MBB: NESCAC

[CCsalive]

Of course the semis are at the highest remaining seed. I got a little excited.
To the Amherst faithful...I imagine you do not want Tufts at #8. Is this true?

[La Verdad]

Friar T; why don't you ask someone on Amherst, Trinity, Wiliams or Middlebury whether they think Colby is a "bad" team? Losing a string of close games does't = bad.

Everyone gets a response but me?   

They are far from being a "bad" team, but ask any nescac squad if they should lose to Colby and you will get a lot of "No's."

[Agent_Zero]

I cant see Amherst much caring if Tufts is at the 8 or not. Sure, they had that run of overtime games over the past couple years. but Amherst won handily this year, even though Tufts did make a run at them in the second half. Still, a 14 point win( or something close to that if i remember correctly) is a dominating win. and since then, Tufts has certainly played some bad basketball while Amherst has continued their run of dominance within the league. It would take a near perfect game out of Tufts to overcame Amherst at Lefrak in the first round(knocking on wood that Tufts gets into the playoffs). I say all this being a huge Jumbo supporter but also recognizing that Amherst probably isnt that scared of a team that might end up with 2 conference wins, no matter the name on the jersey

[La Verdad]

In Tufts' defense, they were without O'Keefe when the came to Amherst.  I'm not sure how much of a difference he makes, just wanted to throw it out there.

[lefrakenstein]

I dont think that amherst would have a significant preference between Colby and Tufts. Tufts has been difficult for the Jeffs in years past, but Colby has played very well this year, and I think most would agree that they are more talented than their record would suggest.

Big news for Amherst yesterday with UMD losing to RIC. It gives Amherst a little bit of breathing room looking ahead to hosting rights for sectionals. If Amherst can escape Trinity and the NESCAC tourny with just one loss (by no means a given, they lost twice last year) then they will probably have hosting rights.

[lefrakenstein]

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to this, but your arguement that Rose's rather pedestrian 36.1% from behind the arc (as of today) makes up for his terrible overall % and free throw % is laughable. Maybe you are unfamiliar with penalty shots and the fact that 3-point shooters are rarely fouled? I like how your stats dont include points from foul shooting. Using your own criteria of points per shot, (including points from free throws) here is the ranking of every player in the nescac who has taken 100 shots or more this season:

JeffRookie,

I think your stat, which includes foul shots rewards the player who takes the most foul shots that are not counted as attempts.  Correct me if I am wrong, but if a player gets fouled on a shot, the player is not get credited for taking the shot unless he makes the basket.  Of course if the player wanted to pad your statistic he would be best served to miss the shot and have the opprtunity to score 2 points without having the shot go in his statistic. 

It is true that including points from foul shots without also including the shot attempt from the foul distorts the statistic, but I think that this is how Hollinger and other statisticians usually approach the points/shot number. It is, as you pointed out, by no means perfect, but I think it is better than ignoring points from foul shots entirely.

[fpc85]

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to this, but your arguement that Rose's rather pedestrian 36.1% from behind the arc (as of today) makes up for his terrible overall % and free throw % is laughable. Maybe you are unfamiliar with penalty shots and the fact that 3-point shooters are rarely fouled? I like how your stats dont include points from foul shooting. Using your own criteria of points per shot, (including points from free throws) here is the ranking of every player in the nescac who has taken 100 shots or more this season:

JeffRookie,

I think your stat, which includes foul shots rewards the player who takes the most foul shots that are not counted as attempts.  Correct me if I am wrong, but if a player gets fouled on a shot, the player is not get credited for taking the shot unless he makes the basket.  Of course if the player wanted to pad your statistic he would be best served to miss the shot and have the opprtunity to score 2 points without having the shot go in his statistic. 

It is true that including points from foul shots without also including the shot attempt from the foul distorts the statistic, but I think that this is how Hollinger and other statisticians usually approach the points/shot number. It is, as you pointed out, by no means perfect, but I think it is better than ignoring points from foul shots entirely.

you can get to the FT w/o taking a shot. that may be why they don't count it a a shot attempt.

[hoopjunkie]

I think with the upcoming weekend the teams making the playoffs are really up in the air . Colby,Tufts & Weslyan with alot of close losses could really beat anyone . I would even put Williams in the same group since they are in danger not to make the nescac playoffs . That is why I love the games . How does anyone explain Williams without graduating any major contributors from last  years championship team , maybe not even making the playoffs???

[eclinchy]

How does anyone explain Williams without graduating any major contributors from last  years championship team , maybe not even making the playoffs???

Gee, I don't know.  Good question.

[MeOak21]

wow, incredible response

[Friar T]

Friar T; why don't you ask someone on Amherst, Trinity, Wiliams or Middlebury whether they think Colby is a "bad" team? Losing a string of close games does't = bad.

Okay, "bad" may not be the right word, but they're sure as hell not good. 1-6 in NESCAC (you lose by 1 or 100 IT'S A LOSS) and 11-11 overall, they're either the most unlucky team in the nation or just not that good...

Let's face it, Colby isn't exactly a NESCAC power. We're talking about a program that has finished in the bottom half of the conference in 6 of the last 7 years, and has had a winning record in conference ONCE over that span (5-4 in 06-07). The team has had an overall winning record twice in that span (15-11 in 06-07 and 14-8 in 04-05).

All this being considered, Choice would have to incredible to be considered for 1st team and pretty good and typically an upperclassman for 2nd team. Granted I've never seen him play, but his numbers are neither. A few points taken straight from Mule-folklore.

2006-07
Nick Farrell named First-Team All-NESCAC
Colby in top half of conference, team winning record overall and in conference
Farrell leads NESCAC in scoring and 3s

2005-06
Drew Cohen named First-Team All-NESCAC
Colby in bottom half with losing record
Cohen dominates, second in scoring, first in rebounds, almost 5 blocks per game (led nation)

2004-05
Pat McGowen named Second-Team All-NESCAC
Colby in bottom half with losing record
A senior...top 10 in scoring, #1 in 3s, #2 in steals
Cohen gets nothing despite equal if not better #'s
Top 10 in scoring and rebounding, led NESCAC in blocks and #2 in FG%

It's real simple:
Solid team + good player = All-NESCAC
Great player = All-NESCAC
Bad team + good player = Maybe second-team, maybe a chance to read about other people getting All-NESCAC honors

If history rings true, Choice might get 2nd team, he might not...

I didn't write the book, I just preach it's teachings...

[FormerPolarBear]

My feelings on the All-Nescac teams are that they are pretty much determined before the season with a few exceptions every year.  Also, I do not think that you have to be on a good team to make an all league team; that doesnt seem to be the the precedent that has been set.  A perfect example and the only one that is fresh in my head at this moment is last year with Bates.  Bates, the 8th best team in the NESCAC, thats right, 8th, had two guys on the 1st team, Ray and Stockwell.  While I played agaisnt these guys for four years and respect their games very much, I was surprised to see that a team that finished 8th in the league could have two guys represented on the 1st team.  Middlebury on the other hand finished 4th last year and did not have anyone representing their squad on the all league teams.  Now, at the same time, I do not believe Middlebury had anyone better than Ray or Stockwell. Thus, my conclusion is that the coaches for the most part choose the 10 best players in the league, and really, I do not have a problem with that.

On another note, how about them Polar Bears, #3 in New England.  Pretty impressive.  I have only been following the Bowdoin program since 2003, but to my knowledge it is the highest ranking the team has had in a long time, maybe ever. 

[Route9_Cassie]

Hoopster, two things.  I do not believe close counts in basketball.  It might, but I don't think it does.  One place where close does not count is the diner.  For example: if I were to pour a glass of water on someone's lap instead of his or her glass I could not ignore it, because well, I was close.  And while I would like to take pride in my straw wrapper twirling on milkshakes, "Best Waitress Ever" didn't earn her nickname by not having the best wrapper twirls.

And second, standing at 6'3, I know that you don't get penalized or handicapped for being tall.  While I am sure we all appreciate your ability to check the Amherst roster for height, it might as well just be an additional stat.  Take it from me - reigning mvp of the WMDBL (Western Mass. Diner Basketball League)

[PolarBear]

The one game I saw Bowdoin play this year was against Colby last Saturday. 

Since Choice is a topic of conversation, my observations from that one game are that Choice is very talented but not quite consistent enough for 40 minutes to be considered among the best players in Nescac.  At times I thought he was the best player on the court.  At other times, I wasn't even aware he was on the court. 

Two mitigating factors to be offered in his defense: 1) Bowdoin impressed me with their physical, aggressive D - better than average, and 2) Colby's offense didn't necessarily seem geared toward getting him frequent touches but rather toward the 3 from their guards.

Overall, without having the benefit of seeing the other all Nescac contenders, but having seen alot of Nescac games/players over the years, my limited impression is that Choice, based on his lack of consistency and based on Colby's dismal record (evidently their new president is already de-emphasizing athletics based on Friar's research - much appreciated in Brunswick), would not merit all Nescac this year, but should be heard from in the future. 

[nescac1]

Nice article on soon to be Nescac rookie of the year, Brian Ellis:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/02/14/ellis_makes_quick_impression_at_bates/