MBB: Midwest Conference

[jeffdc]

gotta get this into the DIII rule books, eh? 

I completely agree with this.  Although I would add that once any team gets up by 30-40 points they should be playing defense in the half court only.

[John Gleich]

gotta get this into the DIII rule books, eh? 

I completely agree with this.  Although I would add that once any team gets up by 30-40 points they should be playing defense in the half court only.

No, and I don't think WooBoo would say that either...

These aren't written rules, they're unwritten rules... It's being a gentleman on the field.

Like in football when you stop throwing the ball up a ton or when you take a knee at the 10 yardline instead of trying to get another touchdown when you're up by a bundle.

Other unwritten rules are ones that have already been mentioned... like not playing your starters in the second half of games that you're winning by 40.


Basically, it's making the conscious choice not to embarrass the other team.

[RogK]

Then lets also prohibit blocked shots in the halfcourt defense, since getting your shot blocked is even more embarrassing than having your inbound pass stolen.

[John Gleich]

Then lets also prohibit blocked shots in the halfcourt defense, since getting your shot blocked is even more embarrassing than having your inbound pass stolen.

A blocked shot in and of itself isn't embarrassing... the embarrassing part is when a guy swats your shot 15 rows up into the bleachers and yells in your face.

Thus, the yelling in your face should be illegal (which it is... but isn't enforced).


I'm still the all-time career and season shot block leader at Wheaton North High School... don't steal my thunder!

[Just Bill]

Then lets also prohibit blocked shots in the halfcourt defense, since getting your shot blocked is even more embarrassing than having your inbound pass stolen.

A blocked shot in and of itself isn't embarrassing... the embarrassing part is when a guy swats your shot 15 rows up into the bleachers and yells in your face.

Thus, the yelling in your face should be illegal (which it is... but isn't enforced).


I'm still the all-time career and season shot block leader at Wheaton North High School... don't steal my thunder!

I've already seen two technical fouls for just this, already this year, so I'd say it's definitely being enforced.

[jeffdc]

Knox has a new coach this year (http://www.midwestconference.org/news/2012/8/27/MBB_0827124306.aspx?path=mbball) - I'll be curious to see how he does. I've always thought the KC team was much better than their record indicated.

Guess GC will find out tonight.

[systemfan86]

I have no problem with The System.  I DO have a problem with it being perverted to aggrandize one individual, against a clearly over-matched opponent you beat by 75 points.  THAT is my issue, not The System.  This was NOT teammates deferring to the 'hot hand' (since he wasn't even hot!); this was a pre-planned attempt at erasing the record (previously held by a Grinnell player ).  I do NOT blame Jack Parkman (or his teammates); they were just doing what the coach ordered.  I DO blame David Arsenault for abysmal sportsmanship and a total bastardization of d3 philosophy and the concept of TEAM sports.  The d3 world has noticed that he never attempts such records against teams that are composed of actual basketball players!

I completely agree with this.  Although I would add that once any team gets up by 30-40 points they should be playing defense in the half court only.

I've been stalking for a while, but I'll throw a couple points out there...
My ID indicates my affiliation.

I'm not a huge fan of records for records sake, but for those who want this accomplishment to be somehow 'organic' - happening in the normal flow of a game - let's face it, scoring records like these don't happen that way. Someone (normally a coach) decides that they want to go for the record and the game plan is adjusted to accomplish it. The 103 scored by the player from Rio Grande was not organic either.

I think the reaction to this situation is overblown on both sides. It's not a remarkable achievement in the sense that it was clearly manufactured. Neither is it the travesty that some want to make it out to be. It was a novelty and should be viewed as such.

Grinnell made the appropriate effort to win the game. That's the first measure. If you try to break a record and make no effort to actually win, THAT's a bigger problem. I think the descriptions from the actors involve indicate that the record itself  was not the original focus. To get Jack the ball and have him score a lot early was the plan. 20 points in the first 10 minutes is the description he gave. Once that was accomplished and he continued to get the ball fed to him, then the plan/goal appeared to change. If he was going for the record from the first whistle, I suspect he would have had more than 58 at half.  (as odd as that sounds).

Going for the record appears to have been set as a goal at half time - when the lead was 29, which apparently means that they didn't have to play half court defense yet. Taylor scored 58 of his team's 85 points in the first half; he scored 80 of 94 in the second. None of this is offered as a defense, but let's agree that the data appears to support that breaking the record may not have been the goal until after half time (when Taylor had a high scoring number).

I suspect that for many achieving an individual goal is not an acceptable goal, period. Quoting Mr Ypsi, it isn't part of the the "concept of TEAM sports". From the interviews I heard, the team considered it more than an individual goal. They feel they contributed as well. I would also point out - as has been pointed out before - that Taylor has more teammates than any other NCAA basketball player and that 19 of them got to play in the game. Compare that to other teams where the 10th and 11th player on the team never see the floor.

Time to let this silly novelty pass.

Oh, and given that Grinnell led by 24 at half last night, where is the outrage that they didn't play half court defense in the second half? Or did the critics stop paying attention?

[Titan Q]

Going for the record appears to have been set as a goal at half time - when the lead was 29, which apparently means that they didn't have to play half court defense yet. Taylor scored 58 of his team's 85 points in the first half; he scored 80 of 94 in the second. None of this is offered as a defense, but let's agree that the data appears to support that breaking the record may not have been the goal until after half time (when Taylor had a high scoring number).

As I posted last week, I don't buy the halftime theory...

35 seconds into the broadcast pregame last night, this from play-by-play guy Rob (didn't catch the last name):

"A few pertinent records for those watching tonight, most points ever in a D3 basketball game was set last year by our own senior shooting guard Griffin Lentsch, 89 points versus Principia.  Tonight that record is going to be attempted, possibly to be broken, by another Grinnell member - not Griffin Lentsch, new transfer sophomore Jack Taylor."

http://client.stretchinternet.com/client/grinnell.portal?mode=link&eventId=79617&broadcastType=video#


In that ESPN interview link I posted above, the interviewer asks Jack Taylor, "Was this the game plan?  Cause I'm looking at the boxscore and no one else on your team took more than 6 shots.  You took 108."

Taylor responded, "We played in a tournament last weekend and I hadn't shot the ball very well, so coming into the game tonight it was definitely a focus of our team to try to get me going offensively a little bit before we get into conference play.  And I started hitting my shots and we just sort of road the wave"

A more direct answer probably would have been, "Yes, we went into this game trying to set an individual scoring record, just like we did last year.  That is why I barely crossed the halfcourt line all night."

The whole "get Jack some shots early"/"realize at halftime something special is going on" explanation seems misleading to me.

When a broadcaster announces that the record will be attempted to be broken, and identifies the player, in the pregame...I think it's pretty clear this was planned heading into the game.

[Titan Q]

BTW, I watched most of the first half of the Grinnell/Knox game last night.  I happened to see on Twitter that sportswriter Dave Kindred (a fellow IWU Titan I might add) was at the game to watch Jack Taylor play, so I pulled up the stream.

I'm on the record as being very critical of Grinnell's contrived attempt to break an individual record against a terrible team, but I will say this -- the 2012-13 Pioneers look to me like a good team.  They seem to have a lot of talent on the floor at all times and players who execute "the system" very well. 

I will be interested to see how Grinnell's MWC season plays out.  With a FR/SO dominated Augustana team pounding MWC favorite St. Norbert, at St. Norbert, it would seem the league is there for the taking.  Last night Grinnell looked very much to me like a team that can win the MWC.

[jeffdc]

oh heck, no one has pointed this out, so....

GC won last night, 113 to 76 over KC.  I don't know if a 37 pt margin is enough to spark outrage. But they tried.

KC's David Jones, who has been quite a player in past seasons, didn't seem to be engaged. Maybe he was recovering from an injury?

GC's Adams, McManamy (who suffers from a name no one can pronounce), Levin, and Yeager all had a solid game.

Looking forward to Saturday's meetup with Ripon.

[jeffdc]

An interesting side note: the KC women seemed to be playing the 'System' last night. It proved pretty effective for them, bringing them within 3 pts of the GC team. They just didn't have the reliable 3 shooters. But watching the KC press was pretty cool.

[Greek Tragedy]

Given the way Grinnell plays, a 24-point deficit isn't an impossible task to reverse. 

[ExBBaller40]

My midweek look at the MWC as well as the WIAC and NathCon http://diiihoopsblog.blogspot.com/2012/11/midweek-blog-1-tis-season.html

[systemfan86]

Given the way Grinnell plays, a 24-point deficit isn't an impossible task to reverse. 

There in lies the rub...with 20 years of evidence to work from, those familiar with Grinnell's style of play understand that seemingly big leads are lost in the same manner that they are gained. So when  others claim that a 30 or 40 point lead should result in letting off the gas, they are not only asking the Grinnell players to change to a style that they aren't coached to play, they are removing the opportunity for the opponent to get back into the game.

Which raises an interesting thought...why is it that teams that play up tempo and score a lot of points are expected to change style when their approach works and they get a lead, but low scoring teams aren't expected to change their style when they fall behind? Why is it reasonable/appropriate to expect a Loyola Marymount team to become Princeton when they are winning big, but not reasonable/appropriate for Princeton to have to shoot early and often if they are losing big? Does that indicate a bias on the part of the advocate?

[cciwrabblerouser]

I have no problem with The System.  I DO have a problem with it being perverted to aggrandize one individual, against a clearly over-matched opponent you beat by 75 points.  THAT is my issue, not The System.  This was NOT teammates deferring to the 'hot hand' (since he wasn't even hot!); this was a pre-planned attempt at erasing the record (previously held by a Grinnell player ).  I do NOT blame Jack Parkman (or his teammates); they were just doing what the coach ordered.  I DO blame David Arsenault for abysmal sportsmanship and a total bastardization of d3 philosophy and the concept of TEAM sports.  The d3 world has noticed that he never attempts such records against teams that are composed of actual basketball players!

I completely agree with this.  Although I would add that once any team gets up by 30-40 points they should be playing defense in the half court only.

I've been stalking for a while, but I'll throw a couple points out there...
My ID indicates my affiliation.

I'm not a huge fan of records for records sake, but for those who want this accomplishment to be somehow 'organic' - happening in the normal flow of a game - let's face it, scoring records like these don't happen that way. Someone (normally a coach) decides that they want to go for the record and the game plan is adjusted to accomplish it. The 103 scored by the player from Rio Grande was not organic either.

I think the reaction to this situation is overblown on both sides. It's not a remarkable achievement in the sense that it was clearly manufactured. Neither is it the travesty that some want to make it out to be. It was a novelty and should be viewed as such.

Grinnell made the appropriate effort to win the game. That's the first measure. If you try to break a record and make no effort to actually win, THAT's a bigger problem. I think the descriptions from the actors involve indicate that the record itself  was not the original focus. To get Jack the ball and have him score a lot early was the plan. 20 points in the first 10 minutes is the description he gave. Once that was accomplished and he continued to get the ball fed to him, then the plan/goal appeared to change. If he was going for the record from the first whistle, I suspect he would have had more than 58 at half.  (as odd as that sounds).

Going for the record appears to have been set as a goal at half time - when the lead was 29, which apparently means that they didn't have to play half court defense yet. Taylor scored 58 of his team's 85 points in the first half; he scored 80 of 94 in the second. None of this is offered as a defense, but let's agree that the data appears to support that breaking the record may not have been the goal until after half time (when Taylor had a high scoring number).

I suspect that for many achieving an individual goal is not an acceptable goal, period. Quoting Mr Ypsi, it isn't part of the the "concept of TEAM sports". From the interviews I heard, the team considered it more than an individual goal. They feel they contributed as well. I would also point out - as has been pointed out before - that Taylor has more teammates than any other NCAA basketball player and that 19 of them got to play in the game. Compare that to other teams where the 10th and 11th player on the team never see the floor.

Time to let this silly novelty pass.

Oh, and given that Grinnell led by 24 at half last night, where is the outrage that they didn't play half court defense in the second half? Or did the critics stop paying attention?

oh please... a "silly novelty???"  yes, it did make division III basketball look very silly across the nation.  but other than that there was nothing silly about it.

look, no one is knocking "the system" here.  what is being critcized is the idea of pouring it on against a hapless opponent when there was no reason to do so.  i haven't seen anyone khock mr. taylor, either.  the criticism rests on the coach's (and his assistants') shoulders for intentionally embarrassing an opponent.  maybe, just maybe, there was a minor bit of 'teamwork' since the others had to get taylor the ball.  but where was the character-building in the travesty?  where was the fairness in what happened?  how does this stack up with the division III philosophy?  what were the life lessons here?

the overriding life lesson is that one way to garner national publicity is to humiliate another group of players.  and in doing so, grinnell college has prostituted its integrity for the sake of espn.

the grinnell community needs to rethink its principles and determine if the college should even play division III basketball.