MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

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.

First of all ... great work, kiko.

Second, I'm not so sure that losing Chang and Bronec to injury affected NCC's record all that much. First of all, remember that they were both role players. Although they were both starters, between the two of them they only averaged 43 minutes per game; their aggregate ppg and rpg numbers, 10.6 and 6.3, would be decent but hardly outstanding for one player, let alone two put together; and in combination they had a negative a:to. They played useful roles as minutes-fillers and as experienced cogs that helped keep the machinery running, but neither was anything close to being a vital part. As it turned out, even when put together they weren't vital -- NCC overcame the loss of both of them and finished second in the league, which is a very fine credit to both the NCC coaching staff and to the rest of the Cardinals rotation.

Both played in NCC's home loss to North Park that, in retrospect, looks like one of two catastrophic defeats from a criteria standpoint. They were both missing for the second catastrophic defeat, which was to Ohio Northern in Vegas over the holidays, and AndOne made the case that this was because the Cards were still getting used to playing without Chang and Bronec. But that flies in the face of the evidence of the previous game; the loss to the Polar Bears followed one day after a 42-point slaughter of a Husson team that is roughly on par with Ohio Northern (Massey has ONU #217 and Husson #227). The obvious conclusion is that the Cardinals should've romped over the Polar Bears, just as they did over Husson the day before; they just didn't show up that day, and the absence of Chang and Bronec was not an excuse that held water because their absence certainly hadn't held back the Cards the day before.

The third loss was to Augustana in Rock Island by 17; it's hard to argue that Chang and Bronec would've made any difference in that game at all. The fourth and fifth losses, which came eleven and eight days ago to IWU and Wheaton, respectively, were instances in which the Cards couldn't close the deal in a tight game. I suppose that you could make the case that the Cards could've really used Chang in the IWU game, since his replacement (Aaron Jones) played poorly, although the fact that the Cards had as many rebounds as did the bigger and deeper Titans militates against Bronec's absence being key. But the farther we get from the losses of Chang and Bronec, the more the validity of the argument in favor of their importance recedes, given how long and how successfully the Cards had played since losing them. And the loss to Wheaton was because the Cards got a big fat dose of Aston Francis (49 points on 17-27 shooting) that was completely Chang-proof.

To sum up, I don't think that you can pin more than one Cards loss on the absence of Chang and Bronec -- and even that's a stretch.

[Gregory Sager]

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.

I'm still stumped as to why you thought that way at any point at all in this season, let alone as late as mid-January.

[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.

I'm still stumped as to why you thought that way at any point at all in this season, let alone as late as mid-January.

Because Augie was undefeated and Ebel was playing great on that 8-0 team.

[Gregory Sager]

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?

Carthage won't get three players on the All-CCIW team. We both know that that's not how the coaches think. Baltimore is a no-brainer first-teamer, and I'm pretty sure that Kedrowski and Johnson will pay the price for the terrible season that the Red Men had. My guess is that the coaches will slot in Nick Penny -- just because someone from Carroll has to be on the team, even though the Pioneers are a collective of roughly equal (and not overly talented) parts that just work really well together, and that the coaches will overlook the fact that Luke Peters missed the 30-man scoring leaderboard and only averaged 8.1 ppg, because his defense was such a difference-maker and because his peripheral stats (ninth in rebounding, third in assists, fifth in a:to) are so strong. My bet is that they'll give Peters a second-team slot, and that they'll also base that reasoning, as usual, on a standings-hierarchy basis; finish in the top three, and you deserve at least a second player on the All-CCIW team.

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?

No question about it. Carthage badly underachieved, and mwunder and K-Mark are right to be up in arms about it.

I guess that the head coach must've been disengaged for the past five months.

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.

I'm still stumped as to why you thought that way at any point at all in this season, let alone as late as mid-January.

Because Augie was undefeated and Ebel was playing great on that 8-0 team.

... while playing in the same league as the player whom Bosko said last night is the best offensive player he's ever seen in his half-century in the CCIW.

[AndOne]

But remember, using the first 8 games that TQ referenced, Mr. Francis was averaging a mere 31 PPG.     

[Gregory Sager]

True. He had to work mightily in the second round-robin just to inch his way up to 32 ppg by season's end.

[GoPerry]

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)

I'm still hoping that Luke Peters will get All Conf recognition.  Obviously, it's tough to stand out statistically amidst the offensive vortex that is Aston Francis.  But if there's any group that would most appreciate the defensive intangible that Peters delivered, it would be the coaches that do this voting.  He would also be the obvious choice should they deem the 3rd place team deserving of two nods which is not a hard rule of course but a strong soft one as Greg inferred.  I would not be in favor of such a ceremonial formula for its own sake, but I believe Peters to be worthy.  Having said this, I'm remiss to name any of these deserving players I would replace.  But that's the coaches job.

And the loss to Wheaton was because the Cards got a big fat dose of Aston Francis (49 points on 17-27 shooting) that was completely Chang-proof.

To sum up, I don't think that you can pin more than one Cards loss on the absence of Chang and Bronec -- and even that's a stretch.

I would add a small countering factor in that Aiden Chang was always the primary defender on Francis and he did the best job of anyone in the league, by far, in keeping him in check.  In my mind it reminded me of Joe Dumars to MJ.  Not to say that MJ didn't torch the Pistons on more than one occasion, but you guys get my drift.  So it's notable that the one game in three seasons where Aston truly went off on the Cardinals was one where Chang wasn't on the floor but the duties were left to Aaron Jones or Tommy Koth, neither of whom were as successful as Chang.  Who knows if this made a difference or not.  But it would be a legitimate argument that the loss of Chang really hurt NCC on their second go around with Wheaton. 

On the other hand, it's been my observation that Francis' play in these last few weeks has been his highest level yet if you believe that.  So not sure anybody could've stopped him.  Hoping this continues.

[Titan Q]

Aston Francis...

* First 8 games: 29.6 ppg, 74-183 FG (.404)
* Second 8 games: 34.4 ppg, 90-189 (.476)

I thought Francis was a great player at the midway point, just as I do know.  After 8 games I just felt like:

1) That .404 FG % was low
2) Wheaton had 3 losses
3) Ebel had led his team to 8-0, was shooting it incredibly well, was providing incredible leadership on the floor, and made a lot of big plays to win games along the way to 8-0.

I thought Ebel deserved it at that point based on his contribution to 8-0...which is really, really hard to do in the CCIW. 

I thought Francis reached another level in the second half of the CCIW season. He shot .476 and had ridiculously huge games and made a ton of big plays in big games.  I felt like in those final 8 games he cemented his position as the lock D3 Player of the Year.  In looking at the complete 16-game body of work, Francis being the CCIW M.O.P. is obviously a no-brainer.

I just saw it differently from others at the midway point and thought Ebel was really tremendous on that 8-0 team.  I respect everyone who disagrees with my position at that point...but that is how I saw it.

[WUPHF]

FWIW, regarding Ebel and Francis, I agreed with you then and I agree with you now...

[Titan Q]

Rose, Ebel, and Rhode - the next tier of elite CCIW guards after Aston Francis - turned out this way statistically in 16 CCIW games...

* Brady Rose: 19.3 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, .456 FG, .407 3-point, .843 FT, 1.6 A:TO

* Jake Rhode: 18.3 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 4.6 apg, .435 FG, .363 3-point, .881 FT, 1.9 A:TO

* Nolan Ebel: 15.0 ppg, 3.4 rpg, 3.2 apg, .497 FG, .430 3-point, .830 FT, 1.6 A:TO


I can't imagine too many leagues have a better group of guards than this.  Francis will certainly be D3 P.O.Y., but the 3 other guys deserve All-American consideration too.

Season as a whole numbers are:

* Aston Francis: 32.4 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 3.3 apg, .436 FG, .386 3-point, .867 FT, 0.9 A:TO

* Brady Rose: 20.9 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 3.7 apg, .483 FG, .436 3-point, .857 FT, 1.4 A:TO

* Jake Rhode: 19.9 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 4.3 apg, .463 FG, .400 3-point, .838 FT, 1.7 A:TO

* Nolan Ebel: 16.2 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 3.2 apg, .502 FG, .450 3-point, .833 FT, 1.7 A:TO

[Titan Q]

At a forward spot, Connor Raridon seems to be an All-American to me...

17.2 ppg, 7.1 rpg, 5.0 apg, .463 FG, .302 3-point, .850 FT, 2.5 A:TO

[AndOne]

Aston Francis...

* First 8 games: 29.6 ppg, 74-183 FG (.404)
* Second 8 games: 34.4 ppg, 90-189 (.476)

I thought Francis was a great player at the midway point, just as I do know.  After 8 games I just felt like:

1) That .404 FG % was low
2) Wheaton had 3 losses
3) Ebel had led his team to 8-0, was shooting it incredibly well, was providing incredible leadership on the floor, and made a lot of big plays to win games along the way to 8-0.

I thought Ebel deserved it at that point based on his contribution to 8-0...which is really, really hard to do in the CCIW. 

I thought Francis reached another level in the second half of the CCIW season. He shot .476 and had ridiculously huge games and made a ton of big plays in big games.  I felt like in those final 8 games he cemented his position as the lock D3 Player of the Year.  In looking at the complete 16-game body of work, Francis being the CCIW M.O.P. is obviously a no-brainer.

I just saw it differently from others at the midway point and thought Ebel was really tremendous on that 8-0 team.  I respect everyone who disagrees with my position at that point...but that is how I saw it.

In defense of the North DuPage team.........

After Wheaton's first 8 games, did they not have 2 losses rather than 3?
Won the first 5, lost the next 2, and won game #8. No?

[Titan Q]

Aston Francis...

* First 8 games: 29.6 ppg, 74-183 FG (.404)
* Second 8 games: 34.4 ppg, 90-189 (.476)

I thought Francis was a great player at the midway point, just as I do know.  After 8 games I just felt like:

1) That .404 FG % was low
2) Wheaton had 3 losses
3) Ebel had led his team to 8-0, was shooting it incredibly well, was providing incredible leadership on the floor, and made a lot of big plays to win games along the way to 8-0.

I thought Ebel deserved it at that point based on his contribution to 8-0...which is really, really hard to do in the CCIW. 

I thought Francis reached another level in the second half of the CCIW season. He shot .476 and had ridiculously huge games and made a ton of big plays in big games.  I felt like in those final 8 games he cemented his position as the lock D3 Player of the Year.  In looking at the complete 16-game body of work, Francis being the CCIW M.O.P. is obviously a no-brainer.

I just saw it differently from others at the midway point and thought Ebel was really tremendous on that 8-0 team.  I respect everyone who disagrees with my position at that point...but that is how I saw it.

In defense of the North DuPage team.........

After Wheaton's first 8 games, did they not have 2 losses rather than 3?
Won the first 5, lost the next 2, and won game #8. No?

at North Park = L
at IWU = W
vs NCC = L
vs Carthage = W
vs Carroll = W
at Millikin = W
at Elmhurst = W
vs Augustana = L

Wheaton was 5-3 at the halfway point.

[Titan Q]

Outgoing CCIW commish Chris Martin joined Eric Stock for an interview yesterday before the IWU/Carroll game.  On the topic of regional realignment Martin said the CCIW would be paired with the MWC and HCAC in the future.  I cannot remember if he mentioned other conferences.  But he definitely said the CCIW would not be in the same region as the WIAC.

There will be 10 regions in the future (there are 8 now).

[AndOne]

I 👀 the 💡
You were talking conference. I saw first 8 games, and visualized the actual first 8 of the year.