BB: Top Teams in West Region

[CrashDavisD3]

It would be nice of the NWC joined the rest of the world with a conference tourney to decide Pool A bid. Cost and weather may be factors of why they dont.

I've never been a fan of conference tournaments and glad the NWC baseball teams have resisted.  The Pool A bid should go to the team who has shown over the entirety of the conference season that they're the best club from start to finish.

I respect your opinion but do you want the best baseball team all season or the best baseball team going into the regional. A great example is the Illinois Wesleyan - http://www.iwusports.com/news/2010/6/1/BB_0601104941.aspx

[wildcat11]

It would be nice of the NWC joined the rest of the world with a conference tourney to decide Pool A bid. Cost and weather may be factors of why they dont.

I've never been a fan of conference tournaments and glad the NWC baseball teams have resisted.  The Pool A bid should go to the team who has shown over the entirety of the conference season that they're the best club from start to finish.

I respect your opinion but do you want the best baseball team all season or the best baseball team going into the regional. A great example is the Illinois Wesleyan - http://www.iwusports.com/news/2010/6/1/BB_0601104941.aspx

All Season.  I like rewarding teams that do it all year and not those that get hot at the right time and backdoor their way to a regional.

[Richard Hamstocks]

It would be nice of the NWC joined the rest of the world with a conference tourney to decide Pool A bid. Cost and weather may be factors of why they dont.

I've never been a fan of conference tournaments and glad the NWC baseball teams have resisted.  The Pool A bid should go to the team who has shown over the entirety of the conference season that they're the best club from start to finish.

I respect your opinion but do you want the best baseball team all season or the best baseball team going into the regional. A great example is the Illinois Wesleyan - http://www.iwusports.com/news/2010/6/1/BB_0601104941.aspx

Is there evidence that teams that upset their conference tournaments to win a pool A bid do particularly well in the regional?  that they are really the "best team" the next week (given that they were the best team this week but not the best team for the previous 12)?
I'll take the large sample size.
That being said, if a team has clearly been the best team all season, then there's probably a pool C bid waiting for them.
Then what conference tournaments do is screw borderline pool C teams.  But they can blame themselves for not winning their pool A.

[108 Stitches]

The best team in the West IMO right now is Centenary. They have beat everyone in their path and just because they are not eligible for postseason play they are not getting any love in the polls. Crash at least you can rank them 

Good series coming up for UTT this week will be a good one to watch.

My team Trinity continues to disappoint for a whole bunch of reasons. They have an unbelievably easy path to the West Regional.

Looks like LaVern has an opportunity to really earn a spot in the SCIAC tournament and have some momentum, could be a surprise team if they get it going.

My thought on Linfield losing: So what - they are 9-1 over the last 10 games; it happens to even the best teams.

Happy Easter everyone!

[TexasBB]

Last year when Centenary was part of the ASC East they lost 2 of 3 to UTT. They would like to even the score I am sure. UTT did not play well this past weekend and had an injury to one of their starters. The bullpen got roughed up and their pitching staff surrenderd 18 runs in the last two games loosing one 8-5 and winning the last one 12-10. If they play like they did against the Ozarks they could be in for a long weekend.

Texas BB

[Ralph Turner]

The ASC has needed a tourney because it is 2 divisions.

The same was the case for the SCAC until this year.

The balance in the ASC has been incredible. Usually 5 or 6 of the 8 teams in the ASC tourney are good enough to win the entire thing.

[Patriotfan87]

Last year when Centenary was part of the ASC East they lost 2 of 3 to UTT. They would like to even the score I am sure. UTT did not play well this past weekend and had an injury to one of their starters. The bullpen got roughed up and their pitching staff surrenderd 18 runs in the last two games loosing one 8-5 and winning the last one 12-10. If they play like they did against the Ozarks they could be in for a long weekend.

Texas BB

No doubt........but I wouldnt count on it. UTT seems to be coming up with the wins they need to this year, and I see the Centenary series as a "need" to take. UTT has played the two best hitting teams in the conference over the last two weekends, and STILL walks out with the best team ERA in the conference.....good luck to any team holding ETBU homerless and tagging them for a gaggle of strikeouts through the first two games of a series. From what I saw, 1-9, Ozarks is a better hitting team than the Tigers, but time will tell....neither should be in the conference tourney due to a lack of success on the mound, but man can they hit!!

[108 Stitches]

but man can they hit!!

Wait till you see the Centenary team. They are beasts.

[CrashDavisD3]

Top Teams in the WEST for CDD3

1) Linfield(20-4)
2) Cal Lutheran(19-6-1)
3) Pomona-Pitzer(19-7)
4) Trinity-Texas(24-7)
5) Texas-Tyler(23-7)
6) Texas-Lutheran(23-7)

On the bubble 
George Fox (19-7)

***Centenary(21-7) ....Sorry no NCAA Regional in 2013 

Pomona-Pitzer could be playing for Pool C bid with games against Linfield that could make the difference.

[doodlesdad]

Linfield's No. 1 nationally and in the West, but only 1-1 vs. the SCIAC. I'm looking forward to their trip to SoCal next weekend for three games with 19-7 Pomona-Pitzer on April 12-13 and a game with 15-9 La Verne on April 14. La Verne beat 'em, 6-0, in the season opener in Arizona.

[TexasBB]

With respect to the discussion of best team all season vs. best team based on conference tournament, I would add the following thought; teams can win their confernce with 3 good starters but not have enough arms to win a tournament.  UTT has been a good example of that. They have won or shared the ASC East title 6 times since 2005 but have only won the ASC tournament twice. They have had 3 good starters and a decent closer many times but lacked that #4 and #5. So if they lose a close game early in a double elimination tournament they have problems.  That is just one example and I am sure there are plenty of others. In the West region teams are only playing 4 times a week and may not develop a good #4 and #5 starter.  Some teams only have 2 top starters but have developed 3 or 4 other pitchers that they use regurlarly. Use in games regularly is the key as pitching in practice is not the same. A team can get buy during the regular season with 3 starters assuming a good offense and defense. However, that will not usually be enough in a tournament like the regional where you have to play a lot of games in a short period of time.

TexasBB

[wildcat11]

but only 1-1 vs. the SCIAC.

I don't read too much into colder weather schools losing season openers down south.  This SoCal trip should be a better barometer.  The only thing that matters is winning the NWC because no NWC school should depend on a committee's judgement.  Not saying the trip doesn't matter but I'm not going to freak out if Linfield doesn't win all four.

[Richard Hamstocks]

With respect to the discussion of best team all season vs. best team based on conference tournament, I would add the following thought; teams can win their confernce with 3 good starters but not have enough arms to win a tournament.  UTT has been a good example of that. They have won or shared the ASC East title 6 times since 2005 but have only won the ASC tournament twice. They have had 3 good starters and a decent closer many times but lacked that #4 and #5. So if they lose a close game early in a double elimination tournament they have problems.  That is just one example and I am sure there are plenty of others. In the West region teams are only playing 4 times a week and may not develop a good #4 and #5 starter.  Some teams only have 2 top starters but have developed 3 or 4 other pitchers that they use regurlarly. Use in games regularly is the key as pitching in practice is not the same. A team can get buy during the regular season with 3 starters assuming a good offense and defense. However, that will not usually be enough in a tournament like the regional where you have to play a lot of games in a short period of time.

TexasBB

Of course, the other reason why UTT has fared so poorly might be that small sample sizes are really bad for determining who the better team is.  It's baseball. Good players can have off days, average players can have good days, over 9 innings teams can hit a lot of balls hard at people, balls can take bad hops, etc., all strongly influencing outcomes. (These tend to average out over 40 games).
 
I'm still arguing against pool A bids going to tournament winners instead of regular season champs.   I think regional selections should be a reward, not a strategic attempt on the part of the committee to try to put forward the teams that have the best chance of winning a national championship because they are "hot".  When looking at pool C criteria, you'll notice that nowhere is performance in the last k games mentioned, or seemingly allowed.  The committee is asked to evaluate cases in a temporal vacuum.  Strange, considering that so many pool A bids are given away based essentially only on how a team has performed very recently.  At least conference tournaments are fun to watch.
 
If you get through the regional, I agree that when you get to the CWS, west region teams are at a disadvantage to teams that regularly have 4th and 5th starters, assuming that you stick around long enough.
     

[CrashDavisD3]

With respect to the discussion of best team all season vs. best team based on conference tournament, I would add the following thought; teams can win their confernce with 3 good starters but not have enough arms to win a tournament.  UTT has been a good example of that. They have won or shared the ASC East title 6 times since 2005 but have only won the ASC tournament twice. They have had 3 good starters and a decent closer many times but lacked that #4 and #5. So if they lose a close game early in a double elimination tournament they have problems.  That is just one example and I am sure there are plenty of others. In the West region teams are only playing 4 times a week and may not develop a good #4 and #5 starter.  Some teams only have 2 top starters but have developed 3 or 4 other pitchers that they use regurlarly. Use in games regularly is the key as pitching in practice is not the same. A team can get buy during the regular season with 3 starters assuming a good offense and defense. However, that will not usually be enough in a tournament like the regional where you have to play a lot of games in a short period of time.

TexasBB

Of course, the other reason why UTT has fared so poorly might be that small sample sizes are really bad for determining who the better team is.  It's baseball. Good players can have off days, average players can have good days, over 9 innings teams can hit a lot of balls hard at people, balls can take bad hops, etc., all strongly influencing outcomes. (These tend to average out over 40 games).
 
I'm still arguing against pool A bids going to tournament winners instead of regular season champs.   I think regional selections should be a reward, not a strategic attempt on the part of the committee to try to put forward the teams that have the best chance of winning a national championship because they are "hot".  When looking at pool C criteria, you'll notice that nowhere is performance in the last k games mentioned, or seemingly allowed.  The committee is asked to evaluate cases in a temporal vacuum.  Strange, considering that so many pool A bids are given away based essentially only on how a team has performed very recently.  At least conference tournaments are fun to watch.
 
If you get through the regional, I agree that when you get to the CWS, west region teams are at a disadvantage to teams that regularly have 4th and 5th starters, assuming that you stick around long enough.
     

I agree with you on the 4th/5th starter. Teams with the West typically dont have that 4/5 guy since there dont develop that guy due to their scheduleds. In the North & East with compressed schedules with 5/6 games a week you can not win consistently without a 4/5 starter.  This definitely creates a advantage come CWS time. West teams have come up short without that 4/5 pitcher along with losing the #1 All American pitcher and not pitching in the CWS.

[Ralph Turner]

With respect to the discussion of best team all season vs. best team based on conference tournament, I would add the following thought; teams can win their confernce with 3 good starters but not have enough arms to win a tournament.  UTT has been a good example of that. They have won or shared the ASC East title 6 times since 2005 but have only won the ASC tournament twice. They have had 3 good starters and a decent closer many times but lacked that #4 and #5. So if they lose a close game early in a double elimination tournament they have problems.  That is just one example and I am sure there are plenty of others. In the West region teams are only playing 4 times a week and may not develop a good #4 and #5 starter.  Some teams only have 2 top starters but have developed 3 or 4 other pitchers that they use regurlarly. Use in games regularly is the key as pitching in practice is not the same. A team can get buy during the regular season with 3 starters assuming a good offense and defense. However, that will not usually be enough in a tournament like the regional where you have to play a lot of games in a short period of time.

TexasBB

Of course, the other reason why UTT has fared so poorly might be that small sample sizes are really bad for determining who the better team is.  It's baseball. Good players can have off days, average players can have good days, over 9 innings teams can hit a lot of balls hard at people, balls can take bad hops, etc., all strongly influencing outcomes. (These tend to average out over 40 games).
 
I'm still arguing against pool A bids going to tournament winners instead of regular season champs.   I think regional selections should be a reward, not a strategic attempt on the part of the committee to try to put forward the teams that have the best chance of winning a national championship because they are "hot".  When looking at pool C criteria, you'll notice that nowhere is performance in the last k games mentioned, or seemingly allowed.  The committee is asked to evaluate cases in a temporal vacuum. Strange, considering that so many pool A bids are given away based essentially only on how a team has performed very recently.  At least conference tournaments are fun to watch.   
 
If you get through the regional, I agree that when you get to the CWS, west region teams are at a disadvantage to teams that regularly have 4th and 5th starters, assuming that you stick around long enough.   

But only the NWC does not have a tournament to decide the Pool A.

As for the national committee, the teams are judged on the entire season for a Pool C bid.

"Last number of games" has not been a D-III baseball criterion in my memory.