Best team from a pool of any UConn, Kentucky, UNC, Kansas, or Duke teams from the past 15 yrs.

[Scoe]

Call me a homer but, I cannot picture the 99 Uconn team losing. The 99 team was as veteran of a team as your ever gonna find at the college level. Rip and Khalid in the clutch, shutdown D from Ricky Moore, a bench consisting of Wane, Saunders, Harrison, Mouring, Rashamel. A team like 2012 Kentucky while being more talented would not beat the veteran 99 team. That team was battle tested, obviously it would be a close game I take JC over Cal anyway in a game of chess. We wouldn't stop Anthony Davis but we would slow him down like we did to Elton Brand in 99, even if Davis got his there is no way their guards would be able to penetrate against ours. Our 99 team to me looked like a bunch of 30 plus old grizzled veterans, no way they are letting those McD 5 star kids beat them no way in hell.

Whoever put this list together looked at purely NBA talent and not the intangibles, you gotta look at the coaching, how would a 2012 UK team respond in a close game, they sure as heck are not gonna be blowing out a 99 Uconn, or 2004 Uconn, and you know how good both those teams were in close games. Gotta look at depth as well. You gotta be on some real good drugs to put 08 Kansas in the top 10.

 

[caw]

He was the 2nd pick in the draft. "Playoff team" is loose when they're 12-20. He's been hurt this year and his defense is good, but a wing who is a zero shooter is going to be tough to hang in the NBA. Maybe he develops that shot (since as you mention he is young), but it looks like he's abandoning the 3 instead, and that's not where the league is headed.


Journeyman was probably the wrong word choice. Starter on a bad team, rotation guy on a good one is his most likely career arc, which is what Augustin has already done.


The Texas team had AJ Abrams also who filled many of these same roles and has played professionally, just not in the NBA.

My main point, which you haven't refuted, is that the Kentucky team was not world's better talent-wise than Durant's Texas team. Cumulatively it probably had more talent, but it's closer than some were arguing and certainly not the difference between round of 32 loss by 20 to #5 seed USC and winning a title with no game closer than 8 points. Brow > Durant in college is that difference.

I'm going to assume your finger was off with the Hornets record. They were in the playoffs last year and on pace to be this year (probably would be if not for MKGs injury).

Dexter Pittman was a freshman who averaged about 3 and 2 that year, even after that he has only played about 50 total games in the NBA.
DJ Augustine was very good at UT and was drafted the next year. He was not good enough to be drafted after his freshman year. He has played about 450 games but only started about 150.
Damion James has played about 40 NBA games in his career.
AJ Abrams never played a game in the NBA.

In total that's about 550 games and 150 starts since 2007.

Not a single player from UT was drafted with Durant.

Davis was drafted with Teague, Lamb, Miller, Jones and MKG.

Teague has played in 88 NBA games.
Lamb has played in 100 NBA games.
Miller played in 100 NBA games.

All played in more NBA games than James, Abrams and Pittman combined.

Jones has played in about 100 games and started nearly 80 of them in 3 seasons. Nearly half of what Augustin has in 8 NBA years, and as mentioned he was starting this year before he was injured on a very good Houston team.

MKG has played about 180 games and started in nearly every one.

That's nearly 550 games and over 250 starts since 2012. Heck Wiltjer is still in college (he came into UK as a freshman with Davis), if he makes the NBA he counts also.

There is no argument that the UK players haven't had better NBA careers. If that's how you are defending talent on UK versus Texas, it's just not a good argument.

Three NBA starters on UK versus one on Texas. One journeyman on Texas versus zero (so far) on UK. Three cups of coffee for UK (so far) versus 2 for Texas). That's a big difference in talent. Not to mention my previous point that no one on UT was NBA ready the year Durant played while UK had 6 guys drafted including Davis.

If you were to draft (based on those two squads after each season) you wouldn't go:

MKG
Jones
Augustin
Lamb
Teague
Abrams
Miller
James
Pittman

 

[Deleted member 3149]

would love to see any team in the past 20 years attempt to take down Cardiac Kemba in the months of March/April.

 

[huskyniner]

Anyone who thinks that the Kentucky '12 team would beat UConn '04 clearly didn't watch the last championship game. Good veterans will beat great freshmen roughly 9 times out of 10.

 

[Waquoit]

Anyone who thinks that the Kentucky '12 team would beat UConn '04 clearly didn't watch the last championship game. Good veterans will beat great freshmen roughly 9 times out of 10.

And we would still have the same coaching mismatch.

 

[auror]

There is no argument that the UK players haven't had better NBA careers. If that's how you are defending talent on UK versus Texas, it's just not a good argument.

Reposting what I said.

...the Kentucky team was not world's better talent-wise than Durant's Texas team. Cumulatively it probably had more talent, but it's closer than some were arguing and certainly not the difference between round of 32 loss by 20 to #5 seed USC and winning a title with no game closer than 8 points. Brow > Durant in college is that difference.

Stars we were debating aside and using your analysis it is 2 rotation guys for Kentucky, 3 cups of coffee vs. 1 rotation guy for Texas, 2 cups of coffee + Abrams. And none of the above guys for either team are lighting the league on fire.

I stand by the "Cumulatively [Kentucky] probably had more talent, but it's closer than some were arguing and certainly not the difference between round of 32 loss by 20 to #5 seed USC and winning a title with no game closer than 8 points."

Davis in college over Durant.