MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[wiz]

Very impressed with the play of Connor Vanderbrug this year.  The Calvin freshman had an excellent first year and he paced the Knights in league play with 25.5 points per 40 minutes.  With a well deserved starting position next season and significantly increased level of playing minutes, he will give the Calvin offense the extra punch it will need.  In this stat, Connor performed a tad better than Jordan Brink in MIAA action and a smidgeon less in overall play.  We'll have to wait and see how that might hold up if he receives the double teaming that Jordan contended with throughout the year.  But, nevertheless, Vanderbrug looks to be a bright spot for the future of Calvin basketball.

[MaroonKnighty]

Anybody know if this kid is being recruited by any MIAA teams?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSxiR-NKBCU#t=80

[KnightSlappy]

Very impressed with the play of Connor Vanderbrug this year.  The Calvin freshman had an excellent first year and he paced the Knights in league play with 25.5 points per 40 minutes.  With a well deserved starting position next season and significantly increased level of playing minutes, he will give the Calvin offense the extra punch it will need.  In this stat, Connor performed a tad better than Jordan Brink in MIAA action and a smidgeon less in overall play.  We'll have to wait and see how that might hold up if he receives the double teaming that Jordan contended with throughout the year.  But, nevertheless, Vanderbrug looks to be a bright spot for the future of Calvin basketball.

Connor's offensive numbers are considerably less impressive when you consider how often he shot the ball. He took 22.8 shots per 40 minutes during the MIAA season (compared to Brink's 14.6 shots per 40 minutes). That lead the conference in shot rate (100 minutes minimum). Second was Brad Visser at 20.6, the only other player in the league above 20.0.

VanderBrug actually ended the conference season with below-average scoring efficiency numbers, but he did that in an odd way. He was a perfectly acceptable three-point shooter (35%), but he had trouble scoring inside the arc (42.5%). He wasn't a reliable finisher at the rim, and he was too quick to settle for mid-range jump shots.

I agree that he has an incredibly promising future, but Calvin isn't going to be able to stomach that same high-quantity, low-efficiency production without Brink's crazy high-efficiency game to balance it out.

[almcguirejr]

At the North Pointe Chr/Shelby game.  Sam Hargraves, Tom Davelaar, Greg Mitchell, Ed Douma and KVS in attendance.

[sac]

They turned away about 2,000 people at the Muskegon/Everett game tonight.   

[HollandKnight]

Anybody know if this kid is being recruited by any MIAA teams?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSxiR-NKBCU#t=80

No. According to 247 Recruiting he has offers from Arizona, Kansas, Michigan State, Ohio State and Duke, to name a few. It would be a blessing if he ended up on this side of Michigan though.

[almcguirejr]

They turned away about 2,000 people at the Muskegon/Everett game tonight.

Everett 75
Muskegon 52

[sac]

They turned away about 2,000 people at the Muskegon/Everett game tonight.

Everett 75
Muskegon 52

I was able to listen to most of it on the radio.  Everett's guards are playing great basketball right now, they turned the game in the 3rd quarter.  Lot of talk afterwards that Everett's players didn't like the fact Manuel didn't win Mr. Basketball.  I don't have final stats but it sounded like Manuel outplayed Mr. Davis.

Radio guys also mentioned it was an overflow crowd, in the first Q they stopped the game to ask people to move back off the floor.

I was in line about an hour before tip and was well short of making it in the door(as was Mickey DeVries).  The line stretched from the door at the Fieldhouse all the way back the length of Eastern HS to Pennsylvania Ave 4 deep when they closed it off.  In De Vos Fieldhouse terms thats from the main entrance, across the field, across Fairbanks and probably across the soccer field plus a little more.  Amazing crowd.

[sac]

Here's Cassius Winton's last second layup for UD-Jesuit againt Clarkston.  Winston's being recruited by D1's including Michigan State.

https://twitter.com/PrepBallReport/status/580501637451612160

We could have used Callahan's Hall's 8,000 seats in Lansing tonight.

[Stinger]

Here's Cassius Winton's last second layup for UD-Jesuit againt Clarkston.  Winston's being recruited by D1's including Michigan State.

https://twitter.com/PrepBallReport/status/580501637451612160

We could have used Callahan's Hall's 8,000 seats in Lansing tonight.

Being that I live about 3 miles from UDM, I was planning on making it Calihan last night. Unfortunately, work happened. 

I missed a great game, and Izzo was in attendance. 

[wiz]

At the North Pointe Chr/Shelby game.  Sam Hargraves, Tom Davelaar, Greg Mitchell, Ed Douma and KVS in attendance.

If I remember correctly, Douma picked up a couple of state championships while coaching at Shelby.  Couple of cousins named Griffin played on those teams.  Some of you Hope fans might remember a generation later when Derek Griffin stuck it to the Dutchmen at DeVos in one of those legendary last second game winners. 

[Flying Dutch Fan]

At the North Pointe Chr/Shelby game.  Sam Hargraves, Tom Davelaar, Greg Mitchell, Ed Douma and KVS in attendance.

If I remember correctly, Douma picked up a couple of state championships while coaching at Shelby.  Couple of cousins named Griffin played on those teams.  Some of you Hope fans might remember a generation later when Derek Griffin stuck it to the Dutchmen at DeVos in one of those legendary last second game winners. 

Sure do remember that - but it's kind of overshadowed in my mind by the Steve Cramer led Hope win over Calvin a week later in the NCAA tournament.   

[pointlem]

Last evening's NCAA men's games brought to mind several questions I periodically have about coaching strategy (which I also see play out in our DIII games). Comments welcome.

Game clock management:  When a team takes possession of the ball with a minute left in a half or game, would it make sense to prioritize getting a shot off by about 43 seconds left—in order to gain (if they don't foul) the last possession?  Wouldn't they rather have two decent attempts to score rather than (as with Notre Dame last night, running the clock down to 34 seconds left) letting the other team have the sole decent chance at a game-winning shot?

Defending the last 30 seconds:  If, as in last night's KY-ND game, the game is tied and one team gains possession with less than 35 seconds left, surely they would like to calmly hold the ball and, with positions established, initiate their play on their own time schedule—with no defensive disruption up to that point. Thus it puzzles me that the defense routinely (as did ND last night) grants them that wish—rather than playing at least nominal defense that forces passing, and the chance of a turnover or at least altering the wished-for last seconds play.

Maximizing key player minutes:  I noticed in the other game last night that a key Arizona player was allowed to play with two first half fouls, and made key contributions in bringing his team from behind into the lead. To me, that makes sense—maximize the player's total game minutes and points, mindful that all points count the same.  Many coaches, however, elect to have a player sit the last 15 minutes of the first half after picking up two early fouls—seemingly in the belief that the points scored at the games end are more decisive (count more?) than those first half points.  Better to have the player play 20 minutes and be available at the game's end then to play 30 minutes and risk not being available then.  (This is one we've discussed before.)

[KnightSlappy]

Last evening's NCAA men's games brought to mind several questions I periodically have about coaching strategy (which I also see play out in our DIII games). Comments welcome.

Game clock management:  When a team takes possession of the ball with a minute left in a half or game, would it make sense to prioritize getting a shot off by about 43 seconds left—in order to gain (if they don't foul) the last possession?  Wouldn't they rather have two decent attempts to score rather than (as with Notre Dame last night, running the clock down to 34 seconds left) letting the other team have the sole decent chance at a game-winning shot?

Defending the last 30 seconds:  If, as in last night's KY-ND game, the game is tied and one team gains possession with less than 35 seconds left, surely they would like to calmly hold the ball and, with positions established, initiate their play on their own time schedule—with no defensive disruption up to that point. Thus it puzzles me that the defense routinely (as did ND last night) grants them that wish—rather than playing at least nominal defense that forces passing, and the chance of a turnover or at least altering the wished-for last seconds play.

Maximizing key player minutes:  I noticed in the other game last night that a key Arizona player was allowed to play with two first half fouls, and made key contributions in bringing his team from behind into the lead. To me, that makes sense—maximize the player's total game minutes and points, mindful that all points count the same.  Many coaches, however, elect to have a player sit the last 15 minutes of the first half after picking up two early fouls—seemingly in the belief that the points scored at the games end are more decisive (count more?) than those first half points.  Better to have the player play 20 minutes and be available at the game's end then to play 30 minutes and risk not being available then.  (This is one we've discussed before.)

Ken Pomeroy wrote about #2 today at Slate.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2015/03/kentucky_beats_notre_dame_the_fighting_irish_should_have_intentionally_fouled.html

Basically, whether or not to foul depends mainly on how likely you are to win in overtime (the more likely, the less you want to foul), but also on how good your defense is and how good/bad the opponent is at FT shooting.

[pointlem]

Last evening's NCAA men's games brought to mind several questions I periodically have about coaching strategy (which I also see play out in our DIII games). Comments welcome.

Game clock management:  When a team takes possession of the ball with a minute left in a half or game, would it make sense to prioritize getting a shot off by about 43 seconds left—in order to gain (if they don't foul) the last possession?  Wouldn't they rather have two decent attempts to score rather than (as with Notre Dame last night, running the clock down to 34 seconds left) letting the other team have the sole decent chance at a game-winning shot?

Defending the last 30 seconds:  If, as in last night's KY-ND game, the game is tied and one team gains possession with less than 35 seconds left, surely they would like to calmly hold the ball and, with positions established, initiate their play on their own time schedule—with no defensive disruption up to that point. Thus it puzzles me that the defense routinely (as did ND last night) grants them that wish—rather than playing at least nominal defense that forces passing, and the chance of a turnover or at least altering the wished-for last seconds play.

Maximizing key player minutes:  I noticed in the other game last night that a key Arizona player was allowed to play with two first half fouls, and made key contributions in bringing his team from behind into the lead. To me, that makes sense—maximize the player's total game minutes and points, mindful that all points count the same.  Many coaches, however, elect to have a player sit the last 15 minutes of the first half after picking up two early fouls—seemingly in the belief that the points scored at the games end are more decisive (count more?) than those first half points.  Better to have the player play 20 minutes and be available at the game's end then to play 30 minutes and risk not being available then.  (This is one we've discussed before.)

Ken Pomeroy wrote about #2 today at Slate.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2015/03/kentucky_beats_notre_dame_the_fighting_irish_should_have_intentionally_fouled.html

Basically, whether or not to foul depends mainly on how likely you are to win in overtime (the more likely, the less you want to foul), but also on how good your defense is and how good/bad the opponent is at FT shooting.

Interesting, KnightSlappy  . .  though my question wasn't about intentionally fouling, but rather just playing some defense rather than sitting back and gifting the team with the ball the time and space it wants to wait out the clock and run their last play from a set formation.