NESCAC 2010

[Becks]

Here's my post from last year on the 2-1-0 v 3-1-0 topic:

The 2-1-0 systems was the original system.  The 3-1-0 system was apparently adopted in England in 1981 to try to encourage teams to go for a win instead of playing for a tie, in order to make games more entertaining for spectators.  The 3-1-0 system did not become commonplace worldwide until after it was for the World Cup in 1994 and was not adopted by MLS until 2000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_points_for_a_win

Personally, I think the 2-1-0 system does a much better job of ranking teams based on their relative strengths.  It seems pretty obvious that a tie is halfway between a win and a loss, and it is odd to not treat it as such. I would say that a team that ties all of its games is better than a team that loses 2/3ds of its games, but with a 3-1-0 system they are viewed as the same.

The inequity of a 3-1-0 system really comes up when teams play unequal numbers of games and you have to use winning percentage rather than points to rank teams.  For example, with a 3-1-0 system, Team A that goes 4-6-0 would be ranked above Team B that goes 4-6-1, when common sense would suggest that a tie would be a better-than-average result for Team A.  Perhaps for this reason, when comparing teams that play an unequal number of games and winning percentages are used, the 2-1-0 system is generally still used.  From what I can tell, the NCAA still uses 2-1-0 in determining winning percentages when calculating the RPIs that are used to selected teams for the tournament.  Also note that even leagues that use a 3-1-0 pts system, still seem to use 2-1-0 in calculating the winning percentages in the league tables (which seems kind of odd).  See, eg, the Big East table, where UConn is 5-5-1, 16 pts, but a .500 win percentage (with a 3-1-0 system, it would have a .485 winning percentage).

Note that NESCAC ranks by winning percentage rather than points. One reason may be that the league does not seem to require that teams play their full schedule if, because of bad weather or other problems, it would be difficult to do so.  Thus some teams may end up playing a different number of games than others.  This happened back in 2006, when the last league games of the season were scheduled for the day before the first day of the league playoffs (bad idea). There was heavy rain on Saturday and 2 of the games (Williams-Amherst and Colby-Bates) were cancelled. That meant Bowdoin finished 4-4-1 and Bates finished 4-4-0.  In a 3-1-0 system, Bates would have been the 6th seed and Bowdoin the 7th seed.  However, since the 2-1-0 system was used, they both finished with a 500 winning percentage, which meant that Bowdoin was seeded 6th and Bates 7th as a result of Bowdoin's head to head win over Bates. (Turned out not to help Bowdoin, however, as they lost to Middlebury in the 1st round, while Bates upset Tufts.)

[Becks]

According to the Wiki article on the topic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_points_for_a_win (amazing what people write wiki articles about), the evidence is less than pursuasive that going to 3-1-0 has any effect on play:

"The number of matches finishing in a draw has not been affected in England by the change to three-points-for-a-win."

I think the rule change will have little (if any) effect on how NESCAC teams play.  Under both systems, the team that thinks it is better is going to keep pushing for the win and will not be happy with a tie, and the team that thinks it is weaker is going to play defensively, try to hold on, hope for a goal off of a quick counterattack (but without risking pushing too many players forward), but be willing to settle for the tie.  Even if a team were inclined to and able to adjust their play based on the scoring system, a top NESCAC team is still not going to change the way it plays, since NCAA selections are still based on 2-1-0.

Per my prior post, I personally think the 3-1-0 is a less equitable scoring system than the 2-1-0. (Is a team that beats team A and loses to team B really better than a team that ties both team A and team B? Should be ranked the same in my book.)  As the NESCAC release indicates, the change is just about conforming to the scoring system that most other soccer leagues use.  Chock one up for conformity.

[Becks]

Predictions for Sat, Sept 11 – Sun, Sept 12 games:

The season gets off to a fast start with Amherst, Bates, Williams and Conn all playing back-to-back league games on Saturday and Sunday, and Middlebury playing a home game on Saturday followed by a tough road game at Wheaton on Sunday.

Sat, Sept 11

Colby @ Trinity – Preseason power ranking #9 @ #4.  Last year, Colby and Trinity tied 0-0 at Colby.  This year, Trinity should be a bit better and Colby a bit worse, plus game is at Trinity.  Predicted result:  Trinity 2-0 Colby.

Bates @ Conn – Preseason power ranking #8 @ #10.  Last year, Bates beat Conn 3-1 at Bates.  This year, Bates should be better and Conn worse, but game is at Conn.  A big first game for both teams for making it to the NESCAC tournament.  Predicted result:  Bates 3-1 Conn.

Amherst @ Bowdoin – Preseason power ranking #2 @ #5 – Last year, Amherst beat Bowdoin 3-0 at Amherst.  This year, Amherst should be a bit better but Bowdoin may have improved more.  Plus game is at Bowdoin.  Should be a competitive game, but I expect Amherst to pull it out.  Predicted result:  Amherst 2-1 Bowdoin.

Williams @ Wesleyan – Preseason power ranking #1 @ #7.  Last year, Williams beat Wesleyan 5-0 at Williams.  This year, Williams should be a bit better and Wesleyan about the same, but game is at Wesleyan.  In recent years, Williams has come out of the gates firing.  In 2009, Williams scored 3 or more in each of their first 8 games and let in only 1 goal.  Predicted result:  Williams 3-0 Wesleyan.

Middlebury @ Tufts – Preseason power ranking #3 @ #6.  Last year, Middlebury beat Tufts 2-1 at Middlebury.  This year, both Middlebury and Tufts should be weaker but the game is at Tufts.  Should be a good competitive game.  Predicted result: Middlebury 1-1 Tufts.

Sun, Sept 13

Amherst @ Bates – Preseason power ranking #2 @ #8.  Last year, Amherst beat Bates 2-0 at Amherst.  This year, Amherst should be a bit better but Bates may have improved more.  Plus game is at Bates.  Both teams are playing back-to-back games:  Amherst two in a row on the road in Maine and Bates away at Conn and then home.  If Amherst is overnighting in Maine, they have the easier travel for the Sunday game but Bates still has the home advantage.  Predicted result:  Amherst 2-0 Bates.

Williams @ Conn – Preseason power ranking #1 @ #10.  Last year, Williams beat Conn 5-0 at Williams.  This year, Williams should be a bit better and Conn worse.  But game is at Conn. Williams is playing back-to-back away games in Connecticut, while Conn is playing back-to-back home games.  I think both teams may have a hard time getting up for this one.  Predicted Result:  Williams 3-0 Conn.

Middlebury @ Wheaton – A big game for early season regional rankings.  Last year, Middlebury beat Wheaton 2-1 at Middlebury.  Box score indicated a very even game with few shots by either team.  This year, Middlebury lost 6 starters, while Wheaton lost only 2.  Plus game is at Wheaton, and Wheaton will have already played 4 games to Middlebury's 1.  Predicted result: Wheaton 2-1 Middlebury.

[amh63]

Becks,
your writeups/assessements/predictions have been most informative.  Your top dog selection has its 2010 preview on the Williams website as of today.

[Becks]

Bowdoin's updated 2010 roster shows some interesting changes from their preliminary 2010 roster that I based by pre-season evaluation on:

Two 2009 starters who would be juniors this year are not on the roster.  That means Bowdoin has lost 4 starters rather than 2.  In addition, Silva is not listed.  Together, that changes my expected change in GD from last year from +4 to -2 and, pending review of the final 2010 rosters for other teams, drops them from #5 in the preseason power rankings to a tie with Wesleyan at #7.

[Becks]

Middlebury's 2010 roster shows, per machine's comment, that 2 players have returned as seniors who were starters in 2008 but did not play in 2009 (Gabriella Curbelo-Zeidman and Nora Tomlinson-Weintraub).  (Apparently Coach Kim rescinded his one-year ban on players with multicultural, hyphenated last names. ) Obviously a plus for Middlebury, but hard to tell whether they should be treated as returning starters after a year off.  I'll give them half credit, which changes my expected change in GD from last year for Middlebury from -4 to -3 but does not change their #3 ranking in the preseason power rankings.

[pcc]

Conn Coll  posted their 2010 roster, 24 players...11 frosh... Becks you'll just have to dig deeper and find out HS and Club performances so you can establish who are the impact rookies amongst  the NESCAC programs!

[Becks]

Becks you'll just have to dig deeper and find out HS and Club performances so you can establish who are the impact rookies amongst  the NESCAC programs!

Thanks for the suggestion, pcc!    Actually I'd be tempted to do it if all the schools listed their frosh recruits earlier in the summer.  Not enough time now with the games starting, and in a few days we'll start to get an idea who the impact players are from actual game performance anyway.

[Giggs]

Folks, enjoy the season, and glad to see the board is active, and Becks you are still providing valuable and fun posts!

[Dfense1]

Becks,

If you were really tempted to do that analysis on the potential impact of First Years before Saturday, perhaps you could start with Amherst and Williams. 

They are the only programs to identify player club teams which may yield higher quality perspective than the high school affiliations. And only 14 frosh between them.

[Becks]

If you were really tempted

I think I'll pass, but feel free to jump in.  

[Dfense1]

No temptations here...thanks. 

[pcc]

Hey, I know Becks is the maestro, but I spotted this nice preview of Wes in my hometown paper...

to the Press

MIDDLETOWN — After posting a solid 8-6-1 mark in 2009, a season which included a best-ever 4-5 record vs. NESCAC foes, Wesleyan women's soccer has 16 of the 22 players who saw action a year ago back for the 2010 season.

Led by co-captains Cora Lautze and Kaitlin Ashley, this experienced squad will be looking to reach the coveted 10-win plateau for the first time since 1994. In that year, Wesleyan posted a program-best 12-4-1 record.

Wesleyan had a lot to be proud of on the women's soccer pitch in 2009 as the Cards set a school record for shutouts in a season with seven.

Wesleyan held four other opponents to a lone goal as the team's goals-against average for the year was an outstanding 0.98.

Wesleyan outscored its opponents by a 28-15 margin. It was the first time since '94 that the Cards put more balls in the back of the net than its rivals and the goal-against mark also was a standard over the last 15 years.

Among the Cardinals' top returnees is NESCAC Rookie of the Year and second-team all-NESCAC choice Laura Kurash.

Despite playing just eight games in 2009 due to illness, Kurash led the squad in scoring with six goals and three assists for 15 points.

She established a school record for points in a game with 10 (four goals, two assists) in a 7-0 win at Smith. Also among the team's top scorers back from a year ago are Dasha Battelle (5-4-14), Kat Ellis-Ferrara (6-1-13) and Kaylin Berger (2-3-7).

Back after starting all 15 games a year ago are Lautze, Anna Crystal, Emma Nitzberg and Jen Brewer.

Mikaela Curtin started eight of 15 contests a year ago while others who saw action consistently in the field include Hannah Stuckey, Maddy Harrington, Hillary Biggs, and Gemma Doll-Grossman.

The Cardinals have both goalies back who handled all the team's minutes in 2009. Clare Colton started all seven games she played before being sidelined by injury.

Kate Connolly-Smithwick, who played in five of the opening seven games, started the final eight contests. Both had solid numbers as Colton went 3-2 with a 0.89 GAA and .778 save percentage. Connolly-Smithwick was 5-4-1 behind a 1.02 GAA and .880 save percentage.

Wesleyan also welcomes 10 newcomers to the squad. With six freshmen contributing so diligently to the Cardinals' fortunes in 2009, similar support is expected from the new batch of players in 2010.

Wesleyan has the enviable task of opening the year at home Saturday against Little Three rival Williams.

The Ephs, who captured the NESCAC tournament title last season, lost just one game in 2009, that in the NCAA Division III tournament sectional semi-finals. Williams handed the Cardinals a 5-0 setback in 2009 and have gone undefeated vs. Wesleyan the last 27 contests (26-0-1).

Twelve of those 26 defeats vs. Williams have come by just one goal, most recently in 2007, the last time the teams met in Middletown

[JustAFan]

The Tufts Daily's season preview is now up at http://www.tuftsdaily.com/sports/women-s-soccer-season-preview-aspirations-high-for-nescac-championship-1.2323521.

The Jumbos brought in 10 freshmen, several of whom are expected to start, including in goal.

[pcc]

Becks was wrong abot the Wes score today! He must be happy!