MBB: NESCAC

[nescac1]

Agree with Bucket.  I've been praising Hart all year, and I was early on the Hart first-team all NESCAC bandwagon.  But in terms of impact, I think it's a much bigger deal that Toomey makes what would otherwise be, in my estimation, merely a pretty good team into one of the best in the country. vs. Hart, who makes what would otherwise be a bad team into a mediocre one.  Toomey does SO much more on both ends than Hart, who is a truly elite scorer but is not what I'd call elite in other aspects of the game -- that comparison is not even close.  Toomey scores with similar efficiency to Hart while ALSO being his team's primary ball-handler and making all the players around him much better.  Toomey is also a stronger defender than Hart.  Kizel plays a similar role for Midd. 

And it's not as if Hart has NO talent around him.  Santos, Newton, Gifford and Kazickas are all nice players -- certainly a better supporting cast than Matt Vadas has. 

Compare his conference stats with Duncan Robinson, by the way, and Robinson clearly has a significant edge:

Hart: 21 ppg, 46/41/85, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg, 1.8 topg, .9 spg, .1 bpg
Robinson: 19 ppg, 61/53/83  5.1 rpg, 2.1 apg, 1.1 topg, 1.2 spg, 1.1 bpg

Robinson scores only two fewer ppg despite attempting four fewer FG attempts per game.  If Robinson had Hart's usage rate I bet he averages around 25.  He shoots the ball far better, he has a better assist-TO ratio, and had a much bigger impact on the defensive end (rebounds, steals, blocked shots).  I think Robinson has to be first-team all-NESCAC, and if only one Williams guy can be on that team, he should be that guy.  Although I recognize that coaches will put a senior on over a freshman if it's even close. 

[madzillagd]

did Kizel, Mayer and Robinson have better seasons than Hart?

Robinson for sure, Mayer probably, Kizel no.  Obviously Hart had a fantastic year but regardless of his individual stats his team still ended up 5-5 so it's tough for folks to overlook good players on 9-1 teams and not give them credit for contributing to a winner.  When we do look at the individual stats, Robinson still put up better numbers than Hart did, Hart just took more shots.

I see nescac1 already went were I was going so I'll just agree with what he said.  With Robinson's superior efficiency, he'd be averaging more ppg than Hart if he took more attempts.  But while Wohl gets a lot of credit for his defense I don't think folks give Robinson as much credit as he deserves.  He's not overpowering anybody but he gets the most out of his height and athleticism and surprises a lot of folks on the defensive end I think. 

[Bucket]

did Kizel, Mayer and Robinson have better seasons than Hart?

Robinson for sure, Mayer probably, Kizel no.  Obviously Hart had a fantastic year but regardless of his individual stats his team still ended up 5-5 so it's tough for folks to overlook good players on 9-1 teams and not give them credit for contributing to a winner.  When we do look at the individual stats, Robinson still put up better numbers than Hart did, Hart just took more shots.

I see nescac1 already went were I was going so I'll just agree with what he said.  With Robinson's superior efficiency, he'd be averaging more ppg than Hart if he took more attempts.  But while Wohl gets a lot of credit for his defense I don't think folks give Robinson as much credit as he deserves.  He's not overpowering anybody but he gets the most out of his height and athleticism and surprises a lot of folks on the defensive end I think.

Kizel, no? Only if ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

[amh63]

Some loose end comments....almost all in response to the posts I have been reading today.
Jayhawk...some fine informative observations,  as usual...thanks.  Comment on Tom Killian going to his left on drives.  Saw them but did not pick up on it.....remember he likes the right side.  Maybe that is why he sliced in so easily...scouting report missing the fact.  The other was that Reid Berman was in street clothes.  Did wonder why he was not inserted when Toomey went out.....Amherst version of Jake Brown and Williams FY PG... Greenman?

GingerB.....very fine post...opinionated and informative.....where have you been?   +K  So much love for Killian.  I pointed out the Amherst team pictures and the senior pics.  The senior ones seem to confirm something that has been bugging me.  Tom Killian as a FY was listed at 6'5"....also C. Gach at 6'4".  They both were shorten by an inch by their sophmore year.  Anyway, not only is Killian stronger (nice point AmStud05) but he looks taller....closer to 6'6" than his listed 6'4".  I believe players' effectiveness on the floor is more important than any listed height.  Still wanted to point it out to help Killian move into 1st-team consideration    Oh yes, GingerB....I too thought about a Willy comparison wrt to all around contribution to the team...good eye....BUT it is too soon to think in those terms, IMO.  Maybe in a decade from now...Willy was my favorite player .

Missed the part of Hoopsville where Hixon mention the condition of Pollack.  Yes, Pollack is strong and bigger than both George and Nabatoff.  Levine came in and played well and he has the size of Pollack.  However, both George and Nabatoff are very long....do not follow the DiVinci body formula.  Nabatoff is like George, very athletic....played football in HS, I believe and comes out of a fine HS program in North Carolina.  He should be the first off the bench for George, unless bigger centers are encounter....than Levine will be the sub.  Levine has more experience  and knows Hixon's ways better at this time.   Still hold out hope for Pollack.

For posters who have questions wrt to Coach Hixon....the man and/or coach.....recommend listening to the Hoopsville interview....truly.  Surprised me a little about his frankness in certain areas. 

[amh63]

Will post on Announcers later....as promised...really.
Even had a comment on an earlier Bucket post....wrote it and posted it on the WBB board.  Deleted it..was not very good.

[grabtherim]

I really enjoying reading the back and forth on post season awards/honors.  The bottom line is this league has some incredible talent.  Toomey stands out above the rest this season, so I really don't care who might be second in the voting as fair arguments can be made for all of the guys cited.  The interesting comparison for the next few seasons will be Sabety versus Robinson.  My guess is Robinson will consistently be surrounded by more talent and unquestionably better coaching.  It will be fun to watch them both develop.
Let's get some predictions on the NESCAC Tournament before it starts.  I'm going with chalk.  I have Amherst over Williams with the league getting two bids of the finalists.  Bowdoin being the odd team out unless they at least make the Finals and the Panthers on the outside looking in for the 1st time since 2008.   

[GingerBaker]

Amh - gracias!  My point wasn't that Killian has become Workman; I was aiming for a "Killian has successfully filled the Workman void, while remaining a unique player unto himself."

Comparisons between this year's Jeff squad v. last year's brings me to a thought that's kind of been nagging me all year, and it has to do with Connor Green - he could either continue being Connor Green, or he could meld into a Green/Williamson monster.  At the beginning of the season, it looked like he was going to be a Toomey-level scorer.  His scoring so far seems misleading to me - he's at 18 ppg so far, but his conference numbers are not at that level - neither in sheer number nor in percentages.  I wonder if he's reaching too hard.  He's a GREAT shooter, but I think he's actually more effective as a driver.  His combo of size and quickness (listed at 6'4'' - that doesn't seem accurate to me) and deftness with the ball is hard to contain; yet he continues to throw up 6-7 3s a game.  Maybe I am being too selective though. 

Also, Killian's not getting any cred in the roster specifications.  My brother-in-law met him by chance last summer and said he's huge in person - towered over my brother-in-law, and he's 6'3''.

As far as the tournament, I can see an Amherst-Williams final like last season - I don't think anyone from Bowdoin on down represents a real threat - it'd have to be a "they didn't beat us, we beat ourselves" scenario for any of the Big Trees to Fall Hard.  As I said before, I haven't counted Middlebury out.  I didn't realize Daley had mono (not cool, whoever taunted him from the stands...), but I still think Kizell's scoring ability and court-vision + their size leave them capable of upsetting Williams (assuming they match up in the semis).  But so long as Amherst plays THEIR game and not their opponents', I see them taking the AQ.

What's Pollack's status?  Is he gone for the rest of the year?  Is there any chance of him returning sometime during either of the postseason tourneys?  Also, word on the street is he and Workman are 2nd or 3rd cousins.  Small world!

[AmherstStudent05]

I too am really enjoying this All Conference discussion.

30 for 30, thanks for your question.  Bucket said absolutely everything I was planning to say in response, but only with more numbers (must be a Middlebury thing).  Just to recap: I have tons of respect for Matt Hart.  He is the best pure shooting guard in the league.  His scoring numbers are incredible (still my favorite stat besides wins) and anyone who was fortunate enough to catch the last 5 minutes of the Middlebury game wouldn't need any numbers to validate Hart's tremendous talent.  However, at least at present, Hart simply does not put up anywhere near the same "secondary" stats as the other NESCAC elites we are talking about -- and this really is rareified air here.  Now, I don't follow Hamilton closely and i concede that Coach Stockwell may not ask Matt to do all the things that Aaron, Joey & Co. are asked to do.  However, while that possibility shouldn't detract from Matt's game, it also shouldn't be held against Toomey, Mayer, Kizel, and Robinson who each do so many different things for their respective teams.

Also, you say that I put Hart "on the bubble," and that may be one way to characterize what I posted last night, but it is not the way I prefer to see things.  As I hope I made clear, I currently have Hart on my First Team and I still view him as a favorite to get that recognition.  However, the upcoming Conference Tournament will provide at least some opportunity for a handful of other players to make a move for the First Team nod.  To the extent any such move is made, I believe it is Hart's spot that would be taken.  By the way, if Hamilton upsets Midd next week, I think we can almost certainly project Hart as a first teamer right then and there.

Bucket, I am sorry to hear what was said about Matt Daley.  I was a couple of rows behind the Amherst bench.  I confess that I didn't see Daley go down, or hear that remark, but it is obviously inappropriate.  Your observation prompts me to post this additional thought that I was going to post last night before I thought better of it.

On the drive up to Amherst yesterday, I read with great interest PN's preview of the Amherst game.  PN discussed how intense the Amherst-Middlebury rivalry has become.  Had I had a computer at hand, I would have reprised the point that Vandy and I made last year: namely, that as competitive as Midd has been over the past 5 years, the rivalry with Williams is just a completely different animal that can't be compared to Midd.

However, I do have to say, early in the game, it was quite clear to me that there was more "tension" and "competitiveness" (I am struggling for the right words and am not sure these are the ones) than I had given this credit for (and that is difficult to capture on a webcast).  Interestingly, the Amherst student body did not seem particularly in to this rivalry, but the parents definitely were and the players were as well.  It still doesn't replicate any Amherst Williams game, but there was more "competitiveness" to Midd then to any other non-Williams team I can remember, and certainly there was much more than I expected. (To be fair though, we should remember that back in my day, Amherst had a lot of real battles with Trinity.  Also, I may be wrong, but they may have even beaten us more than Midd -- they certainly always played us tough).

For the most part, this unexpected tension made for a fantastic atmosphere in LeFrak and a really enjoyable game.  However, it also led to some regrettable excesses from the fan bases of BOTH sides.  You have cited one -- and there were definitely others.  Maybe I have just been away from LeFrak for too long, but I don't quite remember things being this way (except for Williams).  Again, on the whole it brought out a lot of good competition from both sides, but, as always, there is some work that needs to be done as well going forward.

[AmherstStudent05]

GB, I think it is actually very hard to compare this year's Amherst squad with last year's version.  To me, the biggest difference is actually Toomey.  This year's team is obviously more reliant on Toomey than last year's team -- and, to be very clear, Toomey was still easliy our best player last year.

In many ways, this team actually reminds me of the 2012 Amherst team.  That team was similarly reliant on Toomey.  The trouble two years ago was that Toomey was only a sophomore -- it was just a lot to ask of any sophomore to be the team's primary ballhandler and scorer.  Toomey was still the primary ballhandler and scorer last year, but Workman, Kaasila, and then Williamson were all able to shoulder much of the load and to be the focal point of the offense for considerable stretches of time.  This year, Toomey has stepped up his game tremendously. He has now developed Olson like game management (Olson was seemingly born with this ability, whereas Toomey has had to grow into it a bit) and has combined it with his Toomey scoring ability (which he has had from Day 1).  It is a tremendous thing to watch, and he has really stepped his game up to another level.  When combined with Killian, Kalema and Green (and others), it can be really special.  We just don't have the depth or balance of last year.  (Remember, we had Kalema and Green coming off the bench last year).  The other issue is scoring in the paint.  Kaasila was capable of shouldering the offensive burden in the post.  Pollack, when healthy, has a very nice offensive game, but he was never the focal point for us on offense.  Now that he is gone, we are even more reliant on our guards for scoring.

I don't know. Bottom line, it is just a much different team.  Still a long ways to go and still so much to prove, but this year's team -- particularly our seniors -- have already done so much to be proud of.

[30 for 30]

Compare his conference stats with Duncan Robinson, by the way, and Robinson clearly has a significant edge:

Hart: 21 ppg, 46/41/85, 3.7 rpg, 2.7 apg, 1.8 topg, .9 spg, .1 bpg
Robinson: 19 ppg, 61/53/83  5.1 rpg, 2.1 apg, 1.1 topg, 1.2 spg, 1.1 bpg

Nescac1 let's go a bit deeper on stats comparison. Here's how it looks v the conf top 4 teams

Hart 25 ppg. 5.25 rpg 1.75 apg
Robinson 13.75 ppg 4.75 rpg .75 apg

I used both Amherst games for Dunc. If you use Trinity instead of non-league Ahm it's worse. Anything to be said for being at your best against the best? As for assists, Hart could play that role given a higher caliber of Conts finishers however this year Hart's job for the Conts is to score the ball. Safe to say he is doing what Stockwell has asked.

In Conts game v Williams Robinson had open looks all day as Hamilton was also trying to defend Epley, Wohl and Mayer. It was like practice for him. Hart's open looks all season were minimal. No one lost track of him. The case I make here is not to diminsh any of the other players but to make a clear case for Hart as a first team choice not a wobbly 5th position. Review Hart's season game log, consistent as heck. Please no more Vadas comparisons. He is nice player but Hart is not him. If there is a doubt review Saturday's box score!

[AmherstStudent05]

In Conts game v Williams Robinson had open looks all day as Hamilton was also trying to defend Epley, Wohl and Mayer. It was like practice for him.

If this is really the case then I think we can safely rule out Stockwell for Coach of the Year honors.

[GingerBaker]

AS05 - good points.  I didn't mean to compare last year's team to this year's team, exactly.  I may have worded it poorly.  I was aiming more for individual comparisons - Killian/Workman and Green/Williamson.  I guess I just feel Connor Green is capable of more than he's contributing right now - not to say he's contributing nothing, but his ceiling is waaaaay high up, and right now he's not touching it.  He has the ability to be a superstar, but it seems to me like he's trying to take the pure-shooter route to superstardom, as opposed to a combo route comprised of driving/nosing into traffic, and outside shots. 

I agree about points in the paint.  David George is no Kaasila - he's just not enough of a presence, and he's also not as deft.  He gets muscled out cause he's "only" ~210 lbs.  His footwork's a little whacky - I've only been able to catch 2 LJ games in person, so I'm analyzing mostly from webcasts, but it looks like he travels almost every time he has the ball.  Size and footwork may come with time - I saw Workman grow from a Slim Jim to a thick dude, and I saw Williamson grow from a player who gave me heart attacks whenever he dribbled tothe beast who dominated in both tournaments last year.

One last thing: as I said in my post, I've only been following Amherst/NESCAC/D3 bball for the past 5 years - I started following specifically because of the class of '13 - please forgive me if they are my frame of reference for my musings!

[30 for 30]

 "If this is really the case then I think we can safely rule out Stockwell for Coach of the Year honors"

Conts only seeking recognition for the things they've earned, no handouts necessary.

[Bucket]

Bucket, I am sorry to hear what was said about Matt Daley.  I was a couple of rows behind the Amherst bench.  I confess that I didn't see Daley go down, or hear that remark, but it is obviously inappropriate.  Your observation prompts me to post this additional thought that I was going to post last night before I thought better of it.

On the drive up to Amherst yesterday, I read with great interest PN's preview of the Amherst game.  PN discussed how intense the Amherst-Middlebury rivalry has become.  Had I had a computer at hand, I would have reprised the point that Vandy and I made last year: namely, that as competitive as Midd has been over the past 5 years, the rivalry with Williams is just a completely different animal that can't be compared to Midd.

However, I do have to say, early in the game, it was quite clear to me that there was more "tension" and "competitiveness" (I am struggling for the right words and am not sure these are the ones) than I had given this credit for (and that is difficult to capture on a webcast).  Interestingly, the Amherst student body did not seem particularly in to this rivalry, but the parents definitely were and the players were as well.  It still doesn't replicate any Amherst Williams game, but there was more "competitiveness" to Midd then to any other non-Williams team I can remember, and certainly there was much more than I expected. (To be fair though, we should remember that back in my day, Amherst had a lot of real battles with Trinity.  Also, I may be wrong, but they may have even beaten us more than Midd -- they certainly always played us tough).

For the most part, this unexpected tension made for a fantastic atmosphere in LeFrak and a really enjoyable game.  However, it also led to some regrettable excesses from the fan bases of BOTH sides.  You have cited one -- and there were definitely others.  Maybe I have just been away from LeFrak for too long, but I don't quite remember things being this way (except for Williams).  Again, on the whole it brought out a lot of good competition from both sides, but, as always, there is some work that needs to be done as well going forward.

Agreed.

Speaking from a Middlebury perspective, three consecutive buzzer-beating losses to the Lord Jeffs (two in LeFrak in '12, with one being for the top seed in the tourney and the other being for the tourney championship; plus the triple-overtime, Workman-three-from-free insanity in Pepin) coupled with the desperation the Panthers find themselves in this year put many on edge. I certainly was, to a great degree.

The Daley comment did not occur in a vacuum, nor was it illustrative of one side behaving poorly, while the other was angelic. Excesses were present and had no monopoly on  jurisdiction.

[middhoops]

Just an off the wall observation.
Having attended all the recent Midd vs. Amherst and Midd vs. Williams games for around five years and dozens over the decades, I just gotta say: Williams fans are happy and spirited.  Amherst and Middlebury fans harbor a bit more angst below the surface.  I like games at Chandler Gym.
These three teams play each other all out, every time.  Middlebury can't possibly intrude on the history the other institutions have between them.  It's nice to be mentioned in the same breath during the seasons when we deserve it, however.
Being a NESCAC fan is more collaborative than most boards I follow.  What say you, magicman?