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

[Husky25]

I don't think Im way off in anyway--

Well as long as you don't think so...

The offense ran entirely through MW, so Ricky would be used to "cut off the head of the dragon", which was his specialty. It wasn't necessarily to lock down the best scorer, it was to stop the other team from running it's offense through the channels it wanted to go. Putting him on Rashad, who never had the ball in his hands other than to catch and shoot, would be a waste.

Trying to get a bucket on the 1999 team in crunch time was like trying to get through a pack of lions to a wildebeest carcass. By contrast, the 2006 team let Gerry McNamara simply step into a clean look at a tying three and couldn't stop George Mason once. To get a little sidetracked, I've noticed a trend here on the yard where 1999 is getting less and less respect over time in threads like this. This isn't addressed to anyone in particular, but maybe we have too many yarders now too young to remember watching them, who are only looking at NBA success beyond to gauge how talented they were. The 1999 team lost only one game when it had at least four starters. They beat a pair of two seeds on the road (SJU, Stanford) in back to back weekends, the second time without Rip. They won both the BET and the NCAA with signature performances - "they pimped us, yo" and "we shocked the world". The 2006 team was just 3-2 in the postseason and struggled for the 3 wins they did get. The signature win of 2006 was either getting the split with Nova at home (1999 also beat a 1 seed at home thoroughly when Michigan State visited) or Gonzaga at a neutral site. There's absolutely nothing that 2006 has over 1999, other than an edge on players who had cups of coffee in the NBA (4 to 2). Even there, Rip had a better NBA career than Rudy, Voskuhl lasted longer than Boone or Hilton, and KEA and MW are pretty much a wash, although MW's wash lasted slightly longer.

I think the 1999 v 2004 debate is an excellent one. The 2004 team was a two seed, but injury issues contributed to that, and they reached a wrecking ball level in the tourney that none of our other teams have. I still have a hard time betting against 1999 though. That team just was so cohesive and it simply won games.

Good points, all. For the record, I love the '99 team. That was my Senior year and Kevin Freeman is my favorite Husky of all time. I just remember the 2006 team as being an offensive juggernaut. Must be my old age. The 2006 team is marginally fresher in my mind.

 

[3rdbass]

You dont know that-- just by itself the Adams Purvis combination will be the most athletic tandem and if we consider Hamilton a 3rd guard--it might be the best backcourt we have ever had talent wise.(Gibbs locks it as the best)

LOL. Right now RP still has a way to develop his game especially dribbling and being more consistent on offense. Dham isn't a guard and JA is a freshman even if he is highly touted one. You really don't think SN, RB and JL was more talented on paper or how about our front line? There is no way AB, SE, PN, Kelis Fisher and Miller front line seem that imposing right now. I mean AB can block some shots but that is it and Miller still has to adjust to high level basketball and Kelis Fisher and PN are really just 5 fouls at this point. SE is the one variable as we haven't seen him but he does look a little weak on D at the high school level. I rather have EO, JB, CV and HA frontline all day long. Or even keeping it on one team I still would rather have AD, DD, NG, AO, RS, EW, and TO frontline.

 

[Tenspro2002]

2006 is the best team we've ever had on paper, especially when you count AJ Price.

Other teams were better on the court.

Next year's team, even with Gibbs, is maybe the 10th or 11th best team on paper in the last 25 years.

 

[UConn990411]

I don't think Im way off in anyway--I think next year is a validation year and we are going to be great. Last years team was hurt with inconsistency because we had a lack of scoring from the 4 position. It just put too much pressure up and down the line up--you put Daniels on that team and we wouldve been a contender with his 17-9-2.--everyone wouldve had more spacing and we wouldve scored 10 more points game with a better brand of defense.

Now we HAVE a Daniels type back and while he may not be as pure and consistent 3 point shooter as Daniels--he's everything else and more with all the rest of the mobile 4 skills. We lose Boatright and thats big loss BUT we bring in a bigger just as athletic PG who seems like he is a big winner--brings a winning mentality and I think will have similar characteristics of what Jones had for Duke. If you look at the entire 2015 NBA draft--is there 1 PG who plays like Adams? I mean an above the rim triple threat PG? Did anyone watch Purvis curve towards the end of the season--his play looks like it can be incredible--we have seen the Ferrari and Hamilton is also a budding superstar--a guy who at 6-8 has PG skills and can get his own shot at will---but still is a team player and ball mover. We have size all over our frontcourt--we must have a top 5 rim protector--maybe top 3 or even 1?? Maybe Lee from Kentucky and that 7-5 kid from UCD? but Amida is right there. IF we get Gibbs--then were on a different plateau--he would be the difference between a team that has top 10 potential to top 3. Forget hype--this is going to be a great team and we have some rel talent on it. Big athletic and skilled all over.

Remind us again about your Lubin prediction.

 

[3rdbass]

2006 is the best team we've ever had on paper, especially when you count AJ Price.

Other teams were better on the court.

Next year's team, even with Gibbs, is maybe the 10th or 11th best team on paper in the last 25 years.

I think 2012 was better as far as talent. Front court they could match them and the back court had SN, JL and RB. Now that team was a huge let down. 2006 needed another guard to handle and create the offense so bad.

I think though as far as realized talent I would have to go with the 2003-2004 team.

 

[UConn990411]

2006 is the best team we've ever had on paper, especially when you count AJ Price.

Other teams were better on the court.

Next year's team, even with Gibbs, is maybe the 10th or 11th best team on paper in the last 25 years.

Why would we count AJ Price?

And I think the talent on that team has become slightly overrated. I would not put that team over 2003-04 on paper, though I do that they had more talent than the '99 team.

 

[Gurleyman]

2006 is the best team we've ever had on paper, especially when you count AJ Price. Other teams were better on the court. Next year's team, even with Gibbs, is maybe the 10th or 11th best team on paper in the last 25 years.

I still take 1994 on paper. Ray Allen came off the bench, while Donyell was having a first-team A-A season. That's two of our out all time college greats on one team (should both be in our all time staring 5, but Donyell sometimes gets left off due to some Florida backlash). Nobody on 2006 come close (I like Rudy, but he fell short of college greatness).

Travis was on the bench too, while Donny and KO were NBA guys starting. I also believe Sheffer would have stuck in the NBA if he wanted to, but that's just a guess.

 

[FartMan69]

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.

B Not even close
C LoL
E ENOCH! Good lord for the last time
F No

 

[scrappy2.0]

B Not even close
C LoL
E ENOCH! Good lord for the last time
F No

.

Except for one stinker--Purvis averaged 19.3 points close to 4 rebounds and 2 assists his last 7 games--and he showed end to end explosion a better three point shot and above the rim play. I expect we will see something closer to this and this level of play is NBA 1st round.

Amida is a top 40 pick in this draft-he'll be 15-25 next year iF healthy.

Enoch and Adams have all the prototypical size and talents of NBA players. This is no9t a case where a guy is 6-4 when touted as 6-8. Enoch is all of 6-10.5 with long arms and growing. His curve is going to be straight up--I thought the first year Boone example was great. Adams ==easy future 1st round pick.

Miller reminds me a lot of drey green--maybe not flashy and not quite as big as Green but not far behind. Hes the main reason why I think were going to be great.

 

[Stainmaster]

.
Miller reminds me a lot of drey green--maybe not flashy and not quite as big as Green but not far behind. Hes the main reason why I think were going to be great.

. Draymond Green put up 12 and 8 in the Western Conference this year. You are shooting way too high with these.

Let me guess, Terrence Samuel is the next Chris Paul and Kentan Facey is LaMarcus Aldridge?

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

.

Miller reminds me a lot of drey green--maybe not flashy and not quite as big as Green but not far behind. Hes the main reason why I think were going to be great.

The Ivy League transfer is not far behind a kid who's looking at max money this offseason and is one of the critical pieces of arguably the best team in the NBA?

 

[FartMan69]

.

Except for one stinker--Purvis averaged 19.3 points close to 4 rebounds and 2 assists his last 7 games--and he showed end to end explosion a better three point shot and above the rim play. I expect we will see something closer to this and this level of play is NBA 1st round.

Amida is a top 40 pick in this draft-he'll be 15-25 next year iF healthy.

Enoch and Adams have all the prototypical size and talents of NBA players. This is no9t a case where a guy is 6-4 when touted as 6-8. Enoch is all of 6-10.5 with long arms and growing. His curve is going to be straight up--I thought the first year Boone example was great. Adams ==easy future 1st round pick.

Miller reminds me a lot of drey green--maybe not flashy and not quite as big as Green but not far behind. Hes the main reason why I think were going to be great.

Purvis had a historically inconsistent season and doesn't have the coveted length that NBA teams drool over. He is not even close to a first rounder at this point

I can't find any draft board that has Amida in the top 100 prospects this year and I don't know if you've watched this season but the NBA isn't exactly looking for Big men who have zero rebounding instincts and spotty post games.

Really?

 

[CL82]

Agreed. So we can't speculate on this board on who might transfer from UConn but we can dedicate pages on someone who on record has only stated that he was returning to Seton Hall?

Correct.

 

[johnhuskies95]

If Gibbs were to transfer here it would be one of only a handful of UConn teams over the years where 7 or so different guys could average 10 or more points a game(not all at the same time of course) depending on their role in the offense. Similar to '09 in that regard.

But there still needs to be big improvement in several areas to call this team even close to a top 5 UConn team on paper. Last year's team had way too many games where they would struggle to score 60 points.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Purvis had a historically inconsistent season and doesn't have the coveted length that NBA teams drool over. He is not even close to a first rounder at this point

I can't find any draft board that has Amida in the top 100 prospects this year and I don't know if you've watched this season but the NBA isn't exactly looking for Big men who have zero rebounding instincts and spotty post games.

Really?

To be fair, we had a wildly inconsistent player string 7 in a row to end his Sophomore campaign, a year later he put 6 together and we won a title. I can't remember if Deandre went in the first or 2nd though, it was right on the edge there.

And Amida has been on some top 50 draft boards, for whatever those are worth.

 

[Gurleyman]

Why would we count AJ Price? And I think the talent on that team has become slightly overrated. I would not put that team over 2003-04 on paper, though I do that they had more talent than the '99 team.

A lot depends on how you define talent. Ricky isn't thought of as talented, but he was the best I've ever seen in college at what he did. At 6-2 that didn't translate to the next level (without some offensive punch to go with it). Moxie and creativity didn't translate for Khalid either at 5-10. Jake wasn't immensely talented, but as a positional defender he was as good a big as we've ever had - just not a shot blocker. Freeman was more talented than Hilton or Boone - just a few inches shorter.

We also remember Rashad way more fondly than Albie - part personality, part clutch gene (although Albie had a few moments of his own), part disappointing senior year for Albie. But talent wise, there's not much difference. Albie shot threes at a high clip, as a junior especially, and could create off the bounce a little better. Rash Jones was a double digit scorer at one time who we brought off the bench as a senior as a role player.

I think there is a case to be made for 1999 being a case study in winning with the pieces fitting more than winning with supreme talent - so I get the flip side of the argument. Just in some ways we underrate the talent in 1999 and overrate it in 2006 because guys were drafted higher who weren't really more talented than counterparts on other teams.

 

[TheRogers]

You could add all 3 Gibbs brothers and the answer would still be a resounding no.

Go take a gander at the guys we brought off the bench in 2004.

Not if he was referring to THESE three....

 

[3rdbass]

Well it looks like Scrappy's Dream Team is a reality. It is either that or like I said in the other thread we will sending this thread to the crapper!

 

[scrappy2.0]

Ill leave it like this--if we get Gibbs--to me with what we have--its championship or bust. I doubt we have a better team anytime soon.

 

[Matrim55]

A lot depends on how you define talent. Ricky isn't thought of as talented, but he was the best I've ever seen in college at what he did. At 6-2 that didn't translate to the next level (without some offensive punch to go with it).

Exactly. Too many fans define "talent" as "How good were you in the NBA?" which is why Ricky & KFree get overlooked so often.

Bottom line: If I had to choose from UConn's all-time roster to win one game, Ricky is probably my first guard off the bench. Anyone who saw the 1996 BET championship game knows why.

 

[UConn990411]

A lot depends on how you define talent. Ricky isn't thought of as talented, but he was the best I've ever seen in college at what he did. At 6-2 that didn't translate to the next level (without some offensive punch to go with it). Moxie and creativity didn't translate for Khalid either at 5-10. Jake wasn't immensely talented, but as a positional defender he was as good a big as we've ever had - just not a shot blocker. Freeman was more talented than Hilton or Boone - just a few inches shorter.

We also remember Rashad way more fondly than Albie - part personality, part clutch gene (although Albie had a few moments of his own), part disappointing senior year for Albie. But talent wise, there's not much difference. Albie shot threes at a high clip, as a junior especially, and could create off the bounce a little better. Rash Jones was a double digit scorer at one time who we brought off the bench as a senior as a role player.

I think there is a case to be made for 1999 being a case study in winning with the pieces fitting more than winning with supreme talent - so I get the flip side of the argument. Just in some ways we underrate the talent in 1999 and overrate it in 2006 because guys were drafted higher who weren't really more talented than counterparts on other teams.

I just look at talent as how many good players are on the roster without taking roster construction into consideration (in other words, how good is Team A's 7th best player vs. Team B's 7th best player). I think those two teams are close, but the '06 squad had slightly more talent in my opinion.

Trust me, though - I'm not one of the people on this board who underrates the '99 team. 2004 at its best may have been the top UConn team ever, but they no one ranks ahead of the '99 squad in my eyes.

 

[CTBasketball]

Is it crazy to think Jalen Adams might come off the bench? Unless we run a 3 guard lineup with Hamilton and Brimah...my god the possibilities.

 

[RichZ]

I prize scrappy. We need more of him.

No we don't.

Being a full-time curmudgeon (in all aspects of life, not just Huskyball) I cannot take more than one dose per day of unbridled and rarely warranted optimism. One Scrappy is OK, but two would be saccharine.

 

[CallMeBruce]

Is it crazy to think Jalen Adams might come off the bench? Unless we run a 3 guard lineup with Hamilton and Brimah...my god the possibilities.

If Gibbs really does transfer here, and I feel like that's really likely, I'd think Adams has to come off the bench. This would really transform next year's team. Adams as a sixth man is a pretty spectacular weapon, and Omar as the 7th man should be plenty good enough. If any one of Facey/Nolan/Enoch is good enough to be a regular rotation big, this could be a Final Four team.

 

[HuskyBballFan]

Jalen Adams off the bench seems crazy until you remember that Kemba Walker and Shabazz Napier also came off the bench as freshmen.

 

[Mooch82]

While I do think it's ridiculous to say this may be our most talented team on paper ever (if we add Gibbs), it will be extremely deep and talented. I actually think on paper the 2011-12 team was the most talented we ever had, but things obviously didn't work out as expected there.

Adding Gibbs would give us 5 solid guard options (Adams, Gibbs, Purvis, Samuel, Cassell), 5 big options (Brimah, Miller, Facey, Nolan, Enoch), and 2 wings (Hamilton, Calhoun). Can go a number of way with lineups...would be fun to watch.

 

[johnhuskies95]

Adams in the Kemba '09 role would be perfect. Ride him when he's hot, and when he inevitably has a few off games, you don't need to rely on him.

 

[tzznandrew]

If Gibbs really does transfer here, and I feel like that's really likely, I'd think Adams has to come off the bench. This would really transform next year's team. Adams as a sixth man is a pretty spectacular weapon, and Omar as the 7th man should be plenty good enough. If any one of Facey/Nolan/Enoch is good enough to be a regular rotation big, this could be a Final Four team.

Bingo. Gibbs makes this team versatile, and means defenses can't key in on Hamilton or Purvis. It allows a talented freshmen to ease his way into the lineup. Couple that with Miller, and suddenly we have a rotation that makes sense, with talent coming off the bench.

We don't need Miller to shoot 3s, but with Gibbs and Purvis, who improved throughout the year from 3, we can really get space in the lane. Hamilton's numbers from 3 didn't improve over the course , but I like his ability nonetheless.

This is still an if, but if it happens, this team is truly dangerous.

 

[James]

If gibbs commits here, I think KO needs to bring purvis off the bench in a dion waiters roll. adams, gibbs , hamilton can all run offense and shoot, very very lethal. Even bring purvis in quickly so you can have a pg on the floor with all the units.

 

[The Funster]

Lot of good discussion. I think 1999 was the best team. They were so resolute, so driven. 2004 is not far behind. That was a seriously deep squad. My favorite non NC - winning squad was 1995. They were like greased lightning.