AO Article On CBS Sports

[mauconnfan]

Austrie should have never been attacked by any fans. He is basically Donnell Beverly but needed to play a bigger role due to injuries/situations. Taken late in the recruiting efforts due to lack of depth he turned himself into a very solid performer after being thrust into an impact role and given expectations we should have had, he certainly exceeded those in his career as a Husky.

 

[diggerfoot]

Dyson was clearly more of an asset than a liability to that 2009 team. You could debate about whether that was the case in 2007, 2008, and 2010 (and you'd have a strong case for "liability"), but in 2009 we were unquestionably a better team with him.

Among those 2009 wins vs. ranked teams, we snapped Notre Dame's like 50-game home winning streak. That was a historically good team for us, with Dyson, and we would have played a title game for the ages against North Carolina.

I, for one, was not making a case for Dyson as a liability, more as Austrie as facilitating the potential of others. You do bring up an interesting explanation for why 2009 would be an outlier, Price was there to make the team better as well. Your case would imply that Austrie's value was coincidental to Price being more fully healed by the time of that run in 2008, which bolster's mauconnfan's case about coincidence as well. However, how 2008 ended suggests Austrie's role was not coincidental, and Price had nothing to do with the tournament Austrie helped us win as a starter his freshman year.

There's a fair argument to be made in pointing out that Austrie could not help the team to beat Pitt. My memories of those games revolve around how Blair got his way on both ends of the court, minimizing the ultimate value of any guard play. Still, I did neglect to consider how we could not handle Pitt with Austrie starting.

By big games I mean ones where there is considerable doubt we can win. There were plenty of those in the 2008 run. Louisville at their place was one in 2009, though I do think we benefited from Louisville playing badly that game, certainly worse than their ranking at the time. You bring up another legitimate big game in Notre Dame, and Notre Dame played well. I was more psyched about that win because Notre Dame played to their potential. Still not much of a sample size, but I can see your argument of 2009 being viewed as an outlier year where the make up of the team meant Austrie's comparative worth was not as great as it might have been in other years. Yet we played very well in the NCAA tournament with Austrie starting up until the Final Four round, held in Michigan State's territory, as well as we did early and mid season with Dyson starting. Claiming we automatically win a championship with Dyson, besides the fact that the highly talented UNC team was playing its best basketball at the end of the year, ignores or slights Austrie's demonstrated value to the team.

 

[Waquoit]

Austrie should have never been attacked by any fans.

Exactly. He was a Hail Mary that connected. JC owes him to this day, IMO.

 

[caw]

Austrie should have never been attacked by any fans. He is basically Donnell Beverly but needed to play a bigger role due to injuries/situations. Taken late in the recruiting efforts due to lack of depth he turned himself into a very solid performer after being thrust into an impact role and given expectations we should have had, he certainly exceeded those in his career as a Husky.

Someone attacked Austrie now? I missed that.

Austrie was the perfect 4th guard, but he was overmatched as a starting guard against top, top teams. He did hold his own defensively and was OK against any team outside the top 25. He would have been fantastic on last year's team backing up Napier/Boat and Lamb. Evans was playing the same role this year and hopefully will come back and continue in that role soon.

 

[diggerfoot]

Someone attacked Austrie now? I missed that.

Austrie was the perfect 4th guard, but he was overmatched as a starting guard against top, top teams. He did hold his own defensively and was OK against any team outside the top 25. He would have been fantastic on last year's team backing up Napier/Boat and Lamb. Evans was playing the same role this year and hopefully will come back and continue in that role soon.

Well, that's an easy statement to make without defining top, top teams. Austrie started for us when we beat some top ten teams in three different years of his career; I don't believe he ever started his sophomore year. We could not beat Pitt, so let us assume you define a top, top team as one ranked #4 or higher. How many top, top teams did we beat with Dyson as a starter? Consider again that Louisville was ranked #7 at the time, and played even worse than that ranking.

 

[CTBasketball]

Well, that's an easy statement to make without defining top, top teams. Austrie started for us when we beat some top ten teams in three different years of his career; I don't believe he ever started his sophomore year. We could not beat Pitt, so let us assume you define a top, top team as one ranked #4 or higher. How many top, top teams did we beat with Dyson as a starter? Consider again that Louisville was ranked #7 at the time, and played even worse than that ranking.

#7 Gonzaga. But besides the facts Dyson made this team better when he was in the lineup. They played better. When Robinson, Thabeet, Adrien, Walker, or Price didn't have a big game we knew Dyson would score a lot that night. It would work inversely for any of the people named. With Dyson out of the lineup, it put more stress on Austrie, Walker, and Robinson to score. They weren't developed scorers at the time.

 

[Gurleyman]

You keep coming back to the Louisville played "worse than their ranking" argument. I don't get your point. They ended the regular season ranked no. 1 in the country - not like they were overrated when we played them. If they played lousy that night, perhaps the other team had a little to do with it? It was a road game against one of the top teams in the country and we ran them out of their own gym. We looked like the 2004 team against Alabama or GT.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not arguing for Dyson instead of Austrie. I wanted them both. They both had valuable roles to fill when we had everyone.

As for 2009 v 2010, I think it comes down to some people being better as a complementary player rather than the go-to (happened with Burrell and Albie too). The 2010 team was also poorly constructed with Kemba-JD-Sticks at the 1-2-3, all of whom wanted to drive and all of whom had unreliable jumpers. The lane was always crowded. But Dyson deserves a lot of the heat for that year as a senior. The 2007 season isn't fair to hold over anyone - we had a bunch of very raw freshmen (Dyson was still raw, AJ was a shadow of himself, Thabeet couldn't stay upright, Sticks could jump but that was it, etc.) and Adrien as a sophomore. Our only hope of anything that year was to sign Durant - but the 2007 lumps led to 2009. The 2011 season we had a bunch of freshmen, but Kemba to lead them - makes a big difference.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9930 using Tapatalk

 

[CTBasketball]

You keep coming back to the Louisville played "worse than their ranking" argument. I don't get your point. They ended the regular season ranked no. 1 in the country - not like they were overrated when we played them. If they played lousy that night, perhaps the other team had a little to do with it? It was a road game against one of the top teams in the country and we ran them out of their own gym.

From a Marquette fan point of view (in 2005-2006), "The UConn home win doesn't count because they are worse than their ranking and were overrated."

 

[caw]

Well, that's an easy statement to make without defining top, top teams. Austrie started for us when we beat some top ten teams in three different years of his career; I don't believe he ever started his sophomore year. We could not beat Pitt, so let us assume you define a top, top team as one ranked #4 or higher. How many top, top teams did we beat with Dyson as a starter? Consider again that Louisville was ranked #7 at the time, and played even worse than that ranking.

It's not always about winning when talking about something like this. It wasn't Dyson or Austrie going 1 on 5. I mean specifically Austrie being able to do anything against top teams:

Top 25 Teams without Dyson, 2008-2009, Austrie Numbers

MSU: 6 PTS, 2/3, 2 ASTS, 3 REB, 37 Minutes
Missouri: 7 PTS, 1/4, 1 Ast, 1 Reb, 27 Minutes
Purdue: 17 PTS, 4/6, 4 Asts, 2 Reb, 32 Minutes
Cuse: 8 PTS, 2/13, 4 Asts, 2 Rebs 45 Minutes
Pitt: 0 PTS, 0/2, 3 Asts, 0 Rebs, ?? Minutes
Marquette: 2 PTS, 1/6, 2 Asts, 1 Reb, 18 Minutes
Pitt: 5 PTS, 2/9, 1 Asts, 1 Reb, 27 Minutes
Average: 6.4 PTS, 2.4 Asts, 1.4 Reb, 31 Minutes 12/43 = 27%

Top 25 Teams Dyson gets injured, Austrie Numbers
Cuse: 10 PTS, 4/10, 3 Asts, 5 Reb, 29 Minutes

Top 25 Teams with Dyson, Austrie Numbers
UL: 3 PTS, 0/1, 1 Reb, 1 Ast, 21 Minutes
ND: 5 PTS, 1/5, 3 Reb, 2 Ast, 16 Minutes
Nova: 7 PTS, 2/10, 2 Reb, 2 Asts, 27 Minutes
WVU: 2 PTS, 1/2, 1 Reb, 1 Ast, 21 Minutes
Georgetown: 4 PTS 2/5, 1 Reb, 0 Asts, 18 Minutes
Gonzaga: 6 PTS 2/7, 1 Reb, 1 Ast, 27 Minutes
Wiscy: 8 PTS, 3/4, 1 REB, 2 Ast, 27 Minutes
Miami: 9 PTs, 1/6, 0 REB, 2 Ast, 34 Minutes
Averages: 5.5 PTS, 1.4 Asts, 1.3 Reb, 24 Minutes, 12/40 = 30%

Averages against top 25 teams: 6.2 PTS, 1.9 Asts, 1.6 Rebs, 30.1%, 27.4 Minutes
Averages that year: 7.2 PTS, 2.3 Asts, 1.8 Rebs, 35.5%, 25 minutes

Dyson versus Ranked Teams:
UL: 14 PTS, 5/12, 4 Reb, 2 Ast, 30 Minutes
ND: 15 PTS, 5/13, 9 Reb, 2 Ast, 35 Minutes
Nova: 7 PTS, 6/11, 4 Reb, 1 Asts, 30 Minutes
WVU: 11 PTS, 3/7, 2 Reb, 2 Ast, 18 Minutes
Georgetown: 4 PTS 1/10, 5 Reb, 3 Asts, 28 Minutes
Gonzaga: 21 PTS 5/12, 9 Reb, 4 Ast, 38 Minutes
Wiscy: 21 PTS, 8/13, 4 REB, 3 Ast, 33 Minutes
Miami: 12 PTs, 4/7, 3 REB, 3 Ast, 21 Minutes

Averages: 13.1, 2.5 Asts, 5 Rebs, 29 Minutes, 37/85 = 43.5%
Averages that year: 12.5, 2 Asts, 3.6 Rebs, 27 Minutes, 41.3%

I rushed this so feel free to check the numbers.

 

[ctchamps]

By 2008-09, AJ Price had emerged as the undisputed leader of that team and had Dyson under control. He was a much better team player that season than any other year. A brief summary of that era:

2006-07: Dyson was basically the only offensive threat and was given free reign; team was awful
2007-08: AJ was finally back in game shape and took over the team when Dyson was suspended
2008-09: Dyson deferred to AJ's leadership and we played as a team, dominantly
2009-10: Dyson was the leader by default, with disastrous results

So it's not a contradiction to say that Dyson was (overall) a bad team player, while saying that in 2009 we were a much better team with Dyson.

I disagree with your conclusion. Dyson was a much better supporting player when he didn't have to do most of the ball handling. He was not a pg but a decent enough 2 guard. He was forced, because of circumstances, to run the team when he lacked the skills to do this.

In the one year AJ ran the point, JD moved to his natural position and played well. This has nothing to do with "team player", this has to do with skill sets.

 

[ctchamps]

You are correct that Austrie was not starting point guard, obviously, since he replaced Dyson. That was just careless on my part, carrying over from when he replaced Williams as a point guard in a previous year. That matters not in the least to the case I was presenting.

I don't think you understood my argument. By evidence I did not mean stats, and I conceded that Dyson was a better scorer, and let me add a better stat stuffer in general. My case was about making teammates better, which is not reflected in one's own individual stats. My evidence was in the team's performance with Dyson v. Austrie. In '08 the evidence was clearly in favor of Austrie. In '09 we played 8 top ten teams at the time that we played them and went 4-4. With Austrie as starter and Dyson not even available we went 1-1. Not a clear verdict in favor of Austrie, but not in favor of Dyson either, certainly not enough to extrapolate definitively that if we only had Dyson we would win it all.

I'm adding on responses here but Louisville was #7 when we played them, not top five, and played even worse than their ranking. The highest ranked team we played that year was Pitt at #4 and we lost to them twice, certainly not a resounding case for assuming we automatically beat UNC. It's an overstatement for me to say UConn had no chance, but that's not overstating as much as saying UConn would definitely win.

And both those Pitt losses where when Dyson was out. After Dyson went down the only decent team UConn beat was Missouri. That was because KW had and incredible game. The four losses, two to Pitt, one to Cuse and one to MSU all had much better chances to be wins if JD were present.

 

[caw]

And both those Pitt losses where when Dyson was out. After Dyson went down the only decent team UConn beat was Missouri. That was because KW had and incredible game. The four losses, two to Pitt, one to Cuse and one to MSU all had much better chances to be wins if JD were present.

Purdue was pretty good also.

 

[aceboon]

Purdue was pretty good also.

As was Marq, on the road

 

[ctchamps]

You are right, something clicked with Dyson in 2009 and it stinks that he got hurt. But whatever it was, it got unclicked in 2010.

Dyson was never a pg. In 2009 he played the 2g while AJP played pg.

At the beginning of the 2010 season KW was the starting pg and JD's numbers were terrific. During that time he was in the lead for the Wooden Award. But as competition improved as the season progressed Kemba increasingly played out of control so JC made JD the pg. The results were horrible.

 

[ctchamps]

Thanks, mauconnfan, you at least understand what I was getting at. "Coincidence" is a plausible argument, particularly coupled with an argument that 2009 is an outlier as a year. I think the overall bodies of work are enough to rule out "coincidences," we'll just have to disagree on that.

I also think the tournament Austrie started in right off the bat is particularly telling. That, of course, in no way disses Dyson because he was not even an option then. Calhoun had the confidence to start the freshman Austrie in that particular situation, and the freshman responded by facilitating all the stars on the team to play up to their potential, which they often failed to do over the course of that particular season.

UConn's ranking gave them two easy teams at the beginning of that tournament.

 

[ctchamps]

You keep coming back to the Louisville played "worse than their ranking" argument. I don't get your point. They ended the regular season ranked no. 1 in the country - not like they were overrated when we played them. If they played lousy that night, perhaps the other team had a little to do with it? It was a road game against one of the top teams in the country and we ran them out of their own gym. We looked like the 2004 team against Alabama or GT.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not arguing for Dyson instead of Austrie. I wanted them both. They both had valuable roles to fill when we had everyone.

As for 2009 v 2010, I think it comes down to some people being better as a complementary player rather than the go-to (happened with Burrell and Albie too). The 2010 team was also poorly constructed with Kemba-JD-Sticks at the 1-2-3, all of whom wanted to drive and all of whom had unreliable jumpers. The lane was always crowded. But Dyson deserves a lot of the heat for that year as a senior. The 2007 season isn't fair to hold over anyone - we had a bunch of very raw freshmen (Dyson was still raw, AJ was a shadow of himself, Thabeet couldn't stay upright, Sticks could jump but that was it, etc.) and Adrien as a sophomore. Our only hope of anything that year was to sign Durant - but the 2007 lumps led to 2009. The 2011 season we had a bunch of freshmen, but Kemba to lead them - makes a big difference.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9930 using Tapatalk

I give JC more heat than JD. And really there was not much heat to give anyone. KW was not ready to run the team as a sophomore. And JD lacked the skills to be a pg.

JD was playing superbly in the 2010 season as the 2g. Kemba had several bad games in a row and JC put JD at the point. I had no problem with the initial switch. I had a problem with JC continuing to play JD once it became obvious he was more a liability at the pg than Kemba. Meanwhile the production JD manufactured at the 2g was lost. The failure that year was KW was not ready to replace AJP.

This season it will be interesting to see how quickly RB develops and how KO handles the situation vs. JC. You have a similar situation to the 2010 situation in that SN is a much better 2g than a 1g and RB is a much better 1g. But SN like JD brings more experience on the court. The one advantage KO has is SN is a better pg than JD and there is a decent RJE to run things if necessary!

 

[ctchamps]

Purdue was pretty good also.

Yes they were and in the category of good wins that CA was involved with this would be it. CA was a contributor for the other games. A wonderful player to have for UConn.

 

[UConn990411]

By evidence I did not mean stats, and I conceded that Dyson was a better scorer, and let me add a better stat stuffer in general.

Dyson was not just a better scorer than Austrie - he was a better rebounder, passer (that season) and, when he wanted to be, could lock people up defensively. UConn could also play an extremely effective 3-guard lineup with Dyson, which they couldn't do nearly as well after he went down. The only real advantage Austrie had that year was taking care of the ball.

The reality is that UConn was either the first or second-best team in the country with BOTH Dyson and Austrie. Each player brought very different things to the table that helped make that team great. But I'm not going to argue whether they would have done better in the tournament with Dyson or Austrie because, well, there's no tangible way to settle the argument.

I will say this, though: UConn has a far better chance at beating MSU if 2009 Dyson were in the lineup instead of Austrie.

 

[caw]

Dyson was not just a better scorer than Austrie - he was a better rebounder, passer (that season) and, when he wanted to be, could lock people up defensively. UConn could also play an extremely effective 3-guard lineup with Dyson, which they couldn't do nearly as well after he went down. The only real advantage Austrie had that year was taking care of the ball.

The reality is that UConn was either the first or second-best team in the country with BOTH Dyson and Austrie. Each player brought very different things to the table that helped make that team great. But I'm not going to argue whether they would have done better in the tournament with Dyson or Austrie because, well, there's no tangible way to settle the argument.

I will say this, though: UConn has a far better chance at beating MSU if 2009 Dyson were in the lineup instead of Austrie.

That '09 team is probably the biggest what-if in UConn's history.

What if:

• Dyson never gets hurt
• Stanley is with the team all year and focused
• Miles doesn't get expelled
• Miles doesn't deal with Nochimson and is eligible

It would have gone down as one of the best teams ever at UConn, IMO and probably the best defensive unit ever at UConn, or just ever.

Shame never saw an eligible/healthy/focused team of:

PG: Price, Walker, Beverly
SG: Dyson, Austrie
SF: Stanley, Miles
PF: Adrien, Edwards
C: Thabeet, Okuandu
Others: Dove, Haralson

Of course Stanley backed up the four quite a bit and Edwards the five, but still. And I imagine Miles would have played some 2 guard as well and Dyson some 3.

For those saying UConn hasn't has shooters recently, the 2009 recruiting class is a big part of the reason. Miles was a great shooter and Haralson was supposed to be.

Going into the season Dyson and Miles were in place to be option 1a and 1b at the SG spot. Even without either that team went to the final four and had the game to 3 points with a minute to go, I give Austrie a ton of credit for filling in, but Dyson brought that team another level of athletic ability and physicality that it missed after he was injured.

 

[Gurleyman]

That '09 team is probably the biggest what-if in UConn's history.

2006 is close - give us a healthy AJ Price, no laptop scandal, and Andrew Bynum...

(although if Bynum came, Hilton might have redshirted, and Hilton's improvement that year was key - gave us a face-up four to stretch the D a little).

There are a few others (no Ricky injury in 1996, Nadav coming back for his final two seasons, KEA doesn't roll ankle in 2000, Price and Rashad don't both almost die in 2005, Donny doesn't get hurt during Florida game, Edney doesn't go coast to coast, etc.) - but that's basketball, and a lot of programs have similar stories. I'd say 2006 and 2009 both had the most what ifs with them.

 

[Tenspro2002]

2006 is close - give us a healthy AJ Price, no laptop scandal

That's the biggest one. A sophomore AJ Price backing up/playing alongside Marcus Williams makes us a totally different team.

Aside from Austrie, who played sparingly down the stretch, we had one (1!) guy who could reliably handle the ball. MW basically did everything for us down the stretch. Of course, it wasn't point guard play that lost us the GM game, but I would argue that AJ's presence (as someone who wasn't already looking ahead to the NBA) would have focused and sharpened that team.

 

[caw]

That's the biggest one. A sophomore AJ Price backing up/playing alongside Marcus Williams makes us a totally different team.

Aside from Austrie, who played sparingly down the stretch, we had one (1!) guy who could reliably handle the ball. MW basically did everything for us down the stretch. Of course, it wasn't point guard play that lost us the GM game, but I would argue that AJ's presence (as someone who wasn't already looking ahead to the NBA) would have focused and sharpened that team.

The main reason I give 09 the nod here is due to the fact they went to a final four.

I do agree 06 was close, if they had beaten Mason, I would probably have leaned toward 06. Price + Bynum would have made that team very interesting. Not sure if that young Florida team or the UNC team was a better college team though that Florida team was a better NBA team. I'm not sure if Hilton would have redshirted, necessarily. He probably played pretty well in practice and who knows how long Bynum would have taken to adjust to the college game.

 

[UConn990411]

Price and Bynum never played for UConn, and if I'm remembering correctly, A.J. might not have been cleared for that season anyway. We got to see what '09 UConn was capable of doing with a healthy Dyson...and they were a machine.

I'm not guaranteeing UConn would have won the NC because that UNC team was damn good. But UConn would've given them a run for their money, that's for sure.

 

[CTBasketball]

If we start what-if'ing then UConn should have at least 5 rings.

 

[Rico444]

I have no bitterness towards Dyson. From the start I stated I was here to promote Austrie, not dis Dyson. I've conceded that Dyson was the better scorer and stat stuffer. I never said he was bad for the team. When Austrie started the team reliably performed well (though not necessarily Austrie's own stats) in big games in tournaments. The evidence is still not conclusive for Dyson because how many big games or tournaments did Dyson play in during 2009? Louisville was the one big game that I recall. Certainly he does not have the overall body of work of the team playing well in a big game or tournament that Austrie has.

I can sympathize with you if you are a fan who thinks a player you support is unfairly attacked. Dyson certainly has fallen into that category. So, too, has Austrie, which makes me that kind of fan as well. I always felt he was not fully appreciated because as an individual player he does not measure up to others. But basketball is a team game and Austrie was the consummate teammate. He made the teams he started on better, or at least play to their potential.

Hmm. Let me phrase it this way, then. Dyson was unavailable for the Final Four. If Austrie was the one unavailable instead our chances of winning the championship that year would have been no better.

Fair enough, I jumped to conclusions when assuming you were bitter towards Dyson and I apologize. I still disagree pretty strongly that Austrie made the team better than Dyson did. Maybe in 2010 he would've been a better fit; he was certainly better at running the point, but Dyson was a perfect fit for the 2009 team. He was our only real threat to penetrate into the paint; without him, our team was much less balanced offensively.