MBB: NESCAC

[lumbercat]

Tough year for Bates- 0-3 start in league play- could easily by 3-0 but the Bobcats have sealed their own fate.

@Conn--Bates' Baxter gets a great look and buries a beautiful three with 3 seconds left to put Bates up by 2. CC gets it down the court where they fire up a prayer of a shot that goes in off the backboard at the buzzer.

Hamilton--Trailing 65-64 with 4 seconds remaining Bates inbounding the ball in the front court. Inbound pass stolen by Hamilton, game over.

Amherst-- Tie game with .4 seconds left. Bobcats go the line for 2 needing 1 to win. Miss both. Ugh.

No excuses, it's a young team that had a chance to win each of those games. Perfect storm I guess, rough year for the Garnet.

This isn't a great team but believe they will continue to grind and may well be a problem for some as the season rolls on.

[SpringSt7]

Ouch, didn't realize it had been that agonizing for Bates to this point. The bottom of the league is pretty interesting, Bowdoin seems like a lock to miss the conference tournament, Bates is probably trending in that direction as well but are playing better than their record as lumber indicated, and Colby is clearly better than an 0-4 team but they are 0-4 and there are only 6 games left.

One of Colby/Bowdoin will be 1-4 after Saturday and one of Hamilton/Amherst will be 2-3, I would bet on Colby finding a way to hunt one of those teams down if they can get on the board this weekend.

[SpringSt7]

No Amherst-Williams halftime recap or update as I was told not to overreact last time.

[names jaismith]

That's two very painful trips to New London this season for Trinity, as they lose to Mitchell.  Trinity forgot about defense in the second half.  Mitchell scored 56 after intermission, almost twice what they had at halftime.

[nescac1]

With Williams-Amherst it's guaranteed to be a war and this game was no exception.  Ephs hang on by the skin of their teeth as Spivy blocks an Alausa jumper at the buzzer. 

The Ephs were simply terrible on defense in the first half and played stellar defense in the second.  But Amherst kept hitting clutch shots, many of them VERY tightly contested, down the stretch and Williams just could not pull away.  Canin Reynolds was excellent on both ends for Amherst.  Noah Helmke hit some very difficult shots and Ryker Vance once again played strong down low vs. Williams.

For the Ephs, some VERY sweet shooting by Declan Porter and Nate Karren, both from the line and from deep, kept them in the game when nothing else seemed to be dropping.  Those guys were crazy clutch.  In the second half it was all Spencer Spivy as for the third game in the row he controlled the game on both ends down the stretch.  His five combined steals and blocks were massive as were his clutch 3's and drives to the rim.  Evan Glatzer also had some big takes going towards the basket down the stretch.  Cole Prowitt-Smith was a welcome sight to see back on the floor, but he looked, understandably, rusty.  Hopefully he's more like himself vs. Midd and can play bigger minutes. 

Amherst has to be frustrated looking at the margin as a technical foul by a player who slammed the ball in frustration led to two points, which ended up being determinative in the end ...

Looking ahead to Saturday, Williams MUST keep it close on the boards.  No way they keep it even against Midd, but they can't get creamed.  Amherst owned the offensive glass in the first half but Williams was far better in the second getting a body on dudes and keeping Amherst to one shot attempt on most possessions. 

[SpringSt7]

Ephs win in a great environment at Chandler (quite frankly, any concerns about attendance for this game right now have nothing to do with Williams). Karren and Porter dragged them to the finish and Spivy got them across the line.

5 games into a post Brandon Roughley world---unclear what his timetable looks like other than to say they should not count on any meaningful performance---and the reviews have been mixed. A loss @ Amherst, understandable if you ignore the records and a 2 point win over Amherst, again, great if you ignore the records, sandwich 3 league wins against Hamilton, Colby, and Bowdoin, of which the latter two both led into the second half.

It is unrealistic to have expected Williams to continue to win every game by 20 in conference play but the reality appears to be from the outside that they have maybe lost half a step---for the first time in who knows how long, they are struggling against size and on the glass, lacking any true power forward to play next to Nate Karren, who is a good but not great rebounder. They have yet to see their 4 double digit scorers really and truly all play well at the same time in a while.

I understand that many will read this post and say "look at this spoiled clown, they're 16-1". Yes I am spoiled and yes they are 16-1, but they lost a very important piece of the team a couple of weeks ago and as a result, they have new challenges and obstacles to overcome.

[nescac1]

Nice angle on the last shot: https://twitter.com/howardherman/status/1615895202597638145?s=46&t=LMbv0F0fvnoXSemXY2hOMg

Great play by Spivy there. 

SpringSt7 makes fair points and this is not the Williams team that seemed to have an utterly dominant pool of talent before the season. Losing two of your expected top eight  guys plus two more missing big stretches with injuries will take a toll on anyone.  But I do love the mental toughness of this team, in three straight league games they've closed strong after periods of struggles.  And beyond the differing result - which is random - vs Amherst, this game was a lot more encouraging than the first matchup.  I thought both teams played poorly in that game and both played much better hoops today.  Far from perfect, but a lot of great plays by both teams. 

Williams certainly has areas to improve upon. But all the injuries have hurt the team in terms of figuring out a fairly set rotation.  Compare that to a team like Midd where the top seven guys haven't missed a game and it's impressive that the Ephs are where they are right now.  The Ephs are also relying more than expected  on two first years who are as all first years are a bit up and down, but both of whom have had plenty of big moments and will hopefully keep growing as players as they see more time.  Playing big minutes in a charged intense rivalry game will really help them grow. 

Over this recent stretch the Ephs have been hugely reliant on Nate, Spivy, Glatzer and Porter.  All four have been great.  They've felt at times one guy short.  If Cole can regain his wind and his early season form soon, that will be huge.  As will a bit more scoring from Hansen, who had some frustrating very near misses today.  I think Saturday looks like a pure toss up.  Midd has for sure been playing a bit better than Williams of late but the Ephs are at home and I expect another raucous crowd to energize the team. 

On a non-Williams note Wesleyan stays hot behind a scorching Preston Maccoux. He's been lighting it up over the last five games and is the key to Wesleyan's resurgence.  Wesleyan has worked its way into the Pool C picture as Trinity has dropped back. 

[dman]

Question on the rules came up tonight.  Hope someone can clarify.  Williams player is fouled resulting in a one and one. A technical foul follows.  The Williams player is awarded two shots for the technical and then shoots the one and one.  Amherst was given the ball after the free throws.  Shouldn't Williams have received the ball after the free throws because of the technical foul? 

[jumpshot]

The Ephs made alert plays in the final 13 seconds vs. amHerst, Coach App using a foul to give reducing the clock to 5 seconds. Conversely, amHerst draws up a three-point attempt from the corner needing only 2 points to win, runs the play in the direction of a triple team of solid Eph defenders, Glatzer, Karren, and Spivy, and misses seeing amHerst #40 open in the lane. Not fair to pick it apart, just saying there were other options....

[jumpshot]

Good question, dman. My instinct is that the one and one foul occurred first resulting, in this case, two made foul shots. Then the technical foul should have been shot, in this case, two more made foul shots, and the ball should have been awarded to the Ephs. We need a more official determination than my instinct, though. Anyone out there who knows for sure the proper ruling?

[lumbercat]

No contact on that last Amherst shot?

[nescac1]

I was curious too Lumbercat.  I note the ref was right next to the play.  Alausa was off balance when he shot it which I think accounts for him falling down.  I paused the video just as Spivy blocked the shot. It appeared that Spivy was on the side of Alausa when he deflected the shot, with no body or hand contact.  Or if there was it was not clearly perceptible enough to call. 

I captured a freeze frame of Spivy getting what appears to be all ball as he flies past.  But can't figure out how to post a picture. 

[nescac1]

I know Amherst folks have been justifiably pessimistic.  But there is a case to be made that this Amherst team can cause some real problems in the league and even nationally sooner than folks expect. 

First of all, the team has made real strides in recent weeks.  Yes, there have not been many wins, but they played essentially even with Williams and a hot Wesleyan team over three Little 3 games.  They were hanging around the entire second half v. Middlebury.  And they beat Bates.  Only the Tufts game was really bad.  Overall, the last eight games of the schedule are a lot softer than the last few weeks, and there is a chance they put together a run.  Key to the better play has been Sears playing his starters more normal minutes and shortening the bench rotation a bit.  Alausa back from injury has also helped a lot at wing.

Second, Amherst is still a crazily young team.  Right now, the teams is relying on one junior and all the rest underclassmen among its primary contributors.  The senior class has been (due to injuries or coaching decisions) relegated entirely to a deep bench role.  Meanwhile, look around the league and there are a LOT of big time seniors (presumably) graduating from other programs ... Sobel, Spivy, Maccoux/Ravetz/Dezonie, Thoerner/Aronson, King/Tyson, Baxter, etc.  So just by virtue of attrition at other teams, Amherst is going to be well-positioned. 

Third, I think in these recent weeks you can start to see what Sears has in mind coming together.  The Scherer/Vance/Tam/Randle (hurt right now) big man quartet have just terrifying potential.  They average 6'10 as a group and are already tough to deal with inside.  If Vance and Randle can continue to make strides as outside shooters, they can provide the spacing needed to play the 4 offensively.  And defensively, Vance has already shown he can guard wings and Randle is simply massive.  Remember, there is a LONG history in NESCAC of big men exploding onto the scene as juniors ... Sharry, Rogers, Mayer, Whittington, Chapin, Coffin, Sobel, etc.  While there is never any guarantee of that, it's usually junior year until we really see what big men are going to be.  If even two of those four big guys make a big leap over time, they are going to be a REAL problem for the rest of the league, which is mostly devoid of highly promising young big guys, looking across programs. 

Meanwhile, Hammond, Alausa, and Helmke, while very up and down, have all had real moments on the wing and could evolve into a solid wing rotation.  Hammond had an absolutely beautiful finish v. Williams last night and has a lot more skill than I realized early in the season.  At point guard, they should be set with Reynolds, Mitchell, and Garaud incoming.  Again, young players who figure to improve and do a better job taking care of the ball over time. 

Other than Williams, Midd and Trinity, is there any underclassman core in NESCAC in any way competitive with Amherst's on paper?  I don't think so? 

[jumpshot]

dman, I found the correct answer to your question regarding the ball not being awarded to Williams after the technical fouls were shot last night. The referees handled the situation correctly ---no awarding of the ball. It used to be that the ball would be awarded before the rule was changed as the thinking became that awarding the ball made the penalty too severe. My source is a highly regarded, professional college referee considered one of the best in America. Glad you asked as my instinct was correct only before the rule was changed.

[Pat Coleman]

Yes -- these rules changed a handful of years ago.