MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[neilrocks]

2nd...

I disagree Sac that Trine is in a better position than Adrian.  Mostly, it's because Trine has to play Hope and Calvin still AND, I simply think Adrian is better and will beat Trine for a 2nd time when they play each other again.  Adrian could lose to a team other than Hope, but so could Trine.  I see Trine losing 3 games in those and Adrian loses 2.

I think it is very important that this happen if Adrian wants to make it to the NCAA playoffs because the 3 seed would get them a better shot because they could avoid Calvin until the finals.  I know this is both early and presumptious, but, such is life...and sports.

This is also not a knock on Hope.  I still think they are right behind Calvin (and as Hope fans have stated, they believe this is a lesser Hope team than their past teams), but as an Adrian fan and someone looking at results, I rather play Hope in the semi's than Calvin (where Adrian would still be an underdog to Hope).  Also, I think just losing 2 games and getting to the MIAA finals would be enough to get Adrian there.  Sorry, I don't have the Massey or RPI or whatever math you guys use.  But, I think it would happen.

Go Bulldogs!

Interesting perspective and I understand your feelings and logic.  However, it got me thinking about Pool C and what the chances are for Hope and Adrian (assuming Calvin wins the MIAA tourney, which they will be the favorite to do).

I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play.  However, I looked at just the big picture and I think it is interesting and telling.

Hope is 10-8 (exclude College of The Faith), their 10 wins come from opponents whose overall record is 98-96, .505. Their 8 losses come from opponents whose overall record is 111-49, .694.  For this discussion, I view a quality win for Hope as Aurora (15-5) and Adrian (15-4).

Adrian is 15-4, their 15 wins come from opponents whose overall record is 114-187, .379.  Their 4 losses come from opponents whose overall record is 52-23, .693.  For this discussion, I view a quality win for Adrian as Wooster.

Throw out the Trine wins for each, the Olivet losses for each.

I believe, despite 4 of Hope's losses coming to Calvin, North Central, Wheaton and Ill Wesleyan (all teams who most likely will make the tourney), they stand a tough road getting in, without the MIAA tourney trophy.

I believe, based on this it will be next to impossible for Adrian to get in, unless they win the MIAA tourney.  I don't see how they can garner enough evidence, unless they win out.

My opinion only, but I think, we as MIAA fans, better HOPE, someone besides Calvin wins the MIAA tourney, if we HOPE to have two dancing.

Ah yes, the old NCAA tournament argument built around "I think" - a yearly tradition.

Wow, didn't "think" on a discussion board you were prohibited from posting your thoughts with at least your backup for it.

A well-educated and thoughtful response, ZIGGY.  (my take is your a calvin fan, don't know why I would "think" that)

[neilrocks]

Interesting perspective and I understand your feelings and logic.  However, it got me thinking about Pool C and what the chances are for Hope and Adrian (assuming Calvin wins the MIAA tourney, which they will be the favorite to do).

I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play.  However, I looked at just the big picture and I think it is interesting and telling.

Hope is 10-8 (exclude College of The Faith), their 10 wins come from opponents whose overall record is 98-96, .505. Their 8 losses come from opponents whose overall record is 111-49, .694.  For this discussion, I view a quality win for Hope as Aurora (15-5) and Adrian (15-4).

Adrian is 15-4, their 15 wins come from opponents whose overall record is 114-187, .379.  Their 4 losses come from opponents whose overall record is 52-23, .693.  For this discussion, I view a quality win for Adrian as Wooster.

Throw out the Trine wins for each, the Olivet losses for each.

I believe, despite 4 of Hope's losses coming to Calvin, North Central, Wheaton and Ill Wesleyan (all teams who most likely will make the tourney), they stand a tough road getting in, without the MIAA tourney trophy.

I believe, based on this it will be next to impossible for Adrian to get in, unless they win the MIAA tourney.  I don't see how they can garner enough evidence, unless they win out.

My opinion only, but I think, we as MIAA fans, better HOPE, someone besides Calvin wins the MIAA tourney, if we HOPE to have two dancing.

Adrian is positioned better for a Pool C bid right now because they still have the opportunity to have a .750+ in-region winning percentage, and, unlike Hope, they'll have a win versus a regionally ranked opponent (though Hope will have one more in-region game played versus a regionally ranked opponent).

To have even a decent shot at an at-large bid, either team is probably going to have to go 7-1 (losing only in the MIAA Championship), so Wednesday's winner will have the inside track. I'll go so far as to say if Adrian can run the table up to the MIAA championship game, they'll have an 80-90% chance of getting selected.

It doesn't look like either team would be able to take two more losses and still get in. Though, of the two, Adrian might be able to make this happen. If they lose at Hope on Wednesday and then at Hope in the MIAA semifinal, they'll finish with a .714 in-region winning percentage and maybe a .530ish SOS. That could get them "on the table" in time to be one of the final few selections. It's probably not enough to get in however.

KS, when the committee sits down to review the teams for Pool C.  Do they only have the Div III records, in-region record, conf record, etc in front of them.  So, a Hope loss to Cornerstone or Spring Arbor and an Adrian win versus MI-Dearborn, Law Tech really mean very little or nothing?

Thanks in advance

[KnightSlappy]

KS, when the committee sits down to review the teams for Pool C.  Do they only have the Div III records, in-region record, conf record, etc in front of them.  So, a Hope loss to Cornerstone or Spring Arbor and an Adrian win versus MI-Dearborn, Law Tech really mean very little or nothing?

They have all the information, but in-region D3 play is by far the biggest factor. From last season's championship handbook:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed will
be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
● Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
● Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
[See Appendix C for explanation of OWP and OOWP calculations.]
● In-region head-to-head competition.
● In-region results versus common regional opponents.
● In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All the criteria
listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against out-of-region Division
III and all other opponents including those contests versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA,
NCAA Divisions I and II).
● Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
● Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
● Results versus common non Division III opponents.
● Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
● Overall win-loss percentage.
● Results versus all common opponents.
● Overall DIII strength of schedule.
● Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's win-loss percentage during 25 percent of the season is applicable,
(i.e., end-of-seasn performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval from the championships committee.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the basketball committee.

[Pat Coleman]

All the information is available to them, but they primarily make the decision based on in-region results, then overall Division III results if necessary. I'm not sure a non-Division III game enters the decision-making process very often, unless perhaps it's a common opponent between two teams being discussed.

[neilrocks]

Thanks KS and Pat.

Sure helps with that explaination more than the detailed one ZIGGY provided.

Guess it helps Hope if Calvin, North Central, IWU and Wheaton make the tourney.  But not as much as if Wooster does for Adrian.

Only thing Hope can do to match that is beat Calvin.  Then they probably leap frog Adrian in the criteria scale.

Unless of course Hope beats Adrian head-to-head twice..........................oh well..........................

[ziggy]

Thanks KS and Pat.

Sure helps with that explaination more than the detailed one ZIGGY provided.

Guess it helps Hope if Calvin, North Central, IWU and Wheaton make the tourney.  But not as much as if Wooster does for Adrian.

Only thing Hope can do to match that is beat Calvin.  Then they probably leap frog Adrian in the criteria scale.

Unless of course Hope beats Adrian head-to-head twice..........................oh well..........................

I vastly overrated your comment "I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play". My apologies.

[John Gleich]

KS, when the committee sits down to review the teams for Pool C.  Do they only have the Div III records, in-region record, conf record, etc in front of them.  So, a Hope loss to Cornerstone or Spring Arbor and an Adrian win versus MI-Dearborn, Law Tech really mean very little or nothing?

They have all the information, but in-region D3 play is by far the biggest factor. From last season's championship handbook:

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed will
be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
● Win-loss percentage against regional opponents.
● Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
- Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
- Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
[See Appendix C for explanation of OWP and OOWP calculations.]
● In-region head-to-head competition.
● In-region results versus common regional opponents.
● In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All the criteria
listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against out-of-region Division
III and all other opponents including those contests versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA,
NCAA Divisions I and II).
● Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
● Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
● Results versus common non Division III opponents.
● Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
● Overall win-loss percentage.
● Results versus all common opponents.
● Overall DIII strength of schedule.
● Should a committee find that evaluation of a team's win-loss percentage during 25 percent of the season is applicable,
(i.e., end-of-seasn performance), it may adopt such criteria with approval from the championships committee.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the basketball committee.

It will be interesting to see how/if (though I think they have to) these rules change with the regional rules change for 2014...

[neilrocks]

Thanks KS and Pat.

Sure helps with that explaination more than the detailed one ZIGGY provided.

Guess it helps Hope if Calvin, North Central, IWU and Wheaton make the tourney.  But not as much as if Wooster does for Adrian.

Only thing Hope can do to match that is beat Calvin.  Then they probably leap frog Adrian in the criteria scale.

Unless of course Hope beats Adrian head-to-head twice..........................oh well..........................

I vastly overrated your comment "I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play". My apologies.

Apology accepted.  "comes into play, don't really understand it".  But, not sure the NCAA understands everything they do either.

BTW, thanks if you were the one who docked my karma by 2

[ziggy]

Thanks KS and Pat.

Sure helps with that explaination more than the detailed one ZIGGY provided.

Guess it helps Hope if Calvin, North Central, IWU and Wheaton make the tourney.  But not as much as if Wooster does for Adrian.

Only thing Hope can do to match that is beat Calvin.  Then they probably leap frog Adrian in the criteria scale.

Unless of course Hope beats Adrian head-to-head twice..........................oh well..........................

I vastly overrated your comment "I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play". My apologies.

Apology accepted.  "comes into play, don't really understand it".  But, not sure the NCAA understands everything they do either.

BTW, thanks if you were the one who docked my karma by 2

I'm sure the NCAA understand it all, I just don't think they are consistent in the application across the regional committees. Thankfully Mike DeWitt has already stated a desire to help unify the application of the criteria across the regions.

There is a lot of good and legitimate debate that can be had regarding the ranking/selection process with a fundamental understanding of how it works.

I only docked it by one, I'll have to wait 24 hours to do it again.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

Wow, didn't "think" on a discussion board you were prohibited from posting your thoughts with at least your backup for it.

A well-educated and thoughtful response, ZIGGY.  (my take is your a calvin fan, don't know why I would "think" that)

NeilRocks--There is a fundamental difference between a prediction of a future event, say, a game outcome (a prediction based on analysis, gut feel, of something that hasn't happened yet) and a prediction for NCAA tourney Pool C bids.  The former is really anyone's guess since no one can predict the future, and we are all entitled to our opinions, biases, etc.  However, NCAA Tourney Pool C selections are derived not primarily by opinion or gut feel, or the randomness of a future event, but actually a rigorous set of criteria that the NCAA has pre-defined.  Also, at this point of the season, the majority of the season has been played, so we already have a decent body of data of past results to which we can apply those criteria.

Also, I don't suppose anyone is above it, myself probably most of all, but I don't believe that defensiveness, sarcasm, and snark are the primary trademarks of any MIAA college's alumni--including your school.  I've enjoyed your posts recently, but petty comments usually don't reflect well, and might only reinforce unfair stereotypes.

And to the more experienced posters--patiently reminding us of the NCAA Pool C selection criteria for those of us who aren't totally up to speed might be helpful, especially for newer posters who aren't aware.  I realize this topic has been talked about ad nauseum over the years, but it's not inherently intuitive stuff, and a refresher probably would be useful for the casual fan or recent members of this board.  The link on d3hoops for those interested:  http://www.d3hoops.com/interactive/faq/ncaatournament

Cheers!

[neilrocks]

Thanks KS and Pat.

Sure helps with that explaination more than the detailed one ZIGGY provided.

Guess it helps Hope if Calvin, North Central, IWU and Wheaton make the tourney.  But not as much as if Wooster does for Adrian.

Only thing Hope can do to match that is beat Calvin.  Then they probably leap frog Adrian in the criteria scale.

Unless of course Hope beats Adrian head-to-head twice..........................oh well..........................

I vastly overrated your comment "I know SOS, in-region, all that stuff comes into play". My apologies.

Apology accepted.  "comes into play, don't really understand it".  But, not sure the NCAA understands everything they do either.

BTW, thanks if you were the one who docked my karma by 2

I'm sure the NCAA understand it all, I just don't think they are consistent in the application across the regional committees. Thankfully Mike DeWitt has already stated a desire to help unify the application of the criteria across the regions.

There is a lot of good and legitimate debate that can be had regarding the ranking/selection process with a fundamental understanding of how it works.

I only docked it by one, I'll have to wait 24 hours to do it again.

Funny you.  I see how sincere your apology was.

[neilrocks]

Wow, didn't "think" on a discussion board you were prohibited from posting your thoughts with at least your backup for it.

A well-educated and thoughtful response, ZIGGY.  (my take is your a calvin fan, don't know why I would "think" that)

NeilRocks--There is a fundamental difference between a prediction of a future event, say, a game outcome (a prediction based on analysis, gut feel, of something that hasn't happened yet) and a prediction for NCAA tourney Pool C bids.  The former is really anyone's guess since no one can predict the future, and we are all entitled to our opinions, biases, etc.  However, NCAA Tourney Pool C selections are derived not primarily by opinion or gut feel, or the randomness of a future event, but actually a rigorous set of criteria that the NCAA has pre-defined.  Also, at this point of the season, the majority of the season has been played, so we already have a decent body of data of past results to which we can apply those criteria.

Also, I don't suppose anyone is above it, myself probably most of all, but I don't believe that defensiveness, sarcasm, and snark are the primary trademarks of any MIAA college's alumni--including your school.  I've enjoyed your posts recently, but petty comments usually don't reflect well, and might only reinforce unfair stereotypes.

And to the more experienced posters--patiently reminding us of the NCAA Pool C selection criteria for those of us who aren't totally up to speed might be helpful, especially for newer posters who aren't aware.  I realize this topic has been talked about ad nauseum over the years, but it's not inherently intuitive stuff, and a refresher probably would be useful for the casual fan or recent members of this board.  The link on d3hoops for those interested:  http://www.d3hoops.com/interactive/faq/ncaatournament

Cheers!

Thanks HCG!  Here's to hoping Calvin, Hope and Adrian all make it.

[Adrian Bulldawg Alum]

Wow, didn't "think" on a discussion board you were prohibited from posting your thoughts with at least your backup for it.

A well-educated and thoughtful response, ZIGGY.  (my take is your a calvin fan, don't know why I would "think" that)

NeilRocks--There is a fundamental difference between a prediction of a future event, say, a game outcome (a prediction based on analysis, gut feel, of something that hasn't happened yet) and a prediction for NCAA tourney Pool C bids.  The former is really anyone's guess since no one can predict the future, and we are all entitled to our opinions, biases, etc.  However, NCAA Tourney Pool C selections are derived not primarily by opinion or gut feel, or the randomness of a future event, but actually a rigorous set of criteria that the NCAA has pre-defined.  Also, at this point of the season, the majority of the season has been played, so we already have a decent body of data of past results to which we can apply those criteria.

Also, I don't suppose anyone is above it, myself probably most of all, but I don't believe that defensiveness, sarcasm, and snark are the primary trademarks of any MIAA college's alumni--including your school.  I've enjoyed your posts recently, but petty comments usually don't reflect well, and might only reinforce unfair stereotypes.

And to the more experienced posters--patiently reminding us of the NCAA Pool C selection criteria for those of us who aren't totally up to speed might be helpful, especially for newer posters who aren't aware.  I realize this topic has been talked about ad nauseum over the years, but it's not inherently intuitive stuff, and a refresher probably would be useful for the casual fan or recent members of this board.  The link on d3hoops for those interested:  http://www.d3hoops.com/interactive/faq/ncaatournament

Cheers!

Well said HCG!

I find it a bit lonely here on the boards as an Adrian fan, but nonetheless, I hope people don't mind the bias/perspective/Adrian news that I will mostly provide.

I actually agree with some of Neil's points.  I value strength of schedule more than games vs. teams like Lawrence Tech, but I don't make the rules.  It would be nice to see Michigan play 4 tough non-conference games before the Big 10, but sad fact is that if they lose 2 of those, they wouldn't get to National Title Game, but if they had 4 cupcakes and then ran the table in the Big 10, they could (editor's note: Michigan was not a title contender this year nor will they be next year...they are just my favorite college football team).

I don't know if Hope is better than Adrian this year, but they did beat them once this year, and perennialy, they are (which may be why the mere suggestion of Adrian making the tournament is bothersome to some).  But my original prediction, to me, will hold true if Adrian gets to the MIAA final with only 2 more losses (and that would include a 2nd loss to Hope).

[KnightSlappy]

Calvin stays at #17 in the latest poll, and Adrian hangs onto 4 points as an ORV.

http://d3hoops.com/top25/men/2012-13/week9

[maroonandgold]

quote from SAC 

My halfway write-up
http://scottsbbblog.blogspot.com/2013/01/halfway-grades-and-stuff.htm

Thinking back top SAC's halfway write-up, I thought his conclusions at that point were accurate.  One of the most interesting aspects of his choices was the selection of Brian Powell almost in the first team.  What an unusual choice in choosing someone who in not even a starter!  Saturday's game against Adrian showed how smart that choice was.  The game also showed just how much maturity Powell has demonstrated in taking his non-starting role with starter's minutes and really running with it.  He is possibly more effective coming in and giving a spark to the offense when he inters a game, which he has done consistently.  His ball-handling and shot selection have really progressed from previous years, too.  If he can keep it up, he could even be a first team selection without starting; and that would really be unusual.  Mickey De Vries has really bought into his role as a backup with starter's minutes and seems more valuable every game.