2004 Most Talented Roster Ever

[ctchamps]

I rank them:

1) 2004 - That team did look like 1990 UNLV at times. They could destroy teams when they were hitting on all cylinders.

2) 1999 - really good team with quality at every position and a couple of stars.

3) 1995 - Ray, Doron, Donny, and Travis were tough to stop. Ollie was excellent at the point and Fair was effective off the bench when he wasn't in the doghouse. This should have been Calhoun's first championship.

4) 2011 - This team was young, but Kemba was the best player in the Tournament and there was enough complementary talent to make UConn one of the contenders going in.

5) 2006 - Everyone hates on this team, but the talent was amazing. Marcus Williams was the best point guard we had prior to Kemba, and the front court was very good. This team had some chemistry issues, but I think the biggest problem was lack of a second ballhandler.

6) 2014 - no future NBA stars, but this team was strong at every position and had a solid bench. Napier was dominant when he needed to be.

7) 1994 - Donyell was excellent, but the supporting cast was not nearly as good as they would all be a year later.

8) 2009 - Good team. Price and Thabeet were good, not dominant. This was one of those supreme chemistry teams, especially after Dyson got hurt.

9) 1990 - Smith was an amazing college guard even if his game didn't translate to the next level, and this team played as well together as any UConn team, ever.

10) 1998 - very young team. Everyone could tell at the time that this team was a year away.

11) 1996 - This team was really good on paper and played well together, but when you boiled it down it was a 2 man offense that was susceptible to Allen having an off game.

12) 2003 - this team wasn't quite ready for prime time, but I will always believe that UConn would have made the Final Four if it had a better officiating crew for the game against Texas.

13) 2002 - As one-man-show as any UConn team in history, and we were still only a couple of bad calls against Okafor from making the Final Four.

14) 2000 - This team was pretty good, and definitely would have made the Sweet 16 if KEA hadn't sprained his ankle against Utah State.

15) 1991 - how did this team beat Shaq and Tyrone Hill in back to back games?

Great analysis. I'd change two things. I feel the 2006 team was better than the 2011 team even without the second ball handler.

I'd bump the 2009 team over the 2014 team.

It's always fun to remind ourselves the teams and players.

 

[CTBasketball]

I think you guys undervalue the 2009 team.

I may be the only one on here that thinks with a healthy Dyson they beat UNC. He added such a powerful component to that team, especially on defense.

 

[boog204]

3) 1995 - Ray, Doron, Donny, and Travis were tough to stop. Ollie was excellent at the point and Fair was effective off the bench when he wasn't in the doghouse. This should have been Calhoun's first championship.

I agree; this should have been the team to win it all. They were so, so explosive. Ray was still a guy who would dunk on you instead of being purely a shooter, Doron to Donny off a make, KO was super solid in the half court, Travis supremely underrated as a big, and Fair could rain 3's when JC liked him. I think this was our highest scoring team ever bringing in around 90/game.

 

[ctchamps]

I think you guys undervalue the 2009 team.

I may be the only one on here that thinks with a healthy Dyson they beat UNC. He added such a powerful component to that team, especially on defense.

I'm with you. That team was building momentum before that injury. It was a crucial loss.

 

[ctchamps]

I agree; this should have been the team to win it all. They were so, so explosive. Ray was still a guy who would dunk on you instead of being purely a shooter, Doron to Donny off a make, KO was super solid in the half court, Travis supremely underrated as a big, and Fair could rain 3's when JC liked him. I think this was our highest scoring team ever bringing in around 90/game.

Put me in this category. That loss to UCLA is still my number one loss. More than George Mason, more than the six overtimes or Donny's failed free throws or Caron's loss to Maryland.

 

[Mr. French]

09 was very good, but they also had some lulls. I saw them preseason at UB almost lose as #2 in the country. They could also be dominant.

I think they’re no question behind our 2 best teams, 04 and 99. More talented but I think missing something compared to 11 & 14.

06 was very talented, if they had even a frosh Kemba/Bazz they win it all. They needed one more backcourt scorer, preferably with onions.

 

[Waquoit]

The win over Alabama is a personal favorite. We looked like 1990 UNLV.

That's a forgotten great game. Alabama was the "it" team in that game on a big roll. I still remember the UConn hater at the watering hole telling me how fast Bama was. UConn ran 'em out of the gym and the guy left at halftime.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I agree; this should have been the team to win it all. They were so, so explosive. Ray was still a guy who would dunk on you instead of being purely a shooter, Doron to Donny off a make, KO was super solid in the half court, Travis supremely underrated as a big, and Fair could rain 3's when JC liked him. I think this was our highest scoring team ever bringing in around 90/game.

Toby Bailey was releasing off UConn's shot. It was a calculated risk by Harrick, because UConn was winning the battle of the boards, but UCLA got a bunch of breakaway layups which were a big factor in their victory.

Fair was born 20 years too early. If he played today, he would have a bright green light from the perimeter, and his sporadic defense would be tolerated as long as he was scoring. You could also make the case he was born 10 years too early, because his poor defense wouldn't be as big a problem if Okafor was defending the rim, as it was with Knight defending the rim.

 

[Waquoit]

Certainly getting Dyson back didn’t save them in the future.

The team-ball playing Dyson we saw on that 2009 team was really good. I never heard a good reason why that stretch was the exception to the rule in his UConn career. Before and after, he was a hero baller who would have been right at home in the post-JC era.

 

[Excalibur]

If the '04 team played the '09 team, '04 has the two best players on the floor by a pretty significant margin. More times than not, that team wins.

 

[tzznandrew]

What about the 04 team losing to unranked Utah by 16? Losing to unranked Providence by 10? Losing to unranked Notre Dame?

When you compare those losses to 09's losses, and compare relative dominance within wins, it's 09 and not even close.

They didn't lose to Utah that year, they crushed them 76-44. I don't know where you got that one? The Georgia Tech team we killed in the Finals?

That PC team was unranked only by mere accidence. They went into March at 20-5 before utterly falling apart (as PC does).

The 2009 team was great; the 2004 team was better, both teams being healthy. But I think you're right in that the 2009 team gets a bad wrap: it was certainly better than the 1994 and the 1995 teams that everyone loves and remembers more fondly. And it was almost certainly better than the 2011 team that won the title--and definitely than the 2014 team.

Editing in: "better relative to their peers" is probably the best way to put what I'm arguing.

 

[superjohn]

Put me in this category. That loss to UCLA is still my number one loss. More than George Mason, more than the six overtimes or Donny's failed free throws or Caron's loss to Maryland.

But UCLA was just better than us. Our loss to Miss. State, Donyell's missed ft's against Florida, and George Mason were so painful because they were all games we should have won and those teams all had legit shots at winning it all.

 

[kobe]

charge your phone

 

[ctchamps]

But UCLA was just better than us. Our loss to Miss. State, Donyell's missed ft's against Florida, and George Mason were so painful because they were all games we should have won and those teams all had legit shots at winning it all.

I know that. But those teams were not as exciting as the 95 team. Had it not been a home game I think UConn wins and UCLA was the only team standing in their way.

Additionally that was UConn’s first super team and they were one of my favorite teams . There were no NCs that could console me. So for all those reasons it was the worse loss for me.

Those other losses were very very close and I’m well aware of the failed chances.

 

[superjohn]

I know that. But those teams were not as exciting as the 95 team. Had it not been a home game I think UConn wins and UCLA was the only team standing in their way.

Additionally that was UConn’s first super team and they were one of my favorite teams . There were no NCs that could console me. So for all those reasons it was the worse loss for me.

Those other losses were very very close and I’m well aware of the failed chances.

True, if Tyus Edney doesn't go the length of the court against Mizzou and or if we play UCLA on a neutral court we are probably cutting down our first net. We got screwed so many times playing road NCAA games, that's why it was so nice playing at MSG in '14.

 

[tentoes4rings]

True, if Tyus Edney doesn't go the length of the court against Mizzou and or if we play UCLA on a neutral court we are probably cutting down our first net. We got screwed so many times playing road NCAA games, that's why it was so nice playing at MSG in '14.

It really was ridiculous for a while. Like in 98 when we had to play UNC in Greensboro. That was a complete home game for them, that could have easily gone in our favor on a neutral court.

 

[TheChamps990411]

My recollection of 2004 was that they were so talented, that they got lazy at times during the year. That lead to a few upset losses.

Contrast to 1999, which had a spectacular regular season, but which had to work a little harder.

But remember also a major factor in 04` was ok4 having back issues but got healthy and Shad getting into the starting lineup later in the year and it started to come together. Once the big east tourney started that team was all business. Although i think they did get a bit lazy against Gtech in the championship game and JC taking his foot off the peddle allowed that game to have a much closer score at the end. We all know that game couldve ended with us winning by 30 rather easily.

 

[Waquoit]

It really was ridiculous for a while. Like in 98 when we had to play UNC in Greensboro. That was a complete home game for them, that could have easily gone in our favor on a neutral court.

FL in FL, TX in TX, NC in NC, UCLA in CA and MD in DC off the top of my head.

 

[Towney007]

It really was ridiculous for a while. Like in 98 when we had to play UNC in Greensboro. That was a complete home game for them, that could have easily gone in our favor on a neutral court.

We've had a lot of bad luck in that regard.

We played in Cincinnati when Ohio State bounced us in 92
We played in Miami when Florida bounced us in 94
We played in Oakland when UCLA bounced us in 95
We played in Greensboro when UNC bounced us in 98
We played in San Antonio when Texas bounced us in 03
We played in DC when George Mason bounced us in 06 (less being screwed, but GM is like 10 mi)
We played in Detroit when Michigan State bounced us at the Final Four in 09

We've even had virtual home games against Tennessee in 00 in Birmingham and Kansas in 16 in Iowa...

Or we're getting SCREWED~!

Although we've had regionals in NJ, Syracuse and MSG... but yeah.

 

[tzznandrew]

FL in FL, TX in TX, NC in NC, UCLA in CA and MD in DC off the top of my head.

The Maryland one was in Syracuse, not DC. DC was GM.

 

[tentoes4rings]

We've had a lot of bad luck in that regard.

We played in Cincinnati when Ohio State bounced us in 92
We played in Miami when Florida bounced us in 94
We played in Oakland when UCLA bounced us in 95
We played in Greensboro when UNC bounced us in 98
We played in San Antonio when Texas bounced us in 03
We played in DC when George Mason bounced us in 06 (less being screwed, but GM is like 10 mi)
We played in Detroit when Michigan State bounced us at the Final Four in 09

We've even had virtual home games against Tennessee in 00 in Birmingham and Kansas in 16 in Iowa...

Or we're getting SCREWED~!

Although we've had regionals in NJ, Syracuse and MSG... but yeah.

Thanks for the list, I completely forgot about the 09 MSU home game, ugh.

 

[Towney007]

Thanks for the list, I completely forgot about the 09 MSU home game, ugh.

Some of it is bad luck.

'94 was kind of crap. We should have been a #1 seed out West, but we face planted against Providence, and then it's also hard for me to get angry when we basically choked a slam dunk Final Four appearance away when the team we were facing and the rest of the region rolled out the red carpet for us.

'95 surprised me not that we were a #2 seed, but that they stuck us in a region with UCLA and put UMass out east. It did no favors to us - and honestly didn't do favors to UCLA, either.

'98 I don't cry an ounce about. UNC was the #1 seed - they got the draw they deserved to get. Had less to do with us and more to do with them.

'06 and '09 were also bad luck. I mean no one was counting on George Mason in an Elite 8 and the Final Four is just where the Final Four is... North Carolina had to play them in Detroit, too.

So it's a mix of everything. '95 is kinda the one that always stuck in my craw. UMass really wasn't good enough to justify a #2 seed in the east and they also stuck Villanova out there as a #3 a a reward for winning the conf. tournament. We really should have been out east - especially with Wake Forest being by far the weakest #1 seed. I just thought the committee did a bad job of seeding. Don't forget, we also had Maryland and Oregon in our end of the bracket. Texas was a freaking #11 seed... Mizzou, Utah, Indiana.... not an easy bracket for anyone and UCLA was freaking #1 in the country. Then they stuck us and them in the same group together...

 

[The Funster]

'95 really hurt. The 06 team had the talent to win it all but I think most of the guys checked out and were draft dreaming. The 04 team was stacked and had the most talent, IMO. 99 team had talent but lets face it, they were on a mission and no one was going to stop them. 09 was peaking at the right time until Dyson was hurt. 14 was better than 11 but Kemba was indomitable. People still talk about Danny Manning and Kansas but what Kemba did in 11 trumps that, IMO.

Good times. Man we had some great teams to watch, didn't we?

 

[KemBaller]

'95 really hurt. The 06 team had the talent to win it all but I think most of the guys checked out and were draft dreaming. The 04 team was stacked and had the most talent, IMO. 99 team had talent but lets face it, they were on a mission and no one was going to stop them. 09 was peaking at the right time until Dyson was hurt. 14 was better than 11 but Kemba was indomitable. People still talk about Danny Manning and Kansas but what Kemba did in 11 trumps that, IMO.

Good times. Man we had some great teams to watch, didn't we?

Think I'd take the 14 team over the 11 team if they played, just on matchup alone.

 

[SubbaBub]

94 had the most guys who stuck in the NBA. That's the most "talented" team.
'04 was the best team but '99 beats all of them if they actually played.

 

[Zerosumgame]

Think I'd take the 14 team over the 11 team if they played, just on matchup alone.

I think the 2011 team works the 2014 team. 2011 had more size and athleticism and also the best player in that matchup. The toughness of AO and Roscoe inside and defensively would be a big factor, imo.

 

[Hoophound]

You don’t get how much better college basketball teams were in 1990 than they were in 2009.

It’s good that you do realize winning the BET is better than losing in the quarterfinals.

Some people seem to have taken up the 09 team’s cause because they like to play what if with the Dyson injury. They can play pretend that the FF loss to MSU wasn’t as miserable as it was.

Even giving 09 every benefit of the doubt I don’t see anyway to conclude that the roster was better than 99, 04 or 06.

Not only do 99 and 04 immediately look better on paper... they actually... you know... won.

Hey, I’m the one that says the 09’ team was playing the best I’ve ever seen a UConn team play before Dyson went down. However, I am not saying it was our best team ever. I’ll take 99’ on that.

 

[KemBaller]

I think the 2011 team works the 2014 team. 2011 had more size and athleticism and also the best player in that matchup. The toughness of AO and Roscoe inside and defensively would be a big factor, imo.

The 14 team dealt with size very well in the tourney, AO would have gotten his boards but don't think he'd be that much of a scoring presence. Roscoe doesn't really move the needle much in that game IMO. Kemba is for sure the best player in that game but Boat is one of the 2-3 best we've ever had defensively at guard and you can make the case that, after Kemba, the 14 team has the next 4 best players in that game. I also think the 14 team had a much tougher road in their tourney run than the 11 team.

 

[Hoophound]

I like Bazz as much as Kemba in a title game. Kemba was better in some ways, but Bazz had the “right in your face 3 ball” to stop runs, save us with the shot clock running down and blow games open. I seriously don’t know who I’d choose if I had the choice.

 

[tentoes4rings]

'95 really hurt. The 06 team had the talent to win it all but I think most of the guys checked out and were draft dreaming. The 04 team was stacked and had the most talent, IMO. 99 team had talent but lets face it, they were on a mission and no one was going to stop them. 09 was peaking at the right time until Dyson was hurt. 14 was better than 11 but Kemba was indomitable. People still talk about Danny Manning and Kansas but what Kemba did in 11 trumps that, IMO.

Good times. Man we had some great teams to watch, didn't we?

The 06 team gets killed but George Mason played out of their heads that second half and executed almost perfectly. They shot 50% for the game, including 9-18 from three. We would have beaten them 9 out of 10 times, unfortunately that night was the one out of ten.