MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Knightmare]

Attendance of 4680 marks a Van Noord Arena record (I believe). Is this the official basketball capacity?

There seemed to be a few fans wearing their empty seat costumes on Saturday afternoon,  but maybe attendance is calculated on ticket sales instead of turnstile count.

I'll take this opportunity to again say how impressed I continue to be with the Dew Crew.  Thanks for showing us all what great, spirited, loud, organized, POSITIVE fans are all about.  The most dirisive things we heard all day were the good natured "Carrie's better" chant towards Tom, and one instance of Air-ball.  The Dark Knights seemed on the other hand were not effective in generating energy for the Calvin student section at all, and the little things they did seemed to be just trying to poke fun of or provoke Hope.  

I'm going to echo HCG's Dew Crew comments.  I'm very disappointed to have to say (and I'm a Calvin Alum) that the Dew Crew is FAR AND AWAY better than Calvin's student section on a near constant basis.  It is disheartening to constantly see the Calvin student section standing stationary and silent as if they were just background crowd movie extras, even during the 1st half with an 18-pt. Calvin lead.  When watching that game on TV I will say that if all you did is listened to the audio and didn't look at the video for a second you would've thought that Hope was playing a home game based on crowd noise and interaction.  Calvin further compounds the problem by coming up with some new gimmick every few years that becomes comical and falls flat, aka the new "Dark Knights" club.  The name picked is great but they have failed miserably in execution.

So congratulations to Hope on their win saturday as these are two pretty even bball teams and also a huge pat on the back to the Dew Crew where the comparison isn't even close as they have Calvin's student section  severely out-classed.

[sac]

I wasn't going to venture down this path but....I was really wondering what the purpose of the 'Dark Knights' was/is.  To me it appeared to be either

A)  an opportunity for a few of them to mock the Hope cheerleaders once that I could see

B)  an easy way for 9 guys/gals to guarantee themselves front row seats for every home game.

otherwise I didn't see the point or purpose.  Barely one instance of back and forth banter the whole game and I'm not sure they had anything to do with that.

also please don't try to dance ever again, but thanks for the laugh.

[sac]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer.  

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it.  

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

[sac]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer. 

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it. 

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

[calvin_grad]

Agree with previous posters.  As a Calvin alum, the "Dark Knights" are a complete embarrassment.  That idea needs to be retired ASAP.   

[hoopdreams]

I'm not a follower of mlive but went there to look at additional photos of the game.  I'm pretty sure 1 pic is of the phantom blocking foul on Krombeen against Schnyders.  I know that it doesn't show the entire play through completion but it's pretty clear that there was little, if any contact at all.

Were Salo and Powell were exposed as being poor defenders in a half court set off the ball? Were the screens outstanding, and if so, who was setting them because it wasn't a change in plays, just player(s).  Maybe Calvin simply didn't think david would knock those shots down because help defenders ( the person guarding the screener) didn't assist (hedge or switch) in helping out either.

FWIW- I really liked the lineup the last 10 minutes, last 5 especially.  I really like Bowser defending the post player.  Other than Holwerda, he is the "longest"  and definitely the most athletic option (no disrespect to Dickerson and Snuggs).  Krombeen, Overway, Tanis, Neil and Bowser is something to look out for the 2nd time through the league.  Logan can guard the post as well. Remember he guarded Mantel in crunch time last year.

Hope plays, Hope wins!

[KnightSlappy]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer. 

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it. 

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

How much of the change is defense and how much is simple regression to the mean? I'll offer 75-25 in favor of regression (with only witnessing two of the games). That's not to say the 2nd half defense isn't improved, but it isn't actually 33.2% (in 3-pt FG%) better.

[oldknight]

I'll take this opportunity to again say how impressed I continue to be with the Dew Crew.  Thanks for showing us all what great, spirited, loud, organized, POSITIVE fans are all about.  The most dirisive things we heard all day were the good natured "Carrie's better" chant towards Tom, and one instance of Air-ball.  

The Dew Crew does a good job but it's time to retire the "Carrie's better" chant. It's been around since Tom was in high school and was clever and humorous the first couple of times I heard it. Now its a pretty worn cliche'.

Some have commented on the officiating and I agree that the blocking foul on Krombeen (allowing Schnyders to complete a 3 point play) was bogus but overall the game was fairly officiated. Late in the first half Bowser came around a baseline pick set by Dickerson who then proceeded to quite illegally bump the defender (Snikkers) out of bounds thereby freeing up Bowser for a wide open three which he drained. Basically those two plays offset one another.

[Erm Schmigget]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer.  

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it.  

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

How much of the change is defense and how much is simple regression to the mean?

Did you watch the game Saturday?  Hope showed us all (including themselves, I think) what a great defensive team they can be if they play with the kind of intensity needed to defend a good offense.  That was sorely lacking in the first Hope v Calvin matchup this year, and it showed as they got outscored in both halves.  

Numbers don't tell the whole story.  Effort--or lack of it--and other "intangibles" play a role too.

[ziggy]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer.  

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it.  

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

How much of the change is defense and how much is simple regression to the mean?

Did you watch the game Saturday?  Hope showed us all (including themselves, I think) what a great defensive team they can be if they play with the kind of intensity needed to defend a good offense.  That was sorely lacking in the first Hope v Calvin matchup this year, and it showed as they got outscored in both halves.  

Numbers don't tell the whole story.  Effort--or lack of it--and other "intangibles" play a role too.

I think Hope just got hot on defense.

[KnightSlappy]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer. 

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it. 

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

How much of the change is defense and how much is simple regression to the mean?

Did you watch the game Saturday?  Hope showed us all (including themselves, I think) what a great defensive team they can be if they play with the kind of intensity needed to defend a good offense.  That was sorely lacking in the first Hope v Calvin matchup this year, and it showed as they got outscored in both halves. 

Numbers don't tell the whole story.  Effort--or lack of it--and other "intangibles" play a role too.

Right but these intagible efforts probably only explain somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.080 to 0.150 of the 0.332 difference in the percentages.

My point is that the actual difference in the defense probably (definitely) isn't as big as the numbers make it look.

[Erm Schmigget]

I'll take this opportunity to again say how impressed I continue to be with the Dew Crew.  Thanks for showing us all what great, spirited, loud, organized, POSITIVE fans are all about.  The most dirisive things we heard all day were the good natured "Carrie's better" chant towards Tom, and one instance of Air-ball.  

The Dew Crew does a good job but it's time to retire the "Carrie's better" chant. It's been around since Tom was in high school and was clever and humorous the first couple of times I heard it. Now its a pretty worn cliche'.

Some have commented on the officiating and I agree that the blocking foul on Krombeen (allowing Schnyders to complete a 3 point play) was bogus but overall the game was fairly officiated. Late in the first half Bowser came around a baseline pick set by Dickerson who then proceeded to quite illegally bump the defender (Snikkers) out of bounds thereby freeing up Bowser for a wide open three which he drained. Basically those two plays offset one another.

Calvin: "There's no hope!  There's no hope!  There's no hope!"
Worn cliche'.  Since before Tommy was...born.

I'll agree that there will always be calls for or against either team that fans will call bad.  I missed the play involving Dickerson and Snikkers that you mention, but I think if we're honest, there were only three people who missed the Schnyders/Krombeen play.  That one was wide open, with no other players around to distract the view.  I'm assuming that's why it's being brought up by some here.  I was upset by it when it happened, but I've been over it since a few minutes later.  Looking back, it's not inaccurate to say the game was called fairly...both teams got crap calls and no-calls.  

[Flying Dutch Fan]

FWIW - my take on this Hope team is that they are in some ways like a boxer. 

In the early rounds (aka first half) they attack cautiously while getting a feel for how their opponent will be attacking them.  Sure, they get hit in the process, but this team can take a punch, and then learn from it. 

In the later rounds (aka second half) they attack with counter-punching, and are able to defend their opponents attacks quite well.  They seem to know what's coming and are ready to defend it.  They also seem to have done a really good job of identifying where their opponent is "weak" and attack it vigorously.

Maybe a bit of a stretch, but I think reasonable.

Interesting way to think about it.  From what I've seen they forget there is a 3 point line, and who the other teams 3 point shooters are and need a reminder at halftime.

They need to get the blood flowing and moving earlier.

Hope's opponents 3 point shooting in league games

First half           40-65   61.5%
Second half      17-60    28.3%

5 of 8 opponents shot over 50% in the first half

....I would say a good number of the 2nd half 3 point attempts come late in games when opponents have tried to catch up.  But I don't think there's a better way to illustrate what a better job Hope does in the 2nd half than this.   My simple observation is just simply tighter defense and better movement.

How much of the change is defense and how much is simple regression to the mean?

Did you watch the game Saturday?  Hope showed us all (including themselves, I think) what a great defensive team they can be if they play with the kind of intensity needed to defend a good offense.  That was sorely lacking in the first Hope v Calvin matchup this year, and it showed as they got outscored in both halves. 

Numbers don't tell the whole story.  Effort--or lack of it--and other "intangibles" play a role too.

Right but these intagible efforts probably only explain somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.080 to 0.150 of the 0.332 difference in the percentages.

My point is that the actual difference in the defense probably (definitely) isn't as big as the numbers make it look.

Guess everyone just goes COLD against Hope in the 2nd half.

[KnightSlappy]

And while we're speaking of hot and cold.... again... I remember 5 examples of 3-pt shots by Calvin players who could have been considered "hot".

Snikkers missed.
Powell missed.
Salo made one.
Schuster made one.
Salo had one blocked.

[Erm Schmigget]

Right but these intagible efforts probably only explain somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.080 to 0.150 of the 0.332 difference in the percentages.

My point is that the actual difference in the defense probably (definitely) isn't as big as the numbers make it look.

Just comparing the first Hope v Calvin game to the second, and having experienced both from a first-person perspective, it is not wrong to say that Hope's defense was a major factor in its absence (first 3 halves) and its presence (4th half).  Not all outcomes can be explained away with statistics, I'm sorry.  To say that one game's outcome was due to a "simple regression to a mean" as you put it.  Ask any of the coaches or players and I bet they would not point to a simple regression to the mean as the main difference in these two games.

Sports are not driven by statistics alone.  Unless I'm misinterpreting the intent of your posts, you seem to be missing the point of the contest.  I will put forth my efforts against yours and we will see who comes out the victor.  The statistics that come out of that are the product, not the engine.  They are fluid, changing with every contest.  After enough contests you might be more able to recognize which of us is overall better than the other, but we will still compete again because the outcome the next time around is still uncertain.  Statistics point to general truths and help us understand them, but they do not completely define them.  Why is one team often considered better than the other?  Because their stats would indicate so.  But when the statistical underdog emerges as the victor, we see there is more to the contest than numbers.  You have to actually make the effort.