Who's Better Team 2011 or team 2014? | The Boneyard

Who's Better Team 2011 or team 2014?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bosoxfan44

Joined
Feb 14, 2014
Messages
35
Reaction Score
12
I pick team 2014 b/c of better experience level. But rebounding could be this team's undoing. Oryachi and Smith were animals on the boards. When things get crazy at the end of tournament games experience and calmness usually prevails. Can team 2014 bigs including DD suck it up and grab some boards?
 
I'd say 2011, mainly because of Jeremy Lamb, Roscoe Smith, & Alex Oriakhi, with a freshman Shabazz coming off the bench.
 
.-.
UC23Leahy said:
That 2011 team also had one other player who was good, but I can't quite remember his name....;)
Expand ...
Haha, I didn't forget. Was just looking at the supporting casts of each team.
 
We'd all be ecstatic if this season can finish anything like 2011. And while, at the time, the 2011 season seemed to come out of nowhere, I think people really underestimate the talent that squad had.

Kemba had one of the best seasons in NCAA history. We all know this, nothing more to add. Down the stretch, Lamb developed into a reliable, lethal, and efficient second scoring option; something we don't really have on this squad right now. Shabazz, while not the player he is now, was a perfect fit as a second ball-handler, shooter, playmaker, and since we had Kemba, he was able to exert more energy as an on-ball defender. Despite how his career ended here, Oriakhi was a beast down the stretch, both on the boards and protecting the rim. Roscoe Smith was a warrior and he's showing his immense talent this year by leading the entire NCAA in rebounds for most of the season.

Then we had the perfect role players. Chuck protected the rim and could rebound. Beverly added leadership and an additional ball-handler off the bench. Olander gave use a stretch big guy. Giffey and Coombs-McDaniel were good shooting wings off the bench, who provided good defense. That team played great defense down the stretch.

I'm very high on this year's squad, and think we have the pieces to make a run, but they still need to put it all together. After the regular season finale against Notre Dame in 2011, no one could have predicted what happened next. This year, we have Shabazz. Just like in 2011 we had Kemba. And when you have the best player on the floor, you're always in a good position to win. But at this juncture, you'd be very hard pressed to make an argument for this year's team over the 2011 National Champions.
 
2011 had Kemba and the "The Walkers" (until the tourney when a few others showed up to play).

Sooooo, 2014 will be Shabazz and "The Napiers"... no that's not it... hmmm. Oh right, Shabazz and the 2014 National Champs!
 
Based on their experience level Team 2011, winning NCAA tournament was amazing. Comparing starters: Shabazz Sr. vs Kimba Jr.; Boatwright Jr. vs Lamb Fr.; Daniels Jr. vs Smith Fr.; Kromah Sr.+ vs Combs-McDaniels So.; Nolan So. vs Oriakhi So. If experience counts for anything Team 2014 wins hands down. Comparing tournament time talent levels of each team is another kettle of fish.
 
Bosoxfan44 said:
Based on their experience level Team 2011, winning NCAA tournament was amazing. Comparing starters: Shabazz Sr. vs Kimba Jr.; Boatwright Jr. vs Lamb Fr.; Daniels Jr. vs Smith Fr.; Kromah Sr.+ vs Combs-McDaniels So.; Nolan So. vs Oriakhi So. If experience counts for anything Team 2014 wins hands down. Comparing tournament time talent levels of each team is another kettle of fish.
Expand ...
7/10. See me after class.

But in all honesty, I think talent trumps experience.
 
.-.
BET is gone, so no team will ever win 5 games in 5 days, so even if Bazz somehow pulls off a NC run, 2014 just can't match up to what Kemba and co. did.
 
Too early to call.
At this time of the year in 2011 we had self-declared geniuses on this board that were convinced we were on the wrong side of the NCAA tournament bubble. Granted, no one could have predicted that the 2011 team would have gone on to sweep the BE/NCAA tournaments (except Maker's Muppet). But that's the point... it's too early.

If you were to compare the make-up of the team's player rosters, tit-for-tat, that's a somewhat different story. But again, it's too early to call.
No one knew what we had in 2011 with freshmen Bazz/Lamb. Now, it's easy to look back and say that the 2011 team was more talented because of the players Lamb/Bazz have become. But who knows which of our underclassmen/freshmen are going to blow-up like them in the future? Maybe we win it all again this year and in 3 years we could have the same roster discussion and argue 'Well 2014 we had a freshman Amida...' knowing what he may have become.

My point being, it's too early to call. Comparing player roster abilities (input) vs. team performance (output) is like comparing apples to oranges. I think almost everyone would argue that the 2012 team (Bazz/Lamb/Drummond/AO) was the most talented team we've had since 2009 roster-wise, but they were eliminated in the first round of the NCAA tournament.

Teams are ultimately defined by their post-season performance. Going by that logic, no team can top 2011. But then again, if there is any guy who can lead his team in a similar fashion as Kemba did, it would be his pupil, Shabazz. He's been there, he's primed. In Bazz I trust.
 
Last edited:
babysheep said:
BET is gone, so no team will ever win 5 games in 5 days, so even if Bazz somehow pulls off a NC run, 2014 just can't match up to what Kemba and co. did.
Expand ...

Going into BET Team 2011 was a bubble team with I believe 9 losses. Winning 11 games (BET + NCAA) in a row against that type of competition will probably never happen again. All I am saying is that with today's weak competition (AAC + NCAA), Team 2014 shouldn't be ruled out as a serious contender. Remember we beat Florida (my pick to win it all).
 
jfuchs91 said:
We'd all be ecstatic if this season can finish anything like 2011. And while, at the time, the 2011 season seemed to come out of nowhere, I think people really underestimate the talent that squad had.

Kemba had one of the best seasons in NCAA history. We all know this, nothing more to add. Down the stretch, Lamb developed into a reliable, lethal, and efficient second scoring option; something we don't really have on this squad right now. Shabazz, while not the player he is now, was a perfect fit as a second ball-handler, shooter, playmaker, and since we had Kemba, he was able to exert more energy as an on-ball defender. Despite how his career ended here, Oriakhi was a beast down the stretch, both on the boards and protecting the rim. Roscoe Smith was a warrior and he's showing his immense talent this year by leading the entire NCAA in rebounds for most of the season.

Then we had the perfect role players. Chuck protected the rim and could rebound. Beverly added leadership and an additional ball-handler off the bench. Olander gave use a stretch big guy. Giffey and Coombs-McDaniel were good shooting wings off the bench, who provided good defense. That team played great defense down the stretch.

I'm very high on this year's squad, and think we have the pieces to make a run, but they still need to put it all together. After the regular season finale against Notre Dame in 2011, no one could have predicted what happened next. This year, we have Shabazz. Just like in 2011 we had Kemba. And when you have the best player on the floor, you're always in a good position to win. But at this juncture, you'd be very hard pressed to make an argument for this year's team over the 2011 National Champions.
Expand ...
Kemba had an ability to make untested but talented players play at a level that that hid their inexperience. This team with the exception of Brimah ,Nolan and possibly DD are already there. Whether Shabazz could get those 3 to elevate their games is the determining factor on how far we go. It will also determine SN's place in the pantheon of a UConn greats.
 
Bosoxfan44 said:
Going into BET Team 2011 was a bubble team with I believe 9 losses. Winning 11 games (BET + NCAA) in a row against that type of competition will probably never happen again. All I am saying is that with today's weak competition (AAC + NCAA), Team 2014 shouldn't be ruled out as a serious contender. Remember we beat Florida (my pick to win it all).
Expand ...
I don't think they were a bubble team going into the BET. They had a huge amount of Top 50 games and wins. Ignore the losses. The team beat lots of good teams, especially OOC: Kentucky, Michigan State, Texas. They would have been in. But they would not have had a good seed (probably about a 9-10 seed), and so likely would not have had the matchups to make a title run.
 
.-.
This has become one of those recurring myths that we were a bubble team in 2011 before the BET. Maybe if we'd lost to DePaul but (1) not even then, really and (2) we weren't going to lose to DePaul.
 
Inyatkin said:
This has become one of those recurring myths that we were a bubble team in 2011 before the BET. Maybe if we'd lost to DePaul but (1) not even then, really and (2) we weren't going to lose to DePaul.
Expand ...
Going into the BET, they were 21-9 and had a Top 20 RPI and a top 10 SOS. They were 9-8 against the RPI Top 50, and 12-9 against RPI Top 100. Those aren't the numbers of a team being left out.
 
I really feel like this comparisons are out of place right now. How about we let the 2014 team make its own mark. We are not even 3/4 into the college basketball season and we are already making comparisons vs the 2011 National Championship team. Doesn't make sense. Let this team keep winning, and the judge them by results come April. A lot of ball left, a lot of growing-as-a-team left. This team continues to look better as the season progresses...
 
tzznandrew said:
Going into the BET, they were 21-9 and had a Top 20 RPI and a top 10 SOS. They were 9-8 against the RPI Top 50, and 12-9 against RPI Top 100. Those aren't the numbers of a team being left out.
Expand ...

Yes. Even before the BET, they were at worst a 6-7 seed, and nowhere near the bubble, just way too many quality wins.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
Yes. Even before the BET, they were at worst a 6-7 seed, and nowhere near the bubble, just way too many quality wins.
Expand ...
Absolutely. I said 9-10 seed just above... in reality, way too low. 21-11 St. John's--who lost their best player and barely beat Rutgers in the first round (this one: ), got a 6 seed. And UConn had more Top 50 wins, a higher RPI, and a better SOS.
 
.-.
2011 was a tournament team. From Maui to the Championship. I don't believe this team could run through Tourneys like the 2011 team. Lamb was the X-factor.

I will say that 2014 has more champions playing than 2011, and the book is still open. Maybe we should wait a month to answer.
 
After the back to back loses in Texas at the start of the new year, its nice to see this team playing well enough to maybe make a run in the NCAA's. DD had a good chance of being a surprising x-factor in the tournament. Why wait on wild a55 predictions by a homer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,263
Messages
4,560,481
Members
10,452
Latest member
WashingtonH


Top Bottom