MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

That's a reach if you're talking about assistant coaches. You're comparing a part-timer who was moonlighting from his insurance job to a full-timer who was out there getting Dan McCarrell his players as NPC's main recruiter. If you want to compare Steinbrueck to someone:

Steinbrueck = Keith McDonald

Mac was a full-time CPS teacher who moonlighted as an assistant to first McCarrell and then Bosko. That's Steinbrueck's counterpart, not Bosko.

Full-time assistants count, got it.  So...

CCIW Titles
Tom Jessee = 9
Bosko = 7

... and, again:

What Matters Most Of All
Bosko = 3
Tom Jessee = 0

(Sorry, Tom. He made me do it. )

[Titan Q]

... and, again:

What Matters Most Of All
Bosko = 3
Tom Jessee = 0

(Sorry, Tom. He made me do it. )

And what is the 3?

The conversation has gotten so deep that I'm somewhat lost and just don't want Tom to get the shaft here.

[Gregory Sager]

National titles won as a full-time assistant coach.

[Titan Q]

National titles won as a full-time assistant coach.

Ok...now this is accurate data.

I expect the count to be 3-1 in a few weeks.

[kiko]

One of the headwinds that North Central is facing from a Pool C standpoint as we arc toward the end of the season is a relatively weak SOS.  The Cardinals' schedule isn't radically different than it was last year, so I wanted to understand what drove this.  The NCAA SOS calculation includes multipliers and some weighted calcs around OOWP, but what I wanted to look at is opponents' record, as this is a big component, though not the only element, in the NCAA's SOS calc.  I used record versus D3 opponents, and included games through and including conference tournaments for 2017-18.

Some of the questions I wanted to answer were:
- What role did CCIW teams play in the low SOS?
- What role did churn in non-conference opponents play?
- What role did recurring non-conference opponents play?
- Among recurring non-conference opponents, were there any that played an outsized role in driving the SOS down?

From what I can tell, there are two main drivers for the Cardinals' relatively weak SOS, and also one underlying factor:

1. North Central's schedule had three changes versus 2017-18.  They dropped non-D3 Robert Morris-Chicago and instead played Illinois College, and they swapped out their two snowbird tourney opponents.

Robert Morris had no impact on the SOS, but Illinois College was a drag on the SOS, as the Blueboys are 9-15 (.375) versus D3 opponents.

The change in snowbird opponents also negatively impacted things.  Last year in Hawaii, the Cardinals played Whitworth (24-3 / .888) and Lewis and Clark (8-17 / .320) for a combined OWP of .613.  This year in Vegas, the opponents were Husson (15-10 / .600) and Ohio Northern (7-18 / .280), which nets out to an aggregate OWP of .440.  That's a big drop, particularly in light of some of what shows up in #2 below.  Of note -- a year ago, Husson and Ohio Northern combined for a .704 winning percentage.  Husson is four games worse off than a year ago, and ONU is 12.  This dropoff from 2017-18 is a theme we will see below.

The loss to ONU had a major impact on North Central's Pool C resume.  And the pedestrian SOS of this opponent made it a double-whammy.

2. North Central has had 22 common opponents to date compared to its 2017-18 schedule.  CCIW teams were slightly worse than a year ago from a winning percentage standpoint: the Cardinals' conference opponents averaged an 13.9-11.5 record (.547) last year, and this dropped to 13.0-11.8 this year (.523)  Every team currently sits within 1.5 games of how it finished last year excepting Carthage, which was 13-12 a year ago but just 8-17 this year.  (Insert comment here about how if Bosko had only been more engaged...)

Net/net, conference opponents were not a big driver of the change.

The same can't be said for non-conference opponents, as they almost universally fell off by a few games versus last year.  Only Albion was better, record-wise, than in 2017-18:

- Aurora ===> from 19-8 to 14-11
- Benedictine ===> from 17-10 to 13-12
- Heidelberg ===> from 11-15 to 8-17
- Alma ===> from 8-17 to 5-21
- Finlandia ===> from 1-15 to 0-13
- Albion ===> from 9-17 to 17-7

These teams, collectively, averaged 1.3 fewer wins this year than in the prior season, and their collective winning percentage dropped from a weak .448 to a weaker .413.  Last year Whitworth's meaty winning percentage helped cancel this out.  This year, Husson and ONU added kerosene to the fire.

So a couple of conclusions here:
- There was a notable dropoff in the winning percentage of the two snowbird opponents
- If you lump the two snowbird opponents into one "variable element" total, then we saw every opponent except one turn in a weaker winning percentage than in 2017-18.
- As an underlying factor, the opponents' winning percentage started in a relatively weak place both years

It's easy to look at this in hindsight, and much tougher to project a perfect storm of mediocrity like this when you are setting the schedule in the first place.  In other words, it's not Todd Raridon's fault that Heidelberg, Benedictine, etc. were a notch weaker than usual this year.  Typically I think you would expect some puts and some takes here, and this year, excepting Albion, everything unfortunately landed on the negative side of the ledger.

What is controllable is who you choose to play on an annual basis.  North Central should and will continue to schedule the Auroras and Benedictines on a yearly basis -- this year, it hurt the Cardinals that both were down a bit.  The decision to schedule Finlandia was driven by a cancellation, and North Central paid the price from an SOS standpoint.  Hopefully this is a one-off and will not be on the schedule again.

The main opportunity going forward is for the Cardinals to look at upgrading opponents like Alma and Illinois College.  You can only play the teams that will return your calls, and I'm sure sometimes there are links that aren't visible to Joe Public.  (I don't pretend to know what these calls are like but can envision things like "sure, we'll play you in men's basketball, but we've got other options and will probably want to schedule whomever can also help us fill these open dates in softball and women's volleyball", or "Bob, we've got an open date and hey remember that time a couple of years ago when I helped you out?")  In any event, I would think there are opportunities to schedule schools less likely to be such an anchor from a SOS standpoint.  Replace these two and Finlandia with schools that are more likely to be stronger in a random given year, and much of this issue is mitigated.  WIAC schools have been notably absent from the schedule the past couple of years, and they typically are net neutral-to-positives rather than negatives from a SOS standpoint.

[Augie6]

Dear Bob,

Evidentially you, among others, are upset over the fact that after Wheaton and Wesleyan beat North Central recently, I didn't immediately take to the board to heap praise upon them.

Not at all.

My thoughts are captured below better than I could ever write them...

AndOne-

You are probably correct in pointing out that I do tend to just lob a shot your way then disappear for awhile.  There is no vendetta against you.  But, I owe you an explanation and a reasoned well thought out post as to why I do disagree with a lot of your posts, and comment accordingly.  I guess it's posts like the one I quoted that bother me.  I fully respect your passion and dedication to your NCC Cardinals and your knowledge of basketball in general.  It is very impressive on all fronts.  But, I lurk quite a bit on these boards, and I think I have developed a pretty good sense of different posters and their contributions.  It seems like quite a bit of the other posters (Greg, Q, and the few Wheaton, Elmhurst and Augie guys are mostly who I'm referring to) seem to always provide fair, critiqued and nuanced insight into their teams, and will always point out and bring up the bad with the good.  I believe Greg and Q seem to post after every game win or lose.  Yes their posts seem to be much shorter after losses than wins, but they still report back on their insights.

With all that being said, you did not give us a game report after either of the two recent North Central losses.  But, as soon as they are back on the winning side of the ledger, you pop back up.  No huge issues here, lots of fans don't want to post about negatives of their own teams, so I don't begrudge you too much on this point.  The one that gets stuck in my craw a little deeper is when you turn towards other teams.  It's either a positive North Central post, or a negative post about another school.  Questioning the Carthage coach, bringing up technical fouls on other teams whenever you hear of them, mentioning the outlandish celebration styles of opponents, questioning the motivations of any number of transfer students, bringing up potential legal or grade issues with other students at other schools...that act just wears thin.  Especially the part where you imply something that we all know what you are talking about, and then go back and deny that you never technically said the thing you get called on.  The world is not black and white, the Cardinals do not do everything right, and other schools do not do everything wrong.  So many of us are drawn to D3 sports because the vast majority of people involved are in it for the right reasons.  Good students, good coaches, good kids, good basketball players.  That deserves to be celebrated and applauded.  Every once in awhile, people slip up.  I just personally feel like you take joy in the slip ups of others if they are wearing a non NCC jersey, and ignore when a cardinal red uniformed player or coach makes a similar slip up.

In anticipating your response, I am sure you will be able to cite different examples of when you were positive towards other teams and negative towards your own.  I don't begrudge you that point.  I just seem to recall those moments being few and far between, with more posts categorized in the manner I have listed above.

I fully don't intend to turn into a 2nd version of wheels81 and be your major foil on this board, but you asked, and I felt I owed it to you to give you a response.  I really don't harbor any ill will towards you (or anyone for that matter), I just get frustrated at times with your approach to posting on this forum.  I am sure this will elicit a response, and you deserve every chance to do so.  I just don't think I'll go back and forth very much on it.  It absolutely could be because I'm looking for these occurrences, so they seem more plentiful than actual reality proves.  I just think someone with your knowledge of basketball and the D3 landscape could do wonders to educate us on the good and bad of the entire CCIW instead of focusing on the things I've mentioned.

The latest example, after (of course) an NCC win...

Even moreso than the large margin of victory, the most noteworthy features of this game were 1) the apparent surrender of the Redmen about midway through the first half, after which their play was pretty devoid of any sense of urgency, and lacking of any observable degree of sustained effort. Basically, just playing out the string. And 2) Bosko's seemingly detached approach to the game. It appeared to the majority of the NCC contingent that he really wasn't into the game very much. Rather than his usual degree of engagement, barking at the officials, and yelling instructions to his players, he just sat rather quietly on the bench much of the game, apparently resigned to what proved to be the ultimate outcome.

I don't care when you post, or how much.  I just don't like all the pot shots you take about things you have no idea about.

Couldn't agree more with pgkevin's post and your bolded comment, Q.  That's 3, but probably many more who feel the same way. 

[Titan Q]

One of the headwinds that North Central is facing from a Pool C standpoint as we arc toward the end of the season is a relatively weak SOS.  The Cardinals' schedule isn't radically different than it was last year, so I wanted to understand what drove this.  The NCAA SOS calculation includes multipliers and some weighted calcs around OOWP, but what I wanted to look at is opponents' record, as this is a big component, though not the only element, in the NCAA's SOS calc.  I used record versus D3 opponents, and included games through and including conference tournaments for 2017-18.

Some of the questions I wanted to answer were:
- What role did CCIW teams play in the low SOS?
- What role did churn in non-conference opponents play?
- What role did recurring non-conference opponents play?
- Among recurring non-conference opponents, were there any that played an outsized role in driving the SOS down?

From what I can tell, there are two main drivers for the Cardinals' relatively weak SOS, and also one underlying factor:

1. North Central's schedule had three changes versus 2017-18.  They dropped non-D3 Robert Morris-Chicago and instead played Illinois College, and they swapped out their two snowbird tourney opponents.

Robert Morris had no impact on the SOS, but Illinois College was a drag on the SOS, as the Blueboys are 9-15 (.375) versus D3 opponents.

The change in snowbird opponents also negatively impacted things.  Last year in Hawaii, the Cardinals played Whitworth (24-3 / .888) and Lewis and Clark (8-17 / .320) for a combined OWP of .613.  This year in Vegas, the opponents were Husson (15-10 / .600) and Ohio Northern (7-18 / .280), which nets out to an aggregate OWP of .440.  That's a big drop, particularly in light of some of what shows up in #2 below.  Of note -- a year ago, Husson and Ohio Northern combined for a .704 winning percentage.  Husson is four games worse off than a year ago, and ONU is 12.  This dropoff from 2017-18 is a theme we will see below.

The loss to ONU had a major impact on North Central's Pool C resume.  And the pedestrian SOS of this opponent made it a double-whammy.

2. North Central has had 22 common opponents to date compared to its 2017-18 schedule.  CCIW teams were slightly worse than a year ago from a winning percentage standpoint: the Cardinals' conference opponents averaged an 13.9-11.5 record (.547) last year, and this dropped to 13.0-11.8 this year (.523)  Every team currently sits within 1.5 games of how it finished last year excepting Carthage, which was 13-12 a year ago but just 8-17 this year.  (Insert comment here about how if Bosko had only been more engaged...)

Net/net, conference opponents were not a big driver of the change.

The same can't be said for non-conference opponents, as they almost universally fell off by a few games versus last year.  Only Albion was better, record-wise, than in 2017-18:

- Aurora ===> from 19-8 to 14-11
- Benedictine ===> from 17-10 to 13-12
- Heidelberg ===> from 11-15 to 8-17
- Alma ===> from 8-17 to 5-21
- Finlandia ===> from 1-15 to 0-13
- Albion ===> from 9-17 to 17-7

These teams, collectively, averaged 1.3 fewer wins this year than in the prior season, and their collective winning percentage dropped from a weak .448 to a weaker .413.  Last year Whitworth's meaty winning percentage helped cancel this out.  This year, Husson and ONU added kerosene to the fire.

So a couple of conclusions here:
- There was a notable dropoff in the winning percentage of the two snowbird opponents
- If you lump the two snowbird opponents into one "variable element" total, then we saw every opponent except one turn in a weaker winning percentage than in 2017-18.
- As an underlying factor, the opponents' winning percentage started in a relatively weak place both years

It's easy to look at this in hindsight, and much tougher to project a perfect storm of mediocrity like this when you are setting the schedule in the first place.  In other words, it's not Todd Raridon's fault that Heidelberg, Benedictine, etc. were a notch weaker than usual this year.  Typically I think you would expect some puts and some takes here, and this year, excepting Albion, everything unfortunately landed on the negative side of the ledger.

What is controllable is who you choose to play on an annual basis.  North Central should and will continue to schedule the Auroras and Benedictines on a yearly basis -- this year, it hurt the Cardinals that both were down a bit.  The decision to schedule Finlandia was driven by a cancellation, and North Central paid the price from an SOS standpoint.  Hopefully this is a one-off and will not be on the schedule again.

The main opportunity going forward is for the Cardinals to look at upgrading opponents like Alma and Illinois College.  You can only play the teams that will return your calls, and I'm sure sometimes there are links that aren't visible to Joe Public.  (I don't pretend to know what these calls are like but can envision things like "sure, we'll play you in men's basketball, but we've got other options and will probably want to schedule whomever can also help us fill these open dates in softball and women's volleyball", or "Bob, we've got an open date and hey remember that time a couple of years ago when I helped you out?")  In any event, I would think there are opportunities to schedule schools less likely to be such an anchor from a SOS standpoint.  Replace these two and Finlandia with schools that are more likely to be stronger in a random given year, and much of this issue is mitigated.  WIAC schools have been notably absent from the schedule the past couple of years, and they typically are net neutral-to-positives rather than negatives from a SOS standpoint.

This is a great post.

Scheduling is hard.  Even when you think you get it right, and have just the right mix of opponents, you still have no idea how it will turn out.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

One of the headwinds that North Central is facing from a Pool C standpoint as we arc toward the end of the season is a relatively weak SOS.  The Cardinals' schedule isn't radically different than it was last year, so I wanted to understand what drove this.  The NCAA SOS calculation includes multipliers and some weighted calcs around OOWP, but what I wanted to look at is opponents' record, as this is a big component, though not the only element, in the NCAA's SOS calc.  I used record versus D3 opponents, and included games through and including conference tournaments for 2017-18.

Some of the questions I wanted to answer were:
- What role did CCIW teams play in the low SOS?
- What role did churn in non-conference opponents play?
- What role did recurring non-conference opponents play?
- Among recurring non-conference opponents, were there any that played an outsized role in driving the SOS down?

From what I can tell, there are two main drivers for the Cardinals' relatively weak SOS, and also one underlying factor:

1. North Central's schedule had three changes versus 2017-18.  They dropped non-D3 Robert Morris-Chicago and instead played Illinois College, and they swapped out their two snowbird tourney opponents.

Robert Morris had no impact on the SOS, but Illinois College was a drag on the SOS, as the Blueboys are 9-15 (.375) versus D3 opponents.

The change in snowbird opponents also negatively impacted things.  Last year in Hawaii, the Cardinals played Whitworth (24-3 / .888) and Lewis and Clark (8-17 / .320) for a combined OWP of .613.  This year in Vegas, the opponents were Husson (15-10 / .600) and Ohio Northern (7-18 / .280), which nets out to an aggregate OWP of .440.  That's a big drop, particularly in light of some of what shows up in #2 below.  Of note -- a year ago, Husson and Ohio Northern combined for a .704 winning percentage.  Husson is four games worse off than a year ago, and ONU is 12.  This dropoff from 2017-18 is a theme we will see below.

The loss to ONU had a major impact on North Central's Pool C resume.  And the pedestrian SOS of this opponent made it a double-whammy.

2. North Central has had 22 common opponents to date compared to its 2017-18 schedule.  CCIW teams were slightly worse than a year ago from a winning percentage standpoint: the Cardinals' conference opponents averaged an 13.9-11.5 record (.547) last year, and this dropped to 13.0-11.8 this year (.523)  Every team currently sits within 1.5 games of how it finished last year excepting Carthage, which was 13-12 a year ago but just 8-17 this year.  (Insert comment here about how if Bosko had only been more engaged...)

Net/net, conference opponents were not a big driver of the change.

The same can't be said for non-conference opponents, as they almost universally fell off by a few games versus last year.  Only Albion was better, record-wise, than in 2017-18:

- Aurora ===> from 19-8 to 14-11
- Benedictine ===> from 17-10 to 13-12
- Heidelberg ===> from 11-15 to 8-17
- Alma ===> from 8-17 to 5-21
- Finlandia ===> from 1-15 to 0-13
- Albion ===> from 9-17 to 17-7

These teams, collectively, averaged 1.3 fewer wins this year than in the prior season, and their collective winning percentage dropped from a weak .448 to a weaker .413.  Last year Whitworth's meaty winning percentage helped cancel this out.  This year, Husson and ONU added kerosene to the fire.

So a couple of conclusions here:
- There was a notable dropoff in the winning percentage of the two snowbird opponents
- If you lump the two snowbird opponents into one "variable element" total, then we saw every opponent except one turn in a weaker winning percentage than in 2017-18.
- As an underlying factor, the opponents' winning percentage started in a relatively weak place both years

It's easy to look at this in hindsight, and much tougher to project a perfect storm of mediocrity like this when you are setting the schedule in the first place.  In other words, it's not Todd Raridon's fault that Heidelberg, Benedictine, etc. were a notch weaker than usual this year.  Typically I think you would expect some puts and some takes here, and this year, excepting Albion, everything unfortunately landed on the negative side of the ledger.

What is controllable is who you choose to play on an annual basis.  North Central should and will continue to schedule the Auroras and Benedictines on a yearly basis -- this year, it hurt the Cardinals that both were down a bit.  The decision to schedule Finlandia was driven by a cancellation, and North Central paid the price from an SOS standpoint.  Hopefully this is a one-off and will not be on the schedule again.

The main opportunity going forward is for the Cardinals to look at upgrading opponents like Alma and Illinois College.  You can only play the teams that will return your calls, and I'm sure sometimes there are links that aren't visible to Joe Public.  (I don't pretend to know what these calls are like but can envision things like "sure, we'll play you in men's basketball, but we've got other options and will probably want to schedule whomever can also help us fill these open dates in softball and women's volleyball", or "Bob, we've got an open date and hey remember that time a couple of years ago when I helped you out?")  In any event, I would think there are opportunities to schedule schools less likely to be such an anchor from a SOS standpoint.  Replace these two and Finlandia with schools that are more likely to be stronger in a random given year, and much of this issue is mitigated.  WIAC schools have been notably absent from the schedule the past couple of years, and they typically are net neutral-to-positives rather than negatives from a SOS standpoint.

This is a great post.

Scheduling is hard.  Even when you think you get it right, and have just the right mix of opponents, you still have no idea how it will turn out.

I imagine losing two starters to injury also made a Pool C bid a little tougher.  I'd be interested to know how much three games impacts the overall SOS; I'm assuming that's a relatively simple calculation I'm completely incapable of figuring out.

[Gregory Sager]

National titles won as a full-time assistant coach.

Ok...now this is accurate data.

I expect the count to be 3-1 in a few weeks.

Of course. After all, Augustana has 2018-19 CCIW MOP Nolan Ebel on its roster.

[fantastic50]

Whitworth is in a similar situation, in that opponents who are down this year are causing a low SOS that hurts their chances for a Pool C berth.

[Titan Q]

Of course. After all, Augustana has 2018-19 CCIW MOP Nolan Ebel on its roster.

I've shifted my midway CCIW season position on that topic.

[Titan Q]

My final 2018-19 all-CCIW Team...

1st Team
Aston Francis (Wheaton), 6-1 Sr. G
Connor Raridon (North Central), 6-6 Jr. F
Brady Rose (Illinois Wesleyan), 6-3 Sr. G
Nolan Ebel (Augustana), 6-1 Sr G. 
Jake Rhode (Elmhurst), 5-10 So. G
Kienan Baltimore (Carthage), 6-5 Jr. F
Chrishawn Orange (Augustana), 6-2 Sr. G
Matt Cappelletti (North Central), 6-5 Jr. F

2nd Team
Jeremy Ireland (Elmhurst), 6-7 Sr. F
Elijah Henry (Millikin), 6-7 Sr. F
Pierson Wofford (Augustana), 6-4 Jr. F
Colin Bonnett (Illinois Wesleyan), 6-4 Sr. G
Brett Benning (Augustana), 6-6 Sr. G
Jordan Kedrowski (Carthage), 6-3 Jr. G
Sean Johnson (Carthage), 6-10 So. C
Toby Marek (North Park), 6-0 So. G


* Fred Young Most Outstanding Player - Aston Francis (Wheaton)

* CCIW Coach of the Year - Greg Giovanine (Augustana)

* Freshman of the Year - Calvin Fisher (Millikin)

[Titan Q]

I don't think Carthage, at 3-13, deserves 3...but I had a hard time taking off Kedrowski (14.0 ppg, 3.9 apg) or Johnson (11.4 ppg, 6.9 rpg, 3.6 bpg).

Carroll is so balanced that none of their guys, individually, jumps out.  I struggled to find a spot ahead of the guys I picked for Penny (10.8 ppg, 2.4 rpg) or Howat (9.8 ppg) or Ingebrightsen (8.9 ppg, 3.0 rpg, 2.1 apg).  All good players but who do you remove?

[Titan Q]

By the way, with an all-conference caliber point guard, center, and 4-man, Carthage underachieved mightily this season in my opinion.  With that talent...3 wins?

[AndOne]

By the way, with an all-conference caliber point guard, center, and 4-man, Carthage underachieved mightily this season in my opinion.  With that talent...3 wins?

It seems the question that naturally arises is whose job is it to blend all that talent into a cohesive unit that enables them to attain their maximum combined potential. 🤔 🤷🏽‍♂️