MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[Pat Coleman]

It's coach of the year that we select.

[Mr. Ypsi]

What more does a man have to do?

Not be a sophomore!  I only went back four years, but in that period, of 100 players, 73 were seniors, 22 were juniors, and only 5 were sophomores (none this year or in 2005).

You're obviously upset (I thought he deserved it too), but let's maintain some civility and perspective.  Alleging 'politics' is not only somewhat silly, but also beneath the standards of CCIW Chat.

[cardinalpride]

And cardinalpride: Apples and oranges. I don't think that we were likely to name Freeman at a guard spot or Raymond as a forward. We like our All-American Team to be an actual team -- you know, two in the backcourt, three in the frontcourt?

Pat don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying Raymond should have been a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd teamer.  However, this is D3 basketball and it is quite common to see 3 guards and 2 forwards.  As a matter of fact, the team that won the national title a year ago started 3 guards and 2 forwards.  Also, 2 of the 4 semi-finalists from this year started 3 guards and 2 forwards -- you know, three in the backcourt, two in the front court?

[cardinalpride]

What more does a man have to do?

Not be a sophomore!  I only went back four years, but in that period, of 100 players, 73 were seniors, 22 were juniors, and only 5 were sophomores (none this year or in 2005).

You're obviously upset (I thought he deserved it too), but let's maintain some civility and perspective.  Alleging 'politics' is not only somewhat silly, but also beneath the standards of CCIW Chat.

Ypsi, I wasn't the one that alleged politics.  I said the process doesn't make sense and that it stinks.  I'm not upset either.  Just looking for some answers that make sense and that are creditable.  That's all.

[Pat Coleman]

We'd have to bump a forward to do that, then.

I think people that criticize the All-American team should sit down with the 55 pages of nominations and give it a try for themselves. There are very difficult decisions that have to be made.

[usee]

Well, here goes what karma I have left, but damn the torpedoes!

D3Hoops chose Raymond as a pre-season All American, he had an All American season, and yet he gets left out of the final selection?

Smells like politics to me.

Please elaborate on the nature and the specific incidents of "politics" that kept Kent Raymond from making the final All-American lists.

I won't smite you.  I actually would prefer a systematic refutation of the accomplishments of the other All-Americans as to why they should be the one that is left off in favor of Raymond.

Thanking you in advance...

Ralph,

Pat has already made it clear that the process is entirely subjective. as such it has its strengths as well as its limitations. strengths are guys like Zach Freeman (and Joel Kolmodin in previous years) get recognition that is much deserved. you can't refute accomplishments of other AA's when the process is subjective. the only recognized accomplishment that is different is other AA's were seniors and Kent is not. that would be a limitation.

[cardinalpride]

We'd have to bump a forward to do that, then.

I think people that criticize the All-American team should sit down with the 55 pages of nominations and give it a try for themselves. There are very difficult decisions that have to be made.

Well give it a try sometime.  It might work out for you.  Virginia Wesleyan bumped a forward and it got them a national title and a runner-up finish.  I wouldn't imagine coach Macedo received very much criticism for his decision.  All in all Pat, I might disagree with some of the things on D3hoops, but you do an outstanding job with the site.  I mean that sincerely.  Thank you for allowing me to have a voice.   

[Pat Coleman]

Thanks.

I see you didn't volunteer a forward to get rid of. And again, it just isn't the way we name our teams. Just like we don't name a team with a point, three wings and a post, though some schools list their lineups that way too.

[cardinalpride]

Thanks.

I see you didn't volunteer a forward to get rid of. And again, it just isn't the way we name our teams. Just like we don't name a team with a point, three wings and a post, though some schools list their lineups that way too.

Three wings!   Are you ordering chicken?  Do you mean 4 perimeter and a post, or 4 guards and a post?  I've been around basketball a long time and I've never heard of there being 3 wing positions on the court at once.  I've heard of left wing, right wing,...oh that's right the middle wing..no upper left wing...or is it upper right wing.  Hell, I'm confused...

[Gregory Sager]

And cardinalpride: Apples and oranges. I don't think that we were likely to name Freeman at a guard spot or Raymond as a forward. We like our All-American Team to be an actual team -- you know, two in the backcourt, three in the frontcourt?

True ... but you listed Zach Freeman as a forward so that you could get two centers onto the first team, slotting Freeman alongside his fellow low-post denizen Ben Strong of Guilford. Zach Freeman was a center, not a forward. In fact, he was the only player of any substantial size whatsoever on his team this season, which made his "center-ness" even more glaring. Yes, the line is often blurred between center and power forward, but it really wasn't in his case ... and I doubt that it was blurred in the case of the 6'11 Strong, either. More to the point, the line is also blurred in many instances between small forward and shooting guard, to the point where the two positions are often subsumed under the appellation "wing" or "swingman".

I'm not arguing against the inclusion of Freeman on the first team at all. Nor am I getting involved in the whole Kent Raymond brouhaha, although I agree with those who think that his exclusion is a mistake. I'm simply saying that you can't make an argument against positional elasticity in putting together your AA team on the one hand while arguing for it on the other. You and CP can banter about all you like about a point, three wings, and a post, or four perimeters and a post, or whatever ... but one thing that you don't typically see is two centers on the same team on the basketball court at the same time.

[Pat Coleman]

Well, true. But we made up for the disenfranchised forward further down the line.

He didn't seem interested enough in the process to suggest a player that could be removed. That's the point I'm trying to get him to recognize -- that adding a player requires removing one to get to 25.

[Gregory Sager]

I have to admit that I like your "if you disagree with me, go do the research yourself" line of argument. I may borrow it in the future.

[Titan Q]

True ... but you listed Zach Freeman as a forward so that you could get two centers onto the first team, slotting Freeman alongside his fellow low-post denizen Ben Strong of Guilford. Zach Freeman was a center, not a forward. In fact, he was the only player of any substantial size whatsoever on his team this season, which made his "center-ness" even more glaring. Yes, the line is often blurred between center and power forward, but it really wasn't in his case ...

I disagree.  To me, you can call Zach a "center" or a "forward" or a "4" or a "5"...whatever.  Zach can play either position and has over the course of his career.  This year he certainly played more 5 than 4, but he really is more of a true 4.

Put it this way...if the goal is to create teams that could take the floor together in real life, Pat's in good shape with the 1st Team because Zach can play his natural position (the 4) and Ben Strong the 5.  I think anyone who has seen Zach play is OK with him being called a "forward"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2EANANcrj8

[cardinalpride]

Well, true. But we made up for the disenfranchised forward further down the line.

He didn't seem interested enough in the process to suggest a player that could be removed. That's the point I'm trying to get him to recognize -- that adding a player requires removing one to get to 25.

No, I just didn't have the time to do it last night.  I soon will enlighten you with my subjective opinion on who to omit.  Since you guys chose to omit Raymond.

[Late nite]

And cardinalpride: Apples and oranges. I don't think that we were likely to name Freeman at a guard spot or Raymond as a forward. We like our All-American Team to be an actual team -- you know, two in the backcourt, three in the frontcourt?

True ... but you listed Zach Freeman as a forward so that you could get two centers onto the first team, slotting Freeman alongside his fellow low-post denizen Ben Strong of Guilford. Zach Freeman was a center, not a forward. In fact, he was the only player of any substantial size whatsoever on his team this season, which made his "center-ness" even more glaring. Yes, the line is often blurred between center and power forward, but it really wasn't in his case ... and I doubt that it was blurred in the case of the 6'11 Strong, either. More to the point, the line is also blurred in many instances between small forward and shooting guard, to the point where the two positions are often subsumed under the appellation "wing" or "swingman".

I'm not arguing against the inclusion of Freeman on the first team at all. Nor am I getting involved in the whole Kent Raymond brouhaha, although I agree with those who think that his exclusion is a mistake. I'm simply saying that you can't make an argument against positional elasticity in putting together your AA team on the one hand while arguing for it on the other. You and CP can banter about all you like about a point, three wings, and a post, or four perimeters and a post, or whatever ... but one thing that you don't typically see is two centers on the same team on the basketball court at the same time.

True ... but you listed Zach Freeman as a forward so that you could get two centers onto the first team, slotting Freeman alongside his fellow low-post denizen Ben Strong of Guilford. Zach Freeman was a center, not a forward. In fact, he was the only player of any substantial size whatsoever on his team this season, which made his "center-ness" even more glaring. Yes, the line is often blurred between center and power forward, but it really wasn't in his case ...

I disagree.  To me, you can call Zach a "center" or a "forward" or a "4" or a "5"...whatever.  Zach can play either position and has over the course of his career.  This year he certainly played more 5 than 4, but he really is more of a true 4.

Put it this way...if the goal is to create teams that could take the floor together in real life, Pat's in good shape with the 1st Team because Zach can play his natural position (the 4) and Ben Strong the 5.  I think anyone who has seen Zach play is OK with him being called a "forward"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2EANANcrj8

I agree with Greg---I watched Zach play for his entire career---Who was the 5 during that time?---Jones??  Andrew Freeman??  Gant??  Don't think so.  Although his natural might be the 4, HE PLAYED THE 5.