MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Dark Knight]

Alma and Calvin have the same record.  It's amazing how the two schools can look at that fact and have two completely different emotions regarding it.  Alma's has to be elated and Calvin has to be disappointed.  Although Calvin lost 3 of their games without Meckes and two of the four are to D2 schools, they still have to be disappointed with 4 losses this early.

I'm not too disappointed. It's natural--the rule, not the exception--to have a rebuilding year after a final-four year powered largely by seniors. In fact, since all of their losses are without Meckes or to a D-II team, I'd say they're doing pretty well!

What's amazing to me is that Alma continues to play well, without Jones or Barnes. Looks like a structural change there. Should be a good game at the fieldhouse tonight.

[Pat Coleman]

Mr. Coleman,
Wooster should drop as many spots and Baldwin-Wallace gained.  (5) 
You have not taken into consideration that Wooster lost at home, which makes the loss much worse.  A home loss this early in the season is worth a considerable drop in the polls.

I have. I also took into account that it was a double-overtime game, which makes it a one-point game.

Losing doesn't mean a team has to drop. Sometimes it just means other teams have to rise. Sometimes it's a fluke.

And then when you drop Wooster five spots, are you dropping Wittenberg five spots too? Because those two teams proved they belonged right next to each other in their first meeting.

Almost nobody runs the table in Division III. Even the best teams pick up a couple of losses. As long as it's not a bad loss, I think it's good not to overreact.

[BogeyMan]

I find it interesting that you use the word "fluke" to possibly justify a ranking.  If you are running a poll by trying to decide which games are flukes and which games are the real thing, then I would call that a very inaccurate polling method.  Polls should reward teams for good wins, which you did, and lower teams that suffer a loss to a lower team.  I would like to think that BW is as good of a team as Wooster.  They beat them at home!

[Titan Q]

Bogeyman, I'm quite certain Pat is not calling the Baldwin-Wallace win over Wooster a fluke.  He made that statement in very general terms.

Pat's point is a good one though.  Games do not always turn out as they should on paper - it'd be nice if every team played to 100% of their abilities every single time out, but it doesn't happen that way.  Sometimes one team simply doesn't play well and the other plays great.  Call it an "upset" if you wish or "fluke", but those things happen. (I'm not in anyway referring to the Baldwin-Wallace/Wooster game here, by the way - just speaking in general terms.  B-W may be a lot better than Wooster for all I know.)

When poll voters start automatically raising and lowering team based on one game (and not looking a team's complete body of work over the course of the season), they run the risk of producing an inaccurate poll.  The purpose of the poll is to accurately reflect how teams stack up - not to punish and reward teams for each game they play.

I remember watching Illinois play at Ohio State last year late in the Big Ten season.  The Illini came in undefeated on the season overall and left with their first loss.  Should the Illini have been automatically dropped in the poll because they lost to the Buckeyes?  I'd argue no.  You look at as one game in the big picture -- Illinois played poorly for large stretches of that game and it wasn't a true reflection on the caliber of their team.  Had Illinois (15-1 Big Ten) been dropped 5 spots just for losing to a so-so Ohio State (8-8 Big Ten) team, the poll would have been inaccurate.  The Illini ended up one of the last two standing last year.

[MIdoubleA]

Don't worry bogeyman... sometimes I am blinded by my school pride too

Thanks for all of the explanation Pat, it has helped me understand what you are thinking and whatnot. And thanks to posters like TitanQ and Sac for offering additional perspective.

Now, on to todays games!

[Dark Knight]

When poll voters start automatically raising and lowering team based on one game (and not looking a team's complete body of work over the course of the season), they run the risk of producing an inaccurate poll.  The purpose of the poll is to accurately reflect how teams stack up - not to punish and reward teams for each game they play.

The purpose of the poll is to accurately reflect how teams stack up: I think that's the rub. Some polls (like the d3hoops.com poll) have this purpose; others (like the BCS polls perhaps) are intended more to rank teams according to results so far, not to predict future performance.

Interestingly, there's a parallel difference in philosophy between computer rankings. Non-Margin of Victory-based rankings, like Wolfe and the current Massey, may be better at ranking teams according to results so far, but MOV-based polls (like the old Massey) are better at predicting future performance.

[hope1]

halftime    hope   41   olivet  27

[ScotsFan]

Bogey, how long have you been following this poll?  Hope started this season in the "Others Receiving Votes" category.  They have had a pretty significant and almost meteoric rise to where they are now!  IWU was almost a unanimous #1 before there loss to NCC who was unranked at the time and IWU also lost at home since you seem to be ragging on Wooster for losing at home.  One of your arguements is to drop a team as far as the team that beat them rises?  So, seeing as how NCC could go from being unranked last week to cracking the top 15-20, I guess IWU should drop out of the top 10???  That's realisitic?!  

The fact is, IWU, Wooster and Witt  all started the season highly ranked, unlike Hope.  All 3 of them have solid wins over ranked opponents.  And, all of their losses were to ranked opponents (I'm assuming NCC will be ranked next week).  I'd say they had more than proven themselves worthy of their rankings before they were beaten, and it's not as if any of them lost to a cupcake?!

[hope1]

hope won 78 to  53  by  25  points over olivet        wed at albon a big game 

[MIdoubleA]

hope won 78 to  53  by  25  points over olivet        wed at albon a big game 

Looks like the Dutchmen kicked the habit of playing poorly @ Olivet.

It was a good game to listen to

[Pat Coleman]

Bogeyman, I'm quite certain Pat is not calling the Baldwin-Wallace win over Wooster a fluke.  He made that statement in very general terms.

Thanks, Q -- indeed, that was what I was doing, listing possible reasons why top teams don't automatically have to drop following a loss.

[flash96]

Hope at Olivet...
For part of the game it looked like the Giants versus the midgets!  Some of Olivet's guards made me look like a Giant.  Olivet really needs to get some sort of offensive plan, it looked like five individuals out there trying to beat Hope by themselves.  In the second half one Olivet guard attempted four three's and missed each attempt.  With their short lineup they also allowed Hope numerous Offensive boards. 

Its so nice to have ties to an excellent program rather than one in which a victory over Hope, Albion, or Calvin is cause for riotous celebration!

Don't know if I am going to Albion Wednesday or not.  Their crowd gets a little violent and I left there fearing for my personal safety.  Of course it didn't help that we were taunting each other in the waining minutes of the game. 

[Flea]

January 07, 2006

Hope 78 defeats Olivet 53

Kalamazoo 73 defeats Adrian 62

Calvin 64 defeats Alma 60

Albion 86 defeats Tri-State 75

[Flying Dutch Fan]

I loved what I saw from Hope today.  Focused defense, focused offense.  15 assists to 11 turnovers.  Out-rebounded and out-hustled the Comets.  Phillips was big in the first half with 10 points.  When Olivet changed their defense to try to stop him in the second half, VanderHeided seized the opportunity and must have scored 12 in the second half (in about 3 minutes or so). 

It's really nice to be able to have any one of your starters put up 15 or so points any game, depending on what the defense is giving you.  It's also nice to see the efforts of Reimink and Partridge and others off the bench. 

It really was quite comical to see 6-4 Tim Partridge (a point guard) being guarded in the post by Antonio Higgenbotham at 5-9 (more like 5-5). 

Sounds like the other games tonight were all quite close, and from the sounds of Doug Wentworth, Alma is a team that may surprise some other teams.

[hornet fan]

Nice win for the Hornets tonight.  They played tough basketball, not trailing after halftime.  They pushed the lead to double digits with 3 or 4 minutes to go.  They held off a late surge by the Bulldogs to win by 10 or 11.  One of the last plays of the game was an alley oop in transition to Henry McCain and he was fouled.  It was pretty...

They got nice games from Mat Kellogg and McCain.  They also got nice contributions from Thomas Greer and Brad Brinkman.  It was a good all around effort.  Early foul trouble caused the Bulldogs to go small, at one point, Billy Collins was their biggest player on the floor.  The Hornets shot over 50% from the field by attacking the basket.  They stayed away from unneccessary 3s, only taking them when they had good looks.  It was encouraging to watch the defensive intensity and execution.  Let's hope it continues... 

The Hornets have Alma at home on Wednesday.  That would be a very nice win considering how Alma has been playing.   

Stinger and I may be attending the Albion/Hope game on Wedneday.  I am sure Kresge will be rockin...