Best peak performance UConn team? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Best peak performance UConn team?

businesslawyer said:
2023 wouldn’t even be in my consideration. Yes, we looked great when we were rolling over all opposition, but how many teams did we beat that were real to ten teams? ‘Bama? In November? Marquette once out of three tries? Creighton one out of two?

Most of the other teams on your list beat national championship contenders again and again and again. Last year was great, and I love how that team developed, and we are national champions because we deserved to be. But we don’t have the basis that we have with the other teams on your list to know that they could overcome other great teams.
Expand ...

I think that argument's based on the 'names' of the teams involved, not the quality. 2023 beat all of the following teams by double digits: kenpom 4, 8, 13, 14, 22, 24 and 29 (two top 10, four top 15, and seven top 30)/sagarin 2, 7, 15, 16, 18, and 20 (two top 10, six top 20). Again, all by double digits.
 
selles said:
I think that argument's based on the 'names' of the teams involved, not the quality. 2023 beat all of the following teams by double digits: kenpom 4, 8, 13, 14, 22, 24 and 29 (two top 10, four top 15, and seven top 30)/sagarin 2, 7, 15, 16, 18, and 20 (two top 10, six top 20). Again, all by double digits.
Expand ...
correct. And with the exception of Iona, who was a good mid major team and not an easy 1st round match, the 5 teams after the 1st round were all top 25 in the polls and KenPom. I would have to check, but I think there were only 3 other national champions in the last 15 years, or something like that, that can say that.

That's why that whole narrative that UConn got lucky in the NCAA avoiding certain teams doesn't fly with me.
 
businesslawyer said:
2023 wouldn’t even be in my consideration. Yes, we looked great when we were rolling over all opposition, but how many teams did we beat that were real top ten teams? ‘Bama? In November? Marquette once out of three tries? Creighton one out of two?

Most of the other teams on your list beat national championship contenders again and again and again. Last year was great, and I love how that team developed, and we are national champions because we deserved to be. But we don’t have the basis that we have with the other teams on your list to know that they could overcome other great teams.
Expand ...
Eh, the question isn't consistency or average performance.

We beat top 10 Gonzaga by 30. That's peak performance.

I don't consider 2023 as impressive at peak as 2004, but I wouldn't poo poo how this team looked at its best.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
Eh, the question isn't consistency or average performance.

We beat top 10 Gonzaga by 30. That's peak performance.

I don't consider 2023 as impressive at peak as 2004, but I wouldn't poo poo how this team looked at its best.
Expand ...

Fair enough. I really only mean to pooh pooh it compared to '99 and '04.
 
.-.
Scoe said:
Ok 2004 vs 2023

WhatIfSports.com: Fantasy Sports Simulation -- NCAA Boxscore

www.whatifsports.com

2004 wins 96-80

2023 vs 1999

WhatIfSports.com: Fantasy Sports Simulation -- NCAA Boxscore

www.whatifsports.com

2023 wins 108-102 in OT
Expand ...

I looked at your boxscore. I can tell you why I know more about hoops than a computer simulation. The box score against '99 shows both '23 guards hitting roughly half their shots and scoring a decent amount of points. Ricky Moore would have guarded one of Hawkins and Newton, and that one would not have had a decent offensive game. Period.
 
businesslawyer said:
I looked at your boxscore. I can tell you why I know more about hoops than a computer simulation. The box score against '99 shows both '23 guards hitting roughly half their shots and scoring a decent amount of points. Ricky Moore would have guarded one of Hawkins and Newton, and that one would not have had a decent offensive game. Period.
Expand ...
You want me to run a best of 7 series?
 
businesslawyer said:
I looked at your boxscore. I can tell you why I know more about hoops than a computer simulation. The box score against '99 shows both '23 guards hitting roughly half their shots and scoring a decent amount of points. Ricky Moore would have guarded one of Hawkins and Newton, and that one would not have had a decent offensive game. Period.
Expand ...

And, the '99 team isn't giving up 90 pts in regulation to anyone. Sanogo would have had the same problem that Brand had. Moore guards Hawkins, Rip/Saunders guards Jackson, Rip/El-Amin guards Newton. Can Jackson and Karaban make up the difference?

On the other side, Jake, Wane and Freeman vs Sanogo, Clingan, and Karaban, Jackson is guarding Rip Newton is guarding El-amin/Moore. I like 99 holding down 23 than I do 23 holding down 99. If Jackson can stay with Rip (a bigger if than one might think), then 23 would have a shot.

The squads have a lot of similarities, 99 gets more love I think because we saw them develop and they were #1 or #2 the entire season. 23 developed into a championship squad after February.
 
.-.
I don't think it's particularly close. The talent level of the 2004 team was absurd. When you have that much talent clicking it's hard to imagine any of our other teams competing. What they did to Oklahoma or Alabama was wild. The only close tournament game was vs Duke, a game that wouldn't have been close without Okafor's two cheap fouls, and an opponent miles better than anyone the 2023 team played.

2004 had six future first rounders, four lottery picks, three top 10 picks, and two Top 3 picks. That doesn't include Rashad or Taliek or Denham. Our best player was the best player in the nation and #2 pick in the draft.

2023 will likely have two lottery picks (Hawkins, Clingan) and our best player wasn't even drafted. Their peak was impressive relative to the competition but in historical context they're not on par with 2004.
 
Lefty2one said:
I don't think it's particularly close. The talent level of the 2004 team was absurd. When you have that much talent clicking it's hard to imagine any of our other teams competing. What they did to Oklahoma or Alabama was wild. The only close tournament game was vs Duke, a game that wouldn't have been close without Okafor's two cheap fouls, and an opponent miles better than anyone the 2023 team played.

2004 had six future first rounders, four lottery picks, three top 10 picks, and two Top 3 picks. That doesn't include Rashad or Taliek or Denham. Our best player was the best player in the nation and #2 pick in the draft.

2023 will likely have two lottery picks (Hawkins, Clingan) and our best player wasn't even drafted. Their peak was impressive relative to the competition but in historical context they're not on par with 2004.
Expand ...
Agree with the post but Sanogo going undrafted isn't relevant.
 
2023 is our best team.

Not necessarily the best starting 5 but 1-10 we had most talent and abiltiy to impose will.

We could extend perimeter D like no other and with clingan joey C allene and others coming off bench we would beat any other Uconn team in head to head match up.

Too much athleticism for any past team to handle.

Before anyone gets too excited this is just IMO and open to debate.
 
Can’t sleep on the 1990 team either the passing on that team was insane and the 3 point shooting was ahead of its time. George, Smith, and Nadav shooting, Burrell was a game changer as was Depriest. Sellers was a gamer always battling 7 footers like Mourning, Mutombo and Shaq (in 91). Had Gwynn coming off the bench.

No one was beating UNLV that year as we saw what they did to Duke. Our 2004 team was on par with 1990 UNLV.
 
SubbaBub said:
And, the '99 team isn't giving up 90 pts in regulation to anyone. Sanogo would have had the same problem that Brand had. Moore guards Hawkins, Rip/Saunders guards Jackson, Rip/El-Amin guards Newton. Can Jackson and Karaban make up the difference?

On the other side, Jake, Wane and Freeman vs Sanogo, Clingan, and Karaban, Jackson is guarding Rip Newton is guarding El-amin/Moore. I like 99 holding down 23 than I do 23 holding down 99. If Jackson can stay with Rip (a bigger if than one might think), then 23 would have a shot.

The squads have a lot of similarities, 99 gets more love I think because we saw them develop and they were #1 or #2 the entire season. 23 developed into a championship squad after February.
Expand ...
99 gets more love because they only lost 2 games all year in a tough Big East, one of them when they were down Rip and Jake.
 
Lefty2one said:
I don't think it's particularly close. The talent level of the 2004 team was absurd. When you have that much talent clicking it's hard to imagine any of our other teams competing. What they did to Oklahoma or Alabama was wild. The only close tournament game was vs Duke, a game that wouldn't have been close without Okafor's two cheap fouls, and an opponent miles better than anyone the 2023 team played.

2004 had six future first rounders, four lottery picks, three top 10 picks, and two Top 3 picks. That doesn't include Rashad or Taliek or Denham. Our best player was the best player in the nation and #2 pick in the draft.

2023 will likely have two lottery picks (Hawkins, Clingan) and our best player wasn't even drafted. Their peak was impressive relative to the competition but in historical context they're not on par with 2004.
Expand ...
Interesting some of the comments about level of competition now compared to back then.

Do some believe that the competition in college basketball isn’t as good as it was previously?

(Not saying I wouldn’t agree with that, just wondering others thoughts.)
 
.-.
Great question!
With so many players now one or two and done, the depth in Div 1 college basketball is lower by some degree. That, however, is balanced by so many foreign players and the fact that current players now focus on one sport at a younger age means they develop at a younger age.
 
freshler40 said:
Great question!
With so many players now one or two and done, the depth in Div 1 college basketball is lower by some degree. That, however, is balanced by so many foreign players and the fact that current players now focus on one sport at a younger age means they develop at a younger age.
Expand ...
Yeah I don’t think there’s any replicating the 90s where stars stayed for 3 years legitimately. But how about the early years of the one and done era? Is it as good as it was throughout the 2010s?
 
fwiw, just ran a sim for a 7-game series on neutral court between '04 and '99.

'99 won 4-2, with the 6th game going into OT.

I then ran sims between '04 and '23 until '23 won a game. Took 17 games for '23 to notch a win, and that was in OT. Most weren't close, although I did get a 77-74!
 
Last edited:
gtcam said:
I have to look at it in a pre transfer portal way. The portal has changed college basketball.
The 2009 team was nasty and that's not an adjective I throw around too much, however, at peak time they were banged up a bit.
2004 was a resilient team as was 2014 and the run 2014 had in the NCAAs was nothing short of fantastic based on the competition.
2005-2006 - won the Maui vs 3 top 10 teams, lost 2 regular season games , lost the 6 OT OBE tourney game and came up short vs G Mason in the NCAAs - finished the season ranked 2nd in nation.
The 1995 and 1996 teams played in the wonder years of the OBE and more than held their own but again, injuries to key players prevented them from hitting the heights they deserved.
1998-99 had moxie and had not only talent at every key position but they all were tireless workers and willed their way to a NC.
Now to 2023 - the one thing that made the team harder to beat was DC off the bench - without him the team is no way near as strong as other teams in the past. I know the youngsters here haven't the privilege of experiencing the OBE in its heyday, and I dont agree at all that the players now are better shooters. Might be better athletes but not more skilled.
Expand ...
You are eliminated from consideration for not knowing the 6 OT game was in 2009
 
Huskyforlife said:
The 2023 team just went on one of the best runs through the tournament relevant to any team that ever played the sport. It’s them.
Expand ...
Recency bias. 2004 was so much more talented, just look at all the guys that got drafted, and where. The #2 and #3 picks in the draft?? Cmon

This year was great, but that team was a juggernaut. With a healthy Emeka all year could easily have gone undefeated.
 
.-.
husky429 said:
'04 at their best is the answer. One of the best CBB teams in history IMO.
Expand ...

Not only did the 2004 guys beat a really good Duke team teeming with pros, but they kicked the ever-living snot out of Alabama in a game that comes to mind whenever I hear the expression "firing on all cylinders." 53-29 at halftime, punctuated by a Rashad buzzer-beater.

The 2023 team is certainly in the conversation. While the competition was not as strong, these guys beat up everybody they faced in the NCAA Tourny. That was a first for UConn.
 
Jorgensen said:
Fun game to play. Don’t sleep on 09. Team had weapons at every position and was super fun to watch. Could kill opposing teams in so many ways. RIP Dyson’s knee (sobbing).
Expand ...
Would Uconn have beaten Michigam State in the 2009 final 4 and beaten UNC in the championship game if Jerome Dyson didn't have his season ending injury?

I think Uconn would've won that title.
 
RayIsTheGOAT said:
2023 with 2004 as a not too distant second followed by 2009.

I think players are just more skilled now too. Better 3 pt shooters. Sanogo and Karaban- our 4 and 5 guys could shoot 3s. And our guard trio was enormous and versatile between Jackson, Newton and Hawkins. Bigger than Rashad/Gordon/Taliek…. And certainly bigger than the 09 guards.
Bringing Clingan off the bench was just unfair.

Could be totally wrong, I’m pretty young and my memory only goes back to like the 07 team.
Expand ...

I don't want to disparage any UConn team, that's not what this is about.

But I personally think 2023 loses to at least 3-4 of our previous teams. I think 2004 would smack them around quite a bit, 2009 as well.

2004 is the best overall team, when full strength, but man 94-96 are underrated.
 
2004 was the most dominant team with zero weaknesses. Had the guard play. The inside game. Physically dominant

They were heads above the competition. They peaked at the end. I can't remember one Tourney game where I was worried we might lose. Not even close.
 
wingsfan055 said:
2004 was the most dominant team with zero weaknesses. Had the guard play. The inside game. Physically dominant

They were heads above the competition. They peaked at the end. I can't remember one Tourney game where I was worried we might lose. Not even close.
Expand ...
You didn't think they might lose when they were down 8 points with 2:45 left in the final 4 against Duke? I find that really hard to believe.
 
superjohn said:
You didn't think they might lose when they were down 8 points with 2:45 left in the final 4 against Duke? I find that really hard to believe.
Expand ...
He had to have forgotten about that game because that one was definitely worrisome. I was sweating bullets in that one but it made the walk out of the Alamodome pretty sweet.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,252
Messages
4,559,936
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom