If we get Gibbs--is this the best team Uconn has ever had on paper? | Page 2 | The Boneyard

If we get Gibbs--is this the best team Uconn has ever had on paper?

Status
Not open for further replies.
scrappy2.0 said:
If you have a belief that

A Hamilton is a top 5 pick
B Purvis is a first round pick
C Amida is first round pick
D Jalen Adams is a future lottery pick
E Enosch is a future nBA player
F Shonn Miller is a future 2nd round nBA pick
Then we have a darn good team.
Expand ...

You're doing it on purpose, right?
 
nomar said:
Yeah, 2003-04, no question.

It was the strongest team we ever had. A rim-protecting, rebounding, scoring center (Emeka). Boone and Charlie V (and Hilton) provided additional interior defense and rebounding. Two efficient wing scorers, one probably the best shooter we ever had, the other the greatest HS scorer in Canadian history (Rashad and Denham), a do-it-all stud combo guard (Ben), and a tough veteran PG who knew his role (Taliek).

And talent-wise, there were six first-round picks on that team, plus Denham got selected in the 2nd round.
Expand ...

0.jpg
 
Who cares? Paper means nothing. A win on the first Monday in April is all that matters.

The 2006 team could run circles around every UConn team except for 2004 and they have nothing to show for it. Kentucky's 2015 bench would start as a group for 99.5% of any other program in the country and in 5 years, no one will remember them either.
 
This thread is probably the biggest mojo loss of the offseason.
 
scrappy2.0 said:
If you have a belief that

A Hamilton is a top 5 pick
B Purvis is a first round pick
C Amida is first round pick
D Jalen Adams is a future lottery pick
E Enosch is a future nBA player
F Shonn Miller is a future 2nd round nBA pick
Then we have a darn good team.
Expand ...

I would set the line at 1.5 of those things being true. And if one of them is D it's not likely to be next year anyway, so it still doesn't really help your case.
 
scrappy2.0 said:
Weve had some really great teams--some of the teams that did not win championships had more talent man for man than some that did.

But this team next year might just be a freak team.

I think last years team was a good team that didnt play all the way to its potential for a variety of reasons. But I think ultimately the loss of Daniels in addition to the guys we lost was just to much changeover--especially from the offense.

I may be by myself--but I'm a huge believer in Brimah. It looked like he ran out of gas end of season--Ollie wasnt thrilled with him--but he's a guy who can dominate games on the defense by HIMSELF. We had that before with Okafor but I think Amida--now with the ability to put some muscle/power on and hone his game--may be a stronger rim protector than even Oak. Then we add in Miller at PF who was one of the best defenders in the nation at PF and you throw in the rather lengthy Hamilton who was an incredible re-bounder--and you have the making of an incredibly lengthy athletic frontline that will have much more balance than it had this year. Then our back ups 6-10 Nolan 6-11 Enosch 6-9 Facey--the team is just enormous upfront almost like Kentucky was in some respects this year. And guys like Facey Calhuon Nolan and Samuel are due for a level up in play. If we get Gibbs--look at our backcourt--we could start Gibbs and Purvis and rotate them with Adams and Samuel. A combination of athleticism experience 3 point shooting that I think Duke had this year. The n finish it off with a role player like Calhoun --I mean think about it!
Expand ...
You're kidding around, right? You're UConn's version of Rutgersal.

Forget the Gibbs stuff. I think the team as currently constituted should be better than last year's team. At least that's my hope. But best team ever at UConn? Not even close.
 
scrappy2.0 said:
Weve had some really great teams--some of the teams that did not win championships had more talent man for man than some that did.

But this team next year might just be a freak team.

I think last years team was a good team that didnt play all the way to its potential for a variety of reasons. But I think ultimately the loss of Daniels in addition to the guys we lost was just to much changeover--especially from the offense.

I may be by myself--but I'm a huge believer in Brimah. It looked like he ran out of gas end of season--Ollie wasnt thrilled with him--but he's a guy who can dominate games on the defense by HIMSELF. We had that before with Okafor but I think Amida--now with the ability to put some muscle/power on and hone his game--may be a stronger rim protector than even Oak. Then we add in Miller at PF who was one of the best defenders in the nation at PF and you throw in the rather lengthy Hamilton who was an incredible re-bounder--and you have the making of an incredibly lengthy athletic frontline that will have much more balance than it had this year. Then our back ups 6-10 Nolan 6-11 Enosch 6-9 Facey--the team is just enormous upfront almost like Kentucky was in some respects this year. And guys like Facey Calhuon Nolan and Samuel are due for a level up in play. If we get Gibbs--look at our backcourt--we could start Gibbs and Purvis and rotate them with Adams and Samuel. A combination of athleticism experience 3 point shooting that I think Duke had this year. The n finish it off with a role player like Calhoun --I mean think about it!
Expand ...
Great out look. I really like your enthusiasm! But Adams is our future. Not Gibbs.
 
Husky25 said:
Who cares? Paper means nothing. A win on the first Monday in April is all that matters. The 2006 team could run circles around every UConn team except for 2004 and they have nothing to show for it. Kentucky's 2015 bench would start as a group for 99.5% of any other program in the country and in 5 years, no one will remember them either.
Expand ...

1999 would beat 2006 nine times out of ten. Ricky on Marcus is pretty much ball game right there - and 2006 has nobody to defend KEA or Rip. Rudy would have a nice size advantage over Rip, but he didn't know how to use it. The big, big difference between the teams is that the 1999 team always get stops when they needed them - 2006 couldn't get them.

I also don't know who on 2006 has a chance of guarding Kemba or Ray. They couldn't guard Patrick Sparks.

The answer to the OP's question is of course no. The 1994 team had a one seed on its bench for example (Ray-Rudy-Kirk-Travis).
 
I'll have what he's having!

It's nice to see a lot of optimism for once, it gets tough to come on here at times.
 
This thread has some potential.

For the record the 3 best UConn teams for my money are (in no particular order): 1996, 2004, and 2006. Only one team won it all. The 99 championship team isn't that far behind IMO.

Even if we got Gibbs, which we won't, that team wouldn't crack the top 15 teams since 1990.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
This thread has some potential.

For the record the 3 best UConn teams for my money are (in no particular order): 1996, 2004, and 2006. Only one team won it all. The 99 championship team isn't that far behind IMO.

Even if we got Gibbs, which we won't, that team wouldn't crack the top 15 teams since 1990.
Expand ...
If you are talking about teams on paper though definitely the 2012 team with Drummond, Lamb, SN, RB, AO, DD, NG and RS has to be one of the best talking about pure talent. Even Enosch was on that team as a third teamer. Of course they didn't totally click for chemistry reasons but that was a whole lot of talent on one team.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
This thread has some potential.

For the record the 3 best UConn teams for my money are (in no particular order): 1996, 2004, and 2006. Only one team won it all. The 99 championship team isn't that far behind IMO.

Even if we got Gibbs, which we won't, that team wouldn't crack the top 15 teams since 1990.
Expand ...

Do you mean '95? Ollie, Sheffer, Ray, Donny, Travis, Rudy etc etc .......beat by UCLA in Elite 8. I think the 96 team was beaten by Miss St when Ricky got hurt vs Colgate a couple games prior. They were also good but 95 was tremendous - Toby Bailey made money off that game.
 
Gurleyman said:
1999 would beat 2006 nine times out of ten. Ricky on Marcus is pretty much ball game right there - and 2006 has nobody to defend KEA or Rip. Rudy would have a nice size advantage over Rip, but he didn't know how to use it. The big, big difference between the teams is that the 1999 team always get stops when they needed them - 2006 couldn't get them.

I also don't know who on 2006 has a chance of guarding Kemba or Ray. They couldn't guard Patrick Sparks.

The answer to the OP's question is of course no. The 1994 team had a one seed on its bench for example (Ray-Rudy-Kirk-Travis).
Expand ...
I recall Williams being more of a facilitator than a scorer. I'd put Moore on Rashad Anderson and Williams was plenty quick enough to guard Khalid.

El-Amin would also have a hard time putting up that little floater in the lane as well with Boone and Armstrong both very capable of guarding the rim. The difference between the two teams, IMO, was in the post. The 2006 team was bigger and a bit more athletic, but a little too much finesse. The 1999 teams could bruise it up and still play Hamilton on the wing.
 
3rdbass said:
If you are talking about teams on paper though definitely the 2012 team with Drummond, Lamb, SN, RB, AO, DD, NG and RS has to be one of the best talking about pure talent. Even Enosch was on that team as a third teamer. Of course they didn't totally click for chemistry reasons but that was a whole lot of talent on one team.
Expand ...

Think the problem with those guys is most ended up a heck of a lot better than they performed that year so not really.

Drummond was good for a frosh but not as much as an impact as he could have been
Lamb was good, solid and probably could have been better if the team found its way.
Bazz had a sophomoric slump shall I say. Needed to grow up, turned it over but grew from that year.
Boat was still maturing and had a ways to go but wasn't bad.
AO - well he was one of the problems no need to rant about anyone that goes backwards in performance.
DD - he wasn't DD yet and very inconsistent.
NG - see DD
RS - somehow got shoved into the chemistry issues although he wanted to play and play hard. Tough year for him.

All in all not a very good team, amazing they were able to squeeze into the tourney actually. But overall, we will always wonder how good they could have been if everyone was on the same page. As many have pointed out, also a bad year for JC but he was in for one with some of the personalities.
 
mauconnfan said:
Do you mean '95? Ollie, Sheffer, Ray, Donny, Travis, Rudy etc etc ..beat by UCLA in Elite 8. I think the 96 team was beaten by Miss St when Ricky got hurt vs Colgate a couple games prior. They were also good but 95 was tremendous - Toby Bailey made money off that game.
Expand ...

No I think the 96 team was better with Sheffer and Allen a year older and wiser.
 
mauconnfan said:
Think the problem with those guys is most ended up a heck of a lot better than they performed that year so not really.

Drummond was good for a frosh but not as much as an impact as he could have been
Lamb was good, solid and probably could have been better if the team found its way.
Bazz had a sophomoric slump shall I say. Needed to grow up, turned it over but grew from that year.
Boat was still maturing and had a ways to go but wasn't bad.
AO - well he was one of the problems no need to rant about anyone that goes backwards in performance.
DD - he wasn't DD yet and very inconsistent.
NG - see DD
RS - somehow got shoved into the chemistry issues although he wanted to play and play hard. Tough year for him.

All in all not a very good team, amazing they were able to squeeze into the tourney actually. But overall, we will always wonder how good they could have been if everyone was on the same page. As many have pointed out, also a bad year for JC but he was in for one with some of the personalities.
Expand ...
Yes, I was just pointing out on paper that team definitely looked better than what we have coming in this year. The OP did say on paper the best team. I mean as far as pure talent you can't argue that team was loaded. So sad to not see them gel in JC's last year.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
No I think the 96 team was better with Sheffer and Allen a year older and wiser.
Expand ...

I liked them and if Ricky didn't get hurt and Sheffer wasn't playing with a bad hammy they may have gone the distance. But the 95 team made teams play their way, ran people off the court. The Maryland, Cincy and UCLA games were a treat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
238
Guests online
2,007
Total visitors
2,245
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
163,999
Messages
4,378,067
Members
10,169
Latest member
ctfb19382


.
..
Top Bottom