2008 Conference – GAC 845, STO 705

Forums Conferences Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference 2008 Conference – GAC 845, STO 705

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 34 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #12754

      With help from Rustie Gusties original losses post, I’ve done the breakdown for the 2008 conference meet. Numbers don’t lie, and GAC absolutely slaughters Olaf this year. It won’t even be close. JC can scratch every event after the 200 breast, and still win. GAC even has more upside to this number, as it has 3 freshman who are off this analysis, but are probably better than at least 2 of the swimmers from 06/07.

      GAC – 838 last year
      Losses
      Hagemeyer 58.5
      Amundson 51.5
      Waylander 42
      De Leeuw 10 (never would have been on the roster had Mac of the MIAC a say)
      Howard 6
      TOTAL -168

      On the bubble (Ross Elenkiwich, 23pts)

      Gains
      Whitaker Davis 44 (5th 500 free, 4th 1650, 5th 400 IM)
      Craig Norquist 41 (4th 100 back, 6th 200 back, 6th 200 freestyle)
      Paul Kirihara 35 (5th 100 back, 7th 200 back, 9th 200 IM)
      New Diver 30 (4th 1m, 4th 3m)
      Sam DeFranco 23 (9th 50 free, 9th 100 free, 12th 200 free)
      John Rice does not make roster for this analysis, but could score 22 (4:54 500 free)
      Josh Jacobsen does not make roster, but could score 20 (53 100 fly)
      Wes Jones does not make roster, but could score 18 (1:47 200 free)
      TOTAL +175
      2008 TOTAL 845

      STO – 843 2007
      Losses
      Kukla – 53
      Wareham – 51
      Anderson – 49
      Thomas – 40
      Mike Jessop – 40
      CJ Wagner – 37.5
      Lorentzen – 40
      Douros – 29
      Price – 8
      TOTAL – 347.5

      Gains
      Chris Bateman 46 (3rd 500 free, 3rd 1650, 5th 200 free)
      Jacob Reinhart 37 (4th 100 breast, 4th 200 breast, 10th 100 fly)
      Danny Okeefe 37 (6th 500 free, 6th 200 free, 8th 100 free)
      New Diver 32 (3rd 1m, 3rd 3m)
      Luke Money 31 (7th 100 fly, 6th 200 fly, 10th 50 free)
      Luke Murrel 12 (11th 50 free, 11th 100 free)
      Kyle Beiseker 10 (12th 50 free, 12th 100 free)
      Ryan Berry 3 (16th 200 free, 16th 500 free, 16th 1650)
      Evan Plotz 2
      TOTAL +210
      2008 TOTAL 705.5

    • #39862

      What events does Wakefield swim?

    • #39863

      Wakefield will swim the 50, 100, 200. And he is going to score a ton of points. I had him rated very high on my fantasy board.

      There were 7 seniors in the top 16 of the 50 last year. It’s a good year to be Tyler Wakefield or Clement Ayung. Or a 22.1 taper swimmer. You’ll score some points.

      @Chapel Partner wrote:

      What events does Wakefield swim?

    • #39864

      First let me say that I love the analysis, Mac. Detailed and thourough, I like it. Even more to my liking is the outcome. However, there is much, much more to who wins and loses than a simple Outs/Ins points analysis. Not that it isn’t a good starting point though, as it does provide some insight. If you’re losing 400 pts you can’t make that up on a good feeling.

      I think it was said best by OutsideSmoker27 in another thread, so I’ll let him say it again:

      @OutsideSmoker27 wrote:

      It’s hard to predict how the overall meet scores will change based solely on lost RAG points (relegation, attrition, and graduation points, yes I made that term up). There are too many other things in play: 1) new points from freshmen and from upperclassmen who swam exhibition the year before, 2) returning swimmers scoring more (or fewer) points than they did the year before, 3) changes in relay wins or relay DQs (not to mention the “intangibles” of the meet itself: who’s swimming well, who’s in top health, who’s got the momentum on their side at any given point).

    • #39865
      stroker69
      Member

      Since you know how the entire conference meet is going to place out with every team, should we just skip the meet and not swim at all?

    • #39866

      Thanks for asking. I think it’s pretty important, especially for my sweet fantasy league, that you all swim this one out. If you have any other questions, like with what classes to take (always challenge yourself), or what to do with your hair (grow it out), don’t be afraid to ask.

      @stroker69 wrote:

      Since you know how the entire conference meet is going to place out with every team, should we just skip the meet and not swim at all?

    • #39867

      @Rustie Gustie wrote:

      I think it was said best by OutsideSmoker27 in another thread, so I’ll let him or her say it again:

      @OutsideSmoker27 wrote:

      It’s hard to predict how the overall meet scores will change based solely on lost RAG points (relegation, attrition, and graduation points, yes I made that term up). There are too many other things in play: 1) new points from freshmen and from upperclassmen who swam exhibition the year before, 2) returning swimmers scoring more (or fewer) points than they did the year before, 3) changes in relay wins or relay DQs (not to mention the “intangibles” of the meet itself: who’s swimming well, who’s in top health, who’s got the momentum on their side at any given point).

      Proving that sometimes a shameless personal plug really can pay off. 😆

      I think Mac covers the RAG points and #1 pretty well. You have to add in any relay changes (probably not so hard) and #2 (a harder nut to crack) and you’re good to go.

      On the other hand, sometimes it’s better to just start from scratch and guess how many points each team or swimmer’s “going to score” per event…..which Mac has already started as well (it reflects how the meet runs in real life a little better too; everyone starts with 0 points, after all.)

      And just to clarify, “him” would describe me best.

    • #39868

      @OutsideSmoker27 wrote:

      And just to clarify, “him” would describe me best.

      I guessed wrong in another forum not more than a week ago and felt bad about it so I’m trying not to repeat my mistakes. Thanks for the clarification.

    • #39869

      @stroker69 wrote:

      Since you know how the entire conference meet is going to place out with every team, should we just skip the meet and not swim at all?

      I agree with Mac that it’s probably pretty important for you guys to swim this one out. Also worth noting that in-depth analysis has only been done for Gustavus and Olaf, so by no means do we know how “the entire conference meet is going to place out with every team”.

      A huge factor in championship meets is teams at the bottom half stealing points from teams at the top half. If it’s close between two team for first, and a 6th place teams squeak into the finals bumping a guy from team one or two into 9th, that’s quite a difference.

    • #39870
      stroker69
      Member

      Mac, how can you say what the final score for conference meet will be between Gac and Olaf? You can’t say a definite point total for any team in the meet unless you know how every team will do. Also how do you acount for unforseen events, here are a few from the past years that were not “predictable” in October

      1) T.J. Hardy getting 8th in the 50 free (no offense T.J.)
      2) St. Olaf’s 400 Free relay getting 6th
      3) Dave Linn DQing the 50 his senior year

      Finally, Mac, how can you give a final points score with no knowledge of how diving will result for any of the teams. You don’t know who will fail a dive, or how the judges will score any given dive. It is impossible to give and accurate final score for either gac or olaf based on the swimming or diving unless you know how each event will place from 1st to 16th and you are giving every score for every diver

    • #39871
      caveman12
      Member

      stroker69-
      It is called a prediction, its not a dictatorship where what ever MAC says goes. Conference is not a gimme for either Olaf or Gac, so both teams still have to compete well to win. Odds are those arent going to be the exact scores, but a simple prediction never hurt anyone. Let him have some fun. It’s kind of what the forums are for. No one should take what people say on here completely seriously.

    • #39872

      My entire analysis is an educated guess. But now that I’ve done my analysis, it looks like it’s going to be pretty difficult for Olaf to repeat. Olaf has some serious depth issues. They will have 5 conference swimmers struggling to score 10 points, whereas GAC will have 3 swimmers who could score 25 points sitting the conference meet out.

      Having lost to Olaf 3 straight years, and having thought we would beat them every year, I understand your frustration with my prediction. Anything could happen, especially considering FY students can drastically improve their first year.

      Predictions aside, I’m really excited about SJU. They had the best FY class. If they have another great year recruiting, they could challenge both GAC and STO. I was very glad to see GAC emerge as a powerhouse, and I’d be just as happy to see 3 teams challenging for the title.

      @stroker69 wrote:

      Mac, how can you say what the final score for conference meet will be between Gac and Olaf? You can’t say a definite point total for any team in the meet unless you know how every team will do. Also how do you acount for unforseen events, here are a few from the past years that were not “predictable” in October

      1) T.J. Hardy getting 8th in the 50 free (no offense T.J.)
      2) St. Olaf’s 400 Free relay getting 6th
      3) Dave Linn DQing the 50 his senior year

      Finally, Mac, how can you give a final points score with no knowledge of how diving will result for any of the teams. You don’t know who will fail a dive, or how the judges will score any given dive. It is impossible to give and accurate final score for either gac or olaf based on the swimming or diving unless you know how each event will place from 1st to 16th and you are giving every score for every diver

    • #39873

      All time favorite GAC swimmer? Caveman12, without a doubt. Though I would slightly disagree with you, respectfully, of course, as to the fact that d3swimming.com/forum?f=15 is not a dictatorship run by Mac of the MIAC.

      @caveman12 wrote:

      stroker69-
      It is called a prediction, its not a dictatorship where what ever MAC says goes. Conference is not a gimme for either Olaf or Gac, so both teams still have to compete well to win. Odds are those arent going to be the exact scores, but a simple prediction never hurt anyone. Let him have some fun. It’s kind of what the forums are for. No one should take what people say on here completely seriously.

    • #39874

      @stroker69 wrote:

      Mac, how can you say what the final score for conference meet will be between Gac and Olaf?

      He didn’t. He showed what the estimated point totals would be based solely on RAG (nice acronym by the way, OutsideSmoker, it’s quite catchy and useful) points and projected points from returning swimmers and first-years. It’s a prediction based on educated guessing, simple as that.

    • #39875

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      My entire analysis is an educated guess.

      With some sound reasoning behind it, I might add. My educated guess is that based on his post, stroker69 is not a GAC fan and most likely an Ole alum, friend, or current athelete who is upset that the sound logic and reasoning on behalf of Rustie Gustie and Mac of the MIAC points to Olaf losing Conference this year.

    • #39876
      stroker69
      Member

      How can sound reasoning say that any given person will get 16th in all three of their events? Do you simply pull this out of thin air or do you have some support of your claims to all the places people will finish. Also, sound reasoning tells me that Mac added wrong on his “projections”.

    • #39877

      @stroker69 wrote:

      How can sound reasoning say that any given person will get 16th in all three of their events? Do you simply pull this out of thin air or do you have some support of your claims to all the places people will finish.

      Past performances are a big indication. At any rate, the basic equation for figuring out where someone should finish is to:
      1) Pull up results from last years meet.
      2) Delete all non-returning swimmers from graduation and quitting.
      3) Fill in all first-year swimmers based on HS times.
      4) Adjust places as you see fit based on past performances, how you think they will train, insider info, etc.
      5) Score the meet for whichever teams you wish.

      As has been said several times already, these are just predictions. The main purpose is to aid Mac’s fantasy league, but also to bolster discussion on the site. Bottom line is that if you disagree with his scoring, then either a) post your discrepancies and hope someone else scores it with your changes, b) score it out yourself with what you think are fair and accurate placings, or c) quit whining. Personally, I’m hoping for one of the last two.

    • #39878

      @stroker69 wrote:

      How can sound reasoning say that any given person will get 16th in all three of their events? Do you simply pull this out of thin air or do you have some support of your claims to all the places people will finish. Also, sound reasoning tells me that Mac added wrong on his “projections”.

      Did someone pee in Stroker69’s Ceral? He seems to be in a big Huff about this.

      There is not clear predicaion. Everyone said that Ohio State would be rebuilding for a year or two before they would contend again for a National title, but some unpredicatable upsets, someone gets hurt, people quit, etc., and they are ranked #1. Who would have thought Boston College would be up there? When it comes down to it, even if you bring in a great recuiting class and graduate no one, and no one improves and swims like crap, you are not doing much to help your team. If one team just improves everyone by a little bit, someone moves from 8th, to 3rd, others move from Consols to Finals, relays move up a place or two, you can make up a lot of points by those little things. Even a Hundred point meet predication at the beginning of the year is not winning by much, because it is not the actual meet.

    • #39879

      I think that more than anything it gives the Alumni a chance to live vicariously through the current teams as well as something to do other than work. When I did my Graduation loss analysis, I did it mostly out of boredom and my own curiosity. Although I can’t say it for sure, I’m guessing that Mac did his Conference analysis either for his fantasy league, out of boredom, out of curiosity, or some combination thereof.

      Just relax a little bit, stroker69. It’s all in good fun. The only way this at all affects any of the current swimmers is if they read it, believe it, and let it get in their heads. Just ’cause someone makes a post that has Jon Doe from St. John’s taking 10th in the 400 IM doesn’t really mean that’s where he’ll finish. There are virtually limitless variables (health, hitting taper, mental attitude, team atmosphere, etc) that come into play at a Conference meet, how can we possibly account for them all?

    • #39880

      @stroker69 wrote:

      Also, sound reasoning tells me that Mac added wrong on his “projections”.

      So? People make mistakes. If you’re referring to his dual meet prediction between Olaf and Gustavus, that has already been corrected. If you’re referring to Conference, there are quite a few numbers to add up to score out a 3 day meet and it would be easy to miss one.

    • #39881

      Here was my line last year (from a post). Since I didn’t know what anyone was swimming, and since I know nothing about diving, I think I got pretty close. Especially with SJU, Carleton, and Hamline. If Nick Deleuw is replaced on the conference roster, and Tyler Wakefield swims the 100, both of which I had assumed, these results would be spot on.

      Mac of the MIAC 06/07 Line
      GAC 903
      STO 875
      SJU 491
      CAR 377
      HAM 308

      Actual Results
      St. Olaf College 843.50
      Gustavus Adolphus College 838.50
      Saint John’s University 513
      Carleton College 372
      Hamline University 297
      University of St. Thomas 296
      Saint Mary’s University 194
      Macalester College 131

    • #39882

      Let’s hope you’re just as accurate this year!

    • #39883
      Look Up
      Member

      Does the Olaf-Gustavus Dual affect anyone’s predictions in any way?
      (I wish I had the time to score it all out myself, but i don’t)

      Can Olaf challenge for the win in the 4 Free relay?
      (I think so. Olaf has two established sprinters in Koch and Westby, as well as the emerging talent of Murrell. On top of that they have strong sprinters in Edwards and Biesecker to fill out the relay)

      Which swimmers on either team need to hit the next level to sway the results?
      (For Olaf – Bateman is needed to end Gustie dominance in the distance events and someone (besides westby), maybe Witzel or Money is needed in the fly, especially the 200)
      (For Gustavus – The backstrokers, Kirihara, Pokorski and Nordquist, Olaf looks to dominate in the Back and Breast, Gustavus needs to take one of those away. Adam Meyer may be impossible to beat for any of them, but Mo-Lobeda is easily within Range.
      The sprinters – If Olaf challenges in the 4 Free, like I think they will, the sprinters need to step-it off to hold of the oles. Also, without the Clydesdales, and with the Olaf first years, this is a spot where Olaf could pick up a good number of points)

      Note: I apologize for any name misspellings.

    • #39884

      @Look Up wrote:

      Does the Olaf-Gustavus Dual affect anyone’s predictions in any way?

      Not mine. With the meet being so early in the season it’s hard to say how these swims will play out at Conference. Plus, a FY may find a different event by the end of the season. Just ’cause they’re doing sprints now doesn’t mean they won’t be an IMer at Conference. Take Wakefield for example. Swam sprint all season; the mile at Conference.

      @Look Up wrote:

      Can Olaf challenge for the win in the 4 Free relay?

      I think so. Gustavus is hurting without their closers on this relay. I would not be surprised if St. John’s or Carleton was in the running as well.

      @Look Up wrote:

      Which swimmers on either team need to hit the next level to sway the results?

      Like you said, the Oles need someone to take away points in distance and fly. Gustavus needs breaststrokers in a super bad way, as well as someone to challenge Meyer and a breakout sprinter.

    • #39885
      The Pork
      Member

      @Rustie Gustie wrote:

      Just relax a little bit, stroker69. It’s all in good fun. The only way this at all affects any of the current swimmers is if they read it, believe it, and let it get in their heads. Just ’cause someone makes a post that has Jon Doe from St. John’s taking 10th in the 400 IM doesn’t really mean that’s where he’ll finish.

      Agreed. Silent P did little but crap all over St. Olaf Swimming (myself specifically a few times) in much of my time in the program and all it did was motivate me to prove him wrong. So I say keep up the nay saying, it can either break someone, or give them the extra push they need to really improve their times. That being said, I’m not saying the Gustavus doesn’t deserve a lot of the praise they get on this site. They’re great competitors, and I enjoyed swimming against them for all of my four years, even when we lost. THAT being said, I will now try and keep my biased, douche bagginess to a minimum from now on and I encourage others to do the same and give some other teams the credit they deserve as well. Go MIAC.

    • #39886

      @The Pork wrote:

      I encourage others to do the same and give some other teams the credit they deserve as well. Go MIAC.

      Here here, I’ll toast to that!

      MIAC is friggen sweet. It is (and always has been) my opinion that the more good teams there are in the MIAC and the more good swimmers we have will help bring in fast freshman and transfers. The more competition, the better; competition IS what swimming is all about. I would love it if a couple more teams stepped up and threatened for 1st. How exciting would this site (and the MIAC) be if it was all, “Well, Olaf is going to win conference again, for the 20th year in a row, by 1 million points.” I think that every team deserves credit for being good compeditors and excellent representatives of the MIAC.

      MIAC, I salute you.

    • #39887

      @backstroker02 wrote:

      How exciting would this site (and the MIAC) be if it was all, “Well, Olaf is going to win conference again, for the 20th year in a row, by 1 million points.”

      Definitely a good point, backstroker02. If you read through the NCAA forum, the majority of the talk is about the teams that will finish 2nd through 10th, as it is pretty much a given that Kenyon will garner the #1 spot. I too hope that the other programs in the conference will someday be as powerful as Gustavus and Olaf at the Conference. It would make it one heck of an experience, both for athletes and spectators, to have 4 or 5 teams all fighting for first.

    • #39888

      @Look Up wrote:

      Does the Olaf-Gustavus Dual affect anyone’s predictions in any way?

      GAC has better diving than I had estimated. They will pick up points from my prediction.

      GAC’s relays might lose some points. I could see them slipping to 3rd in the medleys to SJU. Olaf looks to have a stronger 200FR.

    • #39889

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      GAC has better diving than I had estimated. They will pick up points from my prediction.

      There should be no reason that he wouldn’t, but I’m guessing that you’re assuming he’ll pick up a solid 3m list by mid-February?

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      GAC’s relays might lose some points. I could see them slipping to 3rd in the medleys to SJU. Olaf looks to have a stronger 200FR.

      They definitely will looking at current times. They will be fighting for 2nd, or possibly the 3rd in the 400 MR and most likely 2nd in the 200 MR. The 2 and 4 FR will be close, with, as you said, a slight advantage to Olaf on the 2. The 800 FR should be GACs.

    • #39890

      If Olaf tries to go after Gustavus in the 400 free relay, they will have to give up any shot at the 800 free relay. In the past 2 years, they took their shot in the 800 free relay and they came up short, they ended up having the sprinters to put on the 400 free relay. Olaf will need Westby and Koch on it. They will both be on the Medlays. Olaf then has a decision, do they put them both on two of the 3 free relays or split them up?

    • #39891

      I would think that between the 400 and 800 FR that Olaf would have the best shot at winning the 400FR. Gustavus is going to have too many great 200 swimmers to lose the 800 FR. If Olaf puts Westby, Koch, and 2other decent guys on it, I think they will be able to give Stewart, Hanson, Wakefield, and Auyeung a run for their money.

    • #39892

      Did Luke Murrell really anchor the 400 FR in a 46.97, or was that actually Koch and the splits were wrong?

      If so, I’d say Koch, Westby, Murrell, and some drunk from the Rueb would be favored in the 400 and 200 FRs at conference.

      Koch and Stewart cancel each other out… then you go down the line and it seems like Olaf has every GAC guy beat.

      GAC right now is probably only favored in the 800 I think going into conference.

      As for my comments on UST. I think Carleton is the early favorite for 3, UST is 4, and SJU is maybe 5. I know it is early, but other than Josh Swenson, is there another swimmer on the team who has a shot at top 8 in any event?

    • #39893

      @Chapel Partner wrote:

      Did Luke Murrell really anchor the 400 FR in a 46.97, or was that actually Koch and the splits were wrong? If so, I’d say Koch, Westby, Murrell, and some drunk from the Rueb would be favored in the 400 and 200 FRs at conference. Koch and Stewart cancel each other out… then you go down the line and it seems like Olaf has every GAC guy beat. GAC right now is probably only favored in the 800 I think going into conference.

      I wasn’t at the meet so I’m just guessing, but intuition tells me that was Koch anchoring and the people were just listed in the wrong order. I do agree with you though that Olaf is probably the favorite in all the relays except for the 800 FR.

      @Chapel Partner wrote:

      I know it is early, but other than Josh Swenson, is there another swimmer on the team who has a shot at top 8 in any event?

      I just paged through the results once more and I can’t find one…. What about Torre Ahlberg, Bobby Chapman, and Darren Lofquist? Couldn’t they be potential top 8 material?

    • #39894

      Mac,

      You posted this very early in the season. Now being a few meets in and only a week or two away from mid-season meets, have your point projections changed at all?

      There have been some quality freshman swims, as well as some no-shows. How does this affect the scoring? Does it widen the gap, or make the meet closer?

    • #39895

      This is starting to look like a pretty good prediction.

      @Mac of the MIAC wrote:

      With help from Rustie Gusties original losses post, I’ve done the breakdown for the 2008 conference meet. Numbers don’t lie, and GAC absolutely slaughters Olaf this year. It won’t even be close. JC can scratch every event after the 200 breast, and still win. GAC even has more upside to this number, as it has 3 freshman who are off this analysis, but are probably better than at least 2 of the swimmers from 06/07.

      GAC – 838 last year
      Losses
      Hagemeyer 58.5
      Amundson 51.5
      Waylander 42
      De Leeuw 10 (never would have been on the roster had Mac of the MIAC a say)
      Howard 6
      TOTAL -168

      On the bubble (Ross Elenkiwich, 23pts)

      Gains
      Whitaker Davis 44 (5th 500 free, 4th 1650, 5th 400 IM)
      Craig Norquist 41 (4th 100 back, 6th 200 back, 6th 200 freestyle)
      Paul Kirihara 35 (5th 100 back, 7th 200 back, 9th 200 IM)
      New Diver 30 (4th 1m, 4th 3m)
      Sam DeFranco 23 (9th 50 free, 9th 100 free, 12th 200 free)
      John Rice does not make roster for this analysis, but could score 22 (4:54 500 free)
      Josh Jacobsen does not make roster, but could score 20 (53 100 fly)
      Wes Jones does not make roster, but could score 18 (1:47 200 free)
      TOTAL +175
      2008 TOTAL 845

      STO – 843 2007
      Losses
      Kukla – 53
      Wareham – 51
      Anderson – 49
      Thomas – 40
      Mike Jessop – 40
      CJ Wagner – 37.5
      Lorentzen – 40
      Douros – 29
      Price – 8
      TOTAL – 347.5

      Gains
      Chris Bateman 46 (3rd 500 free, 3rd 1650, 5th 200 free)
      Jacob Reinhart 37 (4th 100 breast, 4th 200 breast, 10th 100 fly)
      Danny Okeefe 37 (6th 500 free, 6th 200 free, 8th 100 free)
      New Diver 32 (3rd 1m, 3rd 3m)
      Luke Money 31 (7th 100 fly, 6th 200 fly, 10th 50 free)
      Luke Murrel 12 (11th 50 free, 11th 100 free)
      Kyle Beiseker 10 (12th 50 free, 12th 100 free)
      Ryan Berry 3 (16th 200 free, 16th 500 free, 16th 1650)
      Evan Plotz 2
      TOTAL +210
      2008 TOTAL 705.5

Viewing 34 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.