MBB: NESCAC

[La Verdad]

Ballaholic,

Good point on Farrell, congrats to him on being selected as a finalist for the Bob Cousy award...

Junkie,

Your list of jrs is absurd, 9 out of 10 of those guys aren't fit to carry K-Hops' jock strap.

[JeffRookie2]

I think Dan Wheeler might have overtaken Olson in the POY race with his recent play. Helps that he is a senior and Olson a junior.

As amazing as Farrell's improvement is, what happened to Drew Cohen? His scoring numbers are way down from last year's. Any comment from Colby observers?

[Dr E. Spengler]

Ballaholic, stop....please...

"His numbers kill Olsons, who's only got better assist numbers and 10 times the weapons."

Lets give credit where credit is due.  So Olson's assists aren't impressive because he plays on a better team, with better players, but you don't see the connection when you look at other categories?  Why, oh why would you think that scoring more points on a mediocre team is more impressive than playing on the best team, scoring less, distributing the ball more, and creating victories?  If you put Olson on these other NESCAC teams it would be like Gilbert vs. Duke.  He'd score 84 or 85...

Farrell:Olson::Williamstown:Dubai

Lo-cal...an abbreviation for low caliber.  To quote the future NESCAC POY this year..."REALLY THOUGH?!?!?!?"

Since we're asking for feedback from fellow posters on this board, when Goldsmith returns to dominate in the postseason.  Do I post quoting LL Cool J "Don't call it a comeback / I've been here for years" or the less quoted line from The Fugees "Warn the town the beast is loose"

[hoopjunkie]

la verdad
my list of juniors better then Hopkins wouldnt carry his jock beacuse their
all starters with better credentials  then him. Just because if he played more
minutes doesn`t mean his stats improve with those minutes .

[whoarewebobcats]

as for this junior debate--while I don't agree that Hopkins will be POY next year, I was impressed with him in the Bates/Amherst game and agree that his effect goes beyond the box score. I would trade Wholey for him in a heartbeat, though J-O'K may end up jumping up to pretty big numbers as a soph. next year, so from an overall team standpoint maybe it'll be more important to have Wholey next year. Doesn't have Hopkins' height (Jimmy is 6'6) but is very scrappy and has quite a pedigree from HS. Also, Wholey's gonna put up big scoring numbers next year almost by default (Wilson and O'Keefe both have 10 ppg potential next year, but I'd count on Wholey being up around 17-18 regardless), but that doesn't mean he's a game-changing player. As is commonly said, the easiest thing in sports to do is put up good numbers on a bad team (see Curry, Eddy, New York Knicks) and I think that's gonna be Wholey/Bates next year, and I think that can be the knock on the Colby kid this year. You can't have POY from a mid-level school unless he is absolutely destroying people, and this kid isn't. Maybe it's all the "Amherst yahoos" rubbing off on me this year, but my hat's in the ring for Olson, with this kid from Trinity (can't remember his name, 32 I think) getting some consideration, particularly if they were to upset the Jeffs.

[walzy31]

Just to clear up the Harper debate,

He was Amherst's small forward.  Faulkner/Corrigan at the point, Donovan at the 2. 

Small forward no.  Big guard with mustache yes.

To clear up the Harper debate for real. Both Adam and John Donovan were SGs for Amherst who played a 3-guard offense that year. Harper helped bring the ball up against pressure sometimes. I also would not say Harper was not a huge threat on offense because he is Amherst's 12th leading scorer of all time (and you don't score 1,228 points all on steals and breakaway dunks/layups).
And yes, Harper was a big guard with a mustache yes.

Early Monday line on Amh/Trin game:
Amherst -7.5

[nescac hoops]

His numbers kill Olsons, who's only got better assist numbers and 10 times the weapons....Rose and Shalvoy kind of hurt each other's cases...
I think Farrell may have been the POY, but the way the NESCAC works it's doubtful he'll get the recognition because of his teams Lo-cal. 
tell me what you think. 

ballaholic,
i commented on this earlier when some posters wanted to see cohen as the POY. a colby poster wanted cohen as POY and commented that farrell was "lights out". i just feel that if these two, or even just farrell, are really as good as they are then colby should have a better record. obviously, you need more than two players to win but williams is basically in the same situation where they have two players in rose and shalvoy and a bunch of "role players". so far, williams has had more success than colby so i don't exactly understand your shalvoy/rose argument about hurting each other's cases. in the case of farrell and cohen, i think cohen actually helps farrell out b/c i'm sure a lot of teams harp on stopping cohen with double/triple teams underneath and not giving farrell the attention he warrants out on the perimeter. in the case of rose/shalvoy, i think it's a lot harder for them b/c williams has no "distractions" underneath. in other words, i think a balanced scoring attack (points coming from inside and outside) is harder to defend then two strong guards.
as for olson/farrell, ill ask you this. if farrell was on amherst, would he come close to having the numbers that olson has? farrell may not even be a starter.

[mrmike88]

After getting a chance to see R. Kelly and Stone this weekend at LeFrak, I wonder the same thing about those guys.  Would Kelly be even more dangerous on a good team, or would he fade into the background?  I wonder how good he'd be if he were surrounded by the players an Amherst or a Trinity has...

[nescac hoops]

mrmike,
i think truly great players - olson, crotty, coffin, zeija, rhoten, nogelo (old school williams) - you can put them on any team and they would stand out as great players. however, i think for players like kelly and stone there are certain teams they need to be on to be "great". i think the perfect example of a team they would need to be on would be williams or midd. the two teams are good/decent squads. it's not like you can simply triple team rose or rudin and expect nobody else to score. they are good enough teams that everybody is a "threat" but, at least in the case of rose, every play is moreorless run for him and he gets enough shots/minutes to put up some really good numbers. i'm not trying to take anything away from rose but put him on amherst or on a weaker team where the opposition can afford to double team him off screens, etc. and his numbers willl surely drop. i think the same goes for kelly and stone - i haven't seen wesleyan or conn play but i'm sure they get the most attention from the defense and i think if they were put on a more mediocre team where they would still get a ton of minutes/shots but with a little less pressure on them then they would be better off. however, put them on amherst and like i said before, they may not even start.

[hoopjunkie]

I  think you can make a case both ways . less shots for Rose , Stone, Kelly
but maybe less defensive pressure from the defense .

The other argument is  would all the Amherst guys  be as good if for
example Wheeler was the only scorer on his team & did`nt have a good
supporting cast. Who know ? You have to look at the players for their own
merit , in their own situation.

I just feel for All Nescac or POY you have to make your team better & have a winning
record.

[formerbant10]

Wouldn't you want to run plays for your best scorer?

Whoarewe,

#32 from Trinity is Pat Martin....listed as a junior, but I'm not sure about eligibility as he transfered from BU.  Trinity also has Russ Martin, and Robert Taylor III in the junior class. Taylor was co-rookie of the year with Zak Ray and after taking last year off, has been playing extremely well as of late.

[whoarewebobcats]

formerbant, thanks for providing the name since I was too lazy to look it up. I was actually switching from the next year talk to the this-year POY talk (but failed to mention so) but I was basing it purely off what I saw, and Patrick Martin was the standout of the team when they played Bates (looking at the box score, R. Martin and Taylor were about even, but P. Martin was the one who seemed like the real threat, and the guy who I wanted to not have the ball down the stretch). Now looking at their overall stats I realize he isn't really a POY candidate (I don't see anyone challenging Olsen, I don't really buy any other argument being made). Statistically it looks like if R. Martin led a Trinity upset over Amherst he might get some consideration, but only if the Amherst kids knocked each other out in the voting. I've written far too much about this now given that I don't know these players that well, and that I don't think POY is that big of a deal.

[CCsalive]

Interesting debate...I see Farrell as a slightly unorthodox, shoot first point guard who would not start for Amherst. Is he 10x's better than this beloved Salerno character? Of course.

Stone would be great on other talented teams, imagine him playing Antonio Davis to K-Hop's Rik Smits. Would he play in front of Hopkins? I don't know.

Non-Amherst folks are underestimating K-Hop. He is one-of-a-kind. D-III rarely sees players with his height and athleticism.

[The Historian]

The updated conference statistics have been posted on the NESCAC site:

http://www.nescac.com/2006-07/sports/basketball(m)/NESCAC_MBB_020507.pdf

I only looked at them quickly, but it's striking how little they add to all this POY discussion.  There just aren't that many statistical standouts this year in the NESCAC.  I mean, statistically speaking, Farrell has as good a case as anyone.  But Farrell for POY??  C'mon now.

Robert Kelly and Rob Stockwell are both in the top three in both scoring and rebounding, but their teams are a combined 5-9 in the league.

In all three of the above cases, I think whoarewebobcat's comment rings true: nothing is easier than putting up great numbers on an average or poor team.

Personally, I favor viewing the award as if it were a draft.  If you were a NESCAC GM and had the first pick in a pool of all NESCAC players, who are you going to choose?

I'm going with Olson.

Also, as an aside, I'd take Amherst's complete, healthy junior class of Olson, Jones, Walters, Hopkins, Coulibaly, and Goldsmith by 20 over any team of 6 you pick from the other combined junior classes from the NESCAC.

[nescac1]

Listen, the idolization of Amherst's esteemed Junior class is deserved to some extent, without a doubt they are easily the best overall in NESCAC, but let's not get out of hand here: take Stone, Weitzen, Rose, Shalvoy, R. Taylor, R. Martin, you'd have to give them an edge at 4/6 spots (Hopkins and Olson being the exceptions).  As good and enormous as those guys for Amherst are, other than Hopkins none is really a go-to scorer: they have Baskauskas and Wheeler for that.  Still, I'll be the first to admit that given how weak NESCAC looks to be next year, the Amherst seniors should once again run roughshod over the league, unless Trinity, Tufts or Williams have some truly amazing talent coming in. 

Speaking of Williams / Tufts, bummer of a game for the Ephs, I thought after beating Bates they would take that game but they got destroyed on the boards.  Missing three of the best defenders and rebounders on the team to injury (Snyder) or foul trouble for much of the game didn't help.  As good as the frosh have played, they definitely need to learn to keep out of foul trouble, which is not surprising given their lack of experience.  Anyone know how bad Snyder is hurt?  The Ephs have a golden chance to get at least a 4 and possibly a 3 (if Tufts loses to one of the Maine teams, very possible) seed with a sweep this weekend.  They were in the same position last year, of course, and lost two winnable games.   The Ephs, like pretty much everyone in the league, are very hard to predict this year. 

Looks like Trinity and Amherst may be the only NCAA teams ... Bates might sneak in, but they will need to win out until probably the NESCAC finals, which is highly unlikely with such a low seed.  Everyone else is already out unless they can catch Amherst napping on its home court: unlikely.