MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[The Thundertaker]

My take on the top four so far:

Augie is the under-achiever

IWU is the over-achiever

NCC is finally achieving as most expected it would (but not me) -- even running the table, they can't get to 20 wins.   

Wheaton is the luckiest so far, esp. the win over NCC in OT.

To say that a team that is 5-1 in the CCIW and 14-3 overall with losses on the road to #3 Hope by one point, #21 Illinois Wesleyan in overtime and unranked but very good Wash U discredits Wheaton a lot.  You could just as easily say that if they would've shot an average percentage from three point land against IWU at the Shirk, they would be undefeated in conference right now (they were something like 2-13 on the game).  Sure NCC could very well be undefeated as well,  but I think you are taking away from what Wheaton has done already this season.  I'm not saying they are the best team in conference right now, but to say they are lucky discredits what they have done.

[augie_superfan]

11-3, even 10-4? may win/tie for the conference, right?   

I don't think there's any way 10-4 gets a piece of the title.  I'm very confident there will be an 11-3...maybe even two teams at 11-3.

A few weeks ago I did some simulating the conference schedule using my ratings system.  I haven't updated it often because NCC has performed like a different team and are thus short-changed because they are playing at a higher level than their current rating suggests.  However, some interesting things do come out of it now with regards to these type of conversations.

# of wins by the first place conference team

# of wins	% of sims
13	14.0 %
12	47.7 %
11	35.1 %
10	3.2 %

70.3 % of the simulations had an outright winner while 29.7 % had some sort of tie.  Here is the breakdown of the ties for 1st place:

# of teams	% of sims
2	24.5 %
3	4.6 %
4	0.5 %
5	0.003 %

Has IWU as a slight favorite to win it outright vs Wheaton:  30.4% to 29.9% with NCC @ 9.7%
**However, with NCCs current play, those should probably be more even like 23/23/23%

[Gregory Sager]

Wheaton is the luckiest so far, esp. the win over NCC in OT.

That was not a lucky win, unless what you meant by "lucky" was that Wheaton got to face NCC at a time when the Cards didn't have Goldthree available. In that case, I agree with you. But if that's not what you meant by "lucky", then I disagree. I was at that game. Wheaton earned the win, not through luck, but through a lot of very hard work and some great heads-up plays. One could argue that NCC threw the game away when Aaron Tiknis deliberately fouled Tyler Peters with ten seconds left in regulation and the Cards up three, in order to prevent Wheaton from getting off a trey attempt, or that Derek Raridon shouldn't have attempted a trey at the end of the second overtime when a made deuce would've tied the game. But, as I said at the time, in both instances I think that NCC did the right thing. The gambles (no pun intended) just didn't pay off for the Redbirds.

And I agree with Thundertaker that Wheaton's three narrow losses to good teams are not indicative at all of a team that is lucky, and that the word "lucky" itself discredits a solid basketball team.

11-3, even 10-4? may win/tie for the conference, right?   

I don't think there's any way 10-4 gets a piece of the title.  I'm very confident there will be an 11-3...maybe even two teams at 11-3.

I concur. Every year, it seems like, someone throws out the idea for us all to chew on that the conference champ might go 10-4. (It used to be Chuck, until he wised up. ) And it never happens. Just as the CCIW never has an unbeaten team, it never has a four-loss champion. The last team to run the table in the CCIW was Augustana in 1972-73, and the only team to win the CCIW while posting a winning percentage lower than .714 (i.e., a 10-4 record) was the 1960-61 Illinois Wesleyan team that won what was then the six-team CCIW with a 7-3 (.700) record.

Looking at the top 4...

* IWU is the deepest

* Augustana is the biggest

* North Central has the best starting lineup

* Wheaton has the best 1-2 combo (McCrary/Garriott)


It's really a great race to follow.

I could think of a way to make it better.

the article about the millikin a.d. search was, to say the least, is interesting.

while they have plenty of goals in what they are looking for, i think that the president is unrealistic in many areas.  millikin's location is the worst of the eight cciw schools in terms of recruiting -- and recruiting is the lifeblood of any small institution.  he talks about turning people away at the gate.  i don't see that happening anywhere in d-3, even at the schools with premier results.  and raising money, especially in this economy, is a wonderful goal -- but is it realistic?

i think this president can talk a good game, but when the rubber meets the road, he may have unrealized expectations.

I don't know if he really expects to sell out the Griz, which has a 4,080 capacity that is by far the largest in the CCIW. Heck, that's not far off from Illinois State's average home attendance. That, and the comment about putting an upper deck on Lindsay Field, was just hyperbole of the most eye-popping kind.

But, yeah, Millikin's recruiting situation is the worst of the eight schools in the league.

[Titan Q]

Q, totally agree with you about Augie and their game tomorrow vs. Wheaton at home.  They need this one badly if they are going to climb back into the championship race!

My take on the top four so far:

Augie is the under-achiever

IWU is the over-achiever

NCC is finally achieving as most expected it would (but not me) -- even running the table, they can't get to 20 wins.   

Wheaton is the luckiest so far, esp. the win over NCC in OT.

To call a team as talented as Wheaton "the luckiest" is really kind of silly.

FYI, D3 Basketball Index (a computer poll that eliminates any subjectivity) has Wheaton #5 in the country...

https://sites.google.com/site/d3basketballindex/top-75

[The Thundertaker]

NCC has the great inside presence with Landon Gamble, but they are also shooting .422 from 3-point range in CCIW games.  Aaron Tiknis is 11-15 (.733) from 3 for pete's sake...Kevin Gillespie 15-26 (.577).

You could easily argue that NCC has...

* The best point-guard
* The best forward combination
* The best 5-man

I think you can argue that NCC has a nice forward combination, but not the best forward combination. They certainly are a great together, but I believe the Tim McCrary/Spencer Schultze combo is the best duo in the conference.  Statistically (conference play through 6 games):

                                     PPG            RPG               APG
Gamble/Tiknis                26.3            11.9               6.5
McCrary/Schultze           34.3             14.5               3.2

The Wheaton combination do play more minutes per game, but not enough to take away from the difference in numbers. Gamble is the best 5 man in the league and and Tiknis is playing well through the first half of conference so far.  But as a combination, I think Wheaton has the better duo thus far. 

I have not seen much of the CCIW teams, especially NCC, but statistically it's hard to argue for a better combo than the Wheaton pair.

[Titan Q]

NCC has the great inside presence with Landon Gamble, but they are also shooting .422 from 3-point range in CCIW games.  Aaron Tiknis is 11-15 (.733) from 3 for pete's sake...Kevin Gillespie 15-26 (.577).

You could easily argue that NCC has...

* The best point-guard
* The best forward combination
* The best 5-man

I think you can argue that NCC has a nice forward combination, but not the best forward combination. They certainly are a great together, but I believe the Tim McCrary/Spencer Schultze combo is the best duo in the conference.  Statistically (conference play through 6 games):

                                     PPG            RPG               APG
Gamble/Tiknis                     26.3                     11.9                         6.5
McCrary/Schultze                34.3                      14.5                         3.2

The Wheaton combination do play more minutes per game, but not enough to take away from the difference in numbers. Gamble is the best 5 man in the league and and Tiknis is playing well through the first half of conference so far.  But as a combination, I think Wheaton has the better duo thus far. 

I have not seen much of the CCIW teams, especially NCC, but statistically it's hard to argue for a better combo than the Wheaton pair.

When I said "forward combination", I was thinking about the players who fill the 3 & 4 spots.  So...

* Wheaton - Tyler Peters & Tim McCrary
* North Central - Derek Raridon & Aaron Tiknis

(While Landon Gamble and Spencer Schultze may both be listed as "forwards", they both play the 5, so I kind of look at them as "centers.")

So yes, I think that as good as Tim McCrary is, a solid case can be made for the Raridon/Tiknis combo being the best in the CCIW. 

[izzy stradlin]

NCC has the great inside presence with Landon Gamble, but they are also shooting .422 from 3-point range in CCIW games.  Aaron Tiknis is 11-15 (.733) from 3 for pete's sake...Kevin Gillespie 15-26 (.577).

You could easily argue that NCC has...

* The best point-guard
* The best forward combination
* The best 5-man

I think you can argue that NCC has a nice forward combination, but not the best forward combination. They certainly are a great together, but I believe the Tim McCrary/Spencer Schultze combo is the best duo in the conference.  Statistically (conference play through 6 games):

                                     PPG            RPG               APG
Gamble/Tiknis                     26.3                     11.9                         6.5
McCrary/Schultze                34.3                      14.5                         3.2

The Wheaton combination do play more minutes per game, but not enough to take away from the difference in numbers. Gamble is the best 5 man in the league and and Tiknis is playing well through the first half of conference so far.  But as a combination, I think Wheaton has the better duo thus far. 

I have not seen much of the CCIW teams, especially NCC, but statistically it's hard to argue for a better combo than the Wheaton pair.

When I said "forward combination", I was thinking about the players who fill the 3 & 4 spots.  So...

* Wheaton - Tyler Peters & Tim McCrary
* North Central - Derek Raridon & Aaron Tiknis

(While Landon Gamble and Spencer Schultze may both be listed as "forwards", they both play the 5, so I kind of look at them as "centers.")

So yes, I think that as good as Tim McCrary is, a solid case can be made for the Raridon/Tiknis combo being the best in the CCIW.

I don't really care who the best forward combo is, but Tyler Peters is Wheaton's point guard.   Garriott is the 3 and Pflederer the 2.  Schauer has referred to them in that way, although the 3 guards spots can be somewhat interchangeable.  Either way Peters is not a forward.       

[iwu70]

Guess I really got a rise out of you fine, oft-posting gentlemen with my comment about WC being "luckiest."  Of course, Wheaton is a fine program, strong team.  This is very evident.  But, they were lucky to face NCC with Goldthree out, and NCC with other injuries.  Goldthree really hurt the Titans in our game with them @NCC.  And, we all know that some games come down to a few plays, a few possessions, even one call, or one bounce of the ball, and that can, in the end, make or break a conference championship drive.  As Greg indicated, the Cardinals tried some things, supposedly correct things, at the end of regulation and in OT, and, unlucky for them, they didn't work out.  Of course, Wheaton's play probably had something to do with it, but we all know you need to be good, and, sometimes, lucky too, to win a championship.  Yes, some say you make your own luck, but sometimes you are just lucky.  (IWU women were lucky to beat Carthage at home with that last second improbable trey by Bilek, as Carthage was ahead by nine and had outplayed the Titans in most ways during almost all of the second half).  That play may be the one that wins the conference for the Titans.  Perhaps Wheaton's win in OT vs. NCC will be the key play that wins the conference for the Thunder.  I fully respect the Wheaton program and team, as I saw how good they are, how hard they play etc. -- you can check back and see my posts at the time of that game and my comments about McCrary and Garriott and their crisp, effective offense, comparing them overall to Wash U.  But, I stand by my comment, as I think any team that comes out on top this year will clearly "earn" it and also have to have, at some key moments, a little bit of "luck," too.  This is not to "discredit" anyone or any program, but just stating the reality that sometimes you can "earn it" and still lose.  Sometimes you don't earn it, and still win.  Isn't that "luck?"  (The Chinese would say "fate.").   Things sometimes just don't break your way.  Look at NYU and their loss to Wash U.  Bad luck, lousy refs.  This element of competition is one of the reasons we love it so, why it is so compelling, unpredictable, and at times wholly enjoyable and others frustratingly maddening. 

Good luck to all teams this evening, except for Millikin.  By all evidence to date, they are going to need much more than luck. 

IWU70

[iwu70]

Titans vs. Big Blue tonight.  Looking forward to our 6'9" vs. their 6'9".  Hope the Titans have a good game, play well, and put up some good, confidence-building numbers in prep for the big games upcoming -- @Wheaton and @Augie. 

Will be following the WC@Augie matchup tonight with great interest.  If Augie rights the ship, I think they can beat Wheaton at home this evening.

Go TITANS!!!

IWU70

[iwu70]

Q, thanks for the D3hoops Index data.  But, how does this work?  Both Augie and WC have same or worse W-L records than our Titans, and both have weaker SOS rankings, and yet they are both ranked higher?  What else goes in to this "objective" ranking?  The numbers on the chart shown don't seem to support the ranking positions.   

I have no doubt that Wheaton is a fine program and team.  I saw the OT game at the Shirk.  They are very good.  In that game, clearly the IWU depth came into play.  Perhaps their starters are a tad bit better than our starters, but our bench is much stronger then their bench.  This is old news on this borad.   Plus, home court, big home crowd, always an advantage to be sure.

Games @WC and @Augie will be key, then the big homecourt rematch with NCC later on.

Great race so far.  Sure am happy to be in Bloomington this term and able to see more games than all previous seasons.  Very much enjoying the women's run at the 5th consecutive CCIW Championship as well.  Olivia Lett is really fun to watch.  Consistently superb. 

Happy Chinese New Year all!!!  Happy Year of the Dragon.  Kung Hey Fat Choi!  (may you have a healthy and prosperous New Year!)  Good year to have a little Dragon!

IWU70

[TitansIWU]

Sometimes the schedule works for you, and sometimes it doesn't. Right now the schedule is at a perfect point for North Park. After three CCIW games, NPU has played a grand total of ten good minutes of basketball out of 120 (the last ten minutes of Saturday afternoon's game against Wesleyan being the only instance in which the Vikings have been up to snuff). The cure for that should be a home game against Millikin. A big part of basketball is self-confidence, and right now the self-confidence of the Vikings has to be badly shaken. Nobody's expecting a conference championship out of the Park, but it's at least beholden of the Vikings to be competitive every time that they take the floor, and they're playing competitive basketball less than 10% of the time thus far in conference play. Facing Millikin in the crackerbox, even without student support, should remedy that for NPU.

IWU70,

Arggghhh! you might have unleashed the "confidence building curse."   

I hope IWU doesn't gain confidence from playing Millikin in the same narrowly escaped disaster fashion that NPU did. 

[wheels81]

Guess I really got a rise out of you fine, oft-posting gentlemen with my comment about WC being "luckiest."  Of course, Wheaton is a fine program, strong team.  This is very evident.  But, they were lucky to face NCC with Goldthree out, and NCC with other injuries.  Goldthree really hurt the Titans in our game with them @NCC.  And, we all know that some games come down to a few plays, a few possessions, even one call, or one bounce of the ball, and that can, in the end, make or break a conference championship drive.  As Greg indicated, the Cardinals tried some things, supposedly correct things, at the end of regulation and in OT, and, unlucky for them, they didn't work out.  Of course, Wheaton's play probably had something to do with it, but we all know you need to be good, and, sometimes, lucky too, to win a championship.  Yes, some say you make your own luck, but sometimes you are just lucky.  (IWU women were lucky to beat Carthage at home with that last second improbable trey by Bilek, as Carthage was ahead by nine and had outplayed the Titans in most ways during almost all of the second half).  That play may be the one that wins the conference for the Titans.  Perhaps Wheaton's win in OT vs. NCC will be the key play that wins the conference for the Thunder.  I fully respect the Wheaton program and team, as I saw how good they are, how hard they play etc. -- you can check back and see my posts at the time of that game and my comments about McCrary and Garriott and their crisp, effective offense, comparing them overall to Wash U.  But, I stand by my comment, as I think any team that comes out on top this year will clearly "earn" it and also have to have, at some key moments, a little bit of "luck," too.  This is not to "discredit" anyone or any program, but just stating the reality that sometimes you can "earn it" and still lose.  Sometimes you don't earn it, and still win.  Isn't that "luck?"  (The Chinese would say "fate.").   Things sometimes just don't break your way.  Look at NYU and their loss to Wash U.  Bad luck, lousy refs.  This element of competition is one of the reasons we love it so, why it is so compelling, unpredictable, and at times wholly enjoyable and others frustratingly maddening. 

Good luck to all teams this evening, except for Millikin.  By all evidence to date, they are going to need much more than luck. 

IWU70

Luck is better left to describe events that occur in sports outside the players skill.  For example  a golfer who hits it into the trees then ends up on the green because it bounced off two squirrels fighting over an acorn is more lucky then skillful.  The players cause things to happen in basketball  being in the right place at the right time, releasing the ball,etc... that calling it luck takes credit away from their effort.  Hockey has an addage in that you keep putting puck on goal some will get it, it's not luck at all but effort.  So leave luck to the tree climbing rodents and to lottery participants.  It has no business in describing college students playing sports.

[wheels81]

I have no doubt that Wheaton is a fine program and team.  I saw the OT game at the Shirk.  They are very good.  In that game, clearly the IWU depth came into play.  Perhaps their starters are a tad bit better than our starters, but our bench is much stronger then their bench.  This is old news on this borad.   Plus, home court, big home crowd, always an advantage to be sure.



IWU70

I beg to differ on the Titans having a much stronger bench.  I think Wheaton can go 10 deep easy. No they don't have another McCrary or Garriott but their bench is pretty deep.  IW bench may be a "tad bit" better than Wheaton's but not by much.   BTW,  IW was "lucky"?? wheaton shot only 15% from beyond the arc that game.

[Mugsy]

Guess I really got a rise out of you fine, oft-posting gentlemen with my comment about WC being "luckiest."  Of course, Wheaton is a fine program, strong team.  This is very evident.  But, they were lucky to face NCC with Goldthree out, and NCC with other injuries.  Goldthree really hurt the Titans in our game with them @NCC.  And, we all know that some games come down to a few plays, a few possessions, even one call, or one bounce of the ball, and that can, in the end, make or break a conference championship drive.  As Greg indicated, the Cardinals tried some things, supposedly correct things, at the end of regulation and in OT, and, unlucky for them, they didn't work out.  Of course, Wheaton's play probably had something to do with it, but we all know you need to be good, and, sometimes, lucky too, to win a championship.  Yes, some say you make your own luck, but sometimes you are just lucky.  (IWU women were lucky to beat Carthage at home with that last second improbable trey by Bilek, as Carthage was ahead by nine and had outplayed the Titans in most ways during almost all of the second half).  That play may be the one that wins the conference for the Titans.  Perhaps Wheaton's win in OT vs. NCC will be the key play that wins the conference for the Thunder.  I fully respect the Wheaton program and team, as I saw how good they are, how hard they play etc. -- you can check back and see my posts at the time of that game and my comments about McCrary and Garriott and their crisp, effective offense, comparing them overall to Wash U.  But, I stand by my comment, as I think any team that comes out on top this year will clearly "earn" it and also have to have, at some key moments, a little bit of "luck," too.  This is not to "discredit" anyone or any program, but just stating the reality that sometimes you can "earn it" and still lose.  Sometimes you don't earn it, and still win.  Isn't that "luck?"  (The Chinese would say "fate.").   Things sometimes just don't break your way.  Look at NYU and their loss to Wash U.  Bad luck, lousy refs.  This element of competition is one of the reasons we love it so, why it is so compelling, unpredictable, and at times wholly enjoyable and others frustratingly maddening. 

Good luck to all teams this evening, except for Millikin.  By all evidence to date, they are going to need much more than luck. 

IWU70

Luck is better left to describe events that occur in sports outside the players skill.  For example  a golfer who hits it into the trees then ends up on the green because it bounced off two squirrels fighting over an acorn is more lucky then skillful.  The players cause things to happen in basketball  being in the right place at the right time, releasing the ball,etc... that calling it luck takes credit away from their effort.  Hockey has an addage in that you keep putting puck on goal some will get it, it's not luck at all but effort.  So leave luck to the tree climbing rodents and to lottery participants.  It has no business in describing college students playing sports.

The whole "luck" thread here brings up a funny (at least to me) memory.

In 1990 I was playing and coaching football (the American variety) over in England.  Not surprisingly the sports culture there is very, very different from the US.

The second week of the season we lost a tough fought game to a team from Coventry, 12-6.  We played the exact same team 2 weeks later and were thrashed 77-3.  Upon stepping onto the bus one of my fine English teammates said, "Unlucky mate."

Unlucky?  Unlucky?       

We crossed the 50 yard line once the entire game!  We turned the ball over 8 times!  The American running back on the other team ran for 359 yards on 19 carries.  I about lost my mind.  Exactly where did luck factor in to the outcome of that game?  Unlucky that we didn't lose by 60?

I didn't know at the time, but it was very much a culture context statement.

[Titan Q]

I beg to differ on the Titans having a much stronger bench.  I think Wheaton can go 10 deep easy. No they don't have another McCrary or Garriott but their bench is pretty deep.  IW bench may be a "tad bit" better than Wheaton's but not by much.   BTW,  IW was "lucky"?? wheaton shot only 15% from beyond the arc that game.

It is one thing to say a team "can go 10 deep", but I think you have to look at how many guys are actually playing.  Through 6 CCIW games, when you take out guys playing during mop-up time, and those playing very minor minutes, it looks to me like IWU has been 9 deep and Wheaton 8.  CCIW-only production from these players...

IWU bench
Andrew Ziemnik - 7.8 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 1.7 apg (17.8 min/game)
Stephen Rudnicki - 7.0 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 1.2 apg (17.7 min/game)
Eric Dortch - 4.2 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 0.7 apg (13.3 min/game)
Nick Anderson - 3.8 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 0.2 apg (10.3 min/game)
Total = 22.8 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 3.8 apg (59.1 min/game)

Wheaton bench
Nate Serenius - 6.0 ppg, 1.3 rpg, 0.0 apg (16.8 min/game)
Nathan Haynes - 3.0 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 0.5 apg (14.8 min/game)
Jon DeMoss - 1.7 ppg, 1.2 rpg, 0.5 apg (12.5 min/game)
Total = 10.7 ppg, 5.0 rpg, 1.0 apg (44.1 min/game)


I think that is more than a "tab bit" of separation.  Also consider, I have not included IWU's Parker Musselman above, who in 2 appearances in important minutes has averaged 9.5 ppg and 3.5 rpg (12.5 min/game in those 2 games).  I get the feeling he will now become the 10th member of IWU's rotation.