folan.  I agree that he could have easily started over Killian on this year's Amherst team.  It is too bad that there is no annual ALL-NESCAC Sixth Man of the Year award (why isn't there one), but if there had been one, I am sure that Folan would have won it in 2003 and, in fact, without thinking about it too much, Folan would be my initial choice for Sixth Man of the past dozen years in the NESCAC (with 2007 Kevin Hopkins trailing right behind).  However, you keep just asserting that Williams 2003 had "tremendous depth" as if it is some obvious fact and, I am sorry, but I just don't remember it that way.  Amherst played Williams four times in 2003, and, outside of Folan, I don't remember anyone from Williams's bench having any meaningful impact on any of those games. Now, maybe I am misremembering, or maybe those four games were outliers, but while many positive attributes come to mind when I think of that Williams team, "tremendous depth" isn't even near the list: excellent sixth man, absolutely; a number of really talented bench players who consistently played meaningful minutes and were each capable of taking over a game or at least providing a key spark, that I just don't recall.  In fact, after Folan, I would place Kalema and Green as the next two most impactful bench players when looking at both Williams 2003 and Amherst 2013.

(3) Again, I don't think prior or successive years are relevant when talking about all time great teams (anyone know anything about the 84 or 86 Bears?), but, even so, something about your "not just one truly spectacular three month run like Amherst 2013"  rubbed me the wrong way -- although maybe I am just misreading it or am getting the tone a little wrong.  First, and again maybe it is just me, you seem to be suggesting that Amherst's run was just a blip, kinda like the Giants going on one of their now patented four-week playoff runs out of nowhere to beat the Patriots.  Amherst hasn't lost any game since December 6th!  Yes, we had a couple of close calls -- Hamilton, Midd, and Williams (though we held the lead for the entirety of the last five minutes against Williams in the championship game) – but, unlike Williams 2003, Amherst 2013 actually won the NESCAC in the regular season.

More to the point however, Amherst hasn't lost a single NESCAC game in 2 years! We are currently on a 26-0 run (unmatched by your Williams 03-04 teams).  Is that not a sustained enough run for you? To be sure, Amherst 2012 gets overlooked somewhat because they did lose in the Sweet 16.  Granted, that wasn't a great outcome for us.  Now, to be fair, I think everyone would agree that that Amherst team almost certainly earned the right to host the Sweet 16/Elite Eight based on their play in the regular season, but unfortunately logistical considerations forced Amherst to travel to Lancaster to play F&M on their home court. Still, the Dips beat us soundly and we have to accept that.  I also accept that, despite going undefeated, the 2012 Jeffs had lots of close calls in NESCAC play and may not have been so clearly dominant. (To be perfectly honest, I was never as high on the 2012 Jeffs as others may have been. I actually favored the 2011 Amherst squad – which I assume would be a rather unpopular view among Amherst faithful since the 2012 Jeffs bested Williams and Midd in ways that Amherst failed to do in 2011. As I have said previously though, I really liked Meehan's game and I thought we really missed his presence last year.  Last year, it often seemed to me that we were over-reliant on Toomey. This was one of the fantastic improvements of this year's squad. We could comfortably and successfully run the offense through Toomey, Workman, Williamson, or Kaasila by season's end.)  All in all though, I think it is a little rich for you to suggest that we are merely on a little "three month run". (Also, if we want to include suitably long windows, why don't we throw Williams 05 into the mix? If we are looking at a four-year window, it is very tough to beat Amherst 2007)

(4) I think Amherst's postseason run this year was pretty impressive. We absolutely steamrolled RMC a team that a lot of people (Coach Hixon included) really seemed to be high on (they obviously didn't impress me too much the only time I saw them, but what do I know). In the Elite Eight we handily beat a Cabrini team that you yourself were very high on and that made the Championship game from the year before (I confess that, outside of Walton-Moss of course, I wasn't quite as high on them).  In the Final Four we beat an NCC team that featured a First-Team All-American post player and another All-American post player (though Raridon admittedly did not look like an All-American in either of the two games I have seen him play) and was absolutely outstanding defensively and just a very good all-around team.  Of course, overall, I still think Amherst 2007 had a more impressive postseason run than either Amherst 2013 or Williams 2003.

(5) Finally, as for my comments about GA, as I think I conceded at the outset, I freely admit that I never actually saw them play and I thus acknowledge that I am limited about what I can say about this team. Perhaps our disagreement is mostly about semantics, however. I do not deny that GA was "absolutely legit" just as I would say that UMHB was absolutely legit.  They were both talented teams that bested stiff and worthy competition (no fortuitous draws) in order to rightfully earn their place in the Championship game. And they each would have been worthy champions.  My point with UMHB (a point I would rather not dwell on too much since their fans seemed to be so entirely classy down in Atlanta) is that I didn't think UMHB was a "powerhouse" team in the same way I view the Stevens Point teams, Virginia Wesleyan 2007, Wash U 2008, or NCC 2013 (among many others I am sure) that NESCAC teams had previously faced in Salem. I guess my point with GA is that I find it hard to believe that a six-loss team that was ranked outside the top 20 heading into the Tournament could really have been that kind of powerhouse along the lines of the teams I listed above.  Shouldn't the voters have noticed? I know that the polls are far from perfect, but I just find it hard to believe that GA could have been so clearly good as you say they were and yet escaped the voters' attention the way they did, but, again, you may be right.  Where I think you are clearly wrong is in comparing 2013 Amherst with 2003 GA. 2013 Amherst had won 19 straight games (for a record of 25-2 overall) and was the number 2 ranked team in the country heading in to the NCAA Tournament.  That is precisely the "profile" one would expect of a powerhouse team.  Whatever GA may have been, GA never had that kind of profile prior to the NCAA Tournament.

[AmherstStudent05]

I hope this conversation with nescac1 (and others) continues, but for those who are long since fed up with it, I have another -- though admittedly related -- topic of conversation to discuss.  In writing my last post, I started to think about what lineups I would play if I were allowed to combine any two teams from previous NESCAC seasons.

For instance, if I had Amherst 2013 and Williams 03, my starting lineup would be as follows: 1. Crotty, 2. Toomey, 3. Workman, 4. Williamson, 5. Coffin.  Kalema would back up the point to the extent at least that Crotty and Toomey were both off the floor at the same time -- likely to be a rare occurrence. Kaasila would be my reserve 5, meaning that DeMuth would likely play only sparingly, although I suppose I could understand if Williams fans (or others) wanted to make a flip here.  Cole, Abba, and Folan would be my primary rotation for the 2-4 spots.

If I had Amherst 2013 and Amherst 2007, I would go as follows: 1. Olson, 2. Toomey, 3. Workman, 4. Wheeler, 5. Kaasila.  Williamson would be my sixth man assassin off the bench -- a Mo Peterson type role he might be ideally suited for. Hopkins would be my reserve 5. TMac, Baskauskas, and Walters would all also fight for time at the 2-4 positions.  I would also love to get some minutes for Salerno and Kalema, but that might be tough.

Amherst 2007 and Williams 2003 was surprisingly difficult for me.  Interestingly, back when AncientSonofHixon proposed his fantasy draft, I thought to myself that Olson and Crotty would be the top two players on my board (though I never really wanted to admit the Crotty part publicly, even if I would still have him just behind Olson).  While I have seen many different star players dominate at many different positions during my dozen years or so of following NESCAC basketball, I am firmly of the view that star point guards are usually the common thread through most successful NESCAC teams. If I were starting a team, the first thing I would want is a reliable point guard who can effectively manage a game, penetrate or shoot from the outside when needed, and be equally likely to make the game-winning shot or game winning pass.  While I have seen many great point guards in the NESCAC, it is hard to think of anyone better than Olson or Crotty.  However, I think they might diminish each other if they were both on the same team since they cant both be floor generals.  I would still start both of them, along with Wheeler and Coffin. I have no idea who my fifth spot would go to though.  Maybe T-mac or Cole. Maybe Folan or Abba or Baskauskas.  Maybe I would start DeMuth, Coffin and Wheeler with Olson and Crotty to go for a very big lineup.  The various rotations though with Tmac, Cole, Abba, Folan, Baskauskas, Walters, and Hopkins would be very interesting.  Probably way too much for me to handle however. 

[nescac1]

I don't want to keep this going forever, but on the other hand, there isn't anything else to discuss right now, so why not ?

Just a few last quick points ...

(1) AmherstStudent05, I don't see ANY material difference between the schedule faced in the regular season by Williams 03 vs. by Amherst 2013.  Amherst faced a decent schedule this year, but hardly a murderer's row, and of course they lost one more game than that Williams team did.  NESCAC in 2003 was not as strong at the 3/4 spot, but I do think it was deeper.  The bottom of the league this year was really not good -- I think next year there will be much better balance -- and while memory is fuzzy, I remember the league being a bit deeper outside of the top three at that point in time.  Also, Williams played some very good non-conference teams, including Ithaca, St. Lawrence, North Carolina Wesleyan, and Springfield, all of whom were perennial NCAA competitors, I believe, back in that time frame.  Outside of RIC, 2013 Amherst didn't play any particularly impressive teams outside of NESCAC.

(2) By two all-Americans, I meant two guys who both at some point made all-America teams (in Crotty's case two), and were undoubtedly all-America players, in Coffin and Crotty.  I don't think anyone who saw (including you, and I appreciate that) Coffin's play down the stretch in 2003 would doubt that he was playing at an all-American level, he really hit his stride about midway through 2003 and just continued that way into 2004.  IN terms of bench impact guys, although Kain was hurt for part of the year, he was a big time impact player off the bench when he played, shooting well over 50 percent from three on the season, and posting a lot of big games, including if I recall vs. Amherst in the NCAA's.  Bhat and Newton were both VERY solid bigs off the bench who in limited minutes were very productive and efficient players.  Having four quality big guys is a pretty rare luxury and the depth and talent up front was really tremendous for that team.  Really the only spot where Williams didn't have a stellar back-up was point guard.  I'd say that while it's close, I'd take Kain and Folan over Kalema and Green (who are also an outstanding pair of bench players, and Green did really turn it on late in the year), but I'd definitely take the Bhat/Newton combo over Pollack, even though he is also very solid and has a very bright future.  Michael Graham was also a very solid player who would later go on to be a starter, meaning that the Ephs had one elite and four good players off the bench (and also a lot of experience, two seniors, two sophs, one frosh).  That is what I mean by tremendous depth. 

(3) I meant no disrespect at all by talking about three elite months for Amherst.  They have played at a consistently high level for a long time.  But in terms of playing at a truly elite level, I think most Amherst commentators will admit that didn't really start until after the two bad early season losses this year.  Since that time, the team has no doubt been firing on all cylinders.  And they had a very impressive NCAA run especially the wins over Cabrini and North Central.  But those Williams teams from 03-04 played at that level for two straight years, including the two title appearances, the second ending in a two point loss to one of the elite D-3 teams of recent era, the win at Holy Cross, setting a D3 record for consecutive home wins, and beating Amherst teams that themselves made the Elite 8 and then Final 4 6/8 times, without a single loss to any other team. 

(4) I don't want to gift short shrift to the 2010 Williams team in all this.  I think that that team gave the best SINGLE performance I've ever seen from a NESCAC team in the semifinal vs. Guilford.  At its best, I'd take that team over any other NESCAC team, although it's a tough call between them and 2013 Amherst just because no one could guard Williamson the way he played late in this season and Green really emerged as well.   But I don't think 2010 Williams were quite as consistent as the three NESCAC teams who have won titles, due largely to a thin bench which placed a lot of pressure on the top 6-7 guys. 

[frank uible]

Is this the place where one can cast a vote for Ditka?

[amh63]

Frank u.....did Mike play the 2 or the 3 position?

[nescac1]

Congrats to Pat Duquette (Williams '93) who will be the new coach at UMass Lowell:

http://www.lowellsun.com/sports/ci_23255614/duquette-uml-hire

The second Eph (along with Dave Paulsen) who played under Harry Sheehy to earn a D-1 head coaching position.  Impressive legacy. 

[AmherstStudent05]

In continuing with nescac1's "why not" theme, I thought I would keep this enjoyable "debate" going with another overly long post of mine.

As far as respective strength of schedules go, there is obviously no great way to compare schedules across eras, but I do think that contemporary polling data provides some useful information.  As of the last regular season poll of 2013, Amhersthad one win at #4 Middlebury (a true squeaker to be sure), went 3-0 against #7 Williams (two very convincing double digit wins – one on the road – and then a very narrow win in the NESCAC Championship Game, which Amherst hosted of course since they were the best team in the NESCAC), and a win on the road at #16 RIC.  This of course does not include Amherst's wins over Brandeis and Curry and the loss against Springfield, all perhaps arguably good teams.

As for 2003 Williams, as far as I can tell, the only team the Ephs played that year that was ranked in the final regular season poll was Amherst (ranked #11).  Of course, Williams went 2-1 against Amherst in the "regular" season and none of those three games were decided by double digits.  Maybe I am missing something, but none of the very good non-conference teams you cited – Ithaca, St. Lawrence, North Carolina Wesleyan and Springfield – appear to have been ranked.  I am not sure any of those teams were ever ranked in 2002-03.

Again, I fully concede that rankings are flawed and are difficult to compare across the decade, so I won't say that 2013 Amherst's win at #4 Middlebury was more impressive than 2003 Williams's win at #11 Amherst (in fact, as you might imagine, I happen to think that 2003 Amherst was better than both Midd and Williams this year, although I could perhaps be persuaded that this year's Williams team had a higher absolute ceiling when it was fully healthy and when Klemm was on his game).  However, these rankings can give us a general flavor for the strength of schedule these teams played.  When the regular season ended in 2013, Amherst had gone 5-0 vs ranked teams (again, ranked as of the end of the regular season, so I am not counting the win over Brandeis, who I believe was ranked when we played them back in December), and a couple of those wins were decisive and on the road.  In contrast, it appears that Williams went 2-1 vs ranked teams during the "regular" season (I am of course including the NESCAC Tournament).  This may or may not be a major difference, but surely it is a noticeable one.  It also seems to support my general view that, when looking at 2013 and 2003 as a whole, the 2003 Ephs were (at least at the margins) less likely to play top competition and more likely to "struggle" (though still win in all but one case) than 2013 Amherst. Williams's inability to dominate top flight competition is certainly relevant in determining which of these all time great teams put together the most impressive season (although I still think Williams's failure to host the NESCAC Tournament is even more decisive).

Lastly, with due respect, I see absolutely no basis for your claim that the NESCAC was deeper in 2003 than it was in 2013. This seems to be purely wishful thinking on your part I have to say.

I don't know, was Conn College stronger in 2003 when it went 1-8, 7-16 or in 2013 when it went 0-10, 7-16? How about the 2003 Mules (2-7, 6-16) vs. the 2013 Mules (3-7, 7-17)?  In terms of depth, the NESCAC was very down in both 2003 and 2013.  The major difference, as I think I noted from the beginning, was that 2013 featured three top ten NESCAC teams and 2012 only had two.

It seems to me that if you are going to say that Amherst played an easier NCAA Tournament schedule in 2013 than Williams played in 2003 based primarily, as far as I can tell, on your belief that the six-loss team you guys beat in the finals was more organized offensively than the five-loss team we beat in the finals, then you should also be able to see the difference in the schedules Amherst and Williams played in their respective regular seasons.  Also, I can't help but say again that if statistical dominance against a strong SOS is the hallmark of the most accomplished season, then I think you have to throw Amherst 07 back in the mix.  I had initially left them off the list of most accomplished season -- though I think they absolutely remain serious contenders as the best team ever -- because I thought that, in this rarified air, their disappointing one-point loss to Williams in the NESCAC Championship game was disqualifying.  Of course, I also thought Williams's failure to win the regular season NESCAC crown in 2003 was also disqualifying (I would say, historically, the regular season NESCAC champion is more likely to be better than the Tournament Champion -- when they differ -- but it may well be a close call).  If it isn't, I should note that Amherst was just as dominant statistically in 2007 as Williams was in 2003 (although, to be fair, they did have an additional loss) and, unlike Williams, Amherst sustained its dominance throughout the NCAA Tournament.  I would also say that Amherst faced even better competition in Salem in 2007 than Williams faced in 2003.

As for the strength of the Williams bench it 2003, unfortunately, this may all boil down to you asserting that Sumant Bhat was a really solid player and me asserting right back that I don't quite remember him that way (I do remember that he was a fan favorite in Chandler though, so he must have been doing something right!).  However, for anyone who has managed to read thus far, I thought I would share some statistics I found when researching this topic tonight.

Williams played Amherst 4 times in 2003, and those games obviously formed the basis of my impressions of that 2003 Eph team, so I decided to look at the box scores to see if maybe I was misremembering the strength of Williams's bench (outside of Folan).

On January 11, Williams beat Amherst 74-65 in the non-conference game in Chandler (to be honest, I don't remember this game and may not have made the trip).  The Williams bench, including Folan, combined for 4 points that game.

On January 25, Amherst and Williams played a glorious game in LeFrak -- the NESCAC's most famous arena, as I like to call it -- which Amherst happened to win by a score of 67-61.  Folan scored 16 points and the rest of the Williams bench had 2, although Kain missed this game, evidently due to injury.

On March 2, Amherst and Williams played in the NESCAC Championship game. Williams cut down the nets in the NESCAC's most famous arena -- and took their time doing it if I recall -- after beating us 74-70.  Two players scored for Williams. Folan had 12 (I never liked that guy!) and Kain had 6.  Bhat did not play, but I cannot recall if he dressed or not.

On March 15, Williams ruined my spring break by beating Amherst 91-75 in the Elite Eight (the 63.6% game).  The Williams bench here did appear to have a solid and balanced effort, scoring 26 points, of which Folan had half (Kain had only 3).

After reviewing these statistics, I was at least satisfied that I had some basis for not being overwhelmed by the depth of Williams 2003. However, at this point, I decided I might as well bother to look up Williams's full stats from 2003.

The first remarkable thing that stuck out at me was the fact that Williams's preferred starting 5 (Crotty, Cole, Abba, Coffin, DeMuth) all started all 32 games that Williams played in 2003 in a remarkable run of health certainly not enjoyed by either of Amherst's championship teams (I will note again that Amherst was undefeated this year when our preferred starting 5 all dressed, but, as someone who watched the Babson game on webcast -- I missed Springfield -- I am not sure I could possibly argue that Killian would have made much of a difference).  The point is that Williams's depth was never really tested in 2003 (though Folan and Kain appear to have missed some games due to injury).

Now, for the numbers: Folan, unsurprisingly, led the way for the Williams bench by scoring 283 points in 27 games (missing 5 due to injury).  Graham and Kain each notched 141 points on the season (though Kain notably missed 10 games), and Newton and Bhat tallied 113 and 92 points, respectively.

Now, to compare that to this year's Amherst squad: Connor Green had an impressive 297 points on the season (and, to be clear, Green did not simply put things together towards the end of the year as you have suggested; in fact, he was our leading scorer through the early part of the NESCAC season -- he then cooled off massively before thankfully finding his form in a big way for our late Tourney run).  Kalema had 287 points (more than Kain and Graham combined, though Kain did miss 10 games), and Pollack -- who did come on strong -- clocked in with 138.

Again, to be fair, I completely accept that a season box score does not always capture a player.  As I think I have made very clear, I don't think the box score adequately captures Folan's talents as a player and I am not arguing that Green or Kalema were better or as good as Folan (though hopefully they will be next year) just because they happened to score roughly the same amount of points he did.  But I do think the statistics tell us something (in addition to the fact that I saw that Williams team play live several times), and, for what its worth, they tell me that you are overvaluing the depth of that particular Williams team.  I don't think they were any more deep than Amherst's team this year and if you say that Williams was tremendously deep in 2003, I think you would have to say the same about Amherst's team this year.  Quantitatively and qualitatively, Kalema and Green were absolutely huge for us -- particularly in our biggest games against NCC and UMHB and were every bit the equal -- if not more so -- than Folan and Kain (the 2003 version, not the 2004 or 2005 ones).

[pick and roll]

Hate to say I told you so but does anyone want to take a Mulligan on rooting for Amherst to win in Atlanta....

[amh63]

Fascinated by the reference to Tim Folan, Captain of the 2003 Williams team, a non starter his senior year but came off the bench to beat Amherst with his outside shooting and was a "star" player that helped win the title game in Salem....so it was written in a Williams article.  Consider an "assasin" player off the bench....an term used by A..S..05..but also used in the Williams' article.
Tim Folan was quite a player in a local private school in D.C...Gonzaga High.  I watched him play in a title high school game with a work mate whose son was a classmate of Tim.  More interesting to me was another classmate in high school....a great football player that prep a year and then went on to star as a QB in football at Williams.
In this discussion of top Amherst and Williams teams....Tim's name appears.. first from nescac1 and also by AmherstStudent05.  Most interesting!
Tim was a very good player.....but I take exception to the statement by nescac1 that he was better...would start over any of the starters from the great Amherst teams.    Just my two cents here.

[toad22]

One thing to remember about Tim Folan is that he wasn't really a bench or rotation player. He got hurt early in the season, and played hurt through much of that campaign. Dave Paulsen asked Tim to come off the bench, instead of start, when he came back, because the team had settled in very well while he had been hurt. Tim accepted that role well, and fortunately for Williams, recovered his health in time to score the last 7 points of the NCAA championship game. Tim was always on the court at the end of important games. He was a 1,000 point scorer, and was really a 6th starter in his senior year. His entire career, he played really well in the biggest games. He was in my estimation, a true "Amherst killer". Because of the strategic nature of the shots he was willing to take, and make, he goes down in my book, as one of the great Williams players of all times. There is no one I would rather have, except perhaps Mike Nogelo, take the biggest shot in a big game than Tim Folan. He seemed to have ice water in his veins. 

[amh63]

Toad...thanks for the additional insight/info on Tim.  It is that his name was not brought up in any earlier discussions.  It seems that prior to his senior year he was also a strong rebounder, being "only around 6'4" and slight of built for a front court player?...as I can recall.  Believe his QB classmate at Gonzaga also played on the BB team in HS.   Need to look up the player's name ...should remember it since he killed Amherst on the field...suppressed bad memories, I guess.

[Vandy74]

Since NESCAC fans haven't discovered the D3 Lacrosse Board yet I would like to briefly go off topic here and point out that today's women's semi-final match-ups are #1 Trinity vs #4 Cortland and #3 Middlebury vs #2 Salisbury.  Tuft's #6 ranked mens team reached the quarterfinals falling to #2 ranked Dickinson. 

The NESCAC is truly an elite conference in women's lax.  Middlebury has won 5 national championships.  Amherst has won one and Trinity is presently the defending national champion, undefeated and once again ranked #1 in the country.  Amherst, Middlebury and Williams have all been two-time runners-up.  Bowdoin lost the championship game in 2011.  Hamilton was both champion and runner-up shortly before joining the NESCAC.  Trinity, Middlebury, Colby, Bowdoin, Amherst and Hamilton were all ranked in the top 20 at the end of the regular season.  Middlebury, Wesleyan and Connecticut College joined Tufts in the final top 20 ranking for men's lax.  Middlebury has won 3 championships and been runner-up three times while Tufts is 1-1 in championship contests.  It really is a great game and is presently the fastest growing college sport for both men and women.

Again, good luck to Trinity and Middlebury.  And hopefully tomorrow just good luck to Middlebury.

[amh63]

Follow up....Williams QB Joe Reardon was the HS classmate of Folan.  I know...a bit off topic here.

[Vandy74]

Again, good luck to Trinity and Middlebury.  And hopefully tomorrow just good luck to Middlebury.

Salisbury 8 Middlebury 7.  Trinity 8 Cortland 6.  Good luck to Trinity tomorrow repeating as national champions.

[nescac1]

From the Williams Athletic site.  Sounds like good news re: improved webcasts for next year!

COMING THIS SUMMER!

News on Improved Webcasts

&

Re-Design of

Eph Varsity Sports Website