MBB: Midwest Conference

[The Roop]

A member of the selection committee, Gary Grace, was interviewed on Hoopsville this past Sunday and there is a podcast link to it on the front page under "Tournament Time". Takes about 20 minutes to hear it in it's entirety but it's worth the time. The thing I noticed most is that the OWP OOWP was used in DII. Keyword there is "was" as it's obviously not a perfect system, nor will any system ever be at this level. DIII simply isn't a national game but if it weights the power conferences like it's supposed to then it will be an improvement over the previous criteria.

Short of expanding the field and inviting everyone above .500 there will always be someone with an argument about not getting in. Expanding like that is simply not practical and would never happen. Besides, all it would mean for the MWC is that the MWC Tournament would be replayed a week later with the NCAA determining the location and seeding.

Play the allowed 25 games like most everybody else does and stay in-region whenever possible. By doing so the MWC teams would improve their rankings by that alone.

[LU_nut]

Roop:  I listened to Gary whoever and thought it was a bunch of mush topped off with commitment to "integrity".   I do not know how you measure integrity when the measuring stick is a bunch of mush.

I noticed that the % of LU's opponents winning % changed from the release of the poll yesterday from .524 to now being .550.   Unless I am going senile, that is what I believe happened.  If so, I am still darn confused as to how Augustana is number 1 with three more in-region losses than LU.   In my humble opinion, D3 post season mechanics are really lame.    I am not trying to be parochial.   Choose some central neutral sites and play based on some seedings.   (Note to self:  work on letting stuff go....it will make you a happier person ) 

On to a better topic.  I, for one, believe the MWC tourney is going to be very interesting.  Norbs plays very good Defense and was missing Bieniasz last time they played LU.  I think LU is going to have their hands full.

Also, as I have stated before, I think Chamberlain's return has a ton of implications.   He really makes a difference guarding the basket given the defensive system that Grinnell plays.   Last time they were in Alex, they played absolutely horribly (55 pts. I think).   I would think they got some of that out of their system.  It is generally a shooter's gym in terms of rims and background.(at least at one end)

Good Luck to the Vikings.   It would be great to complete the conference "double" for the 4th time in 5 years.

[Titan Q]

Roop:  I listened to Gary whoever and thought it was a bunch of mush topped off with commitment to "integrity".   I do not know how you measure integrity when the measuring stick is a bunch of mush.

I noticed that the % of LU's opponents winning % changed from the release of the poll yesterday from .524 to now being .550.   Unless I am going senile, that is what I believe happened.  If so, I am still darn confused as to how Augustana is number 1 with three more in-region losses than LU.   In my humble opinion, D3 post season mechanics are really lame.    I am not trying to be parochial.   Choose some central neutral sites and play based on some seedings.   (Note to self:  work on letting stuff go....it will make you a happier person ) 

Nut, here is my best analysis FWIW...

There are 5 primary criteria...

* In-region winning %
* Strength of schedule
* Head to head
* In-region common opponents
* Record vs regionally ranked teams

http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/basketball/2008/2008_d3_m_basketball_handbook.pdf
(page 16)

Lawrence vs Augustana...

* In-region winning %: Lawrence 18-2 (.900), Augustana 19-5 (.792)

* In-region strength of schedule: Lawrence .555, Augustana .575

* Head-to-head: N/A

* In-region common opponents:
   - UW-Stevens Point - both lost
   - UW-Oshkosh - both won
   - St. Norbert - Lawrence 2-0, Augie 1-0

(push)
   
* Record vs regionally ranked teams:
- Augustana - 5-2 (wins - Wash U, Wheaton, Elmhurst 2, Webster...loss - UW-Stevens Point, Wheaton)
- Lawrence - 0-1 (UW-Stevens Point)


I believe Augustana is ranked higher due to those 5 wins over regionally ranked teams (and the SOS advantage to some degree).

Good luck to Lawrence in the tournament.

[LU_nut]

thanks Q.   I get it, but think in region % would be a the biggest factor.   Not to start too big of issue, but I am not so sure that the CCIW is not down this year a bit.   They have a lot of ranked teams which helps the Augie in region record, but Augie beating St. norbs in 2 OTs and losing to Lacrosse does not get me excited.   Nor does them losing at home in the tourney last year to Carroll give me much confidence that they are any sort of powerhouse.    The other CCIW teams have not had great years.    Wheaton remains a one man team and Elhmurst has not figured out how to get it all together(and lost to Oshkosh, which LU beat).  IWU is young, but improving.   Now, I will admit the win at Wash U is impressive, but as I mentioned before, they had just lost their best guard for the season.
Personally, I think they are ripe for another post-season disappointment if they meet up with a team that has solid guard play like LU.   

To be clear though:  I think your overall rational is on target.  Thanks.

[John Gleich]

thanks Q.   I get it, but think in region % would be a the biggest factor.

Nut,

I understand your reasoning behind this thought...  It would seem, for the most part, to tell how well a team did in the games that "count" the most.

The other criterion are used to differentiate one team against another... and it shows how good the particular wins are.

I think it would be interesting (though by no means would I ask someone to calculate this... it would hardly be useful enough to spend enough time to see it..) to see what the QOWI numbers would be for the teams in question.  A win was worth more than a loss in every instance, so I think that LU's numbers might be higher with the QOWI... but then again, perhaps not.  It would be interesting, though, nonetheless.

[Greek Tragedy]

I would actually think

* Head to head
* In-region common opponents
* Record vs regionally ranked teams

would be the most important.  Why?

Head to head for obvious reasons.

In-region common opponents...kind of tough using the old "Kevin Bacon" theory, but you get an idea of how teams match up without actually matching up.

Record vs regionally ranked teams...HUGE factor in my opinion.  This gauges you against your direct peers, other teams regionally ranked as well.  This is your record against the so-called best in the regions. 

[Gregory Sager]

barely above .500 team = bad loss, I don't care how young or tough they were playing at times.  Back to my question though, why don't bad losses count more in the regional rankings?

They don't count more within the strength of schedule criterion for the same reason that good wins don't count for more. Neither of the two components of SOS (opponents' average winning percentage, or OWP, and opponents' opponents' winning percentage, or OOWP) are weighted in terms of some games meaning more than others. As the names indicate, they're averages. Augustana gets just as much credit for playing two games against NPU (regional winning percentage of .524) as it does for playing two games against Wheaton (regional winning percentage of .714). Likewise, Lawrence gets just as much credit for playing two games against Beloit (regional winning percentage of .182) as it does for playing two games against Grinnell (regional winning percentage of .682).

Losses, good or bad, count against a team's regional winning percentage -- and, if relevant, they count against the third, fourth, and fifth listed primary criteria as well. Your "bad loss" argument holds no water, because the "bad loss" primary criterion does not exist.

[Gregory Sager]

Funny you should say that Greg, I was recently going to argue that I thought the MWC may be better than the CCIW this season. Is this the ultimate message board blasphemy or does anyone else agree

You're kidding, right? In case you aren't, you should take a look at what the two leagues did in non-conference play. The CCIW went 62-26 (.705). Playing against largely the same pool of opponents as the CCIW's, the MWC went 34-32 (.515).

Play the allowed 25 games like most everybody else does and stay in-region whenever possible. By doing so the MWC teams would improve their rankings by that alone.

If the MWC would ever extend its regular season to 25 games apiece, I would hope that two of the three additional games would be used to fill out the MWC conference schedule and make it a full double round-robin. The extra game for each team would most likely be used against NAthCon opponents (for most of the league), SLIAC opponents (for Knox, Monmouth, and Illinois College), and an IIAC opponent (for Grinnell). Those would all tend to be winnable games more often than not for MWC teams, so in that sense Roop is right.

thanks Q.   I get it, but think in region % would be a the biggest factor. 

Most D3 observers tend to think that way, but the selection committee has never tipped its hand that regional winning % is held in any higher regard than the other four primary criteria.

Not to start too big of issue, but I am not so sure that the CCIW is not down this year a bit.

It's not down, but it is more balanced. The teams at the top are not as good as they've been in recent seasons, while the teams at the bottom are not nearly as bad. Last-place Millikin gave first-place Augustana two of the toughest games that Augie's been in all season.

They have a lot of ranked teams which helps the Augie in region record, but Augie beating St. norbs in 2 OTs and losing to Lacrosse does not get me excited.

The fact that Augie had to go to two overtimes to beat St. Norbert is immaterial in the eyes of the regional committee. Winning margin is not a criterion; Augie's win over the Green Knights counts for just as much as either of Lawrence's wins over SNC. And, as I've said, the loss to UWL doesn't create any special penalties against Augie in the eyes of the committee vis-a-vis Lawrence when it comes to the Midwest Region rankings, because Lawrence didn't play UWL.

Nor does them losing at home in the tourney last year to Carroll give me much confidence that they are any sort of powerhouse. 

Last season is completely irrelevant.

The other CCIW teams have not had great years.    Wheaton remains a one man team

Wrong. All-CCIW second-teamer Andy Wiele averaged 15.0 ppg and 10.2 rpg. All-CCIW third-teamer Ben Panner averaged 13.4 ppg and was the second-best trey shooter in the league at .467. Wheaton was far from a one-man team. F'rinstance, North Park put the clamps on Kent Raymond both times that the Vikings faced Wheaton. Raymond averaged 23 ppg this year, but NPU held him to 13 and 16. However, Wiele and Panner picked up the slack (as did freshman guard Andrew Jahns in the first meeting between the two rivals) and led Wheaton to two narrow wins over NPU.

and Elhmurst has not figured out how to get it all together(and lost to Oshkosh, which LU beat).

Lawrence won by three on its home court against UWO. Elmhurst lost by two to UWO in Oshkosh. Not much difference there. I agree with you that Elmhurst has often been underwhelming this season, but the Bluejays have a pair of players in Brent Ruch and Ryan Burks who could spur them on to make a run in the tourney if things fall their way this coming weekend.

IWU is young, but improving.   Now, I will admit the win at Wash U is impressive, but as I mentioned before, they had just lost their best guard for the season.

Actually, IWU narrowly lost at Wash U. Augustana is the team that beat Wash U in St. Louis.

[gcfan33]

Time for some good old fashioned trash talk--

Tip of my hat to the Lawrence program.  You have the 2nd best fans in the conference, you have the 2nd best school in the conference, and by the end of tomorrow you will have had the 2nd best basketball team in the MWC, which isn't good enough to make the dance.

[The Roop]

Actually I think LU is pretty safe as they score well under the new alphabet soup criteria. Given the distance between the two schools they might not have to face each other until sectionals assuming both would make it that far.

I've already been told by someone close to the program that Grinnell is going to win so why even bother playing. LOL. It's also worth noting that they usually lose whenever he says something like that.

On a side note I think LU needs to do a better job with their ticket policy in the future. I've been hooked up so I will be there but they knew for a while that they were going to host, why not give a little more lead time on the distribution policy. Regardless of which other 3 wound up being there the allotments would not have changed. Each school gets their share of Pool A tickets, Students and Faculty at LU get X amount of Pool B tickets and the general public gets the Pool C tickets. A little tournament humor................

Unfortunately the general public that lives out of the Appleton area doesn't stand much chance at getting in. Why not authorize $10 on a credit card, then if the ticket isn't picked up within an hour of the first game, or something like that, then charge the card and release the ticket for the walk up crowd.     

[systemfan86]

Time for some good old fashioned trash talk--

Tip of my hat to the Lawrence program.  You have the 2nd best fans in the conference, you have the 2nd best school in the conference, and by the end of tomorrow you will have had the 2nd best basketball team in the MWC, which isn't good enough to make the dance.

I might not go that far...

But I like the chances for a Larry-GC matchup tomorrow. GC is 10-1 when Mr. C has been in the lineup this year. After last year's exit, I'm guessing that they aren't taking anything for granted. That's good.  

With Long stepping up, Grinnell can adjust better to a bad shooting night by one of their leaders. Instead of waiting for a single individual to lead the way, they would have to have a bad shooting night from multiple players to stumble like they did last year. And if everyone is on, they will be tough for anyone.  

Everyone healthy? Hope so. Play like it's Fall 2007, GC, and good luck tonight.

[wc2viking]

OK, trash talk.

It's interesting to see the Grinnell folks already looking ahead to the championship game tomorrow given their postseason record of non-success (including the debacle of last year.)  I think the circus leaves town this evening.

[systemfan86]

OK, trash talk.

It's interesting to see the Grinnell folks already looking ahead to the championship game tomorrow given their postseason record of non-success (including the debacle of last year.)  I think the circus leaves town this evening.

Of course, you only heard about last year's debacle, since you weren't there...

[iwumichigander]

Play the allowed 25 games like most everybody else does and stay in-region whenever possible. By doing so the MWC teams would improve their rankings by that alone.

If the MWC would ever extend its regular season to 25 games apiece, I would hope that two of the three additional games would be used to fill out the MWC conference schedule and make it a full double round-robin. The extra game for each team would most likely be used against NAthCon opponents (for most of the league), SLIAC opponents (for Knox, Monmouth, and Illinois College), and an IIAC opponent (for Grinnell). Those would all tend to be winnable games more often than not for MWC teams, so in that sense Roop is right.

Or, if not the double round-robin against at least two other in-region teams; preferably against opponents whom has some reasonable chance of being ranked at the end of the season.

Forgetting for the moment, the committee or the D3hoops voters --- It simply is hard for others looking at the MWC to get excited (or, get behind a Lawrence, for example) when 1) the MWC does not take as much risk as most other D-III teams by playing less than 25 regular season games , 2) when MWC plays the so-called power conferences (WAIC, CCIW, UAA) its non-conference/in-region record against those teams is not good, and as Greg Sager noted "You're kidding, right? In case you aren't, you should take a look at what the two leagues did in non-conference play. The CCIW went 62-26 (.705). Playing against largely the same pool of opponents as the CCIW's, the MWC went 34-32 (.515)."

As to our Top 25, the shortfall of games early on, I think is a factor why voters are not too anxious to give an MWC votes until the later polls. 

As to the Win-Loss %, I fully understand the passion LU-Nut expressed; however, I think you also have to take a look at the numerator and denominator used to derive the percentage.  In the Lawrence vs Augustana example Titan Q posted, the four game differential simply causes one to look a little harder at all the other criteria. If Lawrence where say at 21 - 3 (.875), I'm not so sure how much harder I would look at the other criteria.

[larry_u]

OK, trash talk.

It's interesting to see the Grinnell folks already looking ahead to the championship game tomorrow given their postseason record of non-success (including the debacle of last year.)  I think the circus leaves town this evening.

Of course, you only heard about last year's debacle, since you weren't there...

Eh...frankly with a histoy like Grinnell's, one year is just not enough.  Why not describe the choke jobs Grinnell left at the MWC tournament in say..2003, or 2007...

Lets put it this way.  Carroll and Grinnell have matched up in the 2 vs 3 game in 2006...and Grinnell lost, 2004...and Grinnell lost... 

I think there is plenty of history far saying Grinnell will be heading back to Iowa early tomorrow morning.  Me thinks LU and Carroll will match up again just like in 04, and just like in 06, and in both cases we all know who won....