WBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[iwu70]

RogK, yes, I've thought Shanks might be in the mix too, though I'm not convinced.  Munroe has such great foot speed and decent trey shooting, so I think she's the likely candidate.  Perhaps Sosa will have a try too.  Several of the newbies did play PG in HS so we'll see if they get into the mix right away, as Raven Hughes did last year, and I believe Shanks too as a freshman.  Some of these young TITANS actually have tons of experience already.  Merritt and Anderson really the senior elders in this group.  It will be interesting to see how it all comes together.  Mia does a pretty good job of integrating the new talent early on so they develop for future seasons as key seniors graduate and move on.  As you know Ehresman still around as the Assistant or Graduate student on the staff.  Shelby Jackson has moved on, now living in Colorado and truly enjoy the mountain life, working for the professional soccer team there. 

I'm very optimistic about this new group, even as the greatly talented McGraw and Ehresman have moved on.

IWU'70

[RogK]

Just checked this :
in '17-'18, the median D3 WBB team 3FG % was .292 (happened to be Trine).
for MBB D3 it was .345.
iwu70, do you think we should discuss the Ettner sisters' careers at length? I'm kidding!

[lmitzel]

AndOne, maybe these box scores can alleviate your bitterness :
https://static.cciw.org/custompages/CCIW_Links/WBasketball/Stats/1617/17wb0218.htm
or
https://static.cciw.org/custompages/CCIW_Links/WBasketball/Stats/1415/wbb2715.htm
I know iwu70 would be happy to review them. (ha)

Good times.

So depends on the talent you have and how you run your half-court offense.  NCC ran the system, but at times didn't really have all that many really good trey shooters.

Looking back on it, I don't know how much of that was the lack of "really good trey shooters" versus just sheer volume and law of averages. The percentages speak for themselves by and large, seeing as solely in conference games since I started announcing, NCC has the second-worst three point percentage, so maybe I'm killing my own argument:

School	3P%
Augie	28.78%
Carroll	27.33%
Carthage	36.55%
Elmhurst	31.32%
IWU	31.93%
Millikin	30.73%
NCC	28.29%
NPU	31.07%
Wheaton	33.41%

I think that one of the things that held back NCC's trey percentage was the speed at which the Cardinals played. Innumerable times they chucked up the first open shot available without getting their feet set, and I (and, I think, most observers who know something about the Arseneault System) wrote that off as an artifact of the System's goals-based methodology (x number of trey attempts per game, x number of possessions per game, etc.) rather than as poor technique or inadequate coaching by Michelle Roof and her staff. I didn't necessarily assume that a Cardinals shooter who went 1-8 from beyond the arc wasn't a good shooter. I wrote off her clankitude as an outcome caused by the fact that she was a rushed shooter, and that rushing her shot wasn't entirely her choice.

Is your point that these were the games when the now abandoned "system" was at its pinnacle?

Nope. The system made it a point to avoid taking mid-range shots. Again, my point was solely to emphasize the fact that the mid-range jumper is a dying art in the sport of basketball. Fewer and fewer shots are being attempted from mid-range, and often times those taking them are not terribly proficient at it.

I look at it from a sense of efficiency. The three gets you more points than the two, so it makes sense to incorporate it as a significant portion of your offense, especially from the corner where the distance to the basket is shortest. As for twos, layups are in theory a high percentage shot, so they're extremely efficient as well. The midrange in the sense we discuss it, at least in a vacuum, isn't as "efficient," although if you have someone for whom that's their go-to shot that they can hit at, say, a 40-50 percent clip, the efficiency comes into play there too. Maybe the day will come where we start to cycle back to more of a midrange game, but I don't know that it's coming any time soon.

It won't come back until players start practicing that shot again at the frequency with which they practice treys and layups (and, alas, dunks if you're talking about the men's game). And, right now, there's little to no incentive from coaches to make players practice it.

Thanks, Lucas, for keeping this conversation going. Normally, I'd be loath to talk about a playing style that is now obsolete in terms of CCIW practitioners, but anything is better than having to read yet another iteration of the interminable conversation between iwu70 and Rog regarding Illinois Wesleyan. I'm all for any recognition that this is a nine-team league rather than a one-team league, ever if we're talking about an aspect that no longer exists regarding one of those eight other teams.

With regard to the above, MHO is that both '70 and Sager make good points.
1. In only one of the "system" years did NCC really have several good 3 point shooters.
2. Often times, if you looked away for more than 2-3 seconds after the Cardinals got the ball over half court, you would miss a 3 point attempt. Usually only one pass and then what amounted to a quick throw at the basket as opposed to a good shot. No receiving the pass in good shooting position. No squaring up to the basket. No stepping into the shot. Too often only what amounted to a wild heave. 🙏🏽 👎

I think the most ironic thing about NCC's system years is that arguably their worst shooting year was the year they went to the NCAA Tournament. Again, looking at just conference games (asterisked years are pre- or post-System):

Season	3P%
2011-12*	32.42%*
2012-13	25.84%
2013-14	31.60%
2014-15	26.26%
2015-16	31.29%
2016-17	29.26%
2017-18*	23.21%*

It's also kind of interesting to look at the two non-System years and see the disparity in shooting percentage even though both years North Central wasn't very good. Of course, the pre-System year was more of a conventional offense, versus last year they still used some offensive tenets of The System even though they officially went away from it.

[iwu70]

RogK, I'll leave the Ettner sisters to you.     

Interesting situation for the TITANS, as any number of key players in this returning group could have a break-out CCIW year.  Out of the shadow of McGraw and Ehresman.   Luckily, too, we have the ever solid, consistent Maddie Merritt there in the middle. 

Have a good weekend all -- some big CCIW football games this weekend.  I'm heading for St. Louis tomorrow and the key Wash U game.

'70

[RogK]

lmitzel, your comment on the '14-'15 NCC team led me to look at their full-season stats. I know the numbers you cited were conference play only.
For the full season :
they had 10 players average better than 5 pts/g
they were -6 in rebs/g, but +9 in turnover margin
they had 11.5 more FG att/g than opponents, along with 2.3 more FT att.
Jamie Cuny and Tess Godhardt started all 28 games. Cuny averaged 41 rebs per 100 min, blocked 91 shots and led with 35% 3FG accuracy. Godhardt played with ferocity, averaging around 18 pts in 19:00, 63% 2-point FG shooter, 78% FTs, led with 69 steals.
Maryssa Cladis and Bobbi Johns each shot a lot of FTs per min. Many others did well, of course.

[iwu70]

Titans come in at #12 in the pre-season D3hoops poll.  Wheaton at #27 basically, in the high levels of the ORV category.  Of course, two-time defending Champions Amherst at #1 again.

IWU opens the season on November 11th vs. #7 University of Chicago at The Shirk.  Great way to start off the season with a big time top 15 match-up. 

Should be a great season.  Looking forward . . .

IWU'70

[iwu70]

To be the best, play the best.  IWU early schedule:

#7 U Chicago
#13 DePauw
#21 UW Whitewater
likely #18 Wash U
Two games later #27 WC

UW Stevens Point and some others. . . 

Perhaps Mia got a bit carried away this year.   

And, two pre-season exhibitions too, against Eastern IL. and SIU Edwardville. 

I think the TITANS "will be ready" for CCIW play.

With "run and jump," fitness will be the key.

IWU'70

[RogK]

iwu70, we'll know about strength of schedule at the end of the season, not at the beginning.
A pre-season poll is a forecast, nothing else.

[iwu70]

RogK, yes, a forecast, an estimation to some degree, but surely based on some knowledge of what these teams have coming back, what they did last season, and what good coaching and well-established programs they have.  Of course, some will rise, some will fall, but I bet most of these programs will be in the top 25 by the end of the season, even as they take some losses from one another before conference play.

Pre-season article about the Titans in today's Pgraph, with Coach Smith suggesting that if she was starting today she'd start:  Merritt, Schneider, Shanks, Anderson and Munroe.  (pretty much what I suggested, save for Hughes).  First off the bench in the likely rotation:  Brovelli, Hughes and Sosa.   We'll see if any of the freshmen rise to PT in due course.  Fourteen on the roster.

Coach Smith also suggesting that she felt Wheaton the strongest to compete with IWU for the Conference title.  I expect IWU and WC to be 1-2 in the coaches poll coming out soon.

'70

[Titan Q]

IWU at #12 seems like an enormous stretch in the preseason.  The Titans lost two 1st Team players, including the league MOP. Ehresman made the team go last year...and McGraw was the most talented player on the team.

The Titans have a lot of talent and certainly could end up being a great team, but I was shocked when I saw this ranking.

[GoPerry]

IWU at #12 seems like an enormous stretch in the preseason.  The Titans lost two 1st Team players, including the league MOP. Ehresman made the team go last year...and McGraw was the most talented player on the team.

The Titans have a lot of talent and certainly could end up being a great team, but I was shocked when I saw this ranking.

Agree here.  But besides Amherst I've not studied how strong or weak are teams #2-#11.  So maybe IWU does belong there relative to other teams and on paper.  Despite a team's overall talent, I think it's incredibly difficult to replace someone like Ehresman who did so much and played big minutes in the consequential games.  (See WC last year; i.e. McDaniels)

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

IWU at #12 seems like an enormous stretch in the preseason.  The Titans lost two 1st Team players, including the league MOP. Ehresman made the team go last year...and McGraw was the most talented player on the team.

The Titans have a lot of talent and certainly could end up being a great team, but I was shocked when I saw this ranking.

Agree here.  But besides Amherst I've not studied how strong or weak are teams #2-#11.  So maybe IWU does belong there relative to other teams and on paper.  Despite a team's overall talent, I think it's incredibly difficult to replace someone like Ehresman who did so much and played big minutes in the consequential games.  (See WC last year; i.e. McDaniels)

A lot of teams lost a lot of talent from last season.  I don't envy the women's voters.  It's the opposite on the men's side as so many teams bring back so many players.

[gordonmann]

I had IWU 12th on my ballot as did 7 other voters. The Titans appeared on all 25 ballots and the median position was 12th.

In women's basketball, it's much easier to vote for programs and trust that they will reload  because they often do. Amherst lost two starters, including the Tournament MOP, returns about half of its scoring and rebounding and was still picked no lower than fifth on any ballot. Same goes for Bowdoin and Tufts who lost many starters and were slotted ahead of the Titans. There's a lot less churn at the top than there is on the men's side.

Also the Titans look pretty good in terms of the statistical comparison when you line them up against other Top 25 worthy teams.

* 3 starters back and 8 players who played more than 10 minutes
* 65% of team scoring returns and 76% of rebounding returns

Teams that returned a higher percentage in scoring and rebounding are either in front of IWU (Chicago, George Fox, St. Thomas) or come from conferences where the best teams aren't competitive nationally (GNAC, Centennial, SAA).

I do expect IWU to lose some games out of the gate because of their tough non-conference schedule, but the ranking tells you in part that voters trust that the best team in the CCIW will be one of the best 15 teams in the Country and IWU looks like the best bet to hold that distinction.

[iwu70]

I can understand the doubts about IWU's #12 ranking, though I was not shocked, as Q put it.  Yes, two All-CCIW players gone to graduation, but still two 2nd team All-CCIW players there (Merritt and Schnieder), and other strong, experienced rising seniors, especially Anderson.   Shanks likely to be key in "run and jump" steals.   Several very experienced and talented sophomores in Sosa and Hughes.  A strong back up in the paint in Brovelli.  It seems to me it will come down to how fast Munroe develops as the PG and I think she has the foot speed and talent, ball-handling abilities to do it.  And, how much a few of the freshmen work into meaningful PT off the bench at key times, especially with the defensive pressure schemes the Titans often apply.   I'm more confident about #12 than perhaps the rest of you'all here.  I was surprised that Wheaton, given all what they have coming back, didn't make the top 25. 

Yes, the first run of games will be tough -- Titans could go 8-3 or 4-7, time will tell.  The season is set up as usual, with very very tough schedule going in, prepping for the long CCIW race.  Save for WC, I don't see the TITANS losing many games in CCIW play.  Should be interesting.  Coaching and game management have always been key and there IWU has a strong advantage over many programs, IMHO.

Major pieces in the Pgraph front sports pages today, outlining the season -- for both the IWU men and women.   Everyone anticipating a positive and exciting season ahead.

Finishing football first.

IWU'70

[GoPerry]

I had IWU 12th on my ballot as did 7 other voters. The Titans appeared on all 25 ballots and the median position was 12th.

In women's basketball, it's much easier to vote for programs and trust that they will reload  because they often do. Amherst lost two starters, including the Tournament MOP, returns about half of its scoring and rebounding and was still picked no lower than fifth on any ballot. Same goes for Bowdoin and Tufts who lost many starters and were slotted ahead of the Titans. There's a lot less churn at the top than there is on the men's side.

Also the Titans look pretty good in terms of the statistical comparison when you line them up against other Top 25 worthy teams.

* 3 starters back and 8 players who played more than 10 minutes
* 65% of team scoring returns and 76% of rebounding returns

Teams that returned a higher percentage in scoring and rebounding are either in front of IWU (Chicago, George Fox, St. Thomas) or come from conferences where the best teams aren't competitive nationally (GNAC, Centennial, SAA).

I do expect IWU to lose some games out of the gate because of their tough non-conference schedule, but the ranking tells you in part that voters trust that the best team in the CCIW will be one of the best 15 teams in the Country and IWU looks like the best bet to hold that distinction.

Thanks for the insights into the voting Gordan.  Looks like a pretty solid evaluation method to me.  Titans #12 sounds right then.

Now, do you or Ryan think they'll run the table in the CCIW?    (NOT expecting an answer)