MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[iiwwuu]

As far as playing Brady Rose, IWU needed to get from 11 players down to 10 when CCIW play started...11 is just one too many, even for a deep team.  That decision seems to have come down to Rose vs Stempel...tough call, as both kids have nice upsides and are talented.  I can tell you, based on conversations I've had with Ron Rose this season, that he is naturally inclined to not play Brady...because of perceptions.  I know that for him to have made that decision that he truly believes that Brady is the right guy to have on the floor.  It's not because he's his son - I do know that for sure. 

The stats don't support your statement that Rose is inclined not to play his son.  In fact the stats support the opposite.  From the IWU basketball stats web site:  Pts per minute - Stemple .47, Rose .29.  Yet Rose (211) played more minutes over Stemple (189).  A few other Guard benchmarks on PPM -- Doyle .40, Overstreet .40.  Interesting to say the least.  Make your own objective assessment from the stats.  IMHO, Stemple was more valuable to the team and should not have been the "11th" man as you say.  Coach's decision is open to question using objective measures. 

Subjectively, starting early in the season Coach in fact played Brady more that stats and output or experience would have indicated was fair.  Thinking long term, what is the impact on recruiting?  The class of '17 is left wondering if Brady will take over Overstreets minutes for their next two years and they will be cast aside.  The class of '18 sees the writing on the wall, and more importantly perhaps, why would a guard in the class of '19 and '20 even think about coming to IWU when the cast has already been set with Brady taking over the prime guard spot when performance does not indicate it.  As with IWU losing only 3 guards this year, and an oversized roster already saturated in guards, why would a recruit even remotely consider IWU for the next 2-3 years. 

Sorry if this goes against the grain of blind support for the program.  I'm not arguing Ron Rose past success.  Without question the stats demonstrate it.  But this is the first season where he had to make decisions with his son on the roster, and it appears to me that quite the opposite of your contention there he was bias to 'not playing' Brady that in fact he played in more minutes that he deserved based on production.  At least that's what the objective stats would seem to indicate. 

[toooldtohoop]

As far as playing Brady Rose, IWU needed to get from 11 players down to 10 when CCIW play started...11 is just one too many, even for a deep team.  That decision seems to have come down to Rose vs Stempel...tough call, as both kids have nice upsides and are talented.  I can tell you, based on conversations I've had with Ron Rose this season, that he is naturally inclined to not play Brady...because of perceptions.  I know that for him to have made that decision that he truly believes that Brady is the right guy to have on the floor.  It's not because he's his son - I do know that for sure. 

The stats don't support your statement that Rose is inclined not to play his son.  In fact the stats support the opposite.  From the IWU basketball stats web site:  Pts per minute - Stemple .47, Rose .29.  Yet Rose (211) played more minutes over Stemple (189).  A few other Guard benchmarks on PPM -- Doyle .40, Overstreet .40.  Interesting to say the least.  Make your own objective assessment from the stats.  IMHO, Stemple was more valuable to the team and should not have been the "11th" man as you say.  Coach's decision is open to question using objective measures. 

Subjectively, starting early in the season Coach in fact played Brady more that stats and output or experience would have indicated was fair.  Thinking long term, what is the impact on recruiting?  The class of '17 is left wondering if Brady will take over Overstreets minutes for their next two years and they will be cast aside.  The class of '18 sees the writing on the wall, and more importantly perhaps, why would a guard in the class of '19 and '20 even think about coming to IWU when the cast has already been set with Brady taking over the prime guard spot when performance does not indicate it.  As with IWU losing only 3 guards this year, and an oversized roster already saturated in guards, why would a recruit even remotely consider IWU for the next 2-3 years. 

Sorry if this goes against the grain of blind support for the program.  I'm not arguing Ron Rose past success.  Without question the stats demonstrate it.  But this is the first season where he had to make decisions with his son on the roster, and it appears to me that quite the opposite of your contention there he was bias to 'not playing' Brady that in fact he played in more minutes that he deserved based on production.  At least that's what the objective stats would seem to indicate.

What about other objective data such as assists, turnovers, shooting %?

[badgerwarhawk]

Do you have any numbers to support your assumptions? 

[79jaybird]

I'm thinking that if Elmhurst loses Saturday to IWU,  they MUST win at least one of the CCIW Tournament games to garner a Pool C bid.   I knew that Carthage home loss earlier this year was going to come back and haunt us, possibly costing us a share of the CCIW title.

[Naperick]

I'm thinking that if Elmhurst loses Saturday to IWU,  they MUST win at least one of the CCIW Tournament games to garner a Pool C bid.   I knew that Carthage home loss earlier this year was going to come back and haunt us, possibly costing us a share of the CCIW title.

I agree.  And if Elmhurst wins Saturday, I think they are in.

[iiwwuu]

As far as playing Brady Rose, IWU needed to get from 11 players down to 10 when CCIW play started...11 is just one too many, even for a deep team.  That decision seems to have come down to Rose vs Stempel...tough call, as both kids have nice upsides and are talented.  I can tell you, based on conversations I've had with Ron Rose this season, that he is naturally inclined to not play Brady...because of perceptions.  I know that for him to have made that decision that he truly believes that Brady is the right guy to have on the floor.  It's not because he's his son - I do know that for sure. 

The stats don't support your statement that Rose is inclined not to play his son.  In fact the stats support the opposite.  From the IWU basketball stats web site:  Pts per minute - Stemple .47, Rose .29.  Yet Rose (211) played more minutes over Stemple (189).  A few other Guard benchmarks on PPM -- Doyle .40, Overstreet .40.  Interesting to say the least.  Make your own objective assessment from the stats.  IMHO, Stemple was more valuable to the team and should not have been the "11th" man as you say.  Coach's decision is open to question using objective measures. 

Subjectively, starting early in the season Coach in fact played Brady more that stats and output or experience would have indicated was fair.  Thinking long term, what is the impact on recruiting?  The class of '17 is left wondering if Brady will take over Overstreets minutes for their next two years and they will be cast aside.  The class of '18 sees the writing on the wall, and more importantly perhaps, why would a guard in the class of '19 and '20 even think about coming to IWU when the cast has already been set with Brady taking over the prime guard spot when performance does not indicate it.  As with IWU losing only 3 guards this year, and an oversized roster already saturated in guards, why would a recruit even remotely consider IWU for the next 2-3 years. 

Sorry if this goes against the grain of blind support for the program.  I'm not arguing Ron Rose past success.  Without question the stats demonstrate it.  But this is the first season where he had to make decisions with his son on the roster, and it appears to me that quite the opposite of your contention there he was bias to 'not playing' Brady that in fact he played in more minutes that he deserved based on production.  At least that's what the objective stats would seem to indicate.

What about other objective data such as assists, turnovers, shooting %?

Fair question:  Stemple - FG% 56.5%, 3pt FG 50%, Asst/Turnover Ratio .78;  Rose - FG% 37.9%, 3pt FG 34.2%, Asst/Turn 1.80.  Stemple wins the offensive stats decisively.  Which further begs the question, what is with the coaching choices to bring up Brady so quickly to varsity and displace Stemple?  There are no objective measures to drive Rose's playing time.  This will create an issue with existing players, and seriously hamper the next 2 years of recruiting for guards.  Playing Rose was not an objective decision; it was because of subjective influences.  The numbers do not support the playing time Rose received. 

[iwumichigander]

As far as playing Brady Rose, IWU needed to get from 11 players down to 10 when CCIW play started...11 is just one too many, even for a deep team.  That decision seems to have come down to Rose vs Stempel...tough call, as both kids have nice upsides and are talented.  I can tell you, based on conversations I've had with Ron Rose this season, that he is naturally inclined to not play Brady...because of perceptions.  I know that for him to have made that decision that he truly believes that Brady is the right guy to have on the floor.  It's not because he's his son - I do know that for sure. 

The stats don't support your statement that Rose is inclined not to play his son.  In fact the stats support the opposite.  From the IWU basketball stats web site:  Pts per minute - Stemple .47, Rose .29.  Yet Rose (211) played more minutes over Stemple (189).  A few other Guard benchmarks on PPM -- Doyle .40, Overstreet .40.  Interesting to say the least.  Make your own objective assessment from the stats.  IMHO, Stemple was more valuable to the team and should not have been the "11th" man as you say.  Coach's decision is open to question using objective measures. 

Subjectively, starting early in the season Coach in fact played Brady more that stats and output or experience would have indicated was fair.  Thinking long term, what is the impact on recruiting?  The class of '17 is left wondering if Brady will take over Overstreets minutes for their next two years and they will be cast aside.  The class of '18 sees the writing on the wall, and more importantly perhaps, why would a guard in the class of '19 and '20 even think about coming to IWU when the cast has already been set with Brady taking over the prime guard spot when performance does not indicate it.  As with IWU losing only 3 guards this year, and an oversized roster already saturated in guards, why would a recruit even remotely consider IWU for the next 2-3 years. 

Sorry if this goes against the grain of blind support for the program.  I'm not arguing Ron Rose past success.  Without question the stats demonstrate it.  But this is the first season where he had to make decisions with his son on the roster, and it appears to me that quite the opposite of your contention there he was bias to 'not playing' Brady that in fact he played in more minutes that he deserved based on production.  At least that's what the objective stats would seem to indicate.

What about other objective data such as assists, turnovers, shooting %?

Fair question:  Stemple - FG% 56.5%, 3pt FG 50%, Asst/Turnover Ratio .78;  Rose - FG% 37.9%, 3pt FG 34.2%, Asst/Turn 1.80.  Stemple wins the offensive stats decisively.  Which further begs the question, what is with the coaching choices to bring up Brady so quickly to varsity and displace Stemple?  There are no objective measures to drive Rose's playing time.  This will create an issue with existing players, and seriously hamper the next 2 years of recruiting for guards.  Playing Rose was not an objective decision; it was because of subjective influences.  The numbers do not support the playing time Rose received. A

Except - your comparison is false as not comparable positions or skill sets.  Just take a look at the substution patterns.
Stemple is as a  (3) G/F small forward and played the (4) in high school. 
Rose is a guard that can play the (1) point guard or (2) shooting guard.

[Titan Q]

Fair question:  Stemple - FG% 56.5%, 3pt FG 50%, Asst/Turnover Ratio .78;  Rose - FG% 37.9%, 3pt FG 34.2%, Asst/Turn 1.80.  Stemple wins the offensive stats decisively.  Which further begs the question, what is with the coaching choices to bring up Brady so quickly to varsity and displace Stemple?  There are no objective measures to drive Rose's playing time.  This will create an issue with existing players, and seriously hamper the next 2 years of recruiting for guards.  Playing Rose was not an objective decision; it was because of subjective influences.  The numbers do not support the playing time Rose received.

Brady Rose and Andy Stempel are different players.  Rose is a combo guard who handles it well, and someone who can guard a quick 1 or 2.  Stempel, who also has a high upside, is a bigger wing player who basically plays the 3 on both offense and defense (not a kid who is going to defend a quick 1/2).  This isn't like deciding who to play between Brady Rose and Jordan Nelson, who are basically the same type of player.  (In IWU's rotation, Rose comes in when Nelson leaves.)

Your suggestion that Ron Rose is playing Brady because he's his son is pretty unfair.  If you are honest with yourself, you'll admit you have absolutely no idea what went into Rose's decision to settle on Brady in the rotation.  In reality, it's no different than past decisions to play, say, Matt Schick...or Stephen Rudnicki...or Mike Mayberger (instead of other options).  And those guys weren't related to IWU's head coach. The head coach has to make really tough decisions on which players to put on the floor, in which roles, to maximize chances to win.  I'm 100% sure that Ron Rose wants to win CCIW titles and make the NCAA tournament a lot more than he wants to see his son on the floor.   

By the way, Brady didn't play in IWU's first two games.  He first played in game 3, when Jordan Nelson was out.

[AppletonRocks]

Jack Sikma was my neighbor when he played for the Bucks.

[Gregory Sager]

Good luck Vikings

Thanks, BW!

Greg, how do you know he wasn't talkin' about Augie? 

Because nobody wishes Augie good luck unless it's really, really necessary.

NPU, baby

Bryce Dolan has (deservedly) gotten the accolades for IWU in last night's game, but Mike Marietti has (undeservedly) been completely ignored.  He merely went 7 of 8 from the field - I was 'shocked' when he finally missed one, halfway thru the 2nd.

Marietti did a great job of finishing around the basket, for which he deserves kudos. But a 6'8, 245 center who only pulls down two rebounds in 25 minutes of playing time against drastically smaller opponents has something to answer for in that regard, too.

Oh, I totally agree - and that criticism could go for nearly all the Titans.  (For the #1 rebounding team to be outrebounded badly by the #8 team is a total team disgrace.)  Just didn't want his 7 for 8 to go totally overlooked.  (Earlier this season - can't recall which game right now - he had a perfect night shooting: IIRC, he was 6-6 from the field plus 4-4 from the line.  Haven't checked, but I'd guess he's on track for a top ten all-time in FG%.)

As I said, Marietti's a nice finisher -- as he should be, since he's now the biggest player in the conference since Kevin Schlitter left the Augie roster. He did a good job of making his layups in the crackerbox, especially the nice one that he got off of a back-door cut in the second half. He also ran the floor and got a transition layup in the first half, which you always like to see from your big man.

But I think that you're reading too much into his shooting percentage stats, Chuck. Mike Marietti never takes a shot that isn't within arm's length of the basket. While it's impressive that he makes those kinds of close-in shots at a higher percentage than do other glued-to-the-charge-circle big men such as Cam Van Wyk and Will Nixon, it's not that impressive. I'm more impressed with big men such as Jack Burchett, Ben Ryan, and Charlie Rosenberg who can step out and hit midrange jumpers with regularity while still maintaining a CCIW shooting % over .500. That makes them more versatile and dangerous offensive threats than a guy like Marietti. And I'm even more impressed by smaller guys such as T.J. Sims, Dylan Overstreet, Donte Logan, Jordan Robinson, Brayden Teuscher, and Jayme Moten, players who shoot a lot of trey attempts as well as midrange shots and layups, yet make enough shots from far away to keep themselves on the CCIW shooting percentage leaderboard. Heck, T.J. Sims is 5'8, 156 ... and he's seventh in the league in FG% at .533. That really shows me something about how dynamic and effective a player Sims really is.

I'm much more taken with what Sims is doing with regard to shooting percentage than with what Marietti's doing. In fact, while the aforementioned back-door-cut layup by Marietti on Saturday was well done, I thought that the best moment for an Illinois Wesleyan big man on Saturday night was when Trevor Seibring knocked down an 18-foot jumper from the top of the key early in the first half. If he can do that with regularity, it'll give opponents much more to think about than just his post-up game ... and it'll open up a lot of offensive possibilities for Ron Rose that wouldn't otherwise exist.

The point remains that for a bigger, older team to be outrebounded 42-27 by the underclass 'midgets' from NPU was a total team breakdown (AND a great performance by the Vikings).

"From now on, you'll be history! You'll be hiss, you'll be hiss, you'll be history!"

Both Greg and Titan Q have been very kind to iiwwuu, who seems to have joined in the last week and whose first two posts are highly critical of--one could say an attack on--Ron Rose.  The idea that a DIII coach--or ANY coach--could "hoard" players in the current higher education environment is absolutely absurd.  DIII players are not on athletic scholarships (and those are limited even at DI and DII).  All small colleges, including IWU, are finding it extremely difficult to cover the financial needs of their students and balance the books (and let's not even start on faculty compensation!).  Combine that with demanding admission requirements and the job of recruiting becomes even tougher.

Is IWU's roster larger and is 'hoarding' occurring?  Look at the MBB rosters for other CCIW schools -- Augustana 19 / NCC 16 / Carthage 21 / Elmhurst 21 / Wheaton 18 (source: each schools web site).  At 27, IWU's roster is significantly larger.  And in the AAU circuit, and backed by the figures above, it would seem to indicate that IWU's roster is in fact bloated - to the benefit of IWU, to the benefit of the basketball program, and to the detriment of the players imho.  I'm simply pointing out a trend that I see developing, and one that I don't think is in the best interest of IWU or the players.  Its a fair discussion.  And one that impacts the success of the program.

Providing a new spin on the recruiting talk...  As someone who knows many of the guys who played at IWU over the last 4-5 years, the decision to take IWU over the other CCIW schools is an easy one.  Why?  It isn't money or the coach..  Yes those are factors, but it is the ability to be in Bloomington and virtually on the same campus as Illinois State...  These guys get to play D3 basketball during the day and have the D1 party school at night. No other school offers that, especially since ISU is known for being quite a wild time. I am sure this may sound childish to the older gentleman in this chat, but it is more of a factor than you would think..

You're right ... it does sound childish, but, at the same time, I agree with you. The prospect of bigger and more varied opportunities for mass binge drinking definitely enters into the consideration of some high-school student-athletes when choosing a school, as they're no different than other high-school students in that regard. To quote Joe Hakes yet again:

it is an emotional and often irrational decision that determines where they go

Emphasis this time upon the "irrational" part.

[Gregory Sager]

Final from the Toolshed:

Carthage 83
Illinois Tech 50

What a weird game. IIT outrebounded the Red Men, 29-27, and the Scarlet Hawks shot a scintillating 61% (23-38) from the field and 50% (4-8) from downtown. So why did the South Siders lose by 33 points? Well, getting to the line only once (0-1) certainly didn't help, but the key stat was that IIT turned it over 31 times tonight. Thirty-one turnovers? That's horrible even by women's basketball standards.

Kiston Lee and Mike Leazer each scored 14 for Bosko's Boys, while Mike Stevenson chipped in 13 and Ellis Matthews added 11. Carthage improves to 9-15, while Todd Kelly's inaugural IIT squad drops to 2-21. The CCIW finishes the non-conference slate for the regular season at 64-24 (.727).

I noticed that the CCIW's coordinator of men's basketball officials, veteran ref Ken Maziarka, was one of the three officials for tonight's walk in the park contest. He also officiated North Park's 98-44 drubbing of Dayspring Bible back in January. In the immortal words of Mel Brooks, it's good to be the king.

[Gregory Sager]

Current Massey:

    7. Augustana
  11. Elmhurst
  18. Illinois Wesleyan
  33. North Central
  54. North Park
  94. Wheaton
126. Carthage
187. Millikin

Massey sez:

Augustana 71, Wheaton 66 (AC = 69%)
Carthage 66, Millikin 65 (CC = 51%)
Illinois Wesleyan 76, Elmhurst 73 (IWU = 62%)
North Central 74, North Park 69 (NCC = 66%)

[robberki]

A wise man once told me that coaching your own child is the toughest job in sports. He/she needs to be either your best player or your worst, anything in between and it gets sticky.

[Mr. Ypsi]

A wise man once told me that coaching your own child is the toughest job in sports. He/she needs to be either your best player or your worst, anything in between and it gets sticky.

While my only coaching was at the youth level (mainly soccer; also basketball), I can identify with that.  My older son eventually became the best player and was always seen by everyone as a clear starter; my younger son was a bit iffier - I never caught flak for his playing time, but he was only good, no where near the best.  Perhaps less of a problem because at that level nearly all the coaches are the dads (or, rarely, moms) of one or more of the players.

Brady Rose is unlikely to ever be Steve Djurickovic or Derek Raridon (the jury is still out on matching Eric Bridges), but he is (to me, at least) clearly not the worst on the team, or even in the rotation.  Coach Rose will probably catch flak from many quarters, but I trust him to treat Brady's playing time no differently than any other player.  With Overstreet, Sodemann, and Nelson all graduating, some may worry.  With Dolan, Rose, Pennington, Stempel, and others coming back, I'm confident.

[veterancciwfan]

Please Massey, be right, IWU over Elmhurst. Massey was wrong on the last 2 IWU games. Should be a great game on Senior and Bridges court naming night with women playing before men.