After the loss the ASU, I was reminded of a Mike Deane team; one or two players that could start on a good Division 1 team, and the rest role players or back-ups forced into starting positions. Deane teams seemed a half-step slow and generally lacked athletes (I particularly remember a discussion with a Kentucky fan at Goolsbys after a loss to Cincy, he was highly critical of Marquette's athleticism and he was correct). Nothing has changed in the last two months, still the same team.
Ask yourself, is there anyone on the current team that would start or see significant playing time on the 2003 team?
J. Wilson, Burton, and Gardner would probably see some minutes, but after that . . .
Quote from: warriorfred on January 19, 2014, 07:13:21 AM
After the loss the ASU, I was reminded of a Mike Deane team; one or two players that could start on a good Division 1 team, and the rest role players or back-ups forced into starting positions. Deane teams seemed a half-step slow and generally lacked athletes (I particularly remember a discussion with a Kentucky fan at Goolsbys after a loss to Cincy, he was highly critical of Marquette's athleticism and he was correct). Nothing has changed in the last two months, still the same team.
Ask yourself, is there anyone on the current team that would start or see significant playing time on the 2003 team?
J. Wilson, Burton, and Gardner would probably see some minutes, but after that . . .
I agree with you, we have players that are starting that would not even make the team at many schools . In order to win we have to have everyone playing their best which is a hard thing to do.
The comparison will be spot on once Buzz starts Butt Biting Lady Lawyers at Goolsby's in an alcohol fueled frenzy
Quote from: warriorfred on January 19, 2014, 07:13:21 AM
After the loss the ASU, I was reminded of a Mike Deane team; one or two players that could start on a good Division 1 team, and the rest role players or back-ups forced into starting positions. Deane teams seemed a half-step slow and generally lacked athletes (I particularly remember a discussion with a Kentucky fan at Goolsbys after a loss to Cincy, he was highly critical of Marquette's athleticism and he was correct). Nothing has changed in the last two months, still the same team.
Ask yourself, is there anyone on the current team that would start or see significant playing time on the 2003 team?
J. Wilson, Burton, and Gardner would probably see some minutes, but after that . . .
That's a high standard, our one Final Four team in the last 35 years with one of the 50 greatest to ever play the game, 2 other NBA guys and two talented 6-10 guys. Otule, Gardner, Burton and J Wilson would have been welcome additions on all those successful teams with Lazar, Burke and/or Barro as the only interior guys. Heck 5-7 (depending on how you feel about Anderson/Taylor) of these guys on our current roster got regular minutes on a BE co-champ/Elite 8 team just a year ago.
The big thing obviously is that our backcourt hasn't panned out. And has Chicos has pounded on for years, it is better to have talented guards and suspect bigs than the other way around. We're seeing the veracity of that statement this year.
Our bigs are not talented also.
Quote from: warriorfred on January 19, 2014, 07:13:21 AM
After the loss the ASU, I was reminded of a Mike Deane team; one or two players that could start on a good Division 1 team, and the rest role players or back-ups forced into starting positions. Deane teams seemed a half-step slow and generally lacked athletes (I particularly remember a discussion with a Kentucky fan at Goolsbys after a loss to Cincy, he was highly critical of Marquette's athleticism and he was correct). Nothing has changed in the last two months, still the same team.
Ask yourself, is there anyone on the current team that would start or see significant playing time on the 2003 team?
J. Wilson, Burton, and Gardner would probably see some minutes, but after that . . .
It's a pretty pointless and silly exercise. Go back and look at every team since '03, and you'll likely only come up with 3-4 guys from each that would be able to make their way onto that team. This year is not unique in that regard.
Quote from: keefe on January 19, 2014, 11:06:45 PM
The comparison will be spot on once Buzz starts Butt Biting Lady Lawyers at Goolsby's in an alcohol fueled frenzy
Well done Keefe - Mike Deane was quite the hit with one brunette lady lawyer as I recall, particularly under the influence. I, as many, I'm sure witnessed said butt biting - although saw it go down at Turner Hall, and not Goolsby's. Sadly, Deane's wife at the time, was much hotter than the aforementioned lawyer...although she still lived in NY while Mike was living here..
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 08:39:37 AM
Our bigs are not talented also.
Our bigs were talented enough to help us win a share of the Big East title and reach the Elite Eight last season.
Same exact bigs.
Look at them objectively. Each has some warts.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 08:53:03 AM
Look at them objectively. Each has some warts.
Sure, but they had the same ones last year. Problem is that the guards are not up to the challenge.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 08:39:37 AM
Our bigs are not talented also.
We have the best 4-5 combo we have had in years (probably since 2003). I dig your posts but your refusal to admit it is a guard's game has come home to roost this year.
Our best 4-5's in years and yet this team is currently on par with the 2004-5 season. We have had crap 4-5's in the past with good guards and wings and have won.
Hopefully Buzz has learned this lesson. Good bigs + average guards = average season. Good guards + average bigs = good season.
CO and Gardner were both 2 star playas outta high school. Replace 'em with 4's and 5's and you'd see a different outcome. Game of inches literally and figuratively. How much different would this season been if Embiid had come?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 11:34:59 AM
CO and Gardner were both 2 star playas outta high school. Replace 'em with 4's and 5's and you'd see a different outcome. Game of inches literally and figuratively. How much different would this season been if Embiid had come?
According to most here, it wouldn't be any different at all cause our guards can't pass into the post or create for others.
If he could bring the ball up the court and throw himself some ally-oops off the glass it might be a little different.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 11:34:59 AM
CO and Gardner were both 2 star playas outta high school. Replace 'em with 4's and 5's and you'd see a different outcome. Game of inches literally and figuratively. How much different would this season been if Embiid had come?
CO was a two star player. Wow, that's surprising. You RARELY see a 6'10" or above be a two star and head to a major school. They normally end up a mid-major, benchwarmer. He's done good for himself.
Quote from: Chris Columbo on January 19, 2014, 10:57:47 PM
I agree with you, we have players that are starting that would not even make the team at many schools . In order to win we have to have everyone playing their best which is a hard thing to do.
Who recruited these guys?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on January 20, 2014, 11:34:59 AM
CO and Gardner were both 2 star playas outta high school. Replace 'em with 4's and 5's and you'd see a different outcome. Game of inches literally and figuratively. How much different would this season been if Embiid had come?
Yes, with Embiid we have won maybe 2 more games. Not going to make that big of a difference.
Name me a team prior to 2003 that had better bigs than we do now?
And yet this will be an underperforming team. We will have a better record right now if we had no Otule, no Gardner, and no Wilson but instead had Cadougan, Blue, and Lockett.
Quote from: warriorfred on January 19, 2014, 07:13:21 AM
Ask yourself, is there anyone on the current team that would start or see significant playing time on the 2003 team?
J. Wilson, Burton, and Gardner would probably see some minutes, but after that . . .
Any number of guys (Jamil, Todd, Deonte) would have started over Todd Townsend. Davante or Jamil may have started over Merritt.
the tv guys for the butler-mu game kept saying if we can pound the ball down low, the game is ours to win. guess what? our guards either couldn't or wouldn't do just that and you all know the rest of the story...