MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[bopol]

I'm not convinced that Augie is getting into the regional rankings this week.  I took the data from last week and calculated the traditional RPI and found that Augie is just 14th in the region (SOS is killing them).  I think Grinnell (who beat Lake Forest yesterday for their 2nd win against a regionally ranked team) and Concordia (who was 6th in the region despite the weak SOS) may still be ahead of Augustana.

Grinnell has a bad SOS though too, right?

Yes, their Opponent's Winning Percentage is .443 vs. .437 for Augie, but Grinnell has 4 losses vs. Augie's 5, and Grinnell's OWP will improve slightly this week with the Lake Forest game, whereas Augie played 500 Carthage.  Last week, according to the old RPI, Grinnell was 11th in the region.  If I am guessing what the group that is doing the ranking is doing, they are punishing Concordia (WI) (ranked 6th in RPI) for the lack of a regional win.  Ripon's 10th, but they are just 12-6 in region with a 1-2 record against regional ranked, so I don't think they'll get ahead of Grinnell or Augie.  Rose-Hulman is 12th, but no wins against regionally ranked and Chicago is 13th, but that's entirely off of a tough schedule.  Amazingly, Carthage was 15th, but that is due to a few of their losses being out of region.

Of course, Augie can help themselves greatly by beating Wheaton.

But if I were to guess on this week's rankings, they would go like this.
1. Wash U (despite the loss; the NYU win was huge)
2. Lake Forest (despite the loss; losing at Grinnell isn't a horrible loss).
3. Wheaton (I suspect they like the 4 wins vs. regional ranked teams)
4. Translyvania (despite the loss; the record is still quite good and they dumped Hanover this week)
5. North Central
6. IWU (no reason to flip these two)
7. Concordia (WI) (no huge wins, but they did beat Edgewood this week and have a good RPI)
8. Grinnell (2-0 vs. Lake Forest)
9. Edgewood (pretty nice record against regionally ranked)
10. Augustana (ditto, but weak RPI)

That's why guess anyway.

[augie_superfan]

I think at this point you need to put Augie ahead of Edgewood.  Edgewood has a better SOS but it's not off the charts.  I believe they will be right around 0.5 whereas Augie is probably around 0.47 or so.  The reason I say this is because they have some common opponents to look at:

UW-SP: Edgewood lost by 11 at home, Augie won at home by 5
North Park: Edgewood won by 1 at home, Augie 2-0 by average of 11.5 points
Wisc. Lutheran: Edgewood 2-0 by an average of 10.5 points, Augie won by 28 neutral
Aurora: Edgewood lost by 4 on the road, Augie won by 34 at home

I'd say Augie wins all 4 of those comparisons.  Now, I don't know if Augie will climb into the number 8 spot but they surely should be above Edgewood by now.

[AndOne]

I think you have a good argument there, augie_superfan

[bopol]

Augiefan,

I'm not making an argument that I think Edgewood is better; I'm making a guess based on the regional rankings from last week and how I think the ranking committee looked at RPI and valued record vs. regionally ranked teams.  I personally think that Augie is probably better than Edgewood and Grinnell (who I totally think Augie would chew up). 

[iwu70]

Q, thanks for all the useful posts on the Pool C sitaution.  Glad to see Wash U came through and found a way to beat NYU in New York, after losing to Brandeis earlier in the weekend.

Wonderful atmosphere @ Shirk last eve, for seniors, for two solid wins over EC, for all the families and parents in attendance, and likely some recruits as well.  Great to see all the support, touched with a little sadness as long-time faculty, ardent Titan fan Forrest Frank was not there.  He passed away last week at 74. Many of us attended his funeral earlier in the day on Saturday.  He's right up there with all the loyal, dedicated IWU fans over the years.  A great guy, one very distinguished teacher and colleague.  RIP, Forrest.  Prof. Frank will be missed.

Ending of the evening was really great, with a very large, perhaps 2100 crowd with lots of students, full Titan Band, cheerleaders, dancers, yes, and all of the whiner and non-whiner Titan fans chanting, "Thank you Seniors, Thank you seniors . . . "  Hard to beat this atmosphere in DIII hoops.  Very proud to be one of those loyal Titan fans (and one of those whiners, too!).  Gotta love it. 

Kudos to both teams, all the coaching staffs, for such great seasons -- both men and women.  Let's make some more noise now!

IWU70

[augie_superfan]

Augiefan,

I'm not making an argument that I think Edgewood is better; I'm making a guess based on the regional rankings from last week and how I think the ranking committee looked at RPI and valued record vs. regionally ranked teams.  I personally think that Augie is probably better than Edgewood and Grinnell (who I totally think Augie would chew up).

I know you weren't making that arguement.  I'm just saying at some point, the committee needs to pay closer attention to all the little details when ordering these teams.  Hopefully they start to do that.  Also, you do know that they don't actually look at RPI, right?  They look at the WP and SOS as separate values.  Although Knightslappy has shown that using RPI plus some tweaks has done a decent job at getting a general order of teams.

[bopol]

Yes, I know they don't use RPI, but if you are using WP and SOS, essentially you are using RPI; the only question is how you piece together the two (I used the traditional D1 value of .25 for WP and .75 for SOS), but they are leaving that open to interpretation.  It helped me make guesses on how they interpret the top teams.

How is your ranking system working out this year?  I enjoyed it quite a bit.

[Gregory Sager]

If you're talking about an elite shooter, Bob, then attempts (and, thus, shooting percentage) have to figure into the discussion. I have never seen a discussion of shooters that didn't involve shooting percentage.

Being ranked eighteenth in the NCAA in makes says a lot for Zimmer's endurance and for his capability of getting off his shot at this level. But it doesn't make him an elite shooter.

Zimmer is one of eleven players in all of NCAA D1, D2, and D3 who have made 80+ 3's and made 42% or more...

1. Jaime Smith, Ala-Huntsville (D2), 83-159 (.522)
2. Nick Barbour, High Point (D1), 98-201 (.488)
3. Reggie Chamberlain, UMKC (D1), 91-188 (.484)
4. Jon Van Hoose, Northern Ky (D2), 84-185 (.454)
5. John Jenkins, Vanderbilt (D1), 96-214 (.449)
6. Jordan Miller, Pitt-Johnstown (D2),  80-179 (.447)
7. Jamie Karraker, MIT (D3), 92-211 (.436)
8. Kenny Boynton, Florida (D1), 86-198 (.434)
9. Nick Haynes, Concordia, TX (D3), 94-218 (.431)
10. Felix Llanos, Clarkson (D2), 97-227 (.427)
11. Jordan Zimmer, Ill. Wesleyan (D3), 85-201 (.423)



I'm still comfortable calling him "elite."

And I'm not. A .423 percentage is very good. It's not elite.

Is he a scary shooter, as Mark put it? Sure. Is he an excellent shooter? Absolutely. Is he, as you put it, one of the elite shooters in college basketball? No. He makes a boatload of treys, but for as many as he attempts he doesn't make enough to deserve that sort of superlative.

And yes, I would call Jordan Zimmer an elite shooter, one of the best pure shooters I have seen in the CCIW. And so was Michael Barach (have to keep Greg happy).

Lanny, it's no skin off my nose what you think of Mike Barach's shooting. But as far as Barach is concerned, I wouldn't quite classify him as an elite shooter, either. He shot .445 from downtown for his career, which is outstanding, but it isn't elite if you're talking in the same all-of-college-basketball context as Bob. In fact, I can think of several Vikings I'd put ahead of Barach in the shooting category: Freddie Kruse, Dan Hill, and Jeff Pearson all come to mind. Mike Barach was an elite player. He had the quickest first step in the league -- one of the quickest I've ever seen in a D3 player -- and he had the leaping ability to play over the rim. He had it all, as far as offense was concerned. But I'd classify him as an excellent shooter, not an elite shooter.

[Titan Q]

OK, a much more detailed stab at the Pool C picture on the Pool C board...

http://www.d3boards.com/index.php?topic=4232.3540

Through today, here is the order I have the Pool C teams...


1.   Middlebury (NE)
2.   Western Connecticut (NE)
3.   Rhode Island (NE)
4.   Wooster (GL)
5.   Wheaton, IL (MW)
6.   UW-River Falls (W)
7.   Wesleyan (NE)
8.   Randolph-Macon (S)
9.   UW-Stevens Point (W)
10.   WPI (NE)
11.   Ohio Wesleyan (GL)
12.    Illinois Wesleyan (MW)
13.    Emory (S)
14.    Keystone (MA)
15.    NYU (E)
16.    Keene State (NE)
17.    Augustana (MW)
18.    Gustavus Adolphus (W)
19.    Richard Stockton (Atl)

[Gregory Sager]

So if Augie wins Tuesday...

1. North Central
2. Augustana
3. Wheaton
4. Illinois Wesleyan

If Wheaton wins...

1. North Central
2. Wheaton
3. Illinois Wesleyan
4. Augustana


Right?

I believe that to be correct Q.  Augie would come out of the three-way tie because of their sweep and Wheaton would be next due to the sweep of North Central.

This doesn't look right to me. In the event of an Augie win, there's a three-way tie for second between Wheaton, Augie, and IWU, all of whom would be 10-4. Head-to-head competition is the first tiebreaker, and in terms of head-to-head their results would be:

* Augie 2, Wheaton 0
* Augie 1, IWU 1
* Wheaton 1, IWU 1

Therefore, Augie would be the #2 seed (with a 3-1 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), IWU would be the #3 seed (with a 2-2 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), and Wheaton would be the #4 seed (with a 1-3 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams).

Wheaton's sweep over North Central shouldn't enter into the discussion, because that involves the second tiebreaker, which is "record against teams above the tie, beginning with the highest-ranked team." Since the first tiebreaker resolves the tie in the order Augie-IWU-Wheaton, there's no need to move on to the second tiebreaker.

Or am I forgetting something here?

[Titan Q]

And I'm not. A .423 percentage is very good. It's not elite.

Is he a scary shooter, as Mark put it? Sure. Is he an excellent shooter? Absolutely. Is he, as you put it, one of the elite shooters in college basketball? No. He makes a boatload of treys, but for as many as he attempts he doesn't make enough to deserve that sort of superlative.

Greg, since you are so sure about something that is, honestly, completely subjective - I mean, there is no definition of "elite shooter", complete with required 3-point FG % right? - and have gone out of your way to call out that comment, asking me to "dial down the hyperbole", etc and continued to debate it, I will acknowledge that you are much more passionate about this conversation than I am.

I give.  Uncle.

[Dennis_Prikkel]

I'll take Bill Simpson of Elmhurst and Dave Shaw of Carroll as two of the best pure "elite" shooters I ever saw in a CCIW basketball game.  Unfortunately for this "three-point" argument both played in the seventies.

Shaw finished with well over 2,000 points in his career without the three-point shot.

[thunder38]

So if Augie wins Tuesday...

1. North Central
2. Augustana
3. Wheaton
4. Illinois Wesleyan

If Wheaton wins...

1. North Central
2. Wheaton
3. Illinois Wesleyan
4. Augustana


Right?

I believe that to be correct Q.  Augie would come out of the three-way tie because of their sweep and Wheaton would be next due to the sweep of North Central.

This doesn't look right to me. In the event of an Augie win, there's a three-way tie for second between Wheaton, Augie, and IWU, all of whom would be 10-4. Head-to-head competition is the first tiebreaker, and in terms of head-to-head their results would be:

* Augie 2, Wheaton 0
* Augie 1, IWU 1
* Wheaton 1, IWU 1

Therefore, Augie would be the #2 seed (with a 3-1 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), IWU would be the #3 seed (with a 2-2 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), and Wheaton would be the #4 seed (with a 1-3 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams).

Wheaton's sweep over North Central shouldn't enter into the discussion, because that involves the second tiebreaker, which is "record against teams above the tie, beginning with the highest-ranked team." Since the first tiebreaker resolves the tie in the order Augie-IWU-Wheaton, there's no need to move on to the second tiebreaker.

Or am I forgetting something here?

They changed it a couple of years ago I believe to break one out first and then go head to head....This is from the CCIW website...

Tournament Seeding Tiebreakers (2/18/12)

North Central has won the outright regular season title and has earned the right to host the conference tournament.

If Augustana defeats Wheaton on Tuesday, there will be a three-way tie for second place at 10-4. Augustana would earn the No. 2 seed by virtue of a 3-1 composite record against Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan. The next step would be to break the tie between Wheaton and Illinois Wesleyan. Both teams finished 1-1 against each other during the regular season, so the next tiebreaker would be record against the teams above the tie. Wheaton would earn the No. 3 seed and Illinois Wesleyan would be No. 4 because Wheaton was 2-0 against first place North Central while Illinois Wesleyan was 0-2.

[Titan Q]

This doesn't look right to me. In the event of an Augie win, there's a three-way tie for second between Wheaton, Augie, and IWU, all of whom would be 10-4. Head-to-head competition is the first tiebreaker, and in terms of head-to-head their results would be:

* Augie 2, Wheaton 0
* Augie 1, IWU 1
* Wheaton 1, IWU 1

Therefore, Augie would be the #2 seed (with a 3-1 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), IWU would be the #3 seed (with a 2-2 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams), and Wheaton would be the #4 seed (with a 1-3 head-to-head against the other two second-place teams).

Wheaton's sweep over North Central shouldn't enter into the discussion, because that involves the second tiebreaker, which is "record against teams above the tie, beginning with the highest-ranked team." Since the first tiebreaker resolves the tie in the order Augie-IWU-Wheaton, there's no need to move on to the second tiebreaker.

Or am I forgetting something here?

Doesn't the 3-way tie first get broken by looking at cumulative record of the teams involved in the tie?  So...

Augustana: 3-1
Illinois Wesleyan: 2-2
Wheaton: 1-3

Augie escapes the tie and gets called the #2 seed.

Then we go to usual tie-breaker protocol, with Wheaton getting the 3-seed nod over IWU due to a 1-1 record vs NCC (with IWU 0-2 vs NCC).

[thunder38]

So thus our semi-finals would look like:

Wheaton vs. IWU/Augie -5:00
NCC vs. IWU/Augie- 7:00