Capital Athletic Conference: Year 12-pres Topic

theeyetest
Posts: 117 (0)
Hall of Famer
135 1
Prospect
Posted by luciusmalfoy on 12/8/2010 10:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by magneto999 on 12/8/2010 4:18:00 PM (view original):
Misread the line!  My team was projected at 8-8. We're lucky if we get to 3-13! 
Rebounding has been trod underfoot by the hooves of athleticism.
Fortunately.
12/9/2010 12:35 PM
roguedog
Posts: 52 (0)
Hall of Famer
273
Prospect
York Tracking
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT TOT
Alfred Brennen So. PG 57 79 1 53 7 24 57 71 61 59 88 81 C 638
Scott Gilland So. PG 50 81 1 54 2 1 78 84 73 50 79 68 B- 621
Johnny Kelly Fr. PG 43 73 6 32 1 6 74 68 52 12 71 46 C- 484
Darren Lawrence Jr. SG 26 67 17 46 17 14 90 63 79 78 84 21 B 602
Donald Wood Sr. SF 98 73 14 16 21 44 62 40 39 81 99 61 C 648
Glen Woolridge So. SF 55 48 33 36 30 62 56 41 46 39 71 42 B- 559
Phillip Morisky Fr. SF 55 53 21 37 8 11 51 38 54 32 72 53 C 485
Jeffrey Taylor Sr. PF 56 57 70 42 78 36 22 22 19 87 91 56 C+ 636
Kenneth Ferris Sr. C 58 41 86 54 67 58 14 22 28 41 84 35 D+ 588
David Jones Jr. C 42 18 89 32 82 73 8 1 24 29 75 53 C 526
Andy Kopec Fr. C 40 21 69 22 62 76 1 27 26 52 69 38 C 503
Kenneth Williams Fr. C 40 22 91 34 80 90 1 1 23 48 75 63 C+ 568
Averages - - 52 53 42 38 38 41 43 40 44 51 80 51 - 572
12/25/2010 9:00 AM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
Program projection-- probably the last season with this version, I hope to update with some position specific stuff.  Obviously it doesn't like rusticity's 2 walk ons and underrates MW by 5-7 wins...
The other thing to note is how high the REB totals are.
School Beg. Yr. Avg. # Seniors # Juniors Players >600 Player >500 Top 3 REB Form. Wins Form. Losses
Salisbury 482 2 4 0 7 76 4 12
CUA 534 3 2 3 5 90 11 5
Gallaudet 514 1 5 2 6 78 8 8
Goucher 500 4 2 0 6 83 6 10
MW 460 2 2 0 5 90 1 15
Marymount 525 2 3 2 6 78 8 8
York 544 2 3 3 6 84 11 5
Baptist 507 0 5 0 5 70 4 12
Hood 537 4 3 1 8 75 10 6
Chestnut 542 4 2 3 7 85 13 3
VJ 534 3 2 2 8 97 13 3
SMM 515 1 4 0 7 81 7 9
Average 516 2 3 1.3 6 82 96 96
1/10/2011 11:11 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
    # ATH SPD DEF REB PE LP ST 
Salisbury G 6      37.7      61.7      41.8       5.2      47.2      11.3      75.3
Salisbury SF 1      42.0      51.0      30.0      44.0      39.0      17.0      78.0
Salisbury Big 4      30.0      24.5      31.5      71.3      14.0      59.3      79.3
                   
CUA G 4      41.8      60.8      33.0      11.0      58.3      13.3      75.3
CUA SF 3      39.0      47.7      52.7      47.0      38.0      57.0      80.3
CUA Big 5      46.2      21.8      37.8      83.0       4.8      53.8      63.2
                   
Gallaudet G 4      51.5      70.0      51.3       1.3      56.8       6.3      72.0
Gallaudet SF 2      60.5      47.5      58.5      32.0      37.0      37.5      77.5
Gallaudet Big 5      53.6      22.4      57.8      72.2       8.8      61.8      71.2
                   
Goucher G 5      38.6      67.8      32.4       2.0      57.2      11.2      80.0
Goucher SF 2      63.0      45.5      62.0      17.5      16.5       5.0      66.5
Goucher Big 5      36.2      27.8      38.4      70.2       7.6      60.4      66.2
                   
MW G 4      47.5      71.5      43.0       8.8      47.0       1.5      75.3
MW SF 2      43.5      38.0      49.5      40.5      32.0      31.5      72.0
MW Big 4      49.8      16.3      46.5      86.0       1.5      54.3      73.3
                   
Marymount G 5      52.0      54.8      42.6       9.4      58.4      11.0      76.8
Marymount SF 1      38.0      46.0      38.0      77.0      12.0      83.0      73.0
Marymount Big 5      50.4      31.8      51.0      69.2       4.4      42.8      73.8
                   
    # ATH SPD DEF REB PE LP ST 
York G 5      41.6      72.4      46.4      10.2      65.6      10.8      78.2
York SF 2      57.0      52.0      38.5      27.5      56.0      37.0      71.0
York Big 5      41.4      21.0      30.0      73.4       7.0      59.8      72.4
                   
Baptist G 4      38.8      60.8      49.5       1.0      40.8       1.0      80.3
Baptist SF 2      39.0      40.5      50.0      41.5       9.0      17.5      72.5
Baptist Big 6      43.7      24.0      42.3      62.5      16.7      53.0      71.2
                   
Hood G 6      49.8      71.2      45.3       5.5      65.8      22.8      73.3
Hood SF 1      46.0      40.0      57.0       9.0      55.0      32.0      56.0
Hood Big 5      60.8      19.0      53.6      67.2       8.0      77.6      70.2
                   
Chestnut G 5      41.6      70.0      39.8      12.6      58.2       9.2      80.4
Chestnut SF 2      31.5      42.5      30.0      29.5      41.0      47.0      73.0
Chestnut Big 5      39.0      29.6      29.2      78.4      17.4      61.4      69.2
                   
VJ G 3      33.3      60.3      32.7      22.0      48.3      22.7      76.0
VJ SF 2      22.0      59.5      20.5      42.5      58.5      29.0      85.0
VJ Big 6      37.0      32.8      35.5      82.5      10.8      57.8      77.0
                   
SMM G 4      38.0      65.8      42.8       5.5      72.0      12.3      74.3
SMM SF 3      36.3      47.3      37.3      50.0      42.7      36.0      72.0
SMM Big 5      30.4      19.2      28.4      76.2       4.2      48.2      64.4
1/10/2011 11:13 PM
rusticity
Posts: 152 (0)
Hall of Famer
164 20 3
Prospect
I sandbag just to outperform this metric. I actually didn't realize it used the team average rating so wasn't expecting this at all - especially with my reb top 3.. I see how you only used my top 10 for the positional averages - I would imagine that hurts people who are 12 deep when it otherwise should be an advantage. Having a useful 11 and 12 should not be otherwise hurting ones projection relative to my 10 deep squad. Then again - if the 11th and 12th are getting minutes then maybe they should be included. Some bonus should be added fir being deeper and having fresher starters sonaybe it balances out.
1/11/2011 2:33 AM
rusticity
Posts: 152 (0)
Hall of Famer
164 20 3
Prospect
The thing that surprised me was how good Gallaudet's squad looks on the positional breakdown. And that's with only one senior. And Manahan is actually below the average speed. His PE will be missed of course - quite a bit actually. The SF are quality as well - even better when viewed individually since one is high/low and the other low/high in PE/LP making the average look like its a position that won't contribute offensively. We have the same issue at MW. It's possible that you might want to simply combine PE+LP into one scoring category. Edelman seemed to value Ath over Reb with the bigs- don't know if this was by choice or necessity but it was a formula that helped MW rise - in fact I won more conference championships with that then I have since being able to recruit the big rebounders. The are young though so this might even grow into a 60+/80+ crew - nasty. Heck, Gallaudet even has high ATH guards of the Hood mold. I did notice that France left off Kirkpatrick as the 5th guard which I agree with per my post above.
1/11/2011 3:04 AM
rusticity
Posts: 152 (0)
Hall of Famer
164 20 3
Prospect
While I'm at it, has Hood's REB always been this pedestrian? I know he's had the ridiculous ATH advantage - lol at 60 average. And that's going 5 deep. I would have left Clark off too. Actually maybe not, since I guess Ewing is plaing SF, so that brings the REB down even more but would at least make the SF position a little less ugly - and Benites would roll out of guards to SF as well. Still, 17 and 9 REB at SF - yikes. Benites could end up back at SG next year if he finds a better SF option and that 17 could grow into so
Erving respectable. That particular shade of purple however has a much tougher go odor starting at 17 and his speed doesn't play at the 2 like Benites does. He likely has massive upside all over the place though. With 3 people seeing time at SF and none graduating, I still assume Hood will be looking hard at SF's for one of it's 4 openings next season.
1/11/2011 3:27 AM (edited)
theeyetest
Posts: 117 (0)
Hall of Famer
135 1
Prospect
I really needed to land an SF last season. For this season, I messed up by recruiting a scoring SF instead of a rebounding SF. I was too focused on point totals from the formula I use rather than need. But, I don't think REB has been causing us to lose, at least up to this point. Our rebounding has never been high, but this is as low as it has been.
1/11/2011 6:56 AM
magneto999
Posts: 26 (0)
All Star
32
Prospect
I'm becoming convinced that my big rebounders - especially if it's at the expense of high athleticism and speed, don't pay off. My team is predicted for another great record by France's formula, but we vastly vastly underperformed that last year and I feel the same thing is going to happen this year again too. 
1/11/2011 1:28 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
Scoring By Position     Scoring By Class
    # PPG % Dis 3PG   Class Points   Rebs  
Salisbury G 10      34.0 50%       5.4   Fr.          3.8 5%          0.7 2%
Salisbury SF 10       5.3 8%       0.9   So.        18.7 27%          9.4 31%
Salisbury Big 10      28.8 42%       0.1   Jr.        30.4 43%        13.2 44%
  Total        68.1         6.4   Sr.        17.1 24%          6.6 22%
                       
CUA G 10      28.9 36%       5.0   Fr.        13.4 17%          7.7 22%
CUA SF 10      28.1 35%       1.7   So.          8.5 11%        10.6 30%
CUA Big 10      23.7 29%        -     Jr.        21.8 27%          2.2 6%
  Total        80.7         6.7   Sr.        37.0 46%        14.8 42%
                       
Gallaudet G 10      26.0 33%       4.6   Fr.          5.1 6%          1.8 5%
Gallaudet SF 10      20.8 26%       1.5   So.        22.0 27%        21.4 57%
Gallaudet Big 10      33.0 41%        -     Jr.        42.2 53%        13.5 36%
  Total        79.8         6.1   Sr.        10.9 14%          1.1 3%
                       
Goucher G 10      37.9 50%       5.8   Fr.          4.3 6%          1.8 6%
Goucher SF 10      10.1 13%        -     So.        26.0 35%        16.3 51%
Goucher Big 10      27.2 36%        -     Jr.        15.0 20%          7.3 23%
  Total        75.2         5.8   Sr.        29.9 40%          6.5 20%
                       
MW G 10      35.3 42%       6.4   Fr.        25.3 30%          9.6 23%
MW SF 10      11.2 13%       1.7   So.        13.5 16%          3.5 8%
MW Big 10      37.9 45%        -     Jr.        18.7 22%        19.1 45%
  Total        84.4         8.1   Sr.        26.9 32%        10.4 24%
                       
Marymount G 10      47.4 54%       7.8   Fr.        12.4 14%          7.8 20%
Marymount SF 10      15.0 17%        -     So.        26.9 31%          5.6 14%
Marymount Big 10      25.0 29%        -     Jr.        29.8 34%        18.1 46%
  Total        87.4         7.8   Sr.        18.3 21%          7.6 19%
                       
Scoring By Position     Scoring By Class
    # PPG % Dis 3PG   Class Points   Rebs  
York G 10      43.4 52%       6.6   Fr.          4.9 6%          7.9 25%
York SF 10      10.7 13%       0.9   So.        24.3 29%        12.6 40%
York Big 10      29.0 35%       0.1   Jr.        30.8 37%          3.9 12%
  Total        83.1         7.6   Sr.        23.1 28%          7.0 22%
                       
Baptist G 10      32.4 41%       3.5   Fr.          5.2 7%          0.2 1%
Baptist SF 10       3.6 5%        -     So.        37.6 47%        15.6 42%
Baptist Big 10      43.3 55%       1.1   Jr.        36.5 46%        21.6 58%
  Total        79.3         4.6   Sr.           -   0%           -   0%
                       
Hood G 10      50.7 53%       9.6   Fr.          4.4 5%          6.5 18%
Hood SF 10       1.3 1%        -     So.        12.1 13%          7.5 20%
Hood Big 10      44.1 46%        -     Jr.        36.5 38%          6.6 18%
  Total        96.1         9.6   Sr.        43.1 45%        16.5 44%
                       
Chestnut G 10      42.7 56%       4.4   Fr.          2.7 4%          7.5 25%
Chestnut SF 10      10.4 14%        -     So.        13.4 17%          8.0 26%
Chestnut Big 10      23.7 31%        -     Jr.        21.9 29%          5.8 19%
  Total        76.8         4.4   Sr.        38.8 51%          9.2 30%
                       
VJ G 55        -   0%        -     Fr.        19.5 50%          1.3 7%
VJ SF 55       4.7 44%       1.1   So.        11.4 29%          8.2 49%
VJ Big 55       5.9 56%       6.4   Jr.          1.2 3%          3.1 18%
  Total        10.5         7.5   Sr.          6.9 18%          4.4 26%
                       
SMM G 10      26.7 37%       5.8   Fr.          5.9 8%          8.6 26%
SMM SF 10      23.0 32%       1.3   So.        11.6 16%          8.6 26%
SMM Big 10      22.6 31%        -     Jr.        40.9 56%        12.0 37%
  Total        72.3         7.1   Sr.        14.8 20%          3.6 11%
1/14/2011 9:48 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
Scoring Leaders Other Stats
      PPA       Est Off % Est Def %
Leading scorer: L. Harper        1.07   REB %:   28% 70%
2nd leading scorer: G. Cook        1.01   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.96 to 1
3rd leading scorer: M. Gibson        1.19   Turnover Ratio: 0.92 to 1
Team:            1.13          
                 
Leading scorer: K. Noggle        1.23   REB %:   32% 71%
2nd leading scorer: G. McClimans        1.49   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.99 to 1
3rd leading scorer: P. Herbert        1.38   Turnover Ratio: 1.07 to 1
Team:            1.27          
                 
Leading scorer: M. English        1.12   REB %:   27% 68%
2nd leading scorer: M. Perry        1.14   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.95 to 1
3rd leading scorer: R. Belli        1.08   Turnover Ratio: 1.01 to 1
Team:            1.16          
                 
Leading scorer: H. Waggoner        1.21   REB %:   23% 64%
2nd leading scorer: H. Cook        1.13   Ast/TO Ratio: 1.11 to 1
3rd leading scorer: L. Hannah        1.12   Turnover Ratio: 0.98 to 1
Team:            1.17          
                 
Leading scorer: D. Russell        1.04   REB %:   30% 72%
2nd leading scorer: L. Stephens        1.07   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.82 to 1
3rd leading scorer: J. Callaway        1.39   Turnover Ratio: 1.14 to 1
Team:            1.13          
                 
Leading scorer: N. Toomer        1.27   REB %:   31% 75%
2nd leading scorer: F. Brown        1.35   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.96 to 1
3rd leading scorer: F. Barnhardt        1.24   Turnover Ratio: 0.96 to 1
Team:            1.24          
                 
Scoring Leaders Other Stats
      PPA       Est Off % Est Def %
Leading scorer: D. Lawrence        1.42   REB %:   27% 69%
2nd leading scorer: K. Williams        1.21   Ast/TO Ratio: 1.06 to 1
3rd leading scorer: S. Gilland        1.22   Turnover Ratio: 0.76 to 1
Team:            1.21          
                 
Leading scorer: M. Parsons        1.07   REB %:   25% 66%
2nd leading scorer: M. Cote        1.03   Ast/TO Ratio: 0.69 to 1
3rd leading scorer: J. Leatherwood        1.03   Turnover Ratio: 1 to 1
Team:            1.02          
                 
Leading scorer: S. Harrison        1.13   REB %:   25% 67%
2nd leading scorer: S. Brooks        1.31   Ast/TO Ratio: 1.15 to 1
3rd leading scorer: T. Billington        1.22   Turnover Ratio: 1 to 1
Team:            1.20          
                 
Leading scorer: R. Williams        1.16   REB %:   29% 73%
2nd leading scorer: C. McFarland        1.36   Ast/TO Ratio: 1.27 to 1
3rd leading scorer: T. Scholz        1.19   Turnover Ratio: 0.55 to 1
Team:            1.21          
                 
Leading scorer: E. Noel        1.22   REB %:   32% 72%
2nd leading scorer: P. Suszynski        1.24   Ast/TO Ratio: 1 to 1
3rd leading scorer: M. Taylor        1.19   Turnover Ratio: 1.13 to 1
Team:            1.18          
                 
Leading scorer: D. Cool        1.17   REB %:   30% 71%
2nd leading scorer: K. Simpson        1.22   Ast/TO Ratio: 1.1 to 1
3rd leading scorer: F. Switzer        1.16   Turnover Ratio: 0.98 to 1
Team:            1.18          
1/14/2011 9:57 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
Improvement Summary
North
CUA
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Justin Allen Sr. PG 0 3 4 1 3 1 4 2 3 5 5 0 33 57 64 7 39 12 3 28 59 77 61 95 78 B-
Mark Cutts Fr. PG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 59 5 10 1 21 64 54 40 39 62 51 B
Gary McClimans Jr. SG 0 4 0 0 0 7 6 6 9 4 2 2 40 21 66 10 23 2 13 97 67 61 80 73 41 B-
Billy Hollon Fr. SG 4 6 0 6 2 2 7 7 5 1 1 5 46 61 54 22 60 6 16 44 44 29 44 71 41 B-
Kyle Noggle Sr. SF 0 5 3 7 6 13 12 3 2 6 6 6 69 62 47 59 66 50 84 67 24 32 68 79 89 B-
Kenneth Robinson Jr. SF -1 7 6 6 5 9 12 3 3 2 6 7 65 31 55 49 53 28 74 34 44 27 61 84 75 C+
Franklyn Robert Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 41 33 39 13 13 13 43 50 42 78 59 C+
Paul Herbert Sr. C 3 5 8 0 9 0 1 0 11 6 6 5 54 65 30 99 62 90 64 2 7 24 63 76 57 B
Eric Jessie So. C 4 3 7 3 5 6 1 -1 -1 1 3 4 35 57 16 80 53 70 40 2 8 2 33 60 48 C
Gus Khan So. C 8 4 5 4 0 18 5 -1 -1 3 -1 11 55 25 32 92 22 80 60 18 21 7 57 79 51 C
Thomas Korte Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 22 68 35 57 71 1 29 6 38 55 34 C
Allen Roush Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 9 76 17 66 34 1 16 31 36 46 75 C
11-3, RPI 16.  First thing to note is Khan's +18 LP.  He started at 20 and is now 60, a testament to how High High-High potential can be.  The second thing is Noggle's across the board continued improvement, making him  one of the top 5 highest rated players in D3.  The question is why this squad didn't perform better last year, though I think the lack of backcourt speed gives it a Sweet 16 ceiling unless matchups really fall our way.  The FR are decent.  The Barber makes the Cut with his high SPD/PE/P despite his DEF and ST shortcomings.  Robert was the "best available" guy at the point he was signed; a PG for next year would probably have been a better call, but just didn't see one I liked.  An NT run leading to an increased prestige is necessary to land the pass-first complement McClimans needs.  The bigs needed to come as a pair b/c their STs are abyssmal, but their skills were much better than anything else I could see.  Let's not Rush to judgement on Roush who has several high potentials; on the other side, Korte will see more court time now but is only med on LP and REB, so doesn't have the upside of a typical CUA recruit.

Salisbury
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Larry Harper Sr. PG 1 7 -1 1 0 0 1 4 0 5 -1 6 23 37 82 2 44 5 11 47 73 36 30 76 64 B
Jeremy Cochran Jr. PG 3 1 0 4 2 1 3 9 3 4 2 7 39 35 74 6 40 5 2 45 65 37 46 79 73 C+
Manuel Oyola So. PG 2 2 0 8 1 0 13 1 1 3 0 7 38 36 62 1 38 3 4 57 60 39 43 82 70 B+
David Cummings Jr. SG 2 4 1 6 -1 2 2 3 1 6 6 4 36 36 68 14 39 12 11 47 52 32 57 81 69 B-
Denis Brown Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 32 1 39 1 10 60 33 25 33 85 67 C-
David Trollinger Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 52 7 51 1 30 27 34 56 52 49 35 C-
Nole Murphy So. SF 2 7 6 3 2 6 4 5 0 4 -2 6 43 42 51 44 30 26 17 39 42 12 60 78 36 B-
Brian Bell Jr. PF 2 2 5 2 2 4 -2 1 2 2 0 3 23 21 29 63 32 56 69 8 31 22 26 68 77 B-
Gavin Cook Jr. PF 10 2 0 9 8 3 0 6 2 4 10 5 59 38 37 57 35 63 50 1 42 13 86 91 63 B
Marvin Gibson Sr. C 2 2 6 1 1 14 0 0 1 6 -1 1 33 36 18 88 35 59 64 17 15 17 40 82 87 C
John Stone So. C 3 1 11 1 2 8 6 1 -1 3 2 4 41 25 14 77 24 57 54 30 21 9 55 76 62 C-
David Davis Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 19 8 5 5 12 11 24 7 49 86 40 C+
4-11, RPI 196.  Salisbury has recovered from last year's traveshamockery.  With only 2 SRs, there is some upside for next year.  Odd choice to bring in 2 SGs with only 1 SF and 4 bigs (3 upperclassmen among them) on the roster.  Trollinger's profile is very nice on the ATH/SPD/DEF front and picking up points on the other G cats.  Cook discovered Improvement Island this past year, with 8+ point improvements in ATH, DEF, and BLK turning him into an interesting defensive stopper with more room to get better.  Oyola's +13 PE should continue to grow and project the backcourt pairing with Cochran that should be able to ride All Season Long.

Gallaudet
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Dale Jenkins Jr. PG 0 1 0 5 1 1 0 6 5 3 0 3 26 55 71 1 62 3 20 35 61 56 31 65 45 C
Vaughn Richards Jr. PG -1 7 0 0 1 0 2 9 9 1 2 0 30 45 63 1 42 2 2 61 52 48 35 71 87 C
Henry Sauve Jr. PG 0 7 0 2 1 1 0 9 4 6 -4 0 26 42 81 2 49 4 2 39 73 72 44 75 35 B-
Brandon Kirkpatrick Fr. PG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 52 1 38 1 1 62 48 32 22 68 35 B
Sean Manahan Sr. SG 4 5 0 2 1 0 11 0 3 6 2 1 35 64 65 1 52 5 1 92 43 53 49 77 69 C+
Marvin Perry Jr. SF 2 7 1 3 4 7 5 0 -1 3 2 3 36 72 47 39 64 21 68 23 28 6 36 85 49 B-
David Milliken Fr. SF 7 8 2 2 3 -1 0 2 9 1 -1 8 40 49 48 25 53 7 7 51 31 29 56 70 39 C
Bryan Beck So. PF 5 3 8 2 2 10 3 -1 0 1 1 5 39 42 20 63 36 55 59 35 4 1 38 77 61 C
Robert Belli Jr. C 1 4 7 7 8 15 0 -1 1 6 5 2 55 59 28 87 72 67 87 1 14 2 61 76 53 B
Michael English So. C 4 2 10 0 7 20 0 0 1 6 2 7 59 59 21 84 56 64 80 1 4 14 55 80 93 C+
John Venegas So. C 1 1 7 6 5 12 0 0 -2 1 -2 6 35 46 23 63 60 61 34 6 25 4 33 68 69 C-
Darrell Wysong So. C -1 2 3 7 4 7 0 -2 0 0 4 5 29 62 20 64 65 46 49 1 4 1 30 55 60 C+
9-5, RPI 48.  The most notable thing about this GU squad is the backcourt SPD/ATH combos, with only the FR coming in below 108.  With only 1 SR, the returning starting 5 (Sauve, Richards, Cousin Perry, Belli and English) might be the best in the North.  The only true FR needs some SPD to fill the SG void that "Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding" leaves behind.  Check out the LP improvements among the bigs, another data point that LP upside might have the most upside of any of the D3 skill sets.
1/19/2011 8:11 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
Goucher
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Danny Newport Sr. PG 0 2 0 5 1 0 0 3 4 2 2 6 26 37 83 5 26 9 13 61 86 48 52 81 79 B
Robert Severe Sr. PG 5 5 -1 1 1 0 8 2 -2 1 3 1 24 34 72 1 19 9 26 59 57 61 30 89 73 B-
Harold Waggoner Sr. PG 1 2 1 6 1 0 7 4 0 6 7 8 43 39 64 2 39 4 1 88 57 37 46 80 85 B
Henry Cook Jr. PG 4 0 0 0 1 0 13 5 0 7 6 6 42 31 61 1 25 3 1 52 69 71 44 77 78 B+
Rodney Grimaldi Fr. PG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52 59 1 53 1 15 26 45 31 50 73 67 B-
Tracy Wason So. SF 7 3 -2 0 2 0 1 3 6 6 -2 5 29 69 58 4 67 3 1 15 48 35 34 72 26 C+
Donald Melton Fr. SF 4 3 4 7 0 0 1 2 3 1 1 7 33 57 33 31 57 13 9 18 23 27 62 61 67 B-
Edward Shepard So. PF 1 2 4 3 2 1 0 0 3 5 2 7 30 53 34 61 48 36 64 1 8 23 30 68 44 C+
James Ricketts Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 36 40 55 24 38 19 15 15 51 62 41 D
Christopher Rogers Sr. C 1 0 2 1 5 5 0 0 2 4 2 1 23 33 39 72 36 67 79 9 1 38 53 65 63 D
George Elser Jr. C 3 3 4 0 4 5 0 0 0 2 0 -1 20 19 20 86 18 77 83 8 8 36 37 66 57 C
Leonard Hannah So. C 1 1 12 4 11 5 0 1 0 5 5 2 47 26 10 92 35 80 38 1 11 23 72 70 28 B
7-7, RPI 92.  Will Koop make a post season dance?  It should be close.  With a SR-laden backcourt and just enough REB depth (I'd like another 5-10 points ST on the bigs), this is a solid squad.  The FR are interesting with Grimaldi's place (wearing #10?) among the best ATH/SPD/DEF combos in the North from day 1.  Melton looks like he can similarly slide into contributing minutes form day 1 with his weaknesses in the scoring categories only.  Lacking in REB and BLK (24!), a lineup catching a bad case of Ricketts is a long term issue unless there is substantial green in those of his good categories (ATH, DEF); there is a scenario where he could deserve SF minutes, but with Melton's similar skill set, I'm not sure that was needed.

Mary Washington
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Robert Gault Sr. PG 0 6 0 8 1 0 0 4 13 5 0 1 47 78 81 1 71 3 2 18 51 73 74 84 54 C
James Callaway Fr. PG 7 5 0 5 1 0 1 4 2 1 6 3 35 27 77 1 32 2 1 77 52 64 41 79 29 B
Michael Carter So. SG 5 2 7 1 1 1 3 5 8 5 -4 4 38 35 72 20 27 2 2 69 52 56 44 82 63 B
Antonio Watson Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 56 13 42 1 1 24 34 41 79 56 42 B
Curtis Stone So. SF 6 2 6 0 4 6 1 0 2 1 4 2 34 38 36 45 46 30 61 2 26 25 33 71 75 B-
Michael O'Keefe Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 40 36 53 15 2 62 26 21 42 73 23 B
Leon Stephens Sr. C 0 8 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 6 4 3 29 52 20 83 50 63 85 2 1 1 58 81 27 B
Karl Jones Jr. C 1 1 7 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 17 54 23 96 47 72 29 1 19 1 43 70 60 C
Dale Russell Jr. C 2 2 6 11 2 5 0 0 -1 5 1 6 39 52 4 90 49 80 61 2 1 1 58 88 58 C+
Jimmy Hensley Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 18 75 40 66 42 1 1 9 46 54 64 D
Wayne Bateman Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 18 20 12 18 12 11 1 47 64 62 B-
Christopher Rodgers Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 13 33 5 9 10 1 16 5 30 80 20 D+
8-6, RPI 13.  Rusticity continues to prove that the ATH is mightier than the SPD (for bigs), the Skill is more important than the balance (for SF's scoring) and the SPD is as key as the PE for perimeter shooting.  He also is a testament to value of strategic scheduling affecting RPI, even when you "hit every branch in the bad luck tree" in a game or two.  That this team only has 4 upper classmen and is on pace for another NT bid is ridiculous.  The RS FR Callaway is, oddly enough, not a driver, but already has a nice G skill set, with some ATH upside.  Watson has your Elementary ATH G skill set, with that WE and a couple of greens in the G skills, you have a beast.  The SF is a fun profile, similar to Melton but with elite PE and no LP.  The other FR big gets an Amen from the CAC congregation with a distinct possibility to Move on Up to the Top of the CAC all conference ranks before his career ends.

Marymount
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Freeman Alderson Sr. SG 0 0 1 1 1 15 3 7 -1 4 1 0 35 46 69 2 40 4 39 58 78 54 82 82 73 B+
Frank Barnhardt So. SG 5 5 0 7 1 -1 7 5 -1 4 -3 4 33 62 55 1 55 2 1 74 58 57 34 80 52 C
Frederick Brown So. SG 10 9 0 5 2 0 2 12 8 2 5 11 66 56 53 6 38 3 8 66 42 44 66 76 64 A-
Alfred Rees Fr. SG 7 7 6 6 4 0 0 11 9 1 2 2 55 47 40 37 45 23 1 58 40 19 75 78 33 B
Christopher Taormina Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 57 1 35 1 6 36 49 57 47 68 27 B
Nathan Toomer Jr. SF 0 6 11 9 4 7 6 0 0 3 2 0 48 38 46 77 38 54 83 12 32 30 70 73 78 B
Jamar Downs Sr. PF 1 6 4 9 3 1 -1 -2 3 4 -2 3 29 50 43 60 62 54 69 1 24 10 34 76 92 B-
Joel Hoerr Jr. PF 4 7 6 7 2 10 1 0 0 3 4 0 44 51 38 73 51 42 57 15 11 34 68 87 67 C+
Chad Goodwin Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55 29 57 50 47 28 1 39 35 20 71 54 D+
Richard Turcotte Jr. C 6 9 5 1 5 7 0 -2 -1 5 1 2 38 48 26 83 46 75 46 2 11 29 38 68 60 B-
Kenneth Smith So. C 3 8 11 11 6 7 2 0 1 -1 10 7 65 48 23 73 46 55 14 3 2 25 86 67 43 C+
Christopher Leet Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 1 68 29 51 29 3 2 16 49 56 44 D
12-3, RPI 19.  Marymount's also recovered from last year's moppishness, despite only 1 SR.  The lack of G SPD should worry NC, but the across-the-board ATH is impressive.  Particularly neat is Toomer's 160 REB+LP from the SF position as a JR.  The FR G's (though I assume RS Rees has some SF run in his future) are nice, assuming a decent amount of green in Taormina's profile.  Leet is a leetle bit worse than your typical Marymount big recruit, though rusticity has shown 1 SPD for a big may not be a beeg problem.
1/19/2011 8:15 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
South
York
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Alfred Brennen Jr. PG 0 7 1 9 5 0 16 10 1 7 2 7 71 60 82 2 58 9 24 64 76 62 62 89 85 C+
Scott Gilland Jr. PG 5 7 0 4 1 0 -1 2 10 6 4 6 44 52 85 1 56 3 1 77 85 77 52 80 71 B
Johnny Kelly So. PG 3 6 -1 0 1 -1 2 -1 2 1 3 2 17 44 76 6 32 2 5 74 66 53 12 70 48 C-
Darren Lawrence Sr. SG 1 0 2 2 -1 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 9 26 66 18 47 16 14 90 64 79 79 83 21 B+
John James Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 53 24 39 19 10 23 43 29 74 69 67 C
Glen Woolridge Jr. SF 7 5 1 4 4 0 3 6 0 3 3 3 39 58 50 33 38 32 62 57 44 46 41 71 44 B-
Phillip Morisky Fr. SF 2 4 1 5 3 3 7 2 3 1 1 4 36 56 54 22 39 9 12 55 38 55 33 71 56 C
Charles Adams Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 31 45 31 36 24 22 21 21 69 66 54 C+
David Jones Sr. C 2 6 2 2 4 1 1 0 5 2 -2 4 27 42 20 89 32 84 74 9 1 26 30 72 55 C
Andy Kopec So. C 6 1 3 4 12 2 1 2 0 1 11 6 49 42 21 71 24 68 77 2 28 26 53 73 40 C+
Kenneth Williams So. C 1 4 3 3 0 4 0 -1 6 3 7 5 35 40 24 93 35 80 92 1 1 26 50 78 66 C+
Don Joyce Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 9 69 28 66 32 1 18 1 70 73 55 C-
13-2, RPI 3.  After bringing in a fully formed G last year (Kelly, note the low improvement, but sick starting skills), James is an upside play with interesting REB to go with a need for G skill development.  Adams (The answer:42.  The ?: What was Adams' ATH rating when I pulled in the data) is similar to Ricketts; with another SF in the class, a natural conversion fit doesn't work, so I assume there is enough high-high to make this a good play.  Great team, ridiculous JR backcourt; the FR will need to improve to stay at this level.

Bible Thumpers
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Jesse Leatherwood Jr. PG 0 10 0 12 1 -1 0 6 8 4 -1 0 38 44 80 1 67 4 1 29 67 55 67 92 54 B
Richard Zamzam So. PG 4 4 0 6 1 0 1 5 6 5 4 2 38 54 49 1 51 2 1 26 52 40 51 77 78 D-
Matt Cote So. SG 6 12 0 3 1 0 1 8 12 2 10 6 61 39 67 1 51 2 1 37 49 44 90 82 68 B
Richard Bowen Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 47 1 29 1 1 71 32 56 46 70 54 B-
Brett Willer Jr. SF 1 3 2 5 5 0 0 2 1 3 -1 5 26 42 45 45 51 27 33 9 35 47 55 71 87 B-
Lawrence Elders So. SF 6 2 9 7 7 0 -2 2 6 4 5 6 52 36 36 38 49 33 2 9 47 48 47 74 79 F
William Balderas Jr. PF 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 3 1 3 2 4 19 17 23 64 19 54 68 30 31 28 26 77 50 F
Millard Parsons So. PF 2 4 11 4 6 9 1 -2 -1 5 -3 6 42 42 31 60 28 47 86 2 15 1 54 76 63 B-
Donald Trim So. PF 2 6 0 2 2 2 1 4 0 0 1 1 21 45 40 45 36 30 33 29 23 8 70 62 39 D-
Robert Lay Jr. C 2 1 11 5 0 0 3 0 1 2 5 6 36 47 24 78 56 48 37 37 12 16 79 76 58 F
William Pratt Jr. C 1 2 3 4 2 3 -1 0 0 3 4 1 22 66 22 60 61 40 39 1 33 29 54 72 45 F
Ben Henderson So. C 8 1 7 5 2 3 0 -1 -1 4 10 6 44 45 4 68 54 50 55 1 6 6 53 64 90 C
3-12, RPI 181.  This version isn't a bad team and with no SRs, there are enough pieces to contemplate a PIT run next season, though lack of G depth and PE should be a concern.  Bowen was the right type of recruit, one just wishes that one of the sophomore bigs could have been Trimmed for a similar player in that class.

The Hood
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Ronald Smith Jr. PG 0 4 0 4 1 0 5 5 -1 4 1 6 30 37 84 1 42 3 22 88 78 52 34 82 64 B
Daniel Gill So. PG 5 2 -1 6 0 5 6 8 9 0 9 12 61 49 71 8 39 9 34 44 69 47 58 60 58 C+
Stacey Brooks Sr. SG 2 0 0 2 1 0 -1 5 8 6 1 3 27 59 63 3 48 5 47 92 81 62 68 81 32 B
Timothy Chapman Sr. SG 1 -1 1 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 1 4 22 44 69 3 28 9 19 39 64 78 42 81 88 A-
Timothy Billington Jr. SG 3 5 0 9 1 0 1 4 8 3 -4 7 37 62 66 1 70 3 6 82 57 64 55 78 41 C-
Donald Benites Fr. SG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 74 17 45 10 9 50 59 50 31 58 8 D+
Christopher Lavender Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 40 9 57 1 32 55 32 29 40 56 71 B-
Robert Ewing Jr. PF 4 0 3 0 3 13 4 -2 -1 2 5 0 31 68 23 72 55 60 75 7 9 14 37 71 44 C+
Joseph Ohler So. PF 1 3 8 17 4 6 0 0 0 2 9 7 57 59 5 71 79 58 86 1 1 1 65 74 36 C+
Stephen Harrison Sr. C 2 3 -1 2 9 3 0 0 0 6 3 3 30 56 32 81 36 93 95 1 4 2 47 84 53 B-
Ryan Holt Sr. C 0 1 -2 2 2 11 4 1 -1 3 -1 3 23 67 22 57 64 40 69 30 8 19 44 65 21 B
Walter Clark Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 13 55 34 53 63 1 1 10 53 57 37 C
10-5, RPI 29.  Good news: this team is the defending national champion.  More good news: the pieces are there for an NT run in the swan song for all time greats Brooks (Mr Outside) and Harrison (Mr Inside).  The good news for everybody else: they finally graduate after this year and next year this is probably not a top 10 team, only top 25.  The FR range from the ridiculous (Benites) to the solid (Clark) to the OK (Lavender).  If you put on light-purple colored glasses, you can see an nice ATH/scoring profile, but without REB at the G's, sacrificing all SF rebounding is an odd choice.  Getting a G like several lesser programs did to do the ATH/SPD/REB/DEF heavy lifting and leaving the scoring to Benites and Clark would have seemed a better play.
1/19/2011 8:19 PM
andrewfrance
Posts: 189 (0)
Hall of Famer
16 3 8 225 28 134 7
Prospect
The Hill
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Richard Williams Sr. PG 0 3 1 1 7 2 0 3 1 4 2 0 25 35 87 16 19 28 17 46 72 66 85 94 48 B
Henry Grider So. PG 3 7 0 3 2 0 2 5 8 3 9 10 52 39 86 1 38 5 1 33 75 78 65 81 66 A-
Christopher Coop Sr. SG 3 2 0 6 2 0 2 0 2 6 6 0 29 44 68 11 72 14 12 72 52 38 48 81 92 A-
Charles McFarland Jr. SG 1 1 0 1 0 0 2 2 7 3 2 4 23 53 61 8 39 10 5 71 45 49 67 81 89 B
Ryan Stout So. SG 0 5 0 1 2 0 4 6 -1 1 3 0 21 37 48 27 31 14 11 69 43 42 22 65 56 B
Tommie Scholz Sr. SF 1 1 0 0 2 6 5 1 0 6 1 2 25 31 55 36 26 26 58 41 31 52 44 76 48 B
Norman Sheley Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 30 23 34 1 36 41 47 45 28 70 41 D+
Francis Johnson Sr. PF 0 1 8 3 4 5 2 1 2 3 0 9 38 51 31 73 44 60 52 39 25 42 68 76 88 C
Carl Wise Jr. PF 5 0 11 4 4 17 0 -1 0 6 1 2 49 47 33 93 46 76 73 1 8 14 63 73 67 C+
William Mrozek Fr. PF 4 7 10 1 1 10 -1 2 -2 1 -1 6 38 36 32 63 21 35 66 7 22 5 63 76 62 C
Robert Carpenter So. C 3 1 13 1 2 18 0 3 0 3 4 9 57 35 25 89 26 61 60 22 16 1 62 68 47 C-
Jake Severino Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 27 74 9 62 56 18 26 12 67 53 47 D+
12-3, RPI 17.  This is options' Hannibal from A-Team season when a plan has come together with a pair of PGs with mad speed, a troika of SG who can fill it up, a nice complementary SF pair (is Scholz was half again as good as Noggle, this team would be a F4 favorite, and well-rounded bigs with REB/LP improvements rounding out a nice core set.  The FR bigs look nice (with RS Mrozek flashing 50/50/80/80 potential). Sheley's start skills and WE leave him like a Frankenstein, with nice G skills, fit onto a questionable SF frame.

VJ-RIP
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
David Peck So. PG 0 10 0 9 1 -1 16 14 13 3 6 4 76 31 70 7 35 8 18 57 62 56 61 67 49 C-
Austin McVay So. SG 2 4 9 1 5 0 12 7 7 4 3 9 63 22 55 37 17 16 2 59 61 55 66 81 29 C-
Paul Suszynski So. SG 5 5 0 7 4 9 5 6 6 1 5 0 53 47 56 22 46 14 48 29 58 43 48 80 71 B+
Eric Noel Sr. SF 0 2 3 2 1 -1 -1 -1 2 6 0 -1 12 28 67 41 20 17 16 66 66 19 71 94 55 B
Joseph Fort So. SF 3 10 11 6 10 1 17 0 8 1 10 5 82 16 52 44 21 27 42 51 30 56 85 76 53 C+
Lamont Jones So. PF 4 4 1 8 4 11 5 4 -1 1 0 5 46 46 47 55 54 51 53 30 34 31 39 62 31 C
David Johnson Sr. C 3 2 0 4 0 2 5 0 3 3 6 0 28 55 20 97 55 62 45 8 24 23 87 78 52 B
Peter Penick Sr. C 5 4 4 0 3 4 0 0 5 -27 1 1 0 15 43 96 2 83 48 1 24 14 26 70 98 B-
Bernard Rogers Jr. C 0 6 2 1 1 9 5 4 0 5 8 3 44 33 38 97 27 76 74 7 6 2 76 90 99 C-
Marty Taylor Jr. C 7 5 3 7 6 16 8 0 1 2 3 3 61 44 24 73 46 73 86 17 21 19 74 79 29 B-
Elias Blackwell So. C 2 5 6 4 -1 4 1 -3 -1 1 -5 2 15 29 25 77 29 54 41 2 32 15 21 83 52 C-
Michael Brown Fr. PF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 19 18 48 10 24 23 13 5 100 69 49 C-
10-5, RPI 4.  Still only 3 G's (didn't track closely enough to know what happened with the unfilled scholly); the 94 ST at 1 SF opens up interesting possibilities for Noel's Christmas present being some additional G coverage.  The bigs here are great and despite Magneto's skepticism, his REB rate does show as best in the conference for NC play.  There probably isn't enough ATH to make a real NT run, but I like the Sophomore development (is Fort = Noggle - ATH?  +10/+16/+14/+13 from Peck's G skills is glorious) Taylor/Rogers/Blackwell leaves them set for next year even when 2 of the 95+ REBers graduate.  There is a lot to lik here short and long term.

Saint Mary's of Maryland
      Improvement Current Status
Name Yr. Pos. A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU TOT A SPD REB DE BLK LP PE BH P WE ST DU FT
Craig Ford Jr. PG 0 6 0 6 1 0 4 7 7 6 0 4 42 36 76 1 51 4 1 68 76 66 45 79 58 A-
Marc Morrow Fr. PG 2 4 -1 3 1 -1 4 5 7 0 0 0 24 34 61 6 22 8 11 55 61 54 39 69 44 C-
Freddie Switzer Jr. SG -1 5 3 -1 2 0 9 5 11 4 9 6 52 39 66 7 49 4 5 91 56 55 52 82 78 B-
Roy Legere So. SG 8 7 -1 6 2 1 13 3 1 3 6 0 49 43 60 8 49 4 32 74 56 52 41 67 34 C+
Daniel Cool Sr. SF 2 6 3 6 6 3 8 3 1 6 1 3 48 37 60 45 54 22 57 28 48 42 45 79 70 B
James Battle Jr. SF 5 3 9 1 2 13 1 0 1 2 5 8 50 43 48 73 34 53 46 54 28 18 45 72 69 B-
Andrew Cabe Fr. SF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 34 32 24 19 5 46 52 42 46 65 36 C-
Dana Blaine So. PF 7 8 6 2 8 13 -1 -1 -1 1 6 7 55 25 37 66 19 49 40 7 30 37 46 61 94 C+
Kim Simpson Jr. C 0 9 8 6 7 9 -1 4 0 3 2 12 59 41 31 82 46 69 88 1 13 8 67 69 42 B+
Gary Goulette So. C 6 5 7 5 0 9 2 1 -1 2 6 10 52 27 22 85 27 69 43 7 24 27 43 59 74 B-
Alfred Lilly Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 1 76 28 79 29 2 1 24 42 72 65 C
Michael Nelson Fr. C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 5 72 22 69 41 4 6 1 63 61 58 D+
11-4, RPI 76.  Lucius did a poor job of scheduling nonconference or somebody hexed his opponents something fierce.  This should be a tourney team, but weak noncon SOS might doom it.  The ATH's and WE's are a bit monotonous, but in a good way.  The PE is there, the D is there, the BLK is there, Cool/Battle is the SF combo that Chestnut Hill could use... the big problem, oddly for an SMM team is the bigs.  The ATH is unquestionably light and the LPs are subpar this side of Simpson (though I like the cut of his jib).  The true FR bigs look like nice pieces, assuming at least one is high in LP.  The SF is nothing to write home about, though with enough highs, the PE/BH/P might cover some G deficiencies in the latter two.
1/19/2011 8:24 PM
◂ Prev 1...67|68|69|70|71...84 Next ▸
Capital Athletic Conference: Year 12-pres Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.