POETIC JUSTICE

[MUMac]

1 - Cadougan vs Diener = Diener by far.

2 - DJO vs Wade = Duh.

3 - Blue vs Novak = Let's call it a tie for fun.

4 - Crowder vs Merritt = Crowder.

5 - Otule vs Jackson = Jackson by a lot (and I like Otule).

Even if you call DJO the 3 and give it to him over Novak, it's still a decisive win for 2003. And don't forget that Diener was only a soph and Novak a freshman.

All this is fun but goofy. The 2003 team went to the Final Four. We'll see how this team compares soon enough.

Until then, as Buzz says, I plan to enjoy the ride.

You said 5 - not position by position.  But, as for your list, again, you are looking at the career of the players not the season.  Novak's first year, he was not a 41 point player against UConn.  He came off the bench and played a role.  The role was shooter.  That was it.  Giving it to he over any starter on this years team is fantasy.  The player that started was Townsend. 

If you took 5 out of the 10, I would have Crowder, DJO, Wade and Jackson.  The 5th would be closer than you think between Diener and Blue.  Diener, because you need a point guard.  He hit some clutch shots, but that year he was not the player he was his Junior and Senior years.  Blue might just shut him down defensively and get to the hoop if Diener guards him.

I am not dimishing that years team.  They were fantastic.  This years bench is better than that bench, even with Novak coming off the bench.  I would take Mayo over Novak - through 8 games of their comparative Freshman season for certain.

[Goose]

No way, no how the best team ever. But, I would argue that this is possibly the deepest team ever. Back in the day we did not always win because we outplayed the other team. Many a night in the Al era you walked out and could not believe that we only won by six points against an inferior team. Point is those teams won because they had an attitude and swagger that scared other teams. The depth on this team is impressive and we will win some gams (like last night) that we are outplayed.

[NersEllenson]

Even if one takes the questionable leap that today's players are more athletic and talented than those of Al's era, don't forget that there were only 22 NBA teams in 1977, compared to 30 now. That means there were fewer opportunities to make NBA teams. So having five NBA players on one college team in 1976 is quite impressive.

Frankly, saying this team was better than pretty much any team in Al's last decade is wishful thinking (and/or downright silly).

As for 2003, that team could put five better players on the floor than anything Buzz can put on the floor now. Even if this team is deeper, which it certainly seems to be, don't forget that rotations are shortened in the conference season and then shortened considerably in the tournament.

Folks always seem to want the here and now to be better than what was. I'm very encouraged by what I've seen so far this season, but I'll believe we're better than the Wade-Diener-Jackson-Novak-Merritt team when I see it.

Two critical points you fail to make:

1) The international advancement of basketball.  In Al's time, the US was runaway gold medal winner with college players.  Now, the gold medal is a struggle with our Dream Team.  25% of NBA rosters feature foreign born players now - when there were practically NONE in the 70s.  Suspect this offsets the 22 teams versus 30 teams now argument.

2) The 2003 team was totally and completely skewed due to 1 reason and 1 reason only.  D-Wade.  He made everyone on that whole team significantly better.  How do you reconcile the fact that we went from being a Final Four team in 2003, to an NIT team in 2004 with 10 of the 12 same players back on the roster in 2004?  We lost RJax and Wade.  Still had Merritt, Diener, Novak, Chapman, Townsend, Bradley...

This year's team is far and away MU's most talented team top to bottom in my time as a fan 1980-forward.  What we are missing is a D-Wade who has proven to be one the worlds 5 best basketball players...

[MU82]

You can't take Wade away from that team and say that, otherwise, this one is better. It's because of Wade that the 2003 team is better (at least until this one accomplishes as much). I mean, what, take away Jordan, and the Bulls weren't that good? Yeah, but who's taking away Jordan?

Having said that ... the 2003 team doesn't beat Holy Cross without Diener being an absolute clutch stud. Wade had 15 points and struggled much of the day; Jackson had 4. And Missouri, we all know what Diener did in regulation and Novak did in OT.

So even though Wade is what separated that team, it was far more than just Wade. Anybody who says otherwise has a short memory.

Yes, I am aware that the Diener-Novak heroics above took place at the end of that season and it is now early in this season. Which again goes to my main point:

Come see me in March and I'll tell you if this team should even be mentioned in the same breath as the 2003 bunch.

As for Al's era, it's silly to even compare. At this point in their careers, there are no Butch Lees, Maurice Lucases, Earl Tatums or Dean Memingers, and few signs that this team could play with any of Al's best units.

Hey, I hope this team proves me wrong about all of this and wins the championship. Then, two or five or 10 years from now, I'll be saying: "Come on; nobody even compares to Buzz Williams' 2011-12 group."

[dgies9156]

It goes back to that age-old saying: Good teams find a way to win games. I can legitimately say that this team is better than the last two years' teams, and most likely conclude that because of the chemistry of this team it's also better then the 3 Amigos last season together. And honestly, from what I've seen thus far, it is still very much a possibility that this team is better than the team with Wade-Diener-Novak.

Que the volatile Alums to give me a good spanking, but it's a possibility.

Damn straight. What's exciting is that this team is as good as some of the Ellis-Lee-Walton-Boylan teams. Time will tell whether I'm smoking from the pipe of the delusional Warrior, but closing out last night's game the way they did is something I really haven't seen in a LOOOOOOOONNNNGGGG time.

Since the 1980s, we get in a close game like this one and you get nervous. Who will turn the ball over? Who will take a crappy shot? Who will fail to execute? Not last night. No way! They executed, took a good shot and defended well. Sure there is room for continuous improvement, but two games against two quality teams and two wins is really something.

Question now... will we be undefeated on January 1, 2012?

[jficke13]

Question now... will we be undefeated on January 1, 2012?

Let's take a page from the Packers' playbook: First we'll talk about getting to 9-0, and when we're 9-0 we can talk about getting to 10-0.

[bilsu]

The 2003 team got hot at the right time. Remember they lost the first game of the conference tournament and at the end got destroyed by Kansas. In between they needed 27 points by Diener to squeak by Holy Cross and some key threes by Novak to beat Missouri in overtime. They played very well against Pittsburg and Kentucky. They just as easily could of lost in the first round to Holy Cross and no one would remember that team except for Wade. They lost the year before in the firt game of NCAA tournament when they could not score on their last possession. There can be a very fine line between greatness and an early out.

[Lennys Tap]

This year's team is far and away MU's most talented team top to bottom in my time as a fan 1980-forward.  What we are missing is a D-Wade who has proven to be one the worlds 5 best basketball players...

This year's team is the most talented AT THE BOTTOM, not top to bottom. No MU team has had the depth/quality of bench players that this team does (Mayo, J Wilson, Gardner, etc.). That said, Al had teams where every starter was (relatively) better than this year's counterpart and 3 guys from the 2003 team would have started on this year's team - with the top guy head and shoulders above anyone on this year's squad. Don't get me wrong - I LOVE where the program is and where it's heading - Buzz is already easily the 2nd best coach in MU history. But Wade was incredible and so was the entire McGuire era.

[77ncaachamps]

This starting five could not beat the 2003's.

But this team's bench could beat 2003's.

And that's why it would be a grinder.

[Silkk the Shaka]

1 - Cadougan vs Diener = Diener by far.

2 - DJO vs Wade = Duh.

3 - Blue vs Novak = Let's call it a tie for fun.

4 - Crowder vs Merritt = Crowder.

5 - Otule vs Jackson = Jackson by a lot (and I like Otule).

Even if you call DJO the 3 and give it to him over Novak, it's still a decisive win for 2003. And don't forget that Diener was only a soph and Novak a freshman.

All this is fun but goofy. The 2003 team went to the Final Four. We'll see how this team compares soon enough.

Until then, as Buzz says, I plan to enjoy the ride.

Novak didn't start that year, Townsend did.  He won 6th man of the year by coming off the bench scoring a one-dimensional 7 ppg against subpar CUSA teams and played atrocious defense.  I'd easily take Blue over Townsend and Freshman Mayo over Freshman Novak in a heartbeat.  After that I'd take every single one of our bench players now over every single other bench player on that team.

Not to say that team wouldn't beat this year's, but let's be honest they lost to East Carolina and UAB that year.  Then as others have mentioned they almost got knocked off by 14 seed Holy Cross and went to OT in round 2.  It's not like they were invincible.  They were also vulnerable to in-your-face pressure/fast breaking teams like UAB and Kansas. On a neutral court I'd put money on this year's team.

That doesn't mean we're going to the final four though.

[dgies9156]

Let's leave the 2003 debate this way.

We have a long way to go. While I'm excited that the mistakes and disappointments of last year are gone, we are not suddenly going to challenge North Carolina, Ohio State and Kentucky for the NCAA Championship. If we do, I may be dead next June since me and God have this deal about one more MU Shining Moment before I enter the Maurice Lucas room in heaven.

Our season is a game at a time. We're all excited about what's happened in the last two games. But we still face Syracuse, Georgetown, UConn, Pitt and the Huggie Bear, not to mention Maravich State and Vanderbilt. I'm excited and thrilled by my Warriors, but we have about 20 games left. If we're undefeated in March, then I'm a believer.

We have more talent top to bottom than I ever remember and we have a strong starting line-up. Leave the Wade and Al comparisons (I plead guilty) until the season is over. In the meantime, enjoy the ride!!!!!

[National Champs]

Please use quantifiable stats and analysis to back up such claims.

0, is a quantity equaling the total value you bring to this earth.

[Henry Sugar]

Did you know...

That 2003 final four team had the #1 rated offense and the #101 rated defense?  In the first four games of the tourney run, the team allowed an average of 1.12 ppp defensively.

We were also only the #16 overall Pomeroy team.

[RJax55]

Did you know...

That 2003 final four team had the #1 rated offense and the #101 rated defense?  In the first four games of the tourney run, the team allowed an average of 1.12 ppp defensively.

We were also only the #16 overall Pomeroy team.

Wow, interesting stuff.

I'm guessing that ranking of #101 defensively is one of the worst to make a FF.

[Henry Sugar]

Wow, interesting stuff.

I'm guessing that ranking of #101 defensively is one of the worst to make a FF.

VCU comes close at 86.

Last year I actually lost a gentlemen's bet in the tourney.  I went and looked at data from 2007 through 2011.  Here are the average defensive rankings for the following level of teams.

Win the first game - 34
Sweet Sixteen - 26
Elite Eight - 20
Final Four - 17

Last year was really screwy because of VCU and Butler, and bad defensive teams like Marquette making the S16.