UCONN NC Teams Semi Final #2 1995 vs 2009

[meyers7]

1995 Team - Lobo, Webber (Sr), Betters, Rizzotti, Elliott (Jr), Walters, Berube, Rose (So), Sales, Marquis, Hunt (Fr) - Northway (R/S)

2009 Team - Montgomery, Williams, Kerns (Sr), Charles, Greene, McLaren, Gardler, Fernandes (Jr), Moore, Dixon (So), Hayes, Doty (Fr) - Delle Donne Xfr out, Buck inj R/S, McCormick Xfr in R/S

Give it a couple days to vote.

 

[UcMiami]

Tough - I voted for 1995 and it sort of came down to 'original' being my final line of defense. But to be more explicit -
Best Guard - Rizzotti
Best Center - Wolters (spelling error in your listing by the way!) - narrow edge, but her size and scoring ability are a little better than Tina's speed and athleticism.
Best Power Forwards - Lobo/Eliot
Best Wing - Maya, but Sales is close.

I would say that the best overall player is Maya Moore but in terms of world class players the count is 2 to 4 - Tina and Maya vs. Lobo, Rissotti, Wolters, and Sales. You could convince me to add Montgomery to the 2009 list, but then I would insist we add Eliot to the 1995 list.

 

[diggerfoot]

One thing that usually gets overlooked with this type of thing is the opponent beaten. Before the 1995 season started some thought Tennessee might prove to be the best team of all time, but we took care of that . I personally think that 2002 had the best collection of talent, and were probably the best team, but if the old saying "to be the best you must beat the best" means anything the 1995 team shines the brightest in that regard.

 

[alexrgct]

Tough - I voted for 1995 and it sort of came down to 'original' being my final line of defense. But to be more explicit -
Best Guard - Rizzotti
Best Center - Wolters (spelling error in your listing by the way!) - narrow edge, but her size and scoring ability are a little better than Tina's speed and athleticism.
Best Power Forwards - Lobo/Eliot
Best Wing - Maya, but Sales is close.

I would say that the best overall player is Maya Moore but in terms of world class players the count is 2 to 4 - Tina and Maya vs. Lobo, Rissotti, Wolters, and Sales. You could convince me to add Montgomery to the 2009 list, but then I would insist we add Eliot to the 1995 list.

I can't agree with you on this one.

Renee the senior was certainly more athletic than Jen, and I'd argue at minimum Jen's equal as a junior. I'd give the edge to Renee because of her three point shooting (99 threes in 2009).

Pam Weber was a starter on that team much the way Caroline Doty was a starter on the 2013, but I'd still take Tiff over her.

Jams and Kaleena are tough. I'm going to say a draw.

Maya and Lobo are very different players, and both were NPOY in the seasons we are comparing, but Maya is Maya. I give her the edge.

By Tina's junior year, she was a WBCA AA and a complete force of nature by the time the tournament rolled around. Kara wasn't there yet as a sophomore. Edge to 2009.

The bench edge goes to 1995 simply because they had a freshman Nykesha and Berube.

I don't think the 1995 team matches up athletically with the starting five in 2009. That team was so diverse that four different starters led the team in scoring in at least one game during the tourney. Competitively speaking, their lowest MOV was 10 points the entire season. I really think their only historical comparison was 2002.

 

[semper]

Yeah, I agree with the Wise Guy, although I never got to see 1995, except on tape. I think that the threesome of Maya, Monty, and Tina that year was incredible. What a joy to watch Tina become a true monster. They were topped only by the 2002 crew.

http://the-boneyard.com/threads/john-a-geno-calls-2001-02-greatest-in-wcbb-history.9852/page-2

 

[Wally East]

1995 Team - Lobo, Webber (Sr), Betters, Rizzotti, Elliott (Jr), Walters, Berube, Rose (So), Sales, Marquis, Hunt (Fr) - Northway (R/S)

2009 Team - Montgomery, Williams, Kerns (Sr), Charles, Greene, McLaren, Gardler, Fernandes (Jr), Moore, Dixon (So), Hayes, Doty (Fr) - Delle Donne Xfr out, Buck inj R/S, McCormick Xfr in R/S

Give it a couple days to vote.

1995 does pose match-up problems for 2009.

If you put Tina on Kara, who guards Lobo? McLaren could, but not for very long. Maya would probably have to shoulder that herself. Kalana would have Nykesha, which is a good match-up. Who was Jamelle? Tiffany? They're about the same height but good luck to Tiffany. Renee covers Jen and that's pretty even.

On the flip side: Rebecca covers Tina but switches with Kara. Nykesha guards Maya (good luck, freshman! ) Jamelle on Kalana, Jen on Renee, and that doesn't work out because I have Kara on Tiffany

Sentimentally, I want to pick '95 but '09 has two of UConn's top 5 players.

 

[UcMiami]

1995 does pose match-up problems for 2009.

If you put Tina on Kara, who guards Lobo? McLaren could, but not for very long. Maya would probably have to shoulder that herself. Kalana would have Nykesha, which is a good match-up. Who was Jamelle? Tiffany? They're about the same height but good luck to Tiffany. Renee covers Jen and that's pretty even.

On the flip side: Rebecca covers Tina but switches with Kara. Nykesha guards Maya (good luck, freshman! ) Jamelle on Kalana, Jen on Renee, and that doesn't work out because I have Kara on Tiffany

Sentimentally, I want to pick '95 but '09 has two of UConn's top 5 players.

I think Geno puts Elliott on Maya, and when Maya finally picks herself up off the floor Jamelle just slams her back down. Somewhere around the 6th minute of the first half Maya is beginning to look like a mummy with all the added tape Rosie has added to her arms and legs. And Jamelle has just begun to work up a sweat and feel like she is getting into the flow of the game.

But seriously, just did a little research for the years in question:
Scoring/gm, %, Rbs Asst Stl Blk
Maya 19.3 - 52.1% 8.9 3 2 1.5
Lobo 17.1 - 50% 9.8 3.5 3 3.5
Tina 16.5 - 62% 8.9 1 1 2
Rene 16.5 - 44.8% 2.1 3 2 NA
Kara 15.2 - 62.7% 6.2 1 3 2.8
Jen 12.5 - 50.6% 2.8 4.5 3 NA
Elliott 10.9 - 51.8 8.1 3 1 1

And team numbers 1995/2009:
Pts/gm 89.5 /83.9
Percentage 50.7% / 51%
MoV 33.2 / 30.5
Opp Pts 56.3 / 53.4
Opp % 31.5% / 33.4%
Reb/gm 50.7 / 42.8
Reb Marg 13.8 / 10.9
Blk/gm 7.1 / 4.9
Stl/gm 11.2 / 8.5
Asst/gm 22.5 /19.5
Those in Bold are the only ones where the 2009 team performed better - lower opponent scoring and 0.3% high percentage shooting. In every other team category including MoV and and opponents shooting percentage the 1995 put up better statistic.
Of course the schedule was different and i have no idea which was 'harder'.

 

[UcMiami]

Now that was a total waste of an afternoon, but quite a bit of fun.
I had forgotten how dominant that 1995 team was statistically and how high it ranked in Uconn history. They were #1 in blocks (total even playing only 35 games), blocks/gm, and assists/gm. Number 1 in total rebound (again only 35 games) and #2 in rebounds/gm. Second in rebounding margin and points per game, third in MoV and defensive shooting percent, seventh in shooting percentage and ninth in steals/game. In terms of these numbers 2009 was not bad but not in the same league.

 

[hoophuskee]

I like 2009 team. The 95 team played a lot of zone. The 2009 team would get what they want from 3. Maya Moore is a bad matchup for this team. And Montgomery is better than Rizotti. The top 3 players Maya vs Lobo, Monty vs. Rizzotti and Charles vs Wolters all favors 2009.

 

[Wally East]

Montgomery is better than Rizzotti. Hmm. I'd put it closer to a draw.

Tina would get next to nothing inside against Rebecca and Kara.

 

[ju6381]

Montgomery is better than Rizzotti. Hmm. I'd put it closer to a draw.

Tina would get next to nothing inside against Rebecca and Kara.

Gotta disagree about Tina. Wolters would not be able to keep up with her and it would lead to easy baskets and/or foul trouble.

 

[UcMiami]

Montgomery was a better scorer, probably the least important aspect of being a PG. But Jen was a better distributor, a better leader, and a much better defender. And she shot a better percentage from the floor.

Scoring/gm, %, Rbs Asst Stl Blk
Rene 16.5 - 44.8% 2.1 3 2 NA
Jen 12.5 - 50.6% 2.8 4.5 3 NA

Tina would have beaten Kara down the floor so Lobo would need to cover initially, but Kara had great footwork (she taught Tina some I believe) and was built like a rock so Tina would have had a hard time working her down low. BG hight without the leaping ability or Mr. Gadget arms, but with twice the physical strength. (Think of Stef with 4 more inches.)

 

[hoophuskee]

Wally- I agree they are close but 1995 wasn't when Jen was NPOY. Monty too quick for Jen. It is close though but I give Monty the edge. And I disagree about Tina. The 1995 Team plays a lot of zone. The 2009 team can spread the floor with shooters. Anytime Lobe can't help, Tina would be too quick for Kara imo.

UCMiami- I disagree what is least important in terms of being a pg a scorer vs a passer. IMO it comes down to what does your team need and how effective are you at it. Secondly, while Jen during her time might be better during her time vs Monty in hers in terms of defense, imo Monty would give Jen trouble handling her. Monty too quick. I do agree about Jen's leadership. But I don't agree with your use of stats. Jen got NPOY in 95-96 yet her fg percentage was just 44% while shooting 27.2% rom 3. Thus her shooting didn't matter yet she was NPOY. Same with Monty. Jen only had to take 8.8 shots per game. While Monty had to take 12.9 shots per game. Monty's team needed her to score more. Jen's needed her to pass more. While I like the shooting Jen had in 1995, I just believe Monty would be able to get by her a bit. They are close. But imo edge to Monty.

 

[UcMiami]

Wally- I agree they are close but 1995 wasn't when Jen was NPOY. Monty too quick for Jen. It is close though but I give Monty the edge. And I disagree about Tina. The 1995 Team plays a lot of zone. The 2009 team can spread the floor with shooters. Anytime Lobe can't help, Tina would be too quick for Kara imo.

UCMiami- I disagree what is least important in terms of being a pg a scorer vs a passer. IMO it comes down to what does your team need and how effective are you at it. Secondly, while Jen during her time might be better during her time vs Monty in hers in terms of defense, imo Monty would give Jen trouble handling her. Monty too quick. I do agree about Jen's leadership. But I don't agree with your use of stats. Jen got NPOY in 95-96 yet her fg percentage was just 44% while shooting 27.2% rom 3. Thus her shooting didn't matter yet she was NPOY. Same with Monty. Jen only had to take 8.8 shots per game. While Monty had to take 12.9 shots per game. Monty's team needed her to score more. Jen's needed her to pass more. While I like the shooting Jen had in 1995, I just believe Monty would be able to get by her a bit. They are close. But imo edge to Monty.

Interesting stuff - and on the scoring issue - I have no problem with a point guard putting up lots of points, and I would have a problem with a PG who was not a threat to score. Just saying the most important aspect of a PG's game is setting up teammates and managing the team. There were games where Renee went on a streak and absolutely saved the team's bacon with her scoring. (But there were also a few loses and a few close wins where she was shooting too much and that hurt the team.) It was not a negative that Renee averaged 16.5 points a game, just not that much of a plus. And the fact that Jen scored less is more than offset because she was a better leader and had more assists and steals.
Not sure that I agree that Renee was faster - and I think she would have bother Jen less defensively than Jen would have bothered her.
Listen - we will never know and they were both great players. I have a special fondness for 1995 because that was when Uconn truly arrived at the top of WCBB. And in looking back at the record book, that team does not get the attention it deserves because a lot of people who are current fans never saw them play, and some of those that did have had their memories clouded by so many other more recent stellar incarnations of the team.
I do think the team stats are pretty interesting - that 1995 team has more team records and more top 5 stats than any of the others.

 

[ju6381]

Interesting stuff - and on the scoring issue - I have no problem with a point guard putting up lots of points, and I would have a problem with a PG who was not a threat to score. Just saying the most important aspect of a PG's game is setting up teammates and managing the team. There were games where Renee went on a streak and absolutely saved the team's bacon with her scoring. (But there were also a few loses and a few close wins where she was shooting too much and that hurt the team.) It was not a negative that Renee averaged 16.5 points a game, just not that much of a plus. And the fact that Jen scored less is more than offset because she was a better leader and had more assists and steals.
Not sure that I agree that Renee was faster - and I think she would have bother Jen less defensively than Jen would have bothered her.
Listen - we will never know and they were both great players. I have a special fondness for 1995 because that was when Uconn truly arrived at the top of WCBB. And in looking back at the record book, that team does not get the attention it deserves because a lot of people who are current fans never saw them play, and some of those that did have had their memories clouded by so many other more recent stellar incarnations of the team.
I do think the team stats are pretty interesting - that 1995 team has more team records and more top 5 stats than any of the others.

Remember it is Renee as a senior vs Jen as a sophomore....not really fair to say Monty shot them into any losses.

 

[hoophuskee]

UCMiami- we'll just have to agree to disagree. and this is all fun stuff - no right or wrong answer. Many of us have different views of the game. But we love each and every team- regardless. But here are some points we differ.

Point 1-- I don't believe in "a pg's main aspect" is to set up teammates. Like you have said of your love of the 1995 team, one love I have had of pg's goes back to when I was a kid and saw West and Frazier play. Their most important aspect dictated what their team needed them to do as the pg. In adition, for example, Magic Johnson imo was not as good of a passer than Stockton, but Magic could score. Magic was greater.

Point 2- Our comparison is 1995 vs 2009 when they both went undefeated. Thus Renee's past games of losing doesn't hold. Just as the games Jen lost before or after 1995 season doesn't hold for this argument.

Point 3- I don't agree that Jen scoring less is an offset of a better leader and more assists in this case in terms of them being equal or give nod to Jen. Anyhow I look at it in terms of matchups. Jen was best pg in 1995 vs Renee being best pg in 2009. How would they match up? I believe Renee is a bit too quick for Jen. So before I wasn't saying Renee was faster. Was saying she was quicker. These two are very close imo. If I were to put up a op 20 all-time list I'd have Renee as 10 and Jen as 11.

Point 4- I go with matchups - my perception of them. It means nothing but this is all just fun anyhow. If I were to go by team comparisons, maybe I'd want to bring up strength of schedule. Maybe pace of the game and the era. Or consider the tough time 1995 team had with Virginia in E8 while 09 crushed everyone. We can agree to disagree. Both teams were phenom.

 

[UcMiami]

hoophuskee = all good.
Loved to hate West and Frazer as I was all in for the Celtics. But surprisingly I could never hate Magic. But even with the great scoring PGs, what made their teams successful was not their scoring but the control they exerted and the fact they made their teams more than the individual talents they had - the orchestration they provided. They and all great PGs act as the conductor of the symphony. The points are great, but the real value is in that other quality.
Someone in another thread quoted Geno as saying that Jen IS the embodiment of Uconn basketball. I took that to mean that she was the player that came closest to matching the perfection of basketball that he can see in his mind.
By the way - DT was probably the best Uconn player to date and she certainly has some ability to take on the role of PG and her natural game contains qualities we associate with a PG, but the 2003 and 2004 teams would not have won without a short slow no name player with a pretty good set shot who just happened to be a really good PG. Maria does not get the credit she deserves for being the conductor of those two teams. No one will ever compare Maria to Sue or Jen or Renee in terms of great Uconn PGs, and she had no chance of getting her name on the wall, but she has three rings, and two of them were a direct result of her play.

NB - was referring to Renee's 4 year career and not specifically the championship comparison when talking about the few games where she became to enamored of her own shot. And it didn't happen often so not a real knock on her. I would say looking at the pro career Renee has had, she hasn't had the success I expected. And that has caused me to question if I had rated her a little too highly at Uconn because of her two stellar teammates Tina and Maya.

 

[Wally East]

Remember it is Renee as a senior vs Jen as a sophomore....not really fair to say Monty shot them into any losses.

It's pedantic, I know, but Jen was a junior in '95

 

[diggerfoot]

There was one comment on here about giving 1995 a vote for sentimental reasons, the good 'ol days so to speak. This exercise as a whole supports a contrary phenomenon, that what has been done recently sways far more people than "sentimentality." Since there are at least as many empirical criteria that favors 1995, the fact that 2009 gets four times the popular votes has more to do with recent passions than neutral analysis. Neutral analysis does not make 1995 automatically the favorite. One can bring up SOS, which probably favors 2009, though the best opponent either team faced was 1995 Tennessee by a significant margin. However, neutral analysis should create enough doubt to prevent 2009 from being a "slam dunk," save for the tendency to put greater value on what happens most recently.

 

[Wally East]

There was one comment on here about giving 1995 a vote for sentimental reasons, the good 'ol days so to speak. This exercise as a whole supports a contrary phenomenon, that what has been done recently sways far more people than "sentimentality."

Good points. Part of what works against '95 is, really, you have to be at least 33ish or so now to have a fully formed opinion of the '95 team (unless you watched tapes of all of their games). Also, along with being that old, you had to be a fan then (again, unless you've watched tapes of their games).

Without trying to be argumentative, I'm curious that you assert that the '95 Tennessee team is far and away the best opponent either team faced but you don't assert whether '95 or '09 is better.

 

[ju6381]

Had season tickets all the way back to 1993 and even watched the '95 UConn-Stanford FF game a few weeks ago and I think those that voted for '95 are failing to realize how much the game has changed since then. The players are just faster, stronger and just as skilled, if not more now, then they were back then. Tina was faster AND stronger then both Lobo or Wolters and neither would have been able to check her. Maya would have been able to get any shot she wanted especially with the 95 team sitting in a zone. Rene, Tiff and Kalana also would have made it very difficult for them to get the offensive sets going with their defensive intensity and quick hands/feet. Lastly, the 2009 version of Geno was a more experienced coach then the 95 version and had seen it all by then. The '95 team made me fall in love with the way they played the game and made me a fan of the women team and if the vote was about what team was the most significant to the history of the program I would probably vote for them but isn't this vote about what team would win a match-up? 2009 would win 10/10...

 

[Waquoit]

What a good thread. I came in thinking 2009 would be the easy winner, but some of the posts have given me 2nd thoughts. I agree that Elliott would have given Moore fits. And I think some aren't giving Rizzoti enough respect in the match-up (and giving Wolters too much). Plus the 1996 team had height that would make Charles work. She was capable of having a clunker (but so was Wolters). I suppose the overall athleticism puts the 2009 team ahead a bit, but no way they win 10 out of ten.

 

[diggerfoot]

Good points. Part of what works against '95 is, really, you have to be at least 33ish or so now to have a fully formed opinion of the '95 team (unless you watched tapes of all of their games). Also, along with being that old, you had to be a fan then (again, unless you've watched tapes of their games).

Without trying to be argumentative, I'm curious that you assert that the '95 Tennessee team is far and away the best opponent either team faced but you don't assert whether '95 or '09 is better.

I don't assert whether '95 or '09 is better because I can argue both sides and think it's ultimately just a guess. I'm sticking up for '95 more because of the natural tendency of valuing more what happens most recently. With that opening I'll tackle one more standard argument used out there - how much players have changed. Cheryl Miller could have played anywhere, anytime and matched anyone's athleticism. Over time, as more women get interested, you expect more athletic women to be involved and the overall athleticism for all teams to increase. Evolution does not occur so fast, however, as to make the best athletes even better in a generation. The best teams have the best players and athletes then and now, without the miraculous increase in athleticism of those at the top. You could claim marginal improvements due to training and gear, but exposing the different players to the same gear controls for that. As for Auriemma getting better over time the only evidence I've heard related to that contradicts that. Auriemma finds it harder to push the buttons now than earlier. Despite the other factors that might push the contest in favor of '09, does anyone think there were more driven individuals on either team than Elliott and Rizzotti?

 

[UcMiami]

This thread had sort of died with the results being posted and folks moving on, but it has been revived with some great posts. ju6381 I was about to reply to an early post when I saw yours and you touch on one of the problems in these comparisons.
The best NBA team I ever saw was the 60s era Celtics, but flash forward to the Bird and Magic era and then further forward to 2013 and there is no question in my mind that the athletic skills in the men's game have radically changed over those 50 years and those Celtics teams at their height couldn't touch the Magic/Bird teams, and those teams wouldn't touch the current teams. So you can either say that the worst team in the NBA in 2013 would mop the floor with those early Celtic teams, or you look at the athletic environment in which those teams played and compare the dominance they displayed in that era to the current teams in the current environment. The same comparison could be made with UCLAs great teams.
So the same thing has happened in the women's game as in the men's and the 15 year span between 1995 and 2009 has seen a dramatic shift in athletic skill. I have no idea what the training room regime was in 1995 and how it compares to 2009 or today. But I do know that if CD had had her injuries in 1995 she would have never played her senior year.
So if we could do that time machine deal and put the 1995 team on the court with the 2009 team - 2009 would win easily. BUT if I look at that 1995 team in relation to WCBB in 1995 and look at 2009 in relation to 2009 - my answer is 1995 would beat 2009 easily.

 

[JRRRJ]

The biggest problem with these comparisons from different decades is the speed of the game.

In a time-machine one-game event, the '09 team would win 10/10, because the practice reflexes of the earlier team would be tuned to a less-frenetic pace than the recent team, and 40 minutes is not enough time to re-tune those reflexes.
However, given a 10-game tuneup against good modern teams, I'd bet on Rebecca, Nykesha, Carla, and Pam Webber's ability to spread the floor, Jamelle and Kara's physicality and the whole team's basketball smarts and grasp of fundamentals to allow them to score their average against the '09 defense.

Maya scoring 40 wouldn't be enough, and there wouldn't be much available inside in the half-court sets. Not as many fast breaks as usual, because that '95 team could really rebound and they were good shooters to boot. Nykesha would be as disruptive on defense as anyone the '09 team faced, and Jen was no slouch.

So, in my mind the game would come down to '09s ability to hit the 3 and get to 90+ in that particular game. Is Renee on or off?

One game, with some warmup games, I'll take the '95 team. Wouldn't bet the farm, though.