Note: Sorry for the lag in posts, but now that finals are coming to an end, Damon and I will try to upload some wrap-up thoughts on the basketball season (we have an interview with the seniors already recorded) and will start to look forward to the 2013 football season and the 2013-14 basketball season as the summer continues. 

Dylan Sinnickson will be making a unique mark on Middlebury sports history next season. The rising junior, already a major contributor on the hardwood and the diamond, will be cleating up for Coach Bob Ritter’s offense on the gridiron this fall.

Sinnickson, listed at 6’5″  and 195 pounds, plans to play wide receiver for the Panthers, hoping to develop chemistry with Mac Foote on Middlebury’s record-breaking offense. “Watching our passing offense the last couple years has really been fun,” said Sinnickson, who thinks he has the athleticism to make an impact on the outside right away. “I have been clocked several times at 4.5 seconds for the 40-yard dash but that needs to transition into game speed and learning how to get open.  I have spoken to Coach Ritter and many of the assistants, and they are happy to have me.” In addition to his speed, Sinnickson’s aerial abilities stand out on the basketball court, and he could become an elite vertical threat if he harnesses that ability.

Sinnickson just finished a spring baseball season in which he led the team in batting average (tie), hits, home runs, triples (tie), on base percentage, and slugging percentage, ranking second on the team in steals, and starting every game. Although he missed this basketball season due to a pre-season broken arm, he was the standout freshman on the 2011-2012 Sweet 16 team that spent much of the season ranked first in the country, averaging 5.7 points in 11.4 minutes per game on 53% field goal shooting. Before his injury last season, we projected Sinnickson to be the sixth man on this year’s team.

Asked about whether football will interfere with his basketball season, Sinnickson was confident in his ability to make the transition. “Practicing with the team will be difficult, but I’ll make sure to get in the gym and work on my game when I have the opportunity.  Since I will already be in good physical shape after training all football season, I’m sure the transition will not be an issue.”

Football season will end about two weeks before the first basketball game. “I’m used to making quick transitions,” said the soon-to-be three sport athlete.

Because he missed all of this past season due to injury, Sinnickson is eligible for a fifth year on the basketball team, an option he plans to pursue, saying that it is “just a matter of paperwork now and getting the approval of the NCAA.” If he stays for a fifth year, that will put him in the senior class with Matt Daley, Henry Pendergast, Jake Nidenberg, and Connor Huff.

From a football potential perspective, the ceiling for Sinnickson might be Trinity’s A.J. Jones, the lightning-fast 6’2,” 203 pound wideout, who was a one-dimensional threat last season but made the most of his field-stretching ability, averaging 28.7 yards per catch on his way to five touchdowns for the undefeated Bantams. While Sinnickson’s route-running and catching abilities might be even more raw than Jones’s, his verticality could make him a more viable red zone target.

Asked if he had ever heard of a football-basketball-baseball Middlebury athlete before, Sinnickson said “I think there may have been one guy who did it a decade or two ago.” If he makes it through all three seasons next year, Sinnickson could be a once-in-a-generation Panther.

UPDATE: Here is a video of Sinnickson training for the basketball season last fall.

The 2012-13 Panthers in Salem

(We are on the road to Salem. The combination of driving and mid-terms has delayed our preview, and we apologize.)

North Central (27-3), ranked #3 in the nation in the latest D3hoops.com poll, has emerged from the “Bracket of Death” (an 8-team pod that included Washington U., Illinois Wesleyan, UW-Whitewater, and North Central) and has been playing as well as just about any team in the tournament heading into Salem. Middlebury, who has won three games by a combined seven points in the tournament, faces their toughest matchup of the season.

North Central plays in the CCIW, one of the best conferences in the country, and comes into Salem riding an 11-game winning streak, including wins over Augustana, Illinois Wesleyan (twice each), Wheaton, Centre, and UW-Whitewater. The Cardinals rely on length, athleticism, suffocating defense (58.5 ppg allowed), and efficient offense, led by their two all-conference stars, Derek Raridon and Landon Gamble.

Raridon is a 6’5” score-first All-American who has been lighting up D3 ever since he arrived to North Central and put up 21.3 points per game his inaugural season. This year, Raridon is averaging 14.6 points per game on 51% FG, 46% 3FG shooting, as the talent around him has stepped up to balance his firepower. Raridon will likely go for 40 minutes tonight, and our guess is that Nolan Thompson will be right there with him for all 40.

Gamble is a 6’6” junior post scorer who is averaging 14.1 points and 5.7 rebounds per game on 59% FG shooting. When he stays out of foul trouble, Gamble is one of the strongest and most talented big men in the nation. Given Middlebury’s difficulties stopping A.J. Stephens and Kevin McMahon earlier in the tournament, Gamble could be in for a big day. He will face some combination of Jack Roberts, James Jensen, and Peter Lynch down low. He is likely too strong for Roberts and Jensen, and too athletic for Lynch, but one of them could step up and limit the damage.

Outside of Raridon and Gamble is a deep group of long and talented complementary players. Vince Kmiec is a 6’4” wingman who scores 10.4 points per game and leads the team in 3-point field goals made on the season (48-153). Aaron Tiknis starts next to Gamble down low, averages 10.4 points and 6.4 rebounds per game, and can score from inside and outside. Jack Burchett and Charlie Rosenberg, standing at 6’6” and 6’5” respectively, come off the bench and score efficiently in the post, shooting a combined 57% from the floor. Both, however, shoot under 50% from the free throw line, which limits their effectiveness. Rounding our the rotation are Brandon Williams and Pat Rourke, two limited guards who combine for 7.2 points in 38 minutes per game.

Outside of the individual profiles, we know a few things about North Central’s tendencies as a team. Their defense has carried them this season, as they are one of the best defensive teams in nation, especially on the perimeter; their last two opponents (two top-10 teams) have shot a combined 6-34 from beyond the arc. On offense, they like to get out in transition, and Kmiec and Tiknis won’t hesitate to pull up for three on the fast break. Their point guard play is limited, but the talent of Raridon and Gamble can carry them in the half court. Their one weakness on offense is free throw shooting, where they have shot 67% on the season.

In the sense that they are a great defensive team with mediocre free throw shooting, the Cardinals are reminiscent of the Middlebury squad that lost by two in Salem in 2011. Free throws hurt the Panthers in that loss, and they could hurt the Cardinals tonight. If Middlebury is down by multiple possessions in the last few minutes, they could go to a quick-foul strategy early.

The big question for Middlebury is whether they can score against such a high caliber defens, as the Panthers haven’t really faced a great defensive team this season. The three seniors each struggle when they have less space to play in, and their offensive games will be limited tonight. Wolfin and Thompson will have to adjust from an Ithaca team that left them with open looks for much of the game to a North Central team that by all accounts will not. Both will need to adjust quickly and attack; whether or not they make plays will determine the effectiveness of the Panther offense. Lynch, meanwhile, is most effective when he has time to work one-on-one inside, but the Cardinals are likely to swarm on him, so he has to either go up right away or find open teammates. We can expect Middlebury to give it to Lynch whenever he has Gamble in one-on-ones because of Gamble’s propensity to foul. Joey Kizel works well with limited space and should have another big game. James Jensen will likely get extended minutes because of his defensive value against the Cardinals’ length and athleticism. On offense, Jensen will have to attack the basket and draw contact when he gets the chance. Finally, Jack Roberts is going to be asked to limit Raridon at times and will have to do so effectively while staying out of foul trouble.

This is the toughest test of Middlebury’s season, and a non-NESCAC opponent the likes of which they have not seen since St. Thomas. We know this team too well to think they will go down without a fight. If they adjust to the defense, Thompson wins his matchup with Raridon, Wolfin and Lynch are efficient, and Kizel does Kizelian things, then they can advance. If North Central can score with ease down low, and get out in transition, it will be the end of the run for the Panthers.

Final Score: North Central 64, Middlebury 61.

We will be broadcasting the game live from Salem. If you want to listen, there will be an audio link on the Middlebury Athletics’ “Live Coverage” website.

2011-12 Kizel in one-possession games:

• 20 pts, 6-11 FG, 2-4 3FG, 6-6 FT
• 16 pts, 5-8 FG, 2-4 3FG, 4-4 FT
• 15 pts, 5-10 FG, 1-3 3FG, 4-6 FT
• 24 pts, 7-11 FG, 4-4 3FG, 6-6 FT
• 26 pts, 8-13 FG, 3-6 3FG, 7-8 FT
• 18 pts, 6-11 FG, 2-4 3FG, 4-5 FT
• 21 pts, 7-10 FG, 3-6 3FG, 4-5 FT
• 21 pts, 8-14 FG, 2-6 3FG, 3-3 FT

2011-12 one-possession game average: 

• 20.1 ppg, 59% FG, 51% 3FG, 88% FT

2012-13 Kizel in one-possession* games:

• 17 pts, 5-9 FG, 2-4 3FG, 5-6 FT
• 12 pts, 5-10 FG, 0-3 3FG, 2-6 FT
• 19 pts, 6-9 FG, 3-4 3FG, 4-6 FT
• 15 pts, 5-9 FG, 1-3 3FG, 4-4 FT
• 30 pts, 8-17 FG, 5-10 3FG, 9-10 FT
• 19 pts, 7-14 FG, 4-10 3FG, 1-2 FT
• 13 pts, 4-7 FG, 1-3 3FG, 4-4 FT

2012-13 one-possession game average:

• 17.9 ppg, 53% FG, 43% 3FG, 78% FT

*excluding Curry because a meaningless 3-pointer at the buzzer cut it to one-possession.

Those statistics are incredible. The most amazing statistics might be his consistent efficiency: in fifteen such games, Kizel has been under 50% from the field only twice. And it would have been once were it not for the 3/4-court shot he took and missed at the expiration of the 2013 Amherst game, in which he finished 8-17.

Compare these statistics to those of D3Hoops Northeast Regional Player of the Year and NESCAC Player of the Year Aaron Toomey in one-possession games over the past two years:

Toomey ’11-’13 one-possession game average:

• 14.6 ppg, 34% FG, 36% 3FG, 79% FT

One thing to be confident about heading into Salem: Middlebury’s best player defines rising to the occasion.

Also, a good reminder that we are constantly tweeting over at: @MiddPantherBlog, and for any readers who want more content, you can find it there.

Instead, what this team has, and continues to accomplish has amazed us. There will be another time to say a proper thank you to the many different people who made this improbable run possible, but we wanted to take a moment to share our deep appreciation for what this team has already done. Yesterday, Jeff remarked that no fan base in college basketball has it as good as Middlebury. In four years the seniors on this team have all but guaranteed that every game they play will either result in a win or a final play to decide the game. As basketball fans you can ask for nothing more. No team that I have ever been around has played with the same level of consistency and gritty determination as this team has. For Jake Wolfin, Nolan Thompson and Peter Lynch there could have been no better way to finish their careers at Pepin Gymnasium than Saturday’s win. This team has far surpassed our own expectations, but they have never betrayed any sense that their own expectations have been met. James Jensen told me months ago that this team’s primary goal was to return to Salem, and, incredibly, that is exactly what they have done.

Looking beyond wins and losses

Ithaca beat the once top-ranked Rochester on this buzzer-beater tip-in by Eli Maravich last Saturday

Ithaca lost two of its first three games of the season, and from what we’ve heard, the Bombers came together — think Coach Carter only way less dramatic — after a 17-point loss at Cortland. Ithaca doesn’t lack talent — the team features Sean Rossi, the all-time assist leader in Division III basketball history and Travis Warech, a St. Michaels transfer who scored more than 1,000 points in just three seasons in Division II.  Warech, Rossi, and senior Andrei Oztemel have scored 1,385, 1,137, and 1,244 points in their respective careers. Warech leads the team with 16 points per game, but has been even better over the past two months, averaging 20.8 points in his last 14 games. Over the last three games (road wins over three tournament teams), Warech is averaging 22.3 points per game and 11.3 rebounds per game. Rossi, meanwhile, averages 7.1 assists per game, good for fourth in the nation. There were some bad losses (and wins) along the way for the Bombers, but some of that can be mitigated by injuries and tough last possession losses, to which Middlebury is no stranger. Further, Ithaca enters the game playing its best basketball of the season with three consecutive wins over tournament teams under win-or-go-home circumstances. The Bombers received an automatic bid to the tournament (their only way in) with a 70-55 win over Stevens in the finals of the Empire Eight tournament. They then reeled off wins at Springfield and Rochester. Regardless of their struggles earlier in the year, the Bombers are playing their best basketball of the season right now, and, as they showed when they beat a superior Rochester team, that matters far more than what was accomplished or missing during the regular season.

The Xs and Os

Coaches make big decisions before every game: how will you matchup with certain players? Will you hedge on ball screens or just switch on all screens? Do you implement a new play during the week? At the risk of sounding cliché, the coaches of both teams will have an even bigger impact on this game than usual. Jeff Brown has to determine who Nolan Thompson will guard and how the Panthers will defend the high ball screens that Ithaca continually runs on the perimeter. Warech and Rossi each present different challenges, and there are good reasons for believing Thompson will guard either. Warech seems like the obvious choice, and for good reason. He leads the team in scoring, is Thompson’s height, has carried the Bombers’ offense of late and has the versatility to beat defenders in a variety of different ways. Moreover, matching Thompson up with the shorter Rossi would leave height mismatches at the other positions, as Ithaca’s next five minutes-getters are 6’2″, 6’3″, 6’4″, 6’6″ and 6’9″, respectively. Despite Warech being the natural first choice, the more we look at Sean Rossi’s abilities, the more we are convinced it will be a tougher decision for Coach Brown. Rossi’s 950 career assists speak loudly: he is an offensive creator the likes of which Middlebury has never seen. During the tournament, he has accounted for 77% of the team’s assists. Rossi is a capable scorer, averaging 10.2 points per game on 41% field goal shooting over his career. His scoring numbers coupled with his unrivaled ability to distribute the ball may make him Ithaca’s most dangerous offensive weapon. If that is the case, Jeff Brown may elect to put Thompson on Rossi in the hope that if the NESCAC Defensive Player of the Year can slow down Rossi, Middlebury can stall the entire Ithaca offense. Coach Brown has been in a similar conundrum earlier this year against both Williams and Amherst. Against the Ephs, Thompson matched up exclusively with Williams’ leading scorer Taylor Epley. And while Thompson was able to nullify Epley the first time the teams played, Ephs’ point guard Nate Robertson, also a pass-first, pass-second, shoot-if-he-has-to player who thrives on penetration and distributing from the middle of the defense picked the Panthers apart down the stretch, consistently getting into the lane and finding open shooters on the perimeter, or players cutting to the basket. In the second game, against Amherst, Brown opted to play Thompson on Aaron Toomey to start the game, hoping to stymie the Lord Jeffs’ offense from its inception. Though Toomey struggled, Willy Workman wreaked havoc in Amherst’s half-court sets and the Middlebury coaching staff adjusted accordingly, switching Thompson onto Workman down the stretch. We would not be surprised if Middlebury chooses to do the same today, starting Thompson on either Warech or Rossi, but making the adjustment if/when necessary.

The second decision for Brown is how his team will defend Ithaca’s perimeter action, which involves a lot of high ball-screens and initiates Ithaca’s offense. While Thompson is impeccable at slipping through ball screens, Ithaca runs a number of different sets including a high double-ball screen at the top of the key (and will adjust the ball-handler based on Thompson’s matchup), which could force Middlebury to switch often. This game, more than any other, will test Middlebury defenders’ ability to rotate, communicate and avoid mismatches. Because Ithaca runs this high-screen offense so well, it might dictate Middlebury’s defensive switches anyway, and the Panthers could look to go to their 3-2 zone for stretches against the Bombers. Among their core rotation players, only Oztemel has made more than 33 treys on the season, though as a team, Ithaca shoots a respectable 36% from deep. Middlebury has had a week to prepare for the nuanced sets of this Ithaca offense, and we expect them to be ready with several defensive sets to employ as the situation commands.

For the Bombers, head coach Jim Mullins has an interesting decision to make defensively. Will he employ the same triangle-and-two look that was effective in shutting down John DiBartolomeo (2 points, 0-8 shooting) a week ago? While Joey Kizel (Last five games: 20.4 ppg, 51% FG, 45% 3FG) appears to be an ideal candidate for the triangle-and-two defense (which is comprised of a three-man zone with one defender at the top of the key and two defenders at the baseline on the edge of the lane, coupled with two defenders playing man defense, face-guarding two perimeter players who present the greatest offensive threat), the extended zone around them would give considerable space for other Panther players to operate. James Jensen and Peter Lynch have been especially effective when they catch in space in the middle of the zone and can put the ball on the ground and attack the basket. Furthermore, the Bombers would be taking a considerable risk using the triangle and two when Middlebury has Kizel, Thompson and Hunter Merryman on the floor at the same time, all three of whom shoot better than 42% from beyond the arc.

On the offensive end, the Mullins will have to adjust to Middlebury’s defensive alignment. Teams have shot their way out of games by attempting to force the offense to run through a player guarded by Nolan Thompson (I’m looking at you, Wesleyan). If Thompson matches up with Warech , Rossi will be asked to contribute even more offensively, and Warech would be unwise to attempt to attack Thompson for the perimeter as Sedale Jones did two weeks ago. Furthermore, if the Panthers open in the 3-2 zone, Ithaca will be forced out of many of their high-screen-and-roll looks, and the Bombers will have to find open looks for their best three-point shooters. To some degree, Mullins might be able to dictate when the Panthers play man versus zone, as Jeff Brown goes to the zone primarily when the opposing team’s best three-point threat is off the floor. In Middlebury’s two games against Wesleyan, Brown went to the zone when Brian Bartner sat, and today he may choose to use the zone look when Andrei Otzemel — a 39.7% three-point shooter — or Eli Maravich (42.3%) go to the bench.

Keys to the game

Given the different defensive looks both teams can use in this game, the keys to the game depend somewhat on how the two teams matchup with one another. Having said that, Middlebury will win this game if they can enter the ball into the post and get good looks for Lynch, Jensen and Jack Roberts and knock down open shots from the perimeter when the ball goes inside-out. This will be particularly important if Ithaca comes out in their triangle-and-two defense, which thrives on denying the best offensive players the ball at best, and good looks at worst, and baits other players into taking long-range shots. Given Jake Wolfin’s struggles this season from beyond the arc, if there’s a player Ithaca wants to see shooting the basketball, it’s number 5. That may be good math in theory, but tempting Wolfin into making shots and taking over a game in reality is a far more dangerous prospect. Wolfin is a big-game, big-shot player, who plays  best when the spotlight is on him. Consistently giving him open looks is a high-risk, high-reward strategy, and if Ithaca chooses to go that route, the team should be ready to adjust on the fly if Wolfin knocks down open looks or uses the space given to him to get into the lane and go to the basket or drive and kick. While Nolan Thompson would likely be the other target of the Bombers’ triangle and two, Ithaca will be hard-pressed to stay in the “junk” defense when Merryman, Kizel and Thompson are on the floor at the same time. Middlebury runs a deadly pick-and-pop set with Kizel and Merryman in a high ball screen, and if Ithaca plans on face-guarding Kizel, Merryman, who has struggled with his shot of late (Last five games: 26% FG, 16% 3FG), will get open looks. We say this almost every week, but knocking down open looks from beyond the arc may decide this game for the Panthers.

On the other end, Ithaca will need to attack Middlebury inside. The Bombers have two skilled big men in Frank Mitchell and Tom Sweeney, who are 6’6” and 6’9”, respectively. Of the two, Mitchell should worry Panther fans, as the junior from Hillsborough, New Jersey averages 14.9 points per game on 51% shooting. What he does exceptionally well, however, is draw contact and get to the free throw line. Mitchell has taken 135 free throws on the season, 26 more than Kizel, who is pretty good at getting to the line himself. In a game where Peter Lynch may be especially important on the offensive end (Lynch’s season totals against Williams, which also played an extended zone: 39 points in 48 minutes on 17 of 26 shooting), keeping Middlebury’s 6’6” power forward out of foul trouble will be key. Foul trouble may be an even bigger issue for the Bombers, however, who only have six players that average more than 3.2 points per game. Ithaca is particularly thin in the front court, with only one viable option off the bench behind Mitchell and Sweeney. If the Panthers can find the holes in the triangle and two, or penetrate against the Bombers’ man defense should they defend straight up, and force Ithaca’s big men out of position and into fouling situations, coach Mullins could find himself giving big minutes to inexperienced players off of the bench.

Thinking back to yesteryear

A year and a week ago, Travis Farrell ended Middlebury’s season with a game-winning, buzzer-beating three-point shot. Over the last week a number of coaches and players have talked about how the team overlooked Scranton a season ago. The Royals locked down the Panthers in the first half, holding the hosts to just 20 first-half points. Scranton maintained a three-to-five point lead in the second half as Middlebury failed to make a substantial run to re-take the lead. Then, after a Kizel floater with 5.9 seconds remaining tied the game, Farrell weaved his way to the left corner and released a three-point shot, which splashed through the net as the buzzer sounded.

Scranton advanced to the Sweet 16 (and then the Elite 8) with 7 losses on the regular season, one shy of Ithaca’s 8. While Ithaca is more dangerous offensively, Scranton featured a balanced offensive attack with disciplined perimeter defenders and enough size to challenge Lynch and Sharry inside. There are enough similarities between these two teams as well as the game circumstances that this game remains in the forefront of our minds (though it’s really never that far away) and has motivated the team to focus even more in its preparation for today. If Middlebury loses today, it won’t be the result of oversight.

What a way to say goodbye

As we go into this final home game for the senior trio of Jake Wolfin, Nolan Thompson, and Peter Lynch, it is worth taking a moment to reflect on their accomplished careers. All three have been centerpieces to the greatest run in the history of Middlebury basketball, which has included a NESCAC title and two runner-ups, four NCAA tournament berths, three Sweet Sixteens, one Final Four and a 16-6 career postseason record, all while piling up a school-record-tying 103 wins and only 13 losses. Only one senior class in all of Division III basketball has a better winning percentage in their careers than Thompson, Lynch and Wolfin. From the individual accomplishment department, Thompson and Wolfin are both members of the 1,000-point club, ranking 9th and 13th in school history, respectively. Thompson is second in career free throw percentage (81.5%), and Wolfin is the all-time leader in assists (545). Lynch, meanwhile, had to wait for his opportunity behind Andrew Locke and Ryan Sharry, but the gifted scorer has made up for it over the last two years. In addition to leading the team in scoring this season, Lynch is on pace to finish with the best field goal percentage in school history, at 60.8%. These seniors have defined the character of Middlebury basketball during their careers and we, and the Middlebury fan base, have reaped the benefits in the form of countless unforgettable moments and defining games. For those going to the game, this context should not be lost.

The Final Word

This Ithaca squad is vastly underrated, and those who rely on wins and losses to determine the measure of a team have already overlooked the Bombers. Due to injuries during the regular season to some of Ithaca’s core players, the Bombers are approaching this game with the mentality that they haven’t lost at full strength in two months. Middlebury, however, is coming off a win at Cortland against a hyper-confident team that hadn’t lost at home all season long. Ithaca’s collective mindset can only help them coming into the game, but if they find themselves in foul trouble and fall behind early, or go down by double-digits (or close to it) at halftime, as both of Middlebury’s tournament opponents have, will the Bombers be able to fight their way back into the game, or will the memory of the chemistry issues from the beginning of the year and their struggles to win when not at full strength derail the visitors?

Prediction

Middlebury 74 – Ithaca 70

5’11” G Jesse Winter (15.1 ppg, 46 FG/39 3PT/82 FT): Winter is the leader of this Cortland offense. His offensive game reminds us of Aaron Toomey’s style of play. A dynamic scorer, Winter is most dangerous when he attacks the defense. From the heart of the floor he is a great distributor and a capable finisher. When defenses give help from the wings, he finds open looks for his teammates, and when they stay at home he continues at the basket, with the preponderance of plays ending either with a made basket or Winter at the line shooting free throws. Free throw shooting is an important element of Winter’s game. In 28 games this season, he has taken 131 free throws — 28 more than Joey Kizel, who leads the Panthers with 103 in 26 games. (For further context, Toomey has taken 120 free throws in 27 games.) Winter is an aggressive player in all facets of the game, including as a passer. He is intentional offensively, and looks to make plays in transition. To be successful the Panthers will have to slow him in transition, keep him out of the middle of the defense and stop him from going to the line. That sounds like a job for Nolan Thompson.

6’1” G Jeremy Smith (15.9 ppg, 45/43/85): Smith leads the Red Dragons in scoring and is the best three-point shooter on the team. While primarily a catch-and-shoot scorer, Smith has the quickness, athleticism and ball-handling ability to get into the lane and finish at the rim. He has impressive range and is a zone-breaker all by himself. Middlebury will have to choose the lesser of two evils when guarding Smith, and from what we’ve seen, that means playing him to shoot and challenging him to put the ball on the floor and beat his man with the dribble.

6’3” G/F Brian Manning (11.2 ppg, 44/40/81): Brian Manning is a scoring swingman who comes off the bench but plays starter minutes (26 mpg). In the last two years he has exemplified the sixth man role, scoring the third-most points on the team and shooting 46% from the field despite having never started a game. Manning thrives off the penetration of Winter and Smith, but can create on his own as well. He is a big key for Cortland because he spends a lot of time as the tallest of four guards on the floor when the Red Dragons go into four-guard sets, putting him in a lot of mismatches against opposing forwards. This helps him get open on the perimeter on offense, but should make him a target down low on defense.

6’6” F Kevin McMahon (12.6 ppg, 66/X/70): McMahon is quietly one of the more impressive big men Middlebury has faced all season, as he ranks second in the entire nation in field goal percentage. The senior has a bit of range but does most of his work around the basket, where his presence is also felt on the boards (7.5 rpg) and on defense (1.2 bpg). Very similar in build and stature to Peter Lynch, McMahon is not so much of a focal point of the offense as Lynch is for the Panthers, but he is as good of a complementary big man as it gets.

6’9” F Dan Sternkopf (2.1 ppg, 58/X/40):  The senior center Sternkopf plays just 14 minutes per game despite starting. His 25 made field goals all season suggest a severely limited offensive game, but his 1.2 blocks per contest are quite impressive considering the playing time factor. We expect Sternkopf to be called upon to stop Jack Roberts and Peter Lynch at times, but whenever he is on offense, his man will be asked to roam because Sternkopf is a small enough threat to be left alone.

6’3” G Harrison Hefele (9.8 ppg, 49/38/60): Hefele is a versatile three-guard who can play inside and outside, making him a unique threat in this offense. He scores efficiently when called upon, and also puts up 4.7 rebounds, 2.4 assists, and 1.3 steals per game.

6’1” G Lamard Herron (7.6, ppg, 50/36/71): Herron is the lone underclassmen (sophomore) in the rotation, and his talent appears to warrant his playing time (22 mpg). Herron is first on the team in steals (1.9 spg), and is coming off of a 20 point performance in the first round win over Elms, shooting 8-10 from the floor and 2-3 from three.

Going through the matchups:

The difficulty of guarding Cortland State lies in their ability to play 4 guards on the court at once, all of whom can shoot the three. The two guys over 6’3” in the rotation—McMahon and Sternkopf—average 43 combined minutes per game, whereas the five other rotation mainstays average 139 combined minutes per game. Thus, 76% of minutes among Cortland’s expected big-game rotation go to guards, which means that if they stick to that rotation and timeshare, the Red Dragons will spend 32 minutes with four guards on the court. This is a unique challenge that few teams have been able to answer this season, because it is so rare to have four guys who can stop such a talented stable of guards, and who can maintain a high level of offensive play on the other end. The fact that McMahon, often the lone big man on the court, is so hard to stop makes the matchup even more challenging, but it is the guards who make this team especially dangerous.

Jeff Brown faces a unique challenge in the Cortland State guards

Cortland may have an advantage on the outside, but in some ways this game feels designed to the strengths of Peter Lynch and, in particular, James Jensen. While four-guard sets have undoubtedly given other teams matchup problems, Cortland’s offensive design appears to play right into the defensive teeth of the Panthers. Jensen’s versatility on defense and his explosiveness and leaping ability on offense will negate some of what Cortland can do with that fourth guard. Jensen has guarded point guards and shooters before this season, so Cortland will not be able to take advantage of a big mismatch like they so often do. On offense, Jensen will almost certainly have a 3-inch height advantage on his man in these situations, and the Panthers will look inside to him to score down low. Jensen’s value lies in his versatility; in a game like this, if he steps up to the opportunity, he could play 30+ minutes. Next to him down low for much of the game will be Peter Lynch, who has been tremendous against smaller defensive lineups, torching teams consistently all season that haven’t been able to keep him out of the lane. McMahon will have a hard time slowing down Lynch in the post, and as long as he stays out of foul trouble, Lynch should be a big part of Middlebury’s offensive success. With Jensen on the fourth guard and Lynch on McMahon, Jack Roberts will likely mirror Sternkopf’s minutes and also spell Lynch for stretches. The playing time of Middlebury’s fourth forward, Hunter Merryman, depends on whether the coaches believe he can stick with any of the guards on defense. If he can, Merryman should feast on the mismatches on the other end.

While Middlebury’s frontcourt has much to look forward to in this matchup, the backcourt is playing the underdog role in their positional matchup, as the Cortland guards will be very tough to slow down. It all starts with Winter, and for that reason, we expect Nolan Thompson to start the game on the 5’11” senior. The main objective with Winter is to prevent his dribble penetration, because the Red Dragon offense is predicated on the open looks Winter can find once he draws help. If Thompson keeps Winter on the perimeter, the next challenge for Middlebury will be sticking with the guards through extended offensive sets. Winter, Smith, and co. are great and quick passers, and their off the ball movement creates a lot of open threes. This style of play demands discipline and heady play from Middlebury’s guards. Finally, Kizel and Wolfin will have to keep their guards in front of them with the ball in their hands. We can foresee a scenario where Smith steps into Winter’s drive-and-kick role if Thompson guards Winter. The other challenge that the Cortland guards present is the fastbreak, where their passing, vision, and quickness are on full display. Kizel, Wolfin, and Thompson must be aware of this threat and play safety for the defense to force Cortland into the halfcourt offense.

Forecast:

Cortland State is the best non-conference opponent Middlebury has faced in the last two seasons. Their guards have been too much to handle for pretty much every team they have faced thus far, and if they get out in the fastbreak or get hot from three, there are few teams who can stick with them, especially on their home court. Given the fact that Middlebury has been unable to put together many near-40 minute performances this season, we expect the Cortland runs to be especially difficult to sustain. These factors help account for the fact that the well-respected Massey Ratings system gives Cortland State a 79% chance to win this game. Middlebury’s season is on the ropes. In my view, the Cortland guards will be too much to handle and they will pull away with stretches of near-unstoppable offense, while Middlebury’s problems with consistency will remain. In Damon’s view, Thompson will force their offense out of its rhythm, and the Jensen and Lynch factors will carry Middlebury to victory.

What a difference a year makes

Sedale Jones averages more than 22 points per game and scores in various different ways.

These two teams played as recently as December of 2011. Middlebury won that game 83-54. Unfortunately, that tells us very little about today’s game. Then, Curry was 2-6 and headed for an 11-15 season, 9-9 in CCC play. Only 2 of Curry’s current top-6 rotation players played real minutes in the game, and Middlebury received 22 points from Ryan Sharry on 8-11 shooting from the floor.

Since then, Curry has evolved into a dangerous offensive team, led by three talented scorers. Sedale Jones — recently named the CCC Player of the Year — Lambros Papalambros (a 1st Team All-CCC selection) and AJ Stephens (second team) combine to score 55 of the team’s 81.5 points per game. In three games against NESCAC teams this year, Jones is averaging 32.7 points per game on .561/.500/.793 shooting splits. He is a Division I talent and appears to play his best game against the best competition.

Perhaps even more intriguing than Jones is Lambros Papalambros. In 28 games this season Papalambros is averaging 16 points per game, 4.5 rebounds and 3.9 assists. At 6’4” he’s taller than your average Division III point guard, and a better shooter too. The Massachusetts native shoots 52.6% from the floor and 42.3% from beyond the arc.

Rounding out the top three is AJ Stephens, a 6’5, 255-pound bruiser, who has a similar build (though admittedly wider) to Middlebury’s 6’6”, 215-pound Peter Lynch. At first glance Stephens looks like a (considerably) more skilled version of Weselyan’s Glen Thomas. Stephens averaged 16.9 points per game and 9.9 rebounds while shooting 54% from the field.

Does Curry have the right ingredients to pull off an upset?

In last year’s upset loss to Scranton, Middlebury had difficulty guarding the Royals’ bigger guards who went into the post against the Panthers’ smaller trio of Thompson, Wolfin and Kizel. The Colonels run a similar three guard set with Jones, Papalambros and Carlos Ribeiro. While Ribeiro is just 5’10” the other two are both 6’4” and shoot a high percentage from the floor. Last week Williams took advantage of Taylor Epley’s height advantage over Nolan Thompson and used their 6’4” forward to post up Middlebury’s Defensive Player of the Year, with far more success than when the Ephs attempted to run Epley off screens and play a primarily perimeter game in the first meeting. Curry has the size on the perimeter to take Middlebury out of its defensive comfort zone. The Colonels can play with the top tier of teams in the country, but sticking with teams and beating teams are two very different things. If Curry beats Middlebury ti will be the result of making small adjustments (like going into the post more) and getting help from a poor Middlebury shooting night.

How the upset happens

Offensive discipline: As already noted, Curry will have to play disciplined basketball to beat Middlebury. Sedale Jones will need to have an efficient shooting night, which will be difficult with Nolan Thompson guarding him (more on this in a minute). Jones will need to facilitate, and limit his turnovers. Jones has done a good job getting his teammates looks this year (3 assists per game) but has tuned the ball over 95 times this season (3.4 per game). With Thompson guarding him, a 30-point outburst from Jones is unlikely. But if he can make the most of his limited looks and find teammates for better looks, he will do more for his team’s win probability than if he enters this game looking to replicate what he did against Amherst and Williams (75 combined points). It will be very interesting to see what his mentality is early in the game, whether he’s looking to find his own shot against the best perimeter defender in the country or if he tries to find his teammates.

Foul trouble: This concerns both teams. For Middlebury, keeping Lynch on the floor and out of foul trouble will be vital. The Panthers’ leading scorer averages just 24 minutes per game because he has been forced to sit for long periods of time due to foul issues. Staying out of foul trouble is a much bigger concern for Curry, however. The Colonels’ rotation only goes 7 deep as two of their senior contributors off the bench, 6’7” center Ted Amendola and 5’11” guard Eric Gugliemello haven’t played in over a month. Jones, Papalambros and Stephens will have to be disciplined on both ends of the floor, as Middlebury does a great job drawing charges defensively and will look to enter the ball inside to Lynch and big Jack Roberts early and often.

Middlebury’s past shooting woes: Over the last four years Middlebury has lost 13 total games. In those 13 losses, Jake Wolfin and Nolan Thompson have combined to shoot 33% (84-252) from the floor and 28% (38-135) from beyond the arc. This isn’t to assess blame — or anything close to it — for those losses, but to suggest that when the Panthers miss open shots — and Wolfin and Thompson are most often the recipients of open looks — they struggle to win games. In those losses, Wolfin shot better than 50% or better from the floor once and Thompson twice, without any overlap. Given that only 4 of the 13 losses (and none of the past 9) were decided before the final minute of regulation, missing open looks for Middlebury has proved incredibly costly.

Why the upset won’t happen

The Thompson Effect: The Middlebury seniors have only lost three times at home in their careers, and have never been ousted in the opening round of the NCAA Tournament. And while Curry provides challenges for the Panthers, they share many of the same qualities (one dominant perimeter player, offensive-minded, poor depth) with teams that have struggled immensely against Middlebury. Thompson plays a huge role in this, as his ability to shut down dominant perimeter scorers can stall an entire offense if the offensive system is built primarily around that player, or two or three guys. In last year’s second round game against Albertus Magnus, Nolan limited Darius Watson (a guy’s whose stats this year look eerily similar to Sedale Jones’s) to 11 points on 5-16 shooting, though most of those came in garbage time once the game was out of hand (Watson had 0 at half-time and had attempted just 3 shots). The year before that, in the opening round of the tournament, Nolan held Western Connecticut State’s DaQuan Brooks (he of the 45-point second half) to 11 points of 5-13 shooting in another Middlebury blowout.

Curry’s defensive struggles: Peter Kaasila and Michael Mayer combined to score 48 points on 17 of 24 shooting from the floor. Curry’s center Ted Amendola played in both of those games, but has not played since January 31st. Lynch scored 13 points on perfect 6-6 shooting in the game between these teams last year while Sharry finished 8-11 (as noted above). Given the success of the Kaasila and Mayer, Lynch should be able to take advantage of space to operate, much like he did against Williams last weekend, when he scored 23 points and pulled down 12 rebounds while shooting 10-17 from the floor.

Middlebury’s track record: Over the past four years the Panthers are 55-0 against everyone in the NESCAC not named Williams or Amherst. They have routinely dominated lesser competition, and though Curry has the talent to be a middle-to-upper-tier NESCAC team, it is exactly that kind of team that the Panthers have owned, particularly at home.

Prediction: Middlebury 85 – Curry 70

Middlebury in the NCAA Tournament 2:00
NESCAC tournament recap 13:55
NESCAC Awards recap/critique 25:00
Region-by-region bracket breakdown 45:40

Colby: 6-10, 12 points, 5 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 steals, 1 block, 1 tunrover

Tufts: 7-15, 19 points, 3 rebounds, 1 assist, 2 steals, 3 blocks, 3 turnovers

Williams: 7-13, 15 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 0 steals, 1 (game-saving) block, 0 turnovers

Tournament Average: 53% FG, 15.3 ppg 4.3 rpg, 2.0 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.7 bpg, 1.3 tog

It speaks to the talent of the NESCAC, and of the Lord Jeffs, that Williamson won’t even be considered for either All-NESCAC team. Having spent many hours watching guys play over the course of the season, and an equally long time sifting through stats, and reasoning through our selections, we’ve come to a consensus on our All-NESCAC teams and conference awards. Here are our selections, along with our reasoning where we felt necessary.

1st Team All-NESCAC

G – Aaron Toomey

G – Joey Kizel

G – Nolan Thompson

F – Willy Workman

F – Michael Mayer

These five guys really separated themselves from the pack over the course of the season, and we (as well as many others) would be shocked if the selection turns out any differently. All five had NESCAC-Player-of-the-Year-caliber seasons, making for great discussion. All five are guys you could build a program around, and that’s exactly what these coaches have done. It should come as no surprise, either that all three come from the top three teams in the conference. Middlebury and Amherst each land two apiece, with Mayer representing the Ephs. Notably, three of the selections — and one from each team — are juniors. All three should begin next year as pre-season All-Americans and as the unquestioned leaders of their respective teams. While a young, ultra-talented Ephs team develops around Mayer for his senior season, Kizel and Toomey will headline developing rosters that have much to prove. That  remains a problem for the future, however, as all three have more to play for this year.

2nd-Team All-NESCAC

G – Shasha Brown

G – Ben Ferris

F – Taylor Epley

F – Peter Lynch

C – Peter Kaasila

While the first team selections spoke for themselves by and large, the second team requires greater explanation. This group is headlined by Kaasila, who would be a first team selection many other years. The 6’9” center decimated the conference, averaging 16 points per game and 6.9 rebounds while shooting 60 percent from the floor. Kaasila remains something of a black hole offensively, finishing conference play with just two assists, but when a player scores as efficiently as he did this season, lack of sharing isn’t the end of the world. Lynch and Epley, meanwhile, began the season looking like they belonged on the first team before hitting rough patches of play in the middle of the season put second-team honors in doubt. Both players closed the season the way they started, as Lynch averaged 17.5 points and 10.5 rebounds in the tournament, while Epley scored 17.3 points per game on 56% shooting from the field. The guards in this group presented the most difficult decision. Brown, despite leading the NESCAC in scoring in conference play, underachieved significantly. The 5’11” guard shot a respectable 44 percent from the floor, but was shockingly bad from three (29%) on far too many attempts (59). His numbers were hardly better than Matt Vadas, the conference’s second leading scorer in NESCAC Play and top overall, whose team 0-10 in NESCAC play. While it’s difficult to leave a guy who scored over 20 points per game over the course of the season off of both all-conference teams, that’s exactly what we did in selecting Ferris. While the sophomore averaged almost 7 fewer points per game, he was a tremendously efficient scorer during conference play, shooting 50% from the floor as well as from beyond the arc, one of just three players to do so. Ferris also averaged 6.5 rebounds per game — more than Epley, Lynch and Kaasila. The biggest name left off of this list is the aforementioned Vadas. While the junior swing man finished the season 23rd in the nation in points per game, he did so shooting 41% from the floor, matching the team average. The “yeah-but-he-did-it-all-by-himself argument” also doesn’t look very good when you consider that his teammates, Jared Shill and Mason Lopez, both shot better than 45% from the floor and beyond the arc. And before you credit Vadas with getting good looks for his teammates, consider that he had just 7 assists in conference play, indefensible for a player who spends so much time with the ball in his hands and shoots such a low percentage from the floor.

The Awards

Coach of the Year: David Hixon

Defensive Player of the Year: Nolan Thompson

Rookie of the Year: Tom Palleschi

Player of the Year: Nolan Thompson

The first two decisions should be unanimous, the second two anything but. Not surprisingly, therefore, we’ll address the our selections for Rookie of the Year and Player of the Year in further depth. At the midway point in conference play, Hamilton freshman Matt Hart appeared to have locked up the RoY award. As it is, he may still win it after finishing the season averaging over 15 points per game. In an impressive rookie class, Hart may be the most talented of the group. He wasn’t even our runner up, however, as a pair of Tufts freshmen took the league by storm. Stephen Haladyna, this year’s runner up, averaged 12.5 points per game in conference, with a ridiculous 56/48/81 (FG/3PT/FT) split. Perhaps the most impressive number for Haladyna, however, is 4. That’s the number of turnovers the freshman had in conference play, while averaging 22 minutes per game. And he was good all season long in that category, turning the ball over just 17 times in 26 games, while logging 526 minutes. In our eyes, however, the award goes to his teammate Palleschi, who averaged 13.7 points and 6.2 rebounds in conference play and shot 57 percent from the floor. He also finished second in the NESCAC behind Jack Roberts with 19 blocks and 45 total on the season. Palleschi played his best in the biggest games, scoring 34 in two losses at Amherst and was all but unguardable in a 13-18, 27-point performance against Middlebury. Palleschi’s work on both ends of the floor, and his performance in his team’s biggest games of the season gives him the edge over Haladyna, though by a slim margin.

Finally, our NESCAC Player of the Year, Nolan Thompson. You already know why we think Nolan should be the PoY, so I won’t restate our position here. (If you’re not familiar with our argument, you can read Jeff’s excellent case here). Instead I’ll take a moment (or a few) to rebut some of the arguments people have made against Nolan winning this award. Here are the arguments that we’ve heard and our final counterpoints. (Note: To those of our readers who do not read d3boards, the rest of these piece of based on the context established there, where there was much discussion of our initial case for Nolan Thompson for POY)

1) The NESCAC Player of the Year should go to the best player on the best team

Response: There are many reasons why this is poor logic. First, we have far better ways of determining value than throwing our hands up in the air and saying, “Oh well, it’s too close to call, let’s give it to the best player on the best team.” Again, if you want to hear that side of the argument, look no further than Jeff’s post a week ago. If the best-player-on-the-best-team logic was good, we would have little difficulty applying it without problem to other examples. If the San Antonio Spurs finish the regular season with the best record should Tony Parker be the MVP? Of course not. He’s a distant third to LeBron James and Kevin Durant. To make matters worse, when the “best team” is determined by a miniscule sample size (a 10-game regular season and a 3-game tournament) it’s hard to know exactly who the best team is, or even who the best player on that team is. Some may say it’s clear that Amherst is the best team in the conference — the Lord Jeffs just finished a second straight undefeated season, after all. And isn’t it unfair of me to begin this post by praising what Amherst has accomplished over the last two years, only to call it all into question later? What contradiction! Or is it? Let’s travel back two weeks to the final regular season NESCAC game. It’s the second overtime, Aaron Toomey just bungled a make-one, miss-one free throw opportunity with his team down three and 5.9 seconds left on the clock by missing the front end and then (accidentally) making the second. Jake Wolfin catches the ensuing inbound pass and gets fouled with less than 5 seconds remaining in the game and a chance to ice the game by making two free throws. At this point, if Wolfin makes both and Middlebury wins, Middlebury, Williams and Amherst all sit tied at the top of the NESCAC at 9-1 with a random selection process deciding who hosts the tournament (which might have made the difference in the end). Doesn’t it seem rather silly, when you really think about it, that the best-player-on-the-best-team theory hinges entirely on whether Wolfin makes both free throws? Because people prefer simple solutions to difficult ones, we often sacrifice necessary, logical steps in our decision making. This is a classic example.

2) Nolan Thompson’s case for NESCAC Player of the Year ended after his performance in the NESCAC Semifinal

Response: This was the most recent argument made against Thompson’s candidacy. What’s particularly funny about this argument was that it was made just before Aaron Toomey and Willy Workman combined to shoot 5-23 from the field in the NESCAC title game. The popular (and wildly wrong) response to this is, “Yes, but Toomey/Workman played well enough for their team to win and Thompson didn’t.” First of all, one possession games are toss ups; teams will go .500 in these games with a large enough sample size. Secondly, once again, this argument relies on the play of someone entirely unrelated to the point at hand, Allen Williamson in this case, to justify why one player is better or more valuable than another. If Williamson was late helping or mistimed his jump and fouled Epley instead, this argument can’t be made. By the time Epley catches the inbound pass, make or miss, Toomey and Workman have made their (lackluster) contribution, just like Thompson the night before.

3) The selective “Big Game” argument

Response: This point came shortly after number two, as if two weak arguments made in tandem could buttress one another and make one strong one.  After some very selective reasoning, the argument was made that Nolan was a “no-show” offensively in three of his team’s four biggest games of the season — the two losses against Williams and a one-point win over Tufts. (It was argued that the four biggest games of the season for Middlebury were the two Williams games, the Amherst game and the Tufts game. Somehow the Tufts game, one that was played on January 5th was more important than the first round of the NESCAC Tournament, which may have determined whether Middlebury got into the NCAA Tournament or not. There’s not a single person who would trade a win over Tufts in early January for a win over Wesleyan in late February.) Again, you can use a small sample, coupled with some head-scratching selectivity, or you could expand your sample, and include the Amherst 3OT game and the Tufts game, and get a much better idea of how Nolan actually performed in “big games.” The verdict? In “big games” this year Nolan has averaged 9.8 points, 5.8 rebounds, with 40/35/67 splits, which, while far below his season averages, hardly quantifies as being a “no-show” offensively in big games. And if you want to see the selective “Big Game” argument destroy someone’s candidacy for Player of the Year, look no further than Aaron Toomey, who, in four of his five biggest games of the year (Williams x2, Middlebury and Tufts) shot 17-63 (27%) from the field and 9-35 (26%) from three. The point is, you can do this with almost anyone if you restrict the sample size, selectively remove good performances and prey on a bad game or two. (Hey, did you know that Willy Workman shot 28% from the floor and 23% from beyond the arc in 7 of Amherst’s 9 games decided by 10 points or fewer? Is he always soft or just bad in crunch time? Can we all agree that, though the stat I just presented is just as true as the one documenting Nolan’s performance in three of Middlebury’s five biggest games, that it’s almost pointless to conclude something from such a selectively small sample? Finally, in every big game but the most recent, Nolan’s defense was phenomenally valuable, which offsets more than a little of a poor offensive game (see more in 5A).

4) Nolan only face guards his man, is limited as a help defender and doesn’t get steals

Response: This argument lacks any understanding of a) what it means to be a help defender and why a coach might not want a particular defender to help, and b) that steals are a horrible metric of defensive ability. Steals are most often accumulated either by defenders who gamble consistently (see Toomey, Aaron) or by players who profit from the hard work of others. The majority of steals come off of tipped or contested passes, when the ball spends more time in the air, or does not make it to its intended target. Looking at steals to determine the value of a defender is like using interceptions to determine the value of a defensive back in football. The best corners lock their receiver down, and don’t get targeted enough to intercept a lot of passes. Overrated cornerbacks gamble, sometimes get it right, sometimes get burned and get targeted enough times to make a play on the ball once in a while. Basketball is no different in that regard. Then there’s the concept of help defense. This one really seems to be a doozie for people. When a defender is told, as Nolan often is, not to help off of his man, it’s not because he can’t, it’s because providing help defense off the man he’s guarding is a suboptimal strategy. I’ll bet that when most coaches prepare to play Williams or Amherst they tell their top defender not to help off of Epley or Toomey or Workman (though there also isn’t another defender in the country who can guard all three of those guys). Instead, the player guarding Robertson, or Williamson, or Kalema is asked to play help defense. Somehow Nolan’s “lack of help defense” was horribly misconstrued as a drawback from his game, rather than an affirmation of how difficult it is to be the top defender on every team.

5 A) Teams don’t have to game plan for Nolan like a great offensive player or dominant defensive player like Andrew Locke

Response: One of the most difficult things for people to seemingly understand is that stopping your opponent from scoring is just as valuable as scoring yourself. It took the entire baseball world years to understand the value of preserving runs defensively. Unfortunately, much of that cornered thinking still exists, and has been prevalent throughout this entire discussion. In particular, people clung to the notion that Nolan’s game did not demand that other teams really game plan for him on offense or defense. In one sense, this argument is correct, but only in the sense that some degree opposing coaches don’t game plan for Nolan because you can’t game plan for Nolan. If you’re head coach Mike Maker, what do you tell Taylor Epley — primarily a catch-and-shoot scorer — before he plays Nolan? How do you adjust to a relentless defender, who never takes a play off, fights over, under and through screens like nobody they’ve ever played against and doesn’t just contest shots, but impedes his man from catching the ball in the first place. So yeah, coaches may not game plan all that much for Nolan’s defense, largely because they recognize that trying to affect Nolan’s defensive play is a waste of time. Ask Shasha Brown if they game-planned for Nolan and, if they did, how it went. And while you can point to the NESCAC Semifinals as an example of how a player improves the second time he plays against Nolan, much of that had to do with Middlebury’s game plan which, for a change, included asking Nolan to help off of Taylor Epley due to Nate Robertson’s driving ability. That and some combination of Nolan not playing his best game and Epley, who deserves much of the credit as well, getting the better of Nolan on the perimeter a couple of times. Nolan was the one to improve in the second matchup vs. Brown, despite Wesleyan having a week to prepare for his defense.

5 B) Nolan, therefore, is the NESCAC equivalent of Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier

Repsonse: Lost in this discussion was Nolan’s offensive game, which was tremendous. Let’s try this objectively for a second. Here are three players’ stats from NESCAC play, when everyone faced the same competition.

Player A: 14.0 ppg, 54% FG, 52%, 3PT, 91% FT

Player B: 16.8 ppg, 46% FG, 41% 3PT, 65% FT

Player C: 12.8 ppg, 50% FG, 50% 3PT, 75% FT

Now it would be impressive if you could name those three players without any help based solely on their conference stats. But what if I told you that those three players, in some order were Nolan, Ben Ferris and Taylor Epley. Would you be able to tell which one was Nolan?

He’s Player A, which I think by all objective standards is the most impressive of all of those players. And I chose those three players strategically not because Nolan has better stats than they do, but also because the three of them have similar offensive games and all play a similar role in the offense. None of the three are point guards, all of them are primarily catch-and-shoot scorers and none of them can be considered the first option on their respective teams. And yet Nolan put up superior numbers to both of them. And we’re going to compare Nolan to Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier? Because they’re both good defenders who score primarily by spotting up, much like Ben Ferris or Taylor Epley? Nolan Thompson is the NESCAC Bruce Bowen? The Bruce Bowen who averaged 6.1 points per game on 41/39/58 splits? The one who never scored more than 8.2 points per game in his career? Just because Nolan shoots from similar spots on the floor? Or Shane Battier, who has shot better than 40 percent from beyond the arc only twice in his career? Nolan would be the NESCAC’s version of Bruce Bowen or Shane Battier if one of them held LeBron, Durant and Westbrook to single digits in three straight games, while putting up the best offensive statistics in the league at their position. Yeah, then maybe the NBA to NESCAC comparison will have legs. In the meantime, comparing Nolan to those guys because he has similar tendencies offensively is like saying “Hey, Aaron Toomey’s .436/.426/.908 and below average defense looks a lot like Jose Calderon’s .470/.429/.904 line and matador defense and Jose Calderon would never be a player of the year.” It’s lazy analysis and is a selective viewpoint that misses the bigger picture.

A Final Thought

We’ve made our case and now offered our counterpoints to the critiques made over the last 10 days. We welcome more discussion on this point, and have thoroughly enjoyed discussing this, explaining our argument, and understanding the points that others have made specific to this point and regarding many others. If you still have comments to make, we hope that you read our initial case first, because it was there where the meat of the argument — Nolan’s value and historic defensive season — was established. A thoughtful discussion is satisfying wherever it ends up; equally dissatisfying (and disappointing) is a petty remark that doesn’t address what’s been said.