MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[HopeConvert]

OK, I'll try to resist the temptation to be glib, and I certainly won't gloat, but we got a taste last night of what the rest of the season could look like for Calvin.  The Knights came out with some fire and purpose, and, although Hope knocked them back on their heels a number of times, they showed the  ability and maturity (maybe for the first or second time this season) to weather the storm.  It's clear to me that there are enough offensive weapons to compensate for a dreadful night from the usually dominant Snikkers and the often-contributing Powell and DeBoer.  
It was senior night last night -- but there is talent aplenty in the underclassmen.  Many of us are still waiting for the full emergence of Jordan Brink as a key offensive contributor, and let's hope that happens as soon as the Knights get a true point guard into the rotation.  As oldknight has mentioned, Kruis is steadily developing into a force with which to be reckoned.  A Hope poster asked if that was as well as Calvin can play.  I strongly suspect it is not.

So you're saying that you suspect they can shoot better than 70% from 3-point range, better than 85% from the line (17-19 in the second half), while outrebounding their opponent by more than 25?

Not precisely, HC.  I'm saying that they can take better care of the ball and defend far better than they did last night  Whether they win by 4 or 14 or 24 doesn't much interest me.  But if Snikkers and Powell and Brink and DeBoer are firing on most cylinders, they don't need 58 points from Danny, Brent and Brad.  
Of course, I know that Hope can play significantly better than they did last night, too, although I'm not pushing on the FD to prove it.

This is an interesting claim. Calvin had 20 turnovers in the game - above their season average - but as OK pointed out, this is in part due to how aggressively they attacked the basket. The Knights had 60 shots - right about their season median. If Powell and Brink get more shots, Shuster and Rodts get less (Schnyders is another story). I thought Calvin played exceptionally well last night: it is, after all, their largest margin of victory against Hope in 17 years. They put up 95 points, and I suspect the most ardent Calvin fan wouldn't have dared predict that. Basketball has a zero sum quality to it: you can't really fire on all cylinders. You tend to give up some things in order to get other things. What Calvin did so well last night was take advantage of the matchup problems that were in their favor. Hope never adjusted well to that, or weren't able to. Snikkers and Powell and Brink could do more statistically, but they would be taking away from the others in doing so.

All this said, there was actually one Calvin player last night who impressed me more than the others, and that was Snikkers. He sees the floor very well, keeps his teammates involved, breaks down defenses when he drives, plays under control (unlike the aforementioned Schnyders), and often gets teammates in a position where they can get an easy assist. He's strong and fearless. I think KVS should put him on the bench more.

I know you are a very bright guy.  You teach at a respected institution, and you graduated from a great college and a first-rate university.  I didn't say "all cylinders."  I said "most cylinders."  And if you think that was a good representation of Tom Snikkers' game last night, you need to spend more time watching Calvin basketball.   You might find yourself in a happier zone.

Fair enough. The question I was trying to respond to was "Can Calvin play better?" I haven't watched them enough to know, but it's hard for me to imagine them pasting Hope much worse than that.

As for Snikkers, I have no idea whether last night was a good or a poor representation of his game. My claim was simply that he impressed me very much, and the things he did that impressed me wouldn't be reflected on a stat sheet. Indeed, I think it a mark of a good player when they can significantly affect the outcome of a game without big stats. If last night was a poor representation of his game, then I am, as a Hope fan, decidedly not in a happy place. 

[goodknight]

I completely agree that it is a mark of an exceptional player when they impact a game without exceptional stats.  Krombeen, for example, had a significant bearing on last night's game, despite not having the offensive statistics to support it. 
It's my opinion that the Knights can play better than they did last night.  Whether Calvin can do so against Hope on Jan. 29 or some future date this year remains, of course, to be seen.
For now, I'll be delighted if they play at least as well against K College on Saturday. 

[KnightSlappy]

I think there's also an important distinction between 'playing better' and field goal percentage. To me, the idea of playing better is more about defense, rebounding intensity, positioning, shot selection, and decision making (among others). Whether or not shots actually go in is a different matter (or, at least, a somewhat different matter) entirely.

[oldknight]

It's high risk mediation of the Middle East variety to get in the middle of an internecine dispute of mutual bloodlines--especially among those of the Frisian variety--but with Richard Holbrooke no longer available let me give mediation a try. I did not understand HC's compliments of Snikker's play to be a claim that we saw Tom at his best. I think HC was trying to look beyond the box score and argue that Hope's opportunities were impacted negatively-and Calvin's positively--by Snikker's ability to control play and place pressure on Hope on both sides of the ball.

I understand GK to argue that we didn't see Snikkers at anything close to his best as demonstrated by an off-shooting night and with his other measurable statistics being rather pedestrian. To me GK implies that when Tom is more "into" the game he can be a dominating player at the D3 level--as he demonstrated in the Carthage game when Snikkers went off for 33 and 12.

Since both argue their points from somewhat different perspectives I think it's possible to reconcile them. Like his sister often does, I believe Tom did impact the game in favor of his team even without great statistics by forcing his opponent to account for his presence at both ends. Like Carrie he is an underrated defender who clears space for teammates allowing others to make plays. He's a magnificent athlete in transition. You can be sure Matt Neil spent a fair amount of time preparing his team for handling an obviously premier talent who has the ball placed in his hands a lot and who creates action on offense that is tough to defend.

On the other hand, Tom needs to remain focused for the full 40 and make consistently better decisions with the ball--when to shoot when to penetrate and when to pass. When Snikkers does that he gets better shots and looks like one of the best players in the conference, and potentially the MVP one day. In summary, Calvin can play better if Snikkers matures into a consistently reliable decision maker. That's probably not a comforting thought for you Hope fans but you guys got Carrie so quit yer bitchin.'

[HopeConvert]

I hope this mediation doesn't come attached with billable hours.

I certainly didn't mean to gainsay in any way GK's judgment. He's a keen observer of basketball, and in a much better position to comment on Calvin's team than am I. His post provoked some questions in me that seemed worth exploring. To wit:

• What is a team's "potential"? Clearly we can imagine a universe where a team plays a perfect game, and I suppose any particular game can be measured against that standard. GK thinks there is quite a bit of room yet between Calvin's performance Wednesday and the Ideal. If this is true, it's bad news for the rest of the league.
• How do we assess the relationship between individual performances and collective performance? If we concede that Snikkers, Powell, Brink and others could have had better individual games, does it necessarily follow, then, that Calvin as a team would perform better? Logic would seem to dictate so, but I'm not convinced that is the case, and this is what my comment was getting at. Certain key players could have been statistically better, but would that have made the team better in the aggregate? As an aggregate performance, I find it unlikely that Calvin will shoot or rebound like that on a consistent basis - and if they do, they will make a deep tourney run. Conversely, they set a season-high for turnovers, and that is something they could control and in the process improve themselves. So let's say they have 7 less turnovers and get 7 more shots (which would match the 67 they got against Carthage), and shooting percentage and rebounding remain constant, then clearly Calvin would be significantly improved in terms of offensive efficiency.
• I'm not sure what to make of Calvin's defensive performance, and here GK is clearly in a position to know better. The 81 points Hope scored would have won many of these contests, that is for sure. But Hope looked out of sync to me all night. How much of that was due to Calvin's efforts, how much to Krombeen's foul trouble (and speaking of which, I will never understand why coaches feel compelled to sit players with foul trouble; if he fouls out, he fouls out - he's on the bench either way), and how much to problems internal to Hope's current state, I can't say. Hope didn't shoot the 3 well, or rebound well. I suspect Calvin had a lot to do with that.
• OK has said better than I the impact Snikkers had on the game. I thought he made his teammates better on both ends of the floor, which is why I'm not convinced that an improvement in his statistics would lead to aggregate improvement. That said, if he, as GK and OK both indicate, is capable of playing much better, regardless of what the box score says, then that too would auger badly for the rest of the league. I did note, however, that three of his misses were rebounded by Calvin and put back. He drives, draws the defense, and even if he misses he creates offensive rebounds opportunities.

I'd be loathe to say that Calvin couldn't improve. Rare is the team that has reached perfection. But in the nexus between potential and actualization, I thought Calvin flourished quite fully Wednesday night; but I defer to my cuz, who has a much greater comparative basis for judgment on this matter than I do.

OK: is it so wrong to want to control the Snikkers market?

[pointlem]

[/list]
I will never understand why coaches feel compelled to sit players with foul trouble; if he fouls out, he fouls out - he's on the bench either way

Good question, Hope Convert (and great repartee with OK and GK).  FYI, there is some interesting cognitive science that shows (to open a can of worms) another cognitive illusion akin to the hot hand illusion.  After a series of events, each of which is equally determinative of the final outcome, people misperceive the final events as being more determinative.  Thus in basketball, even if every minute and every basket counts the same, fans and coaches after a close game will see the last points scored as somehow more important to the outcome than, say, a basket scored with 6 minutes left in the first half.

And so it is that coaches will bench a star player with two fouls for the rest of the half (for more than just a rest), preferring to ensure that the player  is available at the game's end--rather than to maximize the player's minutes and total game contribution.  They'd rather have said player play 22 minutes and be available "when the game is on the line" than to play 30 minutes but foul out with five minutes left.

But as we saw on Wednesday night, games are often won and lost before the last minutes, as every minute and point counts the same.  (Please note: this is not directed at any particular coach.  I like Matt Neil and his coaching, and I suspect most fans and fellow coaches agree with the save-your-player-for-the-end philosophy.)

[HopeConvert]

[/list]
I will never understand why coaches feel compelled to sit players with foul trouble; if he fouls out, he fouls out - he's on the bench either way

Good question, Hope Convert (and great repartee with OK and GK).  FYI, there is some interesting cognitive science that shows (to open a can of worms) another cognitive illusion akin to the hot hand illusion.  After a series of events, each of which is equally determinative of the final outcome, people misperceive the final events as being more determinative.  Thus in basketball, even if every minute and every basket counts the same, fans and coaches after a close game will see the last points scored as somehow more important to the outcome than, say, a basket scored with 6 minutes left in the first half.

And so it is that coaches will bench a star player with two fouls for the rest of the half (for more than just a rest), preferring to ensure that the player  is available at the game's end--rather than to maximize the player's minutes and total game contribution.  They'd rather have said player play 22 minutes and be available "when the game is on the line" than to play 30 minutes but foul out with five minutes left.

But as we saw on Wednesday night, games are often won and lost before the last minutes, as every minute and point counts the same.  (Please note: this is not directed at any particular coach.  I like Matt Neil and his coaching, and I suspect most fans and fellow coaches agree with the save-your-player-for-the-end philosophy.)

Amen. All points, all minutes, are created equal. I really don't care if a guy fouls out, but I'd hate to lose a game when he still has some gas left in the tank.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Also, I'm not sure 2 of the 3 officials have ever worked a Hope/Calvin game, might have to look into that.  But they are human too and get caught up in the excitement just as much as the fans who want to see things with their colored glasses on.

Found the answer rather quickly, all 3 officials worked last years first MIAA Hope/Calvin game at Calvin.

http://www.miaa.org/mbb/stats/0910/caho0106.htm

So is this an even more biased situation than Kooiker?  After all it is an entire 3 man crew, completely and solely responsible for Hope opening the MIAA 0-1 for the last 2 years.                 

[Happy Calvin Guy]

[/list]
I will never understand why coaches feel compelled to sit players with foul trouble; if he fouls out, he fouls out - he's on the bench either way

Good question, Hope Convert (and great repartee with OK and GK).  FYI, there is some interesting cognitive science that shows (to open a can of worms) another cognitive illusion akin to the hot hand illusion.  After a series of events, each of which is equally determinative of the final outcome, people misperceive the final events as being more determinative.  Thus in basketball, even if every minute and every basket counts the same, fans and coaches after a close game will see the last points scored as somehow more important to the outcome than, say, a basket scored with 6 minutes left in the first half.

And so it is that coaches will bench a star player with two fouls for the rest of the half (for more than just a rest), preferring to ensure that the player  is available at the game's end--rather than to maximize the player's minutes and total game contribution.  They'd rather have said player play 22 minutes and be available "when the game is on the line" than to play 30 minutes but foul out with five minutes left.

But as we saw on Wednesday night, games are often won and lost before the last minutes, as every minute and point counts the same.  (Please note: this is not directed at any particular coach.  I like Matt Neil and his coaching, and I suspect most fans and fellow coaches agree with the save-your-player-for-the-end philosophy.)

Amen. All points, all minutes, are created equal. I really don't care if a guy fouls out, but I'd hate to lose a game when he still has some gas left in the tank.

Either way, if one of your key players is in foul trouble I'd recommend not assigning him to guard Brad Schnyders.

[ziggy]

Wednesday's win for Calvin is an encouraging sign that their conference season could end quite well but it guarantees nothing. A quick glance at the schedule tells me the Knights need to really take care of business in the first MIAA rotation if they want to host another MIAA tournament.

With the Hope road game out of the way Calvin's biggest first half worries are Olivet and Albion, both of which are at home. Stumbling through the rest of the first half would spell trouble as the second half schedule gets tougher based on where games will be played.

Hope's schedule is just the opposite. They face road games at Olivet and Albion in the first half. Their job will be to keep it close in the standings to take advantage of a more favorable second half schedule.

Olivet and Albion, therefore, have more balanced schedules. Albion has a leg up on Olivet by virtue of their road victory over the Comets on Wednesday.

Massey Says (with appropriate rounding):
1. Calvin 11-3
2. Hope 10-4
3. Albion 9-5
4. Olivet 8-6
5t. Trine 5-9
5t. Adrian 5-9
7t. Alma 3-11
7t. Kalamazoo 3-11

[realist]

Using hindsight, and available technical tools I would submit that the following portion was the key point in the game.

'GOOD! 3 PTR by Logan Neil                       12:39  56-58  V 2
ASSIST by Colton Overway                        12:39
                                               12:30              TIMEOUT TEAM
                                               12:30              SUB IN : Danny Rodts
                                               12:30              SUB OUT: Tom Snikkers
                                               12:16  56-60  V 4  GOOD! JUMPER by Bryan Powell
MISSED JUMPER by Colton Overway                 11:58              BLOCK by Tyler Kruis
                                               11:57              REBOUND (DEF) by Brad Schnyders
                                               11:54  56-62  V 6  GOOD! LAYUP by Bryan Powell [FB/PNT]
                                               11:54              ASSIST by Brad Schnyders
                                               11:52              SUB IN : Tom Snikkers
                                               11:52              SUB OUT: Brian Haverdink
MISSED JUMPER by Adam Dickerson                 11:37              REBOUND (DEF) by Tyler Kruis
                                               11:22  56-65  V 9  GOOD! 3 PTR by Danny Rodts
                                               11:22              ASSIST by Tyler Kruis
TIMEOUT 30sec                                   10:55

Logan Neil had just nailed a 3, and KVS takes a time out.   Calvin scores 7 quick points, and Neil calls a time out.  Hope mamages to get the lead back to 7 several times, but the decisivie points had been scored.

[KnightSlappy]

According to win probability charts (like this one I found online: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pIIiFZQN7OV_MPHRkeO17Ug#gid=0) Calvin went from a win probability of about 58% to about 87% in just over a minute.

Key sequence indeed.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

Using hindsight, and available technical tools I would submit that the following portion was the key point in the game.

'GOOD! 3 PTR by Logan Neil                       12:39  56-58  V 2
ASSIST by Colton Overway                        12:39
                                               12:30              TIMEOUT TEAM
                                               12:30              SUB IN : Danny Rodts
                                               12:30              SUB OUT: Tom Snikkers
                                               12:16  56-60  V 4  GOOD! JUMPER by Bryan Powell
MISSED JUMPER by Colton Overway                 11:58              BLOCK by Tyler Kruis
                                               11:57              REBOUND (DEF) by Brad Schnyders
                                               11:54  56-62  V 6  GOOD! LAYUP by Bryan Powell [FB/PNT]
                                               11:54              ASSIST by Brad Schnyders
                                               11:52              SUB IN : Tom Snikkers
                                               11:52              SUB OUT: Brian Haverdink
MISSED JUMPER by Adam Dickerson                 11:37              REBOUND (DEF) by Tyler Kruis
                                               11:22  56-65  V 9  GOOD! 3 PTR by Danny Rodts
                                               11:22              ASSIST by Tyler Kruis
TIMEOUT 30sec                                   10:55

Logan Neil had just nailed a 3, and KVS takes a time out.   Calvin scores 7 quick points, and Neil calls a time out.  Hope mamages to get the lead back to 7 several times, but the decisivie points had been scored.

Note that future all-MIAA big man Tyler Kruis had a block, a rebound, and an assist on three separate plays in this short sequence.

[realist]

According to win probability charts (like this one I found online: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pIIiFZQN7OV_MPHRkeO17Ug#gid=0) Calvin went from a win probability of about 58% to about 87% in just over a minute.

Key sequence indeed.

Thanks.  I guess I was just looking at it very subjectively, and over this time frame Calvin went from "hoping" they could win to intuitively knowing they could handle anything Hope was able to throw at them. 
IMO Hope did not play a bad game.  They had battled back from deficits, and had Calvin on the ropes.  Take the above sequence out or have Overway know what Kruis could do physically (block his shot), and the game might have come out quite differently.   In 4 seconds everything changed. 

[sac]

Take a little timeout from the collective euphoria to admire this shot......

http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/blog/prep_rally/post/Guard-hits-amazing-back-to-basket-mid-court-sh?urn=highschool-304209