Comparing this season to 2008-09

[alexrgct]

The 2008-09 team was one of UConn's best ever, and you could make the case for best ever. The unbeatable pair of aces, the NPOY, the double digit victories en route to going 39-0 (again)- I mean, that's a great team.

I am trying to compare this season to that one. So far, Uconn has won 25 games, all by at least 11 points (and no league games by fewer than 28). The overall scheduling degree of difficulty has exceeded 2008-09. Moreover, although the Huskies won all of their games by double figures in 2008-09, there were some relatively modest victories that we're not seeing many of this season: GA tech by 11, Penn State by 14, FSU by 12, LSU by 13, DePaul by 15, SJU by 13, ND by 10, @Rutgers by 10.

Meanwhile, the talent seems to be at least on par. Maya and Tina were #1 WNBA draft picks, with Tiff and Kaleena second rounders and Renee a top five pick in her own right. ameanwhile, Breanna Stewart will be #1 without a shadow of a doubt, with Bria (I think) and Stef likely first rounders, Mo on pace for the first round, and KML a likely first rounder as well. The bench probably will include at least one WNBA kid as well.

In short, I think this season's roster and resume could hang with 2008-09. And if that's true, watch out: doesn't the end result of the season have to be as inevitable as it was in 2008-09?

 

[ASweet3781]

I would say the only difference so far is in 2009 there was not a potential opponent as good as Notre Dame.

After watching the best player on the #2 team that year, Courtney Paris, sucking wind after 5 minutes at Gampel in the first game that year (a 30 point dismantling), I thought to myself this will be too easy.

 

[Scotter]

The overall scheduling degree of difficulty has exceeded 2008-09. Moreover, although the Huskies won all of their games by double figures in 2008-09, there were some relatively modest victories that we're not seeing many of this season: GA tech by 11, Penn State by 14, FSU by 12, LSU by 13, DePaul by 15, SJU by 13, ND by 10, @Rutgers by 10.

What are you basing the statement that this season's schedule difficulty exceeds that of the 08-09 season? I don't see support for that statement. In fact I see the opposite as more accurate and in part why there were closer final scores for a number of games.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Have we had a starting 5 before where all 5 players made a 10-player All-American 1st team at some point in their career? Bria, Stef, and Kaleena have all accomplished that feat. Stewie is a no-brainer. Moriah should get there as well, maybe multiple times. This starting unit is exceptionally good. And if Stewie can prove that she's at the level of Diana and Maya, this group could be historically good.

 

[hoophuskee]

The 2008-09 team was one of UConn's best ever, and you could make the case for best ever. The unbeatable pair of aces, the NPOY, the double digit victories en route to going 39-0 (again)- I mean, that's a great team.

I am trying to compare this season to that one. So far, Uconn has won 25 games, all by at least 11 points (and no league games by fewer than 28). The overall scheduling degree of difficulty has exceeded 2008-09. Moreover, although the Huskies won all of their games by double figures in 2008-09, there were some relatively modest victories that we're not seeing many of this season: GA tech by 11, Penn State by 14, FSU by 12, LSU by 13, DePaul by 15, SJU by 13, ND by 10, @Rutgers by 10.

Meanwhile, the talent seems to be at least on par. Maya and Tina were #1 WNBA draft picks, with Tiff and Kaleena second rounders and Renee a top five pick in her own right. ameanwhile, Breanna Stewart will be #1 without a shadow of a doubt, with Bria (I think) and Stef likely first rounders, Mo on pace for the first round, and KML a likely first rounder as well. The bench probably will include at least one WNBA kid as well.

In short, I think this season's roster and resume could hang with 2008-09. And if that's true, watch out: doesn't the end result of the season have to be as inevitable as it was in 2008-09?

I like the 09-10 team better than 08-09 and believe 01-02 is best ever. I thought the difference between Tina in her jr year vs her sr year was huge. I believe in 08-09 Appel was regarded as best center. Paris was early but she really wasn't. IMO Tina "ran over Appel" in her sr year but wasn't as good as her in her jr year. I thought JR Maya was better than So Maya. I thought Kalana was better etc. The only significant better player for 08-09 was Renee imo. Tina's improvement plus all the other improvements, lead me to believe 09-10 was better.

This team needs KML ot ge healthy and play like she was early. And Banks to get healthy. and ofc win all their games.

 

[Suebird10fan]

Interestingly, only one of those close games for the 09 team was vs a ranked opponent (ND). Against ranked opponents the 09 team won by a whopping 27.3 points on average.

In general, this team is clearly in the mix with the all-time great teams, but it's hard to say just yet where they stand. I do think in terms of individual talent, they are as good as any. I'm inclined to go one better than MilfordHusky and say that once KML gets back on track, and if no one else falls back, we have five of the top ten players right now.

I lean toward 2010 as best ever based on their suffocating defense (not that 2009 was a slouch in that regard). Right up until the Stanford game I just felt that team could impose its will on other teams. And I can't take too much away from the team as a result of the final game considering that it was just one game, Stanford was very, very good that year (akin to ND this year), and we won the game.

 

[alexrgct]

What are you basing the statement that this season's schedule difficulty exceeds that of the 08-09 season? I don't see support for that statement. In fact I see the opposite as more accurate and in part why there were closer final scores for a number of games.

the closer final scores were largely against unranked opponents. The number of top 5-10 teams played seems higher on the schedule this season.

 

[DaddyChoc]

those Renee, Tina and Maya years were fun... along with the BIG EAST

 

[alexrgct]

those Renee, Tina and Maya years were fun... along with the BIG EAST

Yes, I imagine it was the Big East schedule, as opposed to the AAC schedule, that might have caused Scotter to argue for the 2008-09 sched. True, the Big East conference was stronger than the AAC, but there wasn't much in the way of ranked teams. This season has included games with Louisville, Duke, Baylor, Maryland, and Stanford, as opposed to "just" UNC, Oklahoma, and Louisville in 2008-09. In short, the Big east was a very solid conference, but I think UCOnn has more skins on the wall this year.

 

[UcMiami]

Hard to say 09/10 team was better than 08/09 team - I agree Tina improved significantly during the course of that season and was a monster as a senior from start to finish, Greene was definitely better and that Maya also improved though more modestly, but the loss of an AA senior guard and replacing her with two sophomores in CD and Tiff who statistically actually shot much better in their freshman year and were nowhere near ready to be the leader Renee had been tips the balance in my mind to the finished product of that 2009 NC team.

 

[meyers7]

In the poll I ran last summer, the 2009 team came out much better than the 2010 team did.

Have we had a starting 5 before where all 5 players made a 10-player All-American 1st team at some point in their career? Bria, Stef, and Kaleena have all accomplished that feat. Stewie is a no-brainer. Moriah should get there as well, maybe multiple times. This starting unit is exceptionally good. And if Stewie can prove that she's at the level of Diana and Maya, this group could be historically good.

2000-2001 had 5 AAs on the team. (Ralph, Abrosimova, Bird, Cash, Taurasi) Although DT didn't start until after Ralph and Abrosimova went down, iirc.

If they go 40-0 with the NC, they will be talked about with the great UCONN teams.

 

[UcMiami]

If they go 40-0 with the NC, they will be talked about with the great UCONN teams.

What happens if they go 40-0 without the NC?

 

[chrissaran]

They can't go 40-0 without winning the National Championship.

 

[Icebear]

They can't go 40-0 without winning the National Championship.

It was a funny. Think about it, it was Milford.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

... I lean toward 2010 as best ever based on their suffocating defense...

One thing I don't recall seeing in these "best ever" discussions is how Geno has progressed as a coach over the years. Not that I have an answer. I don't. But a "suffocating defense" being the difference for believing 2010 team was best ever begs the question: How have Geno's coaching abilities changed over the years?

For example, was a suffocating defense as big a point of emphasis in 01-02 as it is now? Did the 09-10 team benefit from the coach's growth in ways the 01-02 squad couldn't have because Geno is now a better coach?

 

[hoophuskee]

Hard to say 09/10 team was better than 08/09 team - I agree Tina improved significantly during the course of that season and was a monster as a senior from start to finish, Greene was definitely better and that Maya also improved though more modestly, but the loss of an AA senior guard and replacing her with two sophomores in CD and Tiff who statistically actually shot much better in their freshman year and were nowhere near ready to be the leader Renee had been tips the balance in my mind to the finished product of that 2009 NC team.

It's all about whom you like- perception. What you value. We're all different.

For me, Maya and Tina were the leaders in 09-10. They didn't need a leader in the backcourt. While the guards didn't have the offense, they had the defense. So while the offensive fg% goes down from 08-09 to 09-10, the fg% defense improves of 09-10 vs 08-09.

Who's a better defender, Tiff as frosh or Tiff as Soph. etc? And you're getting 19 minutes of "Kelly Faris hustle" in 09-10. Team 08-09 shoots the three better but team 09-10 defends the 3 better etc.

 

[ThisJustIn]

One thing I don't recall seeing in these "best ever" discussions is how Geno has progressed as a coach over the years. Not that I have an answer. I don't. But a "suffocating defense" being the difference for believing 2010 team was best ever begs the question: How have Geno's coaching abilities changed over the years?

For example, was a suffocating defense as big a point of emphasis in 01-02 as it is now? Did the 09-10 team benefit from the coach's growth in ways the 01-02 squad couldn't have because Geno is now a better coach?

Could it also depend on the personnel? CD has said previously that one of Geno's greatest skill is his ability to hide his team's flaws...

 

[hoophuskee]

One thing I don't recall seeing in these "best ever" discussions is how Geno has progressed as a coach over the years. Not that I have an answer. I don't. But a "suffocating defense" being the difference for believing 2010 team was best ever begs the question: How have Geno's coaching abilities changed over the years?

For example, was a suffocating defense as big a point of emphasis in 01-02 as it is now? Did the 09-10 team benefit from the coach's growth in ways the 01-02 squad couldn't have because Geno is now a better coach?

Who says he is a better coach now than in the past? He was the best coach back in 01-02 too. It's all about perception. Is the suffocating, inpenetrable defense better than an unstoppable, invincible offense? Who knows?

 

[Suebird10fan]

One thing I don't recall seeing in these "best ever" discussions is how Geno has progressed as a coach over the years. Not that I have an answer. I don't. But a "suffocating defense" being the difference for believing 2010 team was best ever begs the question: How have Geno's coaching abilities changed over the years?

For example, was a suffocating defense as big a point of emphasis in 01-02 as it is now? Did the 09-10 team benefit from the coach's growth in ways the 01-02 squad couldn't have because Geno is now a better coach?

Well I think defensive talent had a lot to do with it. But as a matter of fact I do think Geno has gotten better at teaching/coaching/nurturing defense. Not that UConn hasn't traditionally been strong on defense, but he just seemed to kick it up a notch at some point.

 

[bballnut90]

The 2008-09 team was one of UConn's best ever, and you could make the case for best ever. The unbeatable pair of aces, the NPOY, the double digit victories en route to going 39-0 (again)- I mean, that's a great team.

I am trying to compare this season to that one. So far, Uconn has won 25 games, all by at least 11 points (and no league games by fewer than 28). The overall scheduling degree of difficulty has exceeded 2008-09. Moreover, although the Huskies won all of their games by double figures in 2008-09, there were some relatively modest victories that we're not seeing many of this season: GA tech by 11, Penn State by 14, FSU by 12, LSU by 13, DePaul by 15, SJU by 13, ND by 10, @Rutgers by 10.

Meanwhile, the talent seems to be at least on par. Maya and Tina were #1 WNBA draft picks, with Tiff and Kaleena second rounders and Renee a top five pick in her own right. ameanwhile, Breanna Stewart will be #1 without a shadow of a doubt, with Bria (I think) and Stef likely first rounders, Mo on pace for the first round, and KML a likely first rounder as well. The bench probably will include at least one WNBA kid as well.

In short, I think this season's roster and resume could hang with 2008-09. And if that's true, watch out: doesn't the end result of the season have to be as inevitable as it was in 2008-09?

I'd liken this team more to 2001-02 Huskies. Starting 5 all scoring double figures, not much depth, a pass first point guard, great passers from multiple positions, and they've been incredibly dominant thus far. The difference between this season and 2001-02 is that a lot of people (including myself) think that Notre Dame has the horses to hang with and potentially beat UCONN in the NCAA tournament. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen, but from my memory, in 2001-02 there was never a doubt that UCONN was going to win the championship.

 

[MilfordHusky]

It was a funny. Think about it, it was Milford.

Milford was funny?

 

[Scotter]

Yes, I imagine it was the Big East schedule, as opposed to the AAC schedule, that might have caused Scotter to argue for the 2008-09 sched. True, the Big East conference was stronger than the AAC, but there wasn't much in the way of ranked teams. This season has included games with Louisville, Duke, Baylor, Maryland, and Stanford, as opposed to "just" UNC, Oklahoma, and Louisville in 2008-09. In short, the Big east was a very solid conference, but I think UCOnn has more skins on the wall this year.

In 08/09 the team played 20 of their 39 games against the Sagarin top 50, but more importantly 15 of those 20 were against the Sagarin top 25. This year's team has played only 9 top 50 teams of which 6 are in the top 25 so won't come close to the 08/09 team which finished with the 4th toughest schedule overall according to Sagarin.

And qualitatively if you really look back at some of those unranked teams that produced narrower wins they were still quality teams with some talented players and good coaching. Like St. John's for example that was led by young players in 08-09 that would eventually beat UConn as an unranked team. I'm not arguing that the 08-09 team was better, but I'm pretty confident they played a tougher schedule.

 

[Suebird10fan]

I'd liken this team more to 2001-02 Huskies. Starting 5 all scoring double figures, not much depth, a pass first point guard, great passers from multiple positions, and they've been incredibly dominant thus far. The difference between this season and 2001-02 is that a lot of people (including myself) think that Notre Dame has the horses to hang with and potentially beat UCONN in the NCAA tournament. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen, but from my memory, in 2001-02 there was never a doubt that UCONN was going to win the championship.

I largely agree with two exceptions. First, I think the bench is better this season--Kiah is much better than any of the subs on the 02 team. Also, I think ND is actually pretty comparable to Oklahoma. That OK team with Dales et al was very, very good. Like ND this year they were a clear #2 and the championship game was quite competitive. We beat OK in the final by 12 in 02 and if we can stay healthy I think we're about 12 points better than ND this year. Doesn't mean they can't beat us, but they'll have to play awfully well.

 

[bballnut90]

I largely agree with two exceptions. First, I think the bench is better this season--Kiah is much better than any of the subs on the 02 team. Also, I think ND is actually pretty comparable to Oklahoma. That OK team with Dales et al was very, very good. Like ND this year they were a clear #2 and the championship game was quite competitive. We beat OK in the final by 12 in 02 and if we can stay healthy I think we're about 12 points better than ND this year. Doesn't mean they can't beat us, but they'll have to play awfully well.

The quality of players coming off the bench (Stokes and Chong) is better than 2002 (Conlon/Moore/Battle), but UCONN literally has 7 healthy scholarship players.

I also think you're underestimating Notre Dame. In my opinion, 2014 Notre Dame is far and away a better team than 2002 Oklahoma. Notre Dame has a very complete team--strong post players who rebound well and can finish inside (Reimer/Achonwa), accurate long range shooters (Mabrey/Cable), an athletic point guard who can score when called upon (Allen) and the nation's top 2 wings in McBride and Loyd. Both Loyd and McBride shoot well, can beat you off the dribble and are great rebounders. On top of all this, Notre Dame's ball movement and passing rivals UCONN's, and Notre Dame has won 7 of the last 9 meetings between the two. You might be right that UCONN is about 12 points better than Notre Dame, hopefully we can see this matchup in the title game. However, I think most fans will be a tad more nervous if UCONN faces Notre Dame in the title game this year compared to how they felt facing Oklahoma in the title game back in 2002.

 

[EricLA]

Look at ND's closest games this season

19 point win over #25 Michigan State (who also has 8 losses)
22 point win over unranked Pennsylvania
16 point win over unranked Depaul
10 point win over #11 PSU (Remember, UCONN beat them without KML and Tuck)
12 point win over unranked Oregon State
7 point win over unranked Virginia
4 point win over #9 Maryland (again, UCONN beat them without KML and Tuck)
Consecutive 21 point wins over #5 Duke and Florida State

Compare that to UCONN, some identical teams played

19 point win over #5 Stanford
17 point win over #9 Maryland
19 point win over #11 PSU
21 point win over tOSU
22 point win over #5 Duke
11 point win over #6 Baylor
17 point win over #3 Louisville

Even without KML and Morgan, UCONN fared better against PSU and Maryland than ND did. ND had a fairly close game against 2 unranked teams - Virginia and Oregon State. It's not like I'm only comparing one game. If you look at the performances against identical, and even similar teams (for example UCONN's 33 point win over #21 Cal vs. ND's 19 point win over #25 Michigan State), and the games against Penn State and Maryland, UCONN has been more dominant by a very wide margin.

I am not saying ND isn't good or can't beat UCONN. But I think some people are actually discounting how good UCONN is. Stokes is far and away the best forward off the bench in the nation. Banks, when healthy, is one of the better guards off the bench in the nation. Chong, while just a freshman who has seemingly hit the freshman wall, has the potential to be a solid reserve if she can push thru the freshman blues. I get the inclination to give ND a lot of credit. I don't get the comments that somehow UCONN is not as good as they actually are.