MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Gregory Sager]

A few random/incoherent thoughts after seeing the Titans play 2 games in person for the first time in several years:

- With Wolfe out, if I'm any CCIW coach I'm playing high pressure press defense until the Titans show they can beat it.

I agree with this, but the good thing is that it doesn't fit the personnel or desired style of many CCIW teams -- I think Carroll and Augustana can pull it off.  I don't think anyone else can really play that way too effectively (at least not for more than a few minutes at a time).

Disagree. I think that Wheaton is quite capable of pulling it off and pulling it off well, especially with the emergence of mobile, defense-minded Collin Uveges and the return of Luke Anthony. Andrew Williams is tailor-made to be a pressing guard, for instance. Mike Schauer has both the numbers and the ability in terms of his roster, particularly among his guards, to play a sustained press. (And Anajuwon Spencer is the ideal candidate to play the back end of it.) The question is whether Mike wants to play it or not. Wheaton's never played that way before, and change comes slowly to the precincts of College Avenue.

I think opponent A:TO ratio is always a very telling stat -- to me, it is a great indicator of how effectively a defense takes an opposing team out of its offense.  Teams that play that Eric Bridgeland type style (formerly Puget Sound, now Whitman) always have an amazing opponent A:TO ratio.  Concordia (TX) is a 0.67, which is outstanding.  Last year Whitman was 0.66 for the season. Against high pressure defenses like this, teams really don't get to run normal offense all that much -- it mostly becomes a matter of individual players making plays.  (You survive a trap, make a pass, and some guy goes to the basket.  A lot of baskets without assists.)

Here are 2019-20 opponent A:TO ratios for CCIW teams:

* Carroll = 0.55
* Augustana = 0.63
---------
* North Central = 0.80
* Wheaton = 0.88
* Illinois Wesleyan = 0.88
* Elmhurst = 0.91
* Carthage = 0.95
* North Park = 1.33
* Millikin = 1.50

Those Carroll and Augie numbers are pretty elite.  I think Carroll and Augie have the personnel to pressure the heck out of IWU the length of the floor if Grant Wolfe is not out there.  Fortunately, IWU had Grant Wolfe in Rock Island and the Titans only have one more left vs the Vikings.  Without Wolfe, I see a much different result in that one -- that game was the perfect example of what Wolfe does for the Titans. 

I don't think the rest of the league is really set up to play that way though.  NCC is always a great defensive team, but I think that is more because they are just so fundamentally sound in their halfcourt defense.  I don't see this Cardinals group being able to play the way a Concordia does.

I think Luke Yoder will keep getting better as the season goes on and be good against most opposing defenses. 

Currently for IWU, w/ one PG, the absolute worst matchup is a Concordia (TX) or Whitman type.  Teams in the CCIW just don't play that way though.

Your analysis of how sustained-press teams can be judged, via opponent team a:to, is spot-on. Where your analysis falls apart is that you're using the current opponent team a:to for CCIW teams to ascertain how well they would do using a sustained press. Since, to the best of my knowledge, nobody in the CCIW has used a sustained press for most or all of a game this season, those numbers don't tell us anything about how they would fare using that style. You're essentially making an apples-to-oranges assessment to prove your point.

The only way to look at a team that is not already pressing for all or most of a game, or even all or most of a half, and reasonably guess how well it would do playing that style, is to look at the personnel it has and then try to extrapolate how well it would do at that style based upon what you already know about those players. I think that you're quite right about North Central, for instance -- but it has nothing to do with the fact that NCC in its current defensive orientation falls below some defined opponent a:to cutoff point for success in a sustained-press defense. (Let's call that cutoff point the Bridgeland Line -- I love a catchy bit of statistical nomenclature. ) It has to do with NCC's personnel, not its current numbers.

[Gregory Sager]

Final from Olivet, MI Battle Creek, MI:

Olivet 88
Carthage 73

This one was a real surprise. I've seen Olivet several times this season, and, while the Comets have two or three good players, they just aren't much at all in the way of being a complete team, as was indicated by their 2-8 record coming into today and the lopsided manner in which they were blown out by teams like Wheaton, NCC, and UW-Platteville. But this was not only an upset on the part of the Comets, it was a pulling-away upset. Olivet led by double digits for most of the second half, and although the Red Men would get to within six on three different occasions in the last ten minutes they failed to score even a single point over the last 3:25 of the game as Olivet ran away and hid.

Kienen Baltimore left the game with about twelve minutes left in the first half, eight seconds after incurring a technical foul, and never reentered the game. He finished the day with zero points on 0-2 shooting.

[Titan Q]

Your analysis of how sustained-press teams can be judged, via opponent team a:to, is spot-on. Where your analysis falls apart is that you're using the current opponent team a:to for CCIW teams to ascertain how well they would do using a sustained press. Since, to the best of my knowledge, nobody in the CCIW has used a sustained press for most or all of a game this season, those numbers don't tell us anything about how they would fare using that style. You're essentially making an apples-to-oranges assessment to prove your point.

I'm using that apples-to-oranges comparison because I believe the teams most likely to be successful playing some version of that Concordia/Whitman style - from the universe of teams not playing it currently - are the ones with an elite opponent A:TO ratio.  I think an opponent A:TO ratio like that of Augie and Carroll almost certainly means a team does a tremendous job pressuring the ball on the perimeter with their guards.  And I believe these kind of teams are the most likely to implement that Concordia/Whitman style of play successfully if they chose to go that route.

That's my opinion.

[Gregory Sager]

Millikin 63
Washington (MO) 61

Forget that Olivet-over-Calvin upset, because it was nothing compared to this one.

[Titan Q]

OMG

[GoPerry]

Millikin 63
Washington (MO) 61

Forget that Olivet-over-Calvin upset, because it was nothing compared to this one.

Wow - big win.  The Big Blue wouldn't go away when they got down by 10.  Credit to them.

That was a pretty gutty no-call by the official on that last trey by Nolan.  He chased the official all the way into the locker room practically.  Coach Juckem and the whole Bears bench was screaming for it.

[Gregory Sager]

Wash U fans can't blame this one on the Bears coming down with a case of eggnogitis, because #10 Wash U went up by 13 at 28-15 with five minutes and change to go in the first half, and in spite of the fact that they were missing starters Hank Hunter and Matt Nester the crispness of their offense led me to believe that they were going to pull away from a clearly outmanned Millikin team. (Honestly, I didn't think that they'd need Nester and Hunter at all, given the disparity of results thus far between the two teams.)

But kudos to the Big Blue, who knuckled down and made it a close game by the half -- and then never went away. They tied it up with fifteen minutes and change, but then the Bears again got out to a 10-point lead at 62-52, as their inside-out game started clicking and they started knocking down treys while MU went through a string of one-and-outs. But the Big Blue really did a great job of fighting hard on defense to make things difficult for the Bears from that point onward, and Millikin finally went ahead with two minutes and change to go on a Zach Fisher trey. From there it was a seesaw affair. With the score tied at 61 and 38 seconds left on the clock, Jack Nolan got called for traveling on a drive in the lane. MU responded calmly by running down the clock and working the ball in to Calvin Fisher, who missed a bunny but then tipped in his own miss with 7.6 seconds remaining to give MU the lead. As GoPerry mentioned, Nolan wanted a foul called on his last trey attempt, which fell well short of the rim, but the refs weren't buying it, as both Nolan and Pat Juckem chased the refs out of the gym. (Kudos to both for coming back in time to get into the handshake line.)

Biggest upset I've seen thus far this season. The Fisher brothers were tremendous; Zach finished with 18, Calvin had 15 and 6, and the frequently-forgotten Korbin Farmer grabbed seven boards, while Sam Stichnote had a nice 4:2 floor game.

Millikin only led for 48 seconds in this game. It's only MU's third win of the season against nine losses, the previous two wins coming over Illinois College (3-6) by a point and Blackburn (3-7) by 11.

[Gregory Sager]

Your analysis of how sustained-press teams can be judged, via opponent team a:to, is spot-on. Where your analysis falls apart is that you're using the current opponent team a:to for CCIW teams to ascertain how well they would do using a sustained press. Since, to the best of my knowledge, nobody in the CCIW has used a sustained press for most or all of a game this season, those numbers don't tell us anything about how they would fare using that style. You're essentially making an apples-to-oranges assessment to prove your point.

I'm using that apples-to-oranges comparison because I believe the teams most likely to be successful playing some version of that Concordia/Whitman style - from the universe of teams not playing it currently - are the ones with an elite opponent A:TO ratio.  I think an opponent A:TO ratio like that of Augie and Carroll almost certainly means a team does a tremendous job pressuring the ball on the perimeter with their guards.  And I believe these kind of teams are the most likely to implement that Concordia/Whitman style of play successfully if they chose to go that route.

That's my opinion.

Well, we're going to disagree about this, then, because I don't think that those numbers translate from a standard style to a radically different one. I think that it all comes down to personnel.

[WUPHF]

Wash U fans can't blame this one on the Bears coming down with a case of eggnogitis,

Yes, we can and we can blame the officials for negating a shot for our best free throw shooter to go to the line for the win or tie and no one can change my mind.

[Gregory Sager]

Hanover 76
Wheaton 65

Wheaton didn't have legs today. Hanover did. The Panthers looked very impressive; they've very smart and disciplined in the halfcourt, never forcing anything and always being willing to pass up a good shot early in the shot clock with the confidence that they'll get a great shot by the end of it.

This game will help Wheaton, because Hanover has similarities in terms of pace and discipline to WC's next opponent, North Central, although the personnel look of the two teams is different.

[GoPerry]

Hanover over Wheaton 76-65

Nyameye Adom             23 pts, 4 rebs
Cade Alioth                   12 pts, 4 rebs
Tyson Cruickshank         10 pts
Luke Anthony                 11 pts

Kevin Williams               19 pts
Mark Albers                   18 pts
Isaac Hibbard                 14 pts, 10 rebs

All credit to the Hanover Panthers, a really solid team that thoroughly beat Wheaton in just about every aspect.  Hanover shot 59% from the field, 63% ( 7-11) from three and were +12 on the glass.  If they keep playing like they did today they will beat a whole bunch of teams ranked or unranked.  Perhaps they had added motivation from the first round tourney game from last year?  They sure looked like it leading 39-23 at halftime.

The Thunder were a step slow defensively in the first half and couldn't solve the screen/roll or drive and dish or kick out for the three that the Panthers employed so efficiently.  When Wheaton made a few comebacks in the second half, Hanover had an answer with a key bucket.  WC lost a little composure when they couldn't quite close the gap and Hanover extended.  Kevin Williams is as impressive a big man as any we see in the CCIW. The visitors deserved the win.

A bummer loss for Wheaton going to the Hangar on Saturday. 

Nice to have Tim Calderwood and Tim Martin on the call.

[Titan Q]

Some damaging non-conference losses by CCIW teams recently -- Augie to La Crosse, IWU to Concordia, Carthage to Olivet, Wheaton to Hanover.

[Gregory Sager]

Some damaging non-conference losses by CCIW teams recently -- Augie to La Crosse, IWU to Concordia, Carthage to Olivet, Wheaton to Hanover.

Yes, which are going to get magnified by what many of us suspect will be a particularly cannibalizing January and February in CCIW play.

Nice to have Tim Calderwood and Tim Martin on the call.

Yep. They both did a good job.

I was a little surprised that Tim Calderwood tipped his hand by indicating that he's a d3hoops.com pollster. Of course, given how many D3 games he calls in Chicagoland, I'm not a bit surprised that Pat picked him to take on that role. I was also wondering to whom Tim Martin was referring when he twice said that the "CCIW experts" had said that Wheaton wouldn't win ten games all season and that Wheaton would miss the CCIW tournament. To whom was he referring? The CCIW coaches poll slotted Wheaton sixth, and it's a six-team tournament, so he couldn't have been referring to the coaches.

Incidentally, I want to give a shout-out to Rusty Lindsey for doing an exceptionally good job yesterday as the SMU vs. Wheaton colorman.

[Titan Q]

I was also wondering to whom Tim Martin was referring when he twice said that the "CCIW experts" had said that Wheaton wouldn't win ten games all season and that Wheaton would miss the CCIW tournament. To whom was he referring? The CCIW coaches poll slotted Wheaton sixth, and it's a six-team tournament, so he couldn't have been referring to the coaches.

I'd like to know if someone actually said that, or if that is just a made up thing that sounds good on the broadcast.

I think everyone generally picked Wheaton 5th or 6th, which is clearly in the CCIW tournament field...and which almost certainly equates to greater than 10 wins.

My preseason CCIW MBB preseason prediction:

1. North Central
2. Augustana
3. Illinois Wesleyan
4. Carthage
5. Elmhurst
6. Wheaton
7. Carroll
8. Millikin
9. North Park

[Gregory Sager]

I was also wondering to whom Tim Martin was referring when he twice said that the "CCIW experts" had said that Wheaton wouldn't win ten games all season and that Wheaton would miss the CCIW tournament. To whom was he referring? The CCIW coaches poll slotted Wheaton sixth, and it's a six-team tournament, so he couldn't have been referring to the coaches.

I'd like to know if someone actually said that, or if that is just a made up thing that sounds good on the broadcast.

I think everyone generally picked Wheaton 5th or 6th, which is clearly in the CCIW tournament field...and which almost certainly equates to greater than 10 wins.

Exactly.

And since he said "experts" -- plural -- my first thought was that he might've been referring to the coaches. My second thought was that he might've been collectively referring to CCIW Chat regulars like us, but I've double-checked all of the posts both in this room and in the multi-regional rooms, and nobody ever posted that Wheaton would fail to win ten games in 2019-20 and/or miss the 2020 CCIW tournament.

I don't want to make it seem like I'm coming down hard on him, because I thought that he did a good job today, but I can't help wondering to whom he was referring.