MUScoop

Who was Marquette's best point guard over the last 20 years?

This is a good poll. I have to say, if this was a "rank 'em" poll, I would list them:

1. Hutch
2. Diener
3. Miller
4. (tie) Henry and James

This is as much aesthetic value as it performance. I just never warmed to James' style of play.

Hutch was a 5'9 shooting guard that played off the ball a lot once Marcus West got here.

Miller was perhaps the best pure point guard ever at MU.

Having seen them all (but not Henry and Diener in person), I would say Diener.

Even though he benefitted from Wade and Novak, he held his own in 04-05.

Hutch was clutch and was my favorite to watch in person.

James would have been a solid #1 if he could hit shots more consistently. He's the only PG in this list who I can recall dunked in an NCAA game.

Quote from: bma725 on June 17, 2009, 02:09:17 PM
Hutch was a 5'9 shooting guard that played off the ball a lot once Marcus West got here.

Miller was perhaps the best pure point guard ever at MU.

Agree -  seventh place all time assist leader in NCAA history.  What more could you want?

1) Diener
2) Miller
3) James
4) Hutchins
5) Henry

Quote from: 1990Warrior on June 17, 2009, 02:25:38 PM
Agree -  seventh place all time assist leader in NCAA history.  What more could you want?

Plus Miller led us to a Sweet 16.  He's hands-down our #1 PG

Quote from: 1990Warrior on June 17, 2009, 02:25:38 PM
Agree -  seventh place all time assist leader in NCAA history.  What more could you want?

I answered assuming PURE point guard was assumed, thus Tony Miller.  Watching him bust the Kentucky press was awe inspiring.  Another thing about Miller:  for his mediocre shooting %, he sure made a lot of big shots.

If we are looking for best combo guard who had a lot of point responsibility, I'd have to say Diener.

Quote from: bma725 on June 17, 2009, 02:09:17 PM
Hutch was a 5'9 shooting guard that played off the ball a lot once Marcus West got here.

Miller was perhaps the best pure point guard ever at MU.

Gotta disagree. Meminger was MU's best point guard ever, not even close.

Tony Miller, without a doubt.

I know it's sacrilegious to say around here, but I always felt like Travis Diener was overrated. Don't get me wrong, he was a nice player for MU but since he was a scrappy, undersized, white guy, fans (and the media) tended to view him as much better than he truly was.

Quote from: LastWarrior on June 17, 2009, 02:37:52 PM
1) Diener
2) Miller
3) James
4) Hutchins
5) Henry

What he said (noting, though, that I didn't pay much attention to MU hoops before about 1986 or 1987).
Hutch was a better scorer than any of them, but as mentioned earlier, he was a shooting guard in a point guard's body and, for the most part, played like one.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on June 17, 2009, 02:52:06 PM
Tony Miller, without a doubt.

I know it's sacrilegious to say around here, but I always felt like Travis Diener was overrated. Don't get me wrong, he was a nice player for MU but since he was a scrappy, undersized, white guy, fans (and the media) tended to view him as much better than he truly was.

Diener led Conference USA in scoring and assists his senior year. Back when C-USA was a legitimate conference.
Not too bad for an overrated, scrappy, undersized white guy.
And he's had - and probably will have - a longer NBA career than any of the other guys on that list.

Quote from: bma725 on June 17, 2009, 02:09:17 PM

Miller was perhaps the best pure point guard ever at MU.

+1

Miller started the modern renaissance of modern MU point guards.

I gotta go with Miller as well. That Kentucky game was a thing of beauty.

What I loved about Miller is he rarely made the game harder than it needed to be. More often than not he made the smart pass instead going for the spectacular pass.

It comes down to Diener and Miller.

I voted for Diener but knew the poll would be close.

Pick your poison I guess, Diener lead the C-USA in scoring and assists when he had ZERO supporting cast.

Miller was a fundamentally sound amazing point guard with great IQ

Coming from someone who saw Miller play only once on TV, but was there for all of Diener's career at MU even I have to go with Miller.  Just look at the numbers end of story.

Quote from: warrior55 on June 17, 2009, 03:39:20 PM
Pick your poison I guess, Diener lead the C-USA in scoring and assists when he had ZERO supporting cast.

Uh, Novak?  He didn't exactly create his own shot that year, but if you wanted an assist, Novak was a great target.

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on June 17, 2009, 02:52:06 PM
but since he was a scrappy, undersized, white guy, fans (and the media) tended to view him as much better than he truly was.

That's interesting because I always thought he was more athletic and talented than people gave him credit for because they loved the romantic/hoosiers-like story of the undersized, scrappy, white guy.

Quote from: bma725 on June 17, 2009, 02:09:17 PM
Hutch was a 5'9 shooting guard that played off the ball a lot once Marcus West got here.

Miller was perhaps the best pure point guard ever at MU.

I agree miller was the best point guard a true floor general with the strenght to play some big time defense and be very strong with the ball.  

And Hutchins was like Diener an undersized SG at PG  both however were talented enough to play the point very very well.

But i think time affects your memory a little West only really interchanged with Hutch the one year.  his freshman year Hutch primarily played as a third guard behind Piep and Miller as a Soph he played thwe pure point next to Piep.  The next year the "itty bitty commitee" came about but by that time it was almost about of necessity as the talent began to slip as we lost Mcall and Deane did not replace oneills talent on par

Quote from: Pakuni on June 17, 2009, 03:20:45 PM
Diener led Conference USA in scoring and assists his senior year. Back when C-USA was a legitimate conference.
Not too bad for an overrated, scrappy, undersized white guy.
And he's had - and probably will have - a longer NBA career than any of the other guys on that list.

I never said he wasn't a good player, I said that I think he was overrated. Saying that a player is "overrated" doesn't mean that I think he's terrible...it means that I don't think that he was as good as his reputation. He was on a couple of very mediocre teams and, in a strange way, I think that raised people's opinion of him because he was able to put up big numbers and because the team flopped when he was hurt.

For the record, I enjoyed watching Diener at MU and I try to follow his NBA career. I have no animosity towards him or anything. I just don't think he was as good as some other people do. That's all.

You guys are too young.  Dean the Dream was the greatest. 

With all due respect to Meminger...the poll stated "in the past 20 years."

Has there been any Meminger tributes in recent years? I don't recall a bobblehead. I'd love to see it!

Not sure if Butch Lee played point, if he did he has my vote. Agree Meminger was great. I guess if your over 50 the world soon forgets.

The poll was who was the best point guard in the last 20 years. Diener could pass, handle the ball and shoot.  He also was good in the clutch and knew how to through the alley oop pass. Miller could not shoot. There is a reason why Diener made the pros and the others did not. He is easily the best.

You're right as to what the poll asked. However, bma stated that Miller, perhaps, was the best pure point guard ever at MU. Couldn't let that go untouched. Miller, Diener, Hutch, fill in the blank, couldn't fill Dean's jockstrap, not even close.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 17, 2009, 09:42:03 PM
You're right as to what the poll asked. However, bma stated that Miller, perhaps, was the best pure point guard ever at MU. Couldn't let that go untouched. Miller, Diener, Hutch, fill in the blank, couldn't fill Dean's jockstrap, not even close.

and the best part is, he never stopped grinning!  Man, Dean w/ the dribble, grinning away, the drums pounding, Al pacing, eating clock, eating clock..., wow!  I guess I, too, have a prob w/ BMA's statement.  But, in the poll, it's Miller all the way.

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on June 17, 2009, 04:24:01 PM
With all due respect to Meminger...the poll stated "in the past 20 years."

Has there been any Meminger tributes in recent years? I don't recall a bobblehead. I'd love to see it!

A bumblebee-clad Meminger bobblehead would be outstanding.

Not sure why we limit it to the just the last 20 years. Open up the aperture and it's Meminger by a mile. I would also add Walton and Boylan to the list

Tony Miller breaking down Kentucky - nuf said

Quote from: MUfan12 on June 17, 2009, 11:31:20 PM
A bumblebee-clad Meminger bobblehead would be outstanding.

This upcoming season is the 40th anniversary of the NIT Championship where Meminger was named MVP.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 17, 2009, 09:42:03 PM
You're right as to what the poll asked. However, bma stated that Miller, perhaps, was the best pure point guard ever at MU. Couldn't let that go untouched. Miller, Diener, Hutch, fill in the blank, couldn't fill Dean's jockstrap, not even close.

Read what I said again.  Meminger was a better player than any of them, but he was not a pure point guard.  He was a scorer that played the point guard position.  True point guards don't lead their team in scoring for two years and attempt more than 400 FG's per season in the non-shot clock era. 

Of all the players mentioned, only Miller was a pure point guard.  The others were all shoot first point guards or short shooting guards that handled the ball a lot.

bm, we still disagree. Meminger was the prototypical point guard who controlled the ball, tempo, passed, scored and defended. He made everyone around him better. Perhaps you're not familiar with his game or have never seen him play. I'll repeat he was Marquette's best point guard ever to this day.

Quote from: bilsu on June 17, 2009, 09:15:08 PM
The poll was who was the best point guard in the last 20 years. Diener could pass, handle the ball and shoot.  He also was good in the clutch and knew how to through the alley oop pass. Miller could not shoot. There is a reason why Diener made the pros and the others did not. He is easily the best.

Making the pros is irrelevent to this discussion.  From the classic, "pure point guard" perspective, Tony Miller was the better choice.  Deiner was all around a better player however.

What about Butch Lee?

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 18, 2009, 08:30:39 AM
bm, we still disagree. Meminger was the prototypical point guard who controlled the ball, tempo, passed, scored and defended. He made everyone around him better. Perhaps you're not familiar with his game or have never seen him play. I'll repeat he was Marquette's best point guard ever to this day.

Prototypical point guards don't score as much as he did and they never lead their team in scoring.  Meminger probably was the best MU guard of that era, but he wasn't a true point guard regardless of what position Al had him playing.

At 6' tall what position would you suggest he play? And I suppose Jeff Sewell or Allie McGuire were then not shooting guards on his teams also? Meminger had the ball in his hands literally 85% of the time when Marquette was on offense. Again I ask you, have you ever seen him play or are you basing your opinion solely on statistics?
Obviously you are a student of basketball recruiting, but your credibility will take take a hit if you hold fast to Meminger not being a point guard.

Quote from: bma725 on June 18, 2009, 06:53:48 AM
Read what I said again.  Meminger was a better player than any of them, but he was not a pure point guard.  He was a scorer that played the point guard position.  True point guards don't lead their team in scoring for two years and attempt more than 400 FG's per season in the non-shot clock era. 

Of all the players mentioned, only Miller was a pure point guard.  The others were all shoot first point guards or short shooting guards that handled the ball a lot.

To set someone apart as special because of their deficiencies ("pure" point is someone who can't shoot or score) seems odd to me. I would prefer someone at the point who can do it all (Chris Paul?). Who does Tony Miller beat out to be the best pure point in MU history and why is being "pure" (i.e. limited) a good thing?

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 18, 2009, 09:23:42 AM
At 6' tall what position would you suggest he play? And I suppose Jeff Sewell or Allie McGuire were then not shooting guards on his teams also? Meminger had the ball in his hands literally 85% of the time when Marquette was on offense. Again I ask you, have you ever seen him play or are you basing your opinion solely on statistics?
Obviously you are a student of basketball recruiting, but your credibility will take take a hit if you hold fast to Meminger not being a point guard.

I've seen him play on tape, not live.

Lazar played the center position some times last season.  That doesn't make him a center.  Meminger played the point guard position but that doesn't make him a true point guard.  Scoring point? Sure.  Shoot first point? Definitely.  Prototypical point guard as you called him? No. 

If we extend this discussion all the way back to the Al era then Mandy Johnson needs to be added to the equation.  I would put him behind Miller as a true point guard but ahead of Diener, Hutch, and James.  I am a bit biased since I lived in the mecca during that time period.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 18, 2009, 09:35:01 AM
To set someone apart as special because of their deficiencies ("pure" point is someone who can't shoot or score) seems odd to me. I would prefer someone at the point who can do it all (Chris Paul?). Who does Tony Miller beat out to be the best pure point in MU history and why is being "pure" (i.e. limited) a good thing?

Pure doesn't mean limited, you just interepret it that way.  Pure point guard simply means someone that looks for their own scoring opportunities last, and someone who is more concerned with getting their teammates involved that scoring on their own.  When called upon to score, they can(just like TM could), but them scoring on their own is at best the 5th option and for the most part shouldn't even be necessary if the team around is talented enough.

That's incredibly rare, especially in modern basketball.  Miller is the only one of those at MU in recent memory, probably Mandy Johnson before him.

Having a pure point guard allows you to maximize the talents of the other players on the court, simple as that.  When you get a point guard that's looking for his own shot before others, or a point guard that isn't a distributor, you aren't using the other four players to their fullest potential.  

Quote from: MUfan12 on June 17, 2009, 11:31:20 PM
A bumblebee-clad Meminger bobblehead would be outstanding.

+70.  With that big smile.

Dean was a point all the way and probably our best. I know I am in the minority but I think Miller was highly overrated. That said, beating Kentucky moves him up the list for me. Lloyd Walton was a pretty darn good PG and was fun to watch, from being introduced to his spats with Al.


Just curious---who does everyone think was the worst?

have to absolutely disagree with you BMA.  

I great point guard is not always the 5th best option to score and a great point guard is great beacuse he makes his team better ...by yes in many cases looking to facilitate the offense through the pass or dribble penetration and the dish...but first and foremost he is able to determine what is the best way for his team to score a basket during that particular possesion.  It appears that you assume a great point guard is a bad shooter or scorer and then must have double digit assists becuase him shooting it is always the 5th best option.  

You are wrong.  Great scoring point guards like Dream, Hutch, and Diener...and even Wade when he palyed the point are not always the 5th best scoring option  and if they are smart realize that in certain cases they are the best option to score.  In fact in Dieners last year or two he was the best player on the court for MU, is it really in MU's best interest to have you best player and your future NBA player to be considered or to consider himself the 5th best option?  he still managed to become the #2 all time assit guy at MU.  

Another perfect example would be Scott Skiles scored over 2400 points at MSU, led the country in scoring becuase he could flat out score it.  Still wound up #1 all time in assists at MSU and holds the NBA record for assists in a game.  So becuase he scored is he a shooting guard in a PG's body, cause Diner and Skiles could drop a dime in a flash if it was there but also could score when it was in their teams best interests.

Quote from: THEGYMBAR on June 18, 2009, 10:43:32 AM
Just curious---who does everyone think was the worst?

Of the bunch mentioned in the poll?  Cordell Henry.

Marquette has had a long history of outstanding point guard play. Marcus Washington, while the '74 team got to the championship game, never impressed me as being more than average at that position.

Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on June 18, 2009, 10:48:42 AM
have to absolutely disagree with you BMA.  

I great point guard is not always the 5th best option to score and a great point guard is great beacuse he makes his team better ...by yes in many cases looking to facilitate the offense through the pass or dribble penetration and the dish...but first and foremost he is able to determine what is the best way for his team to score a basket during that particular possesion.  It appears that you assume a great point guard is a bad shooter or scorer and then must have double digit assists becuase him shooting it is always the 5th best option.  

You are wrong.  Great scoring point guards like Dream, Hutch, and Diener...and even Wade when he palyed the point are not always the 5th best scoring option  and if they are smart realize that in certain cases they are the best option to score.  In fact in Dieners last year or two he was the best player on the court for MU, is it really in MU's best interest to have you best player and your future NBA player to be considered or to consider himself the 5th best option?  he still managed to become the #2 all time assit guy at MU.  

Another perfect example would be Scott Skiles scored over 2400 points at MSU, led the country in scoring becuase he could flat out score it.  Still wound up #1 all time in assists at MSU and holds the NBA record for assists in a game.  So becuase he scored is he a shooting guard in a PG's body, cause Diner and Skiles could drop a dime in a flash if it was there but also could score when it was in their teams best interests.

Re-read what I said.  I said Pure point guards looked for their own scoring last, not great point point guards.  There's a very large difference in those words that none of you seem to grasp. 

Being the best pure point guard and being the best point guard aren't necessarily the same thing.

Pure or contaminated, it doesn't matter. Hay is correct. A point guard makes his teammates better be it with the dribble, dishing, scoring or any combination of these attributes.

so then is the poll really " good point guards that could not shoot"  in that case Deiner should come in last.

Maybe the next poll should be "good centers that could not dunk"...i nominate Barro, Grimm, Clausen, others?

Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on June 18, 2009, 11:56:25 AM
Maybe the next poll should be "good centers that could not dunk"...i nominate Barro, Grimm, Clausen, others?

I'm not sure what criteria would have to be used in order to classify Grimm and Clausen as "good" centers. 

Quote from: bma725 on June 18, 2009, 10:59:24 AM
Re-read what I said.  I said Pure point guards looked for their own scoring last, not great point point guards.  There's a very large difference in those words that none of you seem to grasp. 

Being the best pure point guard and being the best point guard aren't necessarily the same thing.

Again, if Miller could have shot it like Diener or Hutch he would have. If he had the midrange game or the ability to finish of a Memminger or a Worthen he would have used it. He couldn't and he didn't. If lacking these skills makes him by necessity a more "pure" point guard for you so be it. To me it just makes him a more limited one.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 18, 2009, 12:10:41 PM

Again, if Miller could have shot it like Diener or Hutch he would have. If he had the midrange game or the ability to finish of a Memminger or a Worthen he would have used it. He couldn't and he didn't. If lacking these skills makes him by necessity a more "pure" point guard for you so be it. To me it just makes him a more limited one.

We can play that game both ways.  None of those guys could pass the ball or handle the ball or break the press like Miller.  Given those are the essential skills for a point guard, that would make them pretty limited point guards.

Marcus Washington drove me nuts. I have always loved point guards but I could have lived without Marcus.

Quote from: bma725 on June 18, 2009, 12:32:57 PM
We can play that game both ways.  None of those guys could pass the ball or handle the ball or break the press like Miller.  Given those are the essential skills for a point guard, that would make them pretty limited point guards.

I'll give you Hutch, but to suggest that Memminger, Worthen and Diener lacked the ballhandling and passing skills of Miller is nonsense. As for breaking the press, I don't think anyone even tried to press Dean as it would have proven futile. Don't recall with Sam, but I think Travis handled Louisville's press pretty well.

I personally witnessed Meminger dribble for minutes at a time without losing the ball on several occassions. He was cat quick, could pass with anyone, and had an extremely high basketball IQ. Even with a less than stellar outside jumpshot, it's no mystery why the Knicks made him their #1 pick and he played the point in the Association for many years.

Did some of you guys ever see "the Dream"? To question or not his dribbling and ball IQ is unreal. He was an unbelievable player and a joy to watch.

From Wikpedia...............

Coach Al McGuire once remarked that Meminger was "quicker than 11:15 mass at a seaside resort."

I want to know how can anyone not put "Smo" in their top five?

Quote from: THEGYMBAR on June 18, 2009, 12:59:46 PM
Marcus Washington drove me nuts. I have always loved point guards but I could have lived without Marcus.

that's because he hurt his leg before arriving at MU, but too late to replace, so everyone knew he couldn't go to his right and covered him accordingly.  He also was the most likely to drive under the basket, leap in the air with no outlet, shot or plan.

Quote from: augoman on June 18, 2009, 10:02:54 PM

that's because he hurt his leg before arriving at MU, but too late to replace, so everyone knew he couldn't go to his right and covered him accordingly.  He also was the most likely to drive under the basket, leap in the air with no outlet, shot or plan.

I'm thinking even if he had time to replace his leg, he still couldn't go to his right....

it's tough to say because I have really only seen Henry, Diener, and James play the point at Marquette.  (And Dan Fitzgerald)

You guys need only do one thing to realize who the greatest "pure" point guard in Marquette history was. Order the game tapes from the 1978-79 and 1979-80 films and you will see that none before or sINCE  totally ownED the team in terms of quaterbacking passing dishing and scoring as an afterthought and that is Sam Worthen, he never played with a Center over 6-9  while at Mw and only got two years in the system and dominATED IT. 6'-5" COULD BREAK PRESSES ANKLES AND ALWAYS PUT THE BALLS IN THE HANDS OF TEAMATES. PLEASE DO NOT FORGET SAM!

Sam "The Sham" Worthen was good, no question. But, the absolute best Warrior point guard ever, bar none, was Dean "The Dream" Meminger. Truly, our dream, their nightmare.

Quote from: 4everwarriors on June 17, 2009, 02:50:07 PM

Gotta disagree. Meminger was MU's best point guard ever, not even close.

100% agree. Also, Lucky Lloyd Walton was better than any of these guys, save perhaps Miller. And Jim Boylan has a ring.

It has to be Diener. Diener could shoot, pass and handle the ball. Diener made the pros which is a strong indication he was better than Tony Miller. Miller had a big front line to pass to and he had a lot of assists because of that and the fact he could not shoot so he was looking to pass.

Quote from: MedicineHatSpanker on August 17, 2010, 01:49:01 AM
100% agree. Also, Lucky Lloyd Walton was better than any of these guys, save perhaps Miller. And Jim Boylan has a ring.

Agreed.

Out of this list I say Diener, but of all-time I pick Meminger.