MBB: University Athletic Association

[WUPHF]

I have a rough draft of how the UAA All-Association Team might look, but I was hesitant to post because I have three players from Washington University on the first team. 

The Bears certainly have three of the best players in the league while Emory and Chicago have more depth and balance. 

I also could not figure out what to do with Brandeis and Case Western Reserve and I am probably cheating a player or two from Carnegie Mellon.  Thoughts?

First Team:
Dane McLoughlin, Case Western Reserve
Alex Foster, Emory (Player of the Year)
Michael Florin, Emory (Defensive Player of the Year)
Evan Kupferberg, NYU
Matt Palucki, Washington University
Nick Burt, Washington University
David Fatoki, Washington University

Second Team:
Julien Person, Case Western Reserve
Jordan Smith, Chicago
Alex Voss, Chicago
Will Trawick, Emory
Hakim Harris, NYU
Costas Gontikas, NYU
Sam Borst-Smith, Rochester

Honorable Mention:
Jordan Cooper, Brandeis
Jon Powell, Brandeis
Robinson Vilmont, Brandeis
Davis Rao, Emory
Josh Schattie, Emory
Jack Serbin, Carnegie Mellon
Seth Cordts, Carnegie Mellon
Nate Brooks, Chicago
Waller Perez, Chicago
Tyler Howard, Chicago
Jimmy Holman, Case Western Reserve
Eric Black, Case Western Reserve (Rookie of the Year)
Mack Montague, Rochester
Jared Seltzer, Rochester
Luke Silverman-Lloyd, Washington University

Coaching Staff:
Emory

[deiscanton]

Summary of invites today:

Wash U-- NCAA Pool C bid-- hosts 1st round on Thursday.

Emory hosting a weekend pod in NCAAs.

NYU gets #3 seed in ECAC Metro tourney-- will host Rutgers-Camden on Wednesday.

Carnegie Mellon not invited to ECAC South tourney-- season over.

[WUPHF]

Welcome back to D3boards.com!

I wish NYU had received a bid just to see what they could do in the tournament.  I am not sure if Hakim Harris has a full year of eligibility, but if he does, NYU will be dangerous next season.

I am thrilled to see Washington University get the home game even if a win means a road trip to Rock Island. 

I have not seen every team in the Emory bracket play, but I think the Eagles could go far.

[Gregory Sager]

I have a rough draft of how the UAA All-Association Team might look, but I was hesitant to post because I have three players from Washington University on the first team. 

The Bears certainly have three of the best players in the league while Emory and Chicago have more depth and balance. 

I also could not figure out what to do with Brandeis and Case Western Reserve and I am probably cheating a player or two from Carnegie Mellon.  Thoughts?

Yeah, the same thought I have every year: the UAA puts waaaay too many people on the All-Association team. It's about one step away from the "blue participation ribbons for everybody!" mode of postseason player recognition.

Summary of invites today:

Wash U-- NCAA Pool C bid-- hosts 1st round on Thursday.

Emory hosting a weekend pod in NCAAs.

NYU gets #3 seed in ECAC Metro tourney-- will host Rutgers-Camden on Wednesday.

Carnegie Mellon not invited to ECAC South tourney-- season over.

Good to hear from you again, Allen!

[WUPHF]

Yeah, the same thought I have every year: the UAA puts waaaay too many people on the All-Association team. It's about one step away from the "blue participation ribbons for everybody!" mode of postseason player recognition.

I actually had that thought about the CCIW all conference team which includes more players on three teams than the the UAA has on the first and second teams. 

I would be much more excited to be on the third team than I would to be given an honorable mention.  Honorable mention, in my mind, means one did not make the team, but performed admirably.

[Gregory Sager]

Yeah, the same thought I have every year: the UAA puts waaaay too many people on the All-Association team. It's about one step away from the "blue participation ribbons for everybody!" mode of postseason player recognition.

I actually had that thought about the CCIW all conference team which includes more players on three teams than the the UAA has on the first and second teams. 

I would be much more excited to be on the third team than I would to be given an honorable mention.  Honorable mention, in my mind, means one did not make the team, but performed admirably.

I don't read it that way at all. The way I see it, if you're on the honorable mention list, the league singled you out by naming you to a postseason honor. And that's my whole point: 29 players culled from an eight-team league is far too many.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I just think of the CCIW HM as 'fourth team'.

[WUPHF]

The UAA All-Association Team with 15 players making the two teams and 8 others who did not make the teams, but received honorable mentions.

http://uaasports.info/sports/mbkb/2014-15/files/14-15_MBKB_All-Assoc.pdf

[Gregory Sager]

Looks to me that all three teams (and, thus, all 24 players) are listed under the heading, "2014-15 UAA MEN'S ALL-ASSOCIATION BASKETBALL TEAM." There's two headings on that page, and the rest of the copy is listed under the first heading, "2014-15 UAA Men's Basketball Honors." It seems quite clear by this layout that the nine Honorable Mention players are considered to be part of the All-Association team.

I just think of the CCIW HM as 'fourth team'.

What "CCIW HM," Chuck? You must be thinking of a different league.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Looks to me that all three teams (and, thus, all 24 players) are listed under the heading, "2014-15 UAA MEN'S ALL-ASSOCIATION BASKETBALL TEAM." There's two headings on that page, and the rest of the copy is listed under the first heading, "2014-15 UAA Men's Basketball Honors." It seems quite clear by this layout that the nine Honorable Mention players are considered to be part of the All-Association team.

I just think of the CCIW HM as 'fourth team'.

What "CCIW HM," Chuck? You must be thinking of a different league.

I was recently looking at all-CCIW selections over the years - plenty were HM.  It appears that in 1987 they renamed HM as Third Team (which I had not noticed was previously not there).  The change evidently never penetrated my consciousness, but apparently there never was both a Third Team AND an HM.

[WUPHF]

You knew I did that for you right?  The first rule of thumb in reading my posts is to never take anything I say seriously.

Though seriously, to change the honorable mention designation to a third team is a significant upgrade for the CCIW.  The standard definition of honorable mention is an acknowledgment for someone who did not win an award.

As an aside, I disagree with to the coaches who voted Nick Burt as a member of the second team.  If the voting is based on play in conference, which it was because Hakim Harris is on the first team, I disagree with the inclusion of Jordan Smith over Nick Burt.

I know...apples and oranges...different roles and different positions...I get it.  Maybe I'll explain why I think this way later.

[Gregory Sager]

You knew I did that for you right?  The first rule of thumb in reading my posts is to never take anything I say seriously.

Duly noted for future reference.

Though seriously, to change the honorable mention designation to a third team is a significant upgrade for the CCIW.  The standard definition of honorable mention is an acknowledgment for someone who did not win an award.

I don't think that anyone involved with the CCIW took it that way. The players who were named "honorable mention" in the pre-'87 CCIW all got the same certificates (with different wording, of course) that the first- and second-teamers got. I don't think that they accepted your "standard definition," inasmuch as they did receive an award. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the UAA's honorable mention players receive some sort of an award, too, whether it's a certificate or something else.

Looks to me that all three teams (and, thus, all 24 players) are listed under the heading, "2014-15 UAA MEN'S ALL-ASSOCIATION BASKETBALL TEAM." There's two headings on that page, and the rest of the copy is listed under the first heading, "2014-15 UAA Men's Basketball Honors." It seems quite clear by this layout that the nine Honorable Mention players are considered to be part of the All-Association team.

I just think of the CCIW HM as 'fourth team'.

What "CCIW HM," Chuck? You must be thinking of a different league.

I was recently looking at all-CCIW selections over the years - plenty were HM.  It appears that in 1987 they renamed HM as Third Team (which I had not noticed was previously not there).  The change evidently never penetrated my consciousness, but apparently there never was both a Third Team AND an HM.

Correct. The change for the 1986-87 season was basically nothing more than a shift in nomenclature. The only occasion when the CCIW's 5-5-5 format has been different (aside from the occasional extra player added to the team because of a tied vote, as was the case this season) was the 1971-72 season, when for some unknown reason the league tinkered with the format and had only ten players named to the team. all of whom were considered first-teamers.

[WUPHF]

Duly noted for future reference.

By the way, I would like to point out that both you and I predicted early on that Emory was the class of the UAA.  They were, even if it was not by much.

[WUPHF]

Very surprised to see Emory trailing Whitworth at the half, 40-37, but I doubt the Eagles will lose at home.

[ADL70]

I asked every student I talked to today and though my sample is relatively small and included only one athlete who is not on the basketball team, no one I talked to knew Pi past 3.1415.

I think we would fare better on GPA.

Wait, so I know one more place of pi than the average WUSTL student?  That makes me feel a lot better about myself today.

I can't resist pulling up a 40 year old memorization: 3.1415926535897932384626433.

\\

Happy Pi Day!!!