MU #18 team of the past decade

[NersEllenson]

Ners is so out to lunch on this.   Red Auerbach, who never played in the NBA, must be spinning in his grave.


Of course, Ners also fails to respond to all the crappy coaches out there that did play but still failed just as there are great coaches out there that never played.  Go figure.

Funny - you accuse me of calling coaches terrrible..I ask you to quote me when/where I said that...you fail to do so...now, you mention all of the "crappy coaches out there that did play but still failed."  And, the only one out to lunch on this is you Chicos - only you would argue against the fact that 26 of the current 27 NBA coaches played at the college/pro level (24 at pro level).  

I guess we'll just have to assume you know more than the General Managers of all NBA teams, because ironically, if one "crappy" coach is fired, they are usually replaced with another former player.

And Chicos, would you answer my question - did the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 teams underachieve (or at least go from being a Final Four caliber team, to an NIT participant) due to a lack of talent, or due to poor coaching, or due to the loss of DWade, or due to the monster schedule they played in C-USA..which included losing to TCU in the conference tourney BOTH years..a veryy lowly regarded TCU team.

[Hards Alumni]

And Chicos, would you answer my question - did the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 teams underachieve (or at least go from being a Final Four caliber team, to an NIT participant) due to a lack of talent, or due to poor coaching, or due to the loss of DWade, or due to the monster schedule they played in C-USA..which included losing to TCU in the conference tourney BOTH years..a veryy lowly regarded TCU team.

As I have said from the beginning, it is a combonation of all of those, not one in particular that led to result of those seasons.

You need to stop talking in absolute terms here.  This is what I was talking about when I called you obtuse a while back.

Replace the ORs in your statement with ANDs.

[NersEllenson]

Never said I graduated, but I am glad that you jumped to another incorrect conclusion.

And who said that color commentators are knowledgable?  Len Elmore, anyone? :-P

So basically you spent $30,000 per year on law school, to only find out you didn't want to be a lawyer or practice a career in law?  That doesn't reek of intelligence, nor do your arugments here.  Up to this point you've basically argued:
1) Losing DWade wasn't the reason we didn't return to the NCAA tournament in 2004, 2005
2) That Travis Diener's team as a junior (with Scott Merritt) was less talented than Travis's senior year team ( minus Merritt + Dameon Mason)  (Incidentally, I disagree.)
3) That Travis was a very good penetrating point guard
4) That as a 3-time letter winning wrestler in high school, your analysis of basketball is 100% more correct than mine, someone who has a track record of playing/coaching basketball - and that I am 100% wrong in all of my basketball analysis.

[reinko]

So basically you spent $30,000 per year on law school, to only find out you didn't want to be a lawyer or practice a career in law?  That doesn't reek of intelligence, nor do your arugments here.

Congrats, jag POTD.

[Lennys Tap]

Travis got to the rim more than you think. He would run baseline and finish with a reverse layup all the time.

Travis was a great shooter and an outstanding passer. He had a very good handle and excellent court vision. As D1 point guards go, though, he was only slightly above average as a penetrator and below average as a finisher.

[Hards Alumni]

So basically you spent $30,000 per year on law school, to only find out you didn't want to be a lawyer or practice a career in law?  That doesn't reek of intelligence, nor do your arugments here.  Up to this point you've basically argued:

So I guess I have to set you straight again.  I left law school after a semester and a half.  I was very much interested in it, but I did not like the person I would have to be to be a successful lawyer.  It isn't that I couldn't cut it, it isn't that I got lazy, it isn't the ten other conclusions you would jump to.  Realistically, it doesn't matter why I left.

I won't go into statistics about turn over in the law profession... suffice it to say, that I got out before I got in over my head in debt.  Did I make a mistake in going?  Yes!  Sometimes you have to make mistakes to learn.  At least one of us can admit they have made mistakes. 

1) Losing DWade wasn't the reason we didn't return to the NCAA tournament in 2004, 2005

Actually, I argued that losing DWade PLUS Robert Jackson was the reason we didn't return to the NCAA tournament in 2004, and 2005.

2) That Travis Diener's team as a junior (with Scott Merritt) was less talented than Travis's senior year team ( minus Merritt + Dameon Mason)  (Incidentally, I disagree.)

Yes, I argued that, and I stand by my stronger argument.  Where I base my assessment with statistics.  On the other hand, your argument is that you are right because you played basketball and coached some kids at an MU bball camp.

3) That Travis was a very good penetrating point guard

I never said that he was very good!  I said it wasn't his strength, but that I would still take him off the dribble over other CUSA players!

4) That as a 3-time letter winning wrestler in high school, your analysis of basketball is 100% more correct than mine, someone who has a track record of playing/coaching basketball - and that I am 100% wrong in all of my basketball analysis.

What I am saying is that it doesn't matter.  You don't just win every basketball related argument because you played and were a coach.  I said that you were being obtuse and trying to alter your arguments to fit the information people had added to the argument.  Specifically, you added that Robert Jackson was a factor in the poor seasons after the Final Four run after others had mentioned it.  That is called back pedaling.

[NersEllenson]

  I said that you were being obtuse and trying to alter your arguments to fit the information people had added to the argument.  Specifically, you added that Robert Jackson was a factor in the poor seasons after the Final Four run after others had mentioned it.  That is called back pedaling.

For the last time, go back to Page 1, post 24..my original post..here it is again..and it was written in rebuttal to Chicos who tried to discount Wade's importance to the Final Four team.  Between the two of you, you both twisted and turned every point I made to fit your own agenda.  Did I really not include Robert Jackson in my original point????  No, once again, you are wrong..I didn't backpedal.:

Chicos - The reality is that in the 2003-2004 season, we had Novak, Diener and Merritt we lost to TCU in the first round of the CUSA tourney, and were an NIT team that finished 19-12.  Sure Robert Jackson was important, but D-Wade was the X-Factor that took us on the Final Four run.  Every player returned, other than Wade and R-Jack and we were a shell of the 2003 team in 2004...we didn't beat 1 ranked team in all of 2003/2004 season.  Same story in 2004/2205 with both Novak and Diener - no wins over a Top 25 team, and first round loss to TCU in C-USA tourney.  We lost Merritt, but still had Chapman, Townsend as holdovers from the Final Four Team. It almost defeats your central argument about the quality of coach that Tom Crean was - as once he lost Wade, he couldn't get his team back to the NCAA with 2 future NBA'ers in Novak and Diener (or Merritt), or Townsend, Chapman, and any of his additional recruits...all while playing in the C-USA.

[Hards Alumni]

I didn't research it that far, but I stand corrected.  That said, do you have a justification as to how the 2003-2004 team with Diener, Novak, Merritt, Chapman and Townsend failed to beat a ranked team all year, and failed to make the NCAA, finished 19-12, coming off of a 27-7 Final Four appearance - other than to say they lost D-Wade?  Therefore, it is pretty safe to draw the conclusion that the difference between MU being a Final Four team in 2003 and being an NIT team in 2004 and 2005 with virtually the same personnel - was D-Wade.

This was what I was referring to.  I'll give you that you mentioned him, and even went as far as to say he was 'important'.  You mentioned Robert Jackson, but you made it sound as though he was an after thought.  In many people's opinion he was as big of a reason for the Final Four run as DWade.  Count me as one of those people. 

Don't get me wrong, DWade against UK was as unreal of a performance as I have seen, but to discount Jackson in any way really cheapens how much he did that year.

Also, I don't have an adgenda.  If you've read anything I've written on this board you'd know that I don't hold TC on any sort of pedastal.

[StillAWarrior]

I'm not really looking to jump into the fray on the 2003/2004/2005 seasons, but does this basketball/wrestler thing mean that from here on out Murph automatically wins all basketball debates?  I'm going to go out on a limb and assume he's got more basketball experience than any 10 of the rest of us combined.

[augoman]

I'm not really looking to jump into the fray on the 2003/2004/2005 seasons, but does this basketball/wrestler thing mean that from here on out Murph automatically wins all basketball debates?  I'm going to go out on a limb and assume he's got more basketball experience than any 10 of the rest of us combined.

I'd be inclined to agree if it had been Murph..., but only based on the half of his posts that I agreed with.

[Lennys Tap]

This was what I was referring to.  I'll give you that you mentioned him, and even went as far as to say he was 'important'.  You mentioned Robert Jackson, but you made it sound as though he was an after thought.  In many people's opinion he was as big of a reason for the Final Four run as DWade.  Count me as one of those people. 

Don't get me wrong, DWade against UK was as unreal of a performance as I have seen, but to discount Jackson in any way really cheapens how much he did that year.

Also, I don't have an adgenda.  If you've read anything I've written on this board you'd know that I don't hold TC on any sort of pedastal.

As a four year varsity wrestler myself I'm bending over backward to agree with you but when you say that "In many people's opinion he (Jackson) was AS BIG a reason for that final four run as Dwyane Wade" you lose me. Important and even indespensible? Yes. As important to the run as Wade? No way, no how, no chance.

[NersEllenson]

This was what I was referring to.  I'll give you that you mentioned him, and even went as far as to say he was 'important'.  You mentioned Robert Jackson, but you made it sound as though he was an after thought.  In many people's opinion he was as big of a reason for the Final Four run as DWade.  Count me as one of those people. 

Don't get me wrong, DWade against UK was as unreal of a performance as I have seen, but to discount Jackson in any way really cheapens how much he did that year.

Also, I don't have an adgenda.  If you've read anything I've written on this board you'd know that I don't hold TC on any sort of pedastal.

Truly, I don't undervalue Robert Jackson's contribution to the Final Four team, have acknowledged that he was 2nd most important player on that team, then followed by Diener.  The biggest point I've been trying to make is that it is almost incalcuable to determine how valuable DWade was to that team..and that while RJack was important, it still shouldn't result in the team the following years missing the NCAA tourney with the talent they had returning.  In my attempt to illustrate how important Wade was...I pointed out/or asked what Travis Diener led teams accomplished..which then got twisted into me saying Travis Diener was terrible..not the point..again..going back to my original point..I was more questioning Tom Crean's coaching in the 2004, 2005 teams..in my original post..as I felt with the talent of Diener, Novak, Merritt, Chapman, Townsend...that that team should have been good enough to go to the NCAA...either that..or it illustrated how valuable DWade was to that team...as..he did lead the 2002 team to the NCAA without Robert Jackson....

[Hards Alumni]

As a four year varsity wrestler myself I'm bending over backward to agree with you but when you say that "In many people's opinion he (Jackson) was AS BIG a reason for that final four run as Dwyane Wade" you lose me. Important and even indespensible? Yes. As important to the run as Wade? No way, no how, no chance.

I guess I should have said it that way.

[Marquette84]

Truly, I don't undervalue Robert Jackson's contribution to the Final Four team, have acknowledged that he was 2nd most important player on that team, then followed by Diener.  The biggest point I've been trying to make is that it is almost incalcuable to determine how valuable DWade was to that team..and that while RJack was important, it still shouldn't result in the team the following years missing the NCAA tourney with the talent they had returning.  In my attempt to illustrate how important Wade was...I pointed out/or asked what Travis Diener led teams accomplished..which then got twisted into me saying Travis Diener was terrible..not the point..again..going back to my original point..I was more questioning Tom Crean's coaching in the 2004, 2005 teams..in my original post..as I felt with the talent of Diener, Novak, Merritt, Chapman, Townsend...that that team should have been good enough to go to the NCAA...either that..or it illustrated how valuable DWade was to that team...as..he did lead the 2002 team to the NCAA without Robert Jackson....

Interesting that you think that we had enough talent to make the tournament in 2004, but make the case about how under-talented we were this past year.

Forget the comparisons with 2006.  Let's compare the talent level in 2004 to this past season. No matter how you want to spin it, Crean had less overall talent in 2004 than Buzz did last year--but your expectations don't seem to reflect that disparity. 

• Anyone as good as Hayward on Crean's 2004 team?  Nope.  Best was Novak (a sophomore to be) and Diener (a junior-to-be).   Both were good--but neither had the combination of shooting touch, athleticism, speed and most importantly the experience of Hayward. 
• Buzz's best outside shooter turned out to be Acker--the same Acker (and not Novak) who holds the MU senior-season record for 3 point shooting.  And I think he probably handled the ball (and possibly even defended) better than Novak as a soph. I don't know if I'd take Acker over Novak now that Novak is fully developed--but Acker's performance as a 5th year senior is arguably superior to Novak's sophomore season.
• I think by any reasonable argument, DJO came in this year with the same reputation for shooting that Diener had (without Diener's reputation for lack of speed, athleticism or explosiveness).  Diener saw the floor better than DJO--but I think if you compare DJO's soph season with Diener's junior year, you'd have to say they're pretty damn close--possibly a slight edge, but certainly not a huge advantage to Diener.
• Butler's offense (coming into the year ranked as the #4 offensive player the year before) has got to be considered a bit stronger than Merritt, Chapman or Townsend.

By any measure, Buzz had a much stronger lineup this year than Crean had in 2004.

I'm not sure why you mention their future NBA success--neither Diener nor Novak exhibited NBA talent yet in 2004.  They later developed that talent, but they were no more NBA players than Jim McIlvaine, Tony Smith, Amal McCaskill, or Chris Crawford were before their senior seasons.

The only fair argument here is Crean took a less talented team to the NIT in 2004, and Buzz took a more talented team to the NCAA in 2010.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Funny - you accuse me of calling coaches terrrible..I ask you to quote me when/where I said that...you fail to do so...now, you mention all of the "crappy coaches out there that did play but still failed."  And, the only one out to lunch on this is you Chicos - only you would argue against the fact that 26 of the current 27 NBA coaches played at the college/pro level (24 at pro level).  

I guess we'll just have to assume you know more than the General Managers of all NBA teams, because ironically, if one "crappy" coach is fired, they are usually replaced with another former player.

And Chicos, would you answer my question - did the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 teams underachieve (or at least go from being a Final Four caliber team, to an NIT participant) due to a lack of talent, or due to poor coaching, or due to the loss of DWade, or due to the monster schedule they played in C-USA..which included losing to TCU in the conference tourney BOTH years..a veryy lowly regarded TCU team.

Why do you put words in my mouth?  Did I ever say playing at higher levels HINDERS you?  Of course not.  What I DID SAY was that just because one hasn't played at those levels doesn't disqualify them to be successful coaches.  This is why you keep losing me and others with your argument.

Does being a great CEO require you have a MBA?  No.   Does being a great NBA coach require you be a former player?  No.  Is it nice to have?  Sure.  Is it a guarantee of success?  HELL NO.

That is the rub.  Just because you coached at a clinic and played ball doesn't mean you have the market cornered on analysis.  That is all we've been saying.  You want to make it a zero sum argument, which it clearly isn't.

I'm just worried after all your ranting how good Buzz is going to be, considering he didn't play in the NBA or in college.  Should we be worried that Buzz won't have what it takes?



And no, I don't think the 2003-04 team underachieved considering what they lost.  You do, I don't.  Much stronger conference that year, loss of Wade, loss of Jackson, Merritt coming off shoulder surgery and playing a different position, Diener playing hurt, target on our back all year.....ALL OF THOSE THINGS together did not surprise me that we were a NIT team that year.  


Finally, on your comments about other coaches.  Despite your denial that you've never said a coach was terrible, etc, you have indeed made such comments: 


"they were coached by JERRY WAINWRIGHT who was a TERRRIBLE coach"  January 21, 2010

That took me about 20 seconds to find.  Should I continue?  Of course you've said it about other coaches from time to time as well.  It's ok, in fact in this case you are right.  He did not do a good job at DePaul.  Just don't deny that you have used that terminology in the past because you clearly have.

[NersEllenson]

And no, I don't think the 2003-04 team underachieved considering what they lost.  You do, I don't.  Much stronger conference that year, loss of Wade, loss of Jackson, Merritt coming off shoulder surgery and playing a different position, Diener playing hurt, target on our back all year.....ALL OF THOSE THINGS together did not surprise me that we were a NIT team that year.  


Finally, on your comments about other coaches.  Despite your denial that you've never said a coach was terrible, etc, you have indeed made such comments:  


"they were coached by JERRY WAINWRIGHT who was a TERRRIBLE coach"  January 21, 2010

That took me about 20 seconds to find. Should I continue?  

Yes, please do find other examples where I have said coaches are terrible.  Also, please let me know when the last time a color commentator or analyst for a basketball game, or football game, or baseball game...was someone other than a former player in that sport?  Unless you have been an absolute gym rat, such as Buzz, and probably Crean...the average ordinary joe/pedestrian fan who hasn't played basketball at a minimum of the high school level, probably isn't going to be quite as knowledgeable as one who has.  does that make me 100% in all of my opinions...NO..and I acknowledge when others make a good point that counters my point of view, or conflicts with my point of view.  In fact I've been ridiculed in this thread for starting some of my posts with an "I stand corrected," or which you ridiculed me for...and The Golden Avalanche with  his dig that I wrote "All of this may be true.."  

So, when someone makes a good point, I will acknowledge it, but as is the case with you 90% of your points I find to be poorly thought out...just as you feel the same toward me.  Difference of opinions for sure...and that doesn't make you a bad guy or me a bad guy..just convicted.  

But please..stop making excuses for the 2003-2004 team..Diener played in every game, just as Merrit did..and both logged big minutes 30+ minutes per game...acknowledge that DWAde was the huge catalyst and reason for our Final Four year/run..and I'm good

[rocky_warrior]

MUScoop research finding #68: Wrestlers and basketball players can't get along.

Huh....who knew. 

[C.HestonsLoincloth]

Travis got to the rim more than you think.

I have heard he had quite the stable while at Marquette. I have to believe he "took it to the rim" with incredible frquency, at least if he was taking care of business properly

[NersEllenson]

Interesting that you think that we had enough talent to make the tournament in 2004, but make the case about how under-talented we were this past year.

Forget the comparisons with 2006.  Let's compare the talent level in 2004 to this past season. No matter how you want to spin it, Crean had less overall talent in 2004 than Buzz did last year--but your expectations don't seem to reflect that disparity. 

• Anyone as good as Hayward on Crean's 2004 team?  Nope.  Best was Novak (a sophomore to be) and Diener (a junior-to-be).   Both were good--but neither had the combination of shooting touch, athleticism, speed and most importantly the experience of Hayward. 
• Buzz's best outside shooter turned out to be Acker--the same Acker (and not Novak) who holds the MU senior-season record for 3 point shooting.  And I think he probably handled the ball (and possibly even defended) better than Novak as a soph. I don't know if I'd take Acker over Novak now that Novak is fully developed--but Acker's performance as a 5th year senior is arguably superior to Novak's sophomore season.
• I think by any reasonable argument, DJO came in this year with the same reputation for shooting that Diener had (without Diener's reputation for lack of speed, athleticism or explosiveness).  Diener saw the floor better than DJO--but I think if you compare DJO's soph season with Diener's junior year, you'd have to say they're pretty damn close--possibly a slight edge, but certainly not a huge advantage to Diener.
• Butler's offense (coming into the year ranked as the #4 offensive player the year before) has got to be considered a bit stronger than Merritt, Chapman or Townsend.

By any measure, Buzz had a much stronger lineup this year than Crean had in 2004.

I'm not sure why you mention their future NBA success--neither Diener nor Novak exhibited NBA talent yet in 2004.  They later developed that talent, but they were no more NBA players than Jim McIlvaine, Tony Smith, Amal McCaskill, or Chris Crawford were before their senior seasons.

The only fair argument here is Crean took a less talented team to the NIT in 2004, and Buzz took a more talented team to the NCAA in 2010.   

We can spin it like this:  2004 = Tom Crean's 5th year at the helm. 2010 = Buzz Williams 2nd year at the helm.  I strongly believe Buzz won't be in such a "talent-less" (as you put it) situation with his roster in Year 5.  No matter how hard-headed you are, Buzz had to deal with transfer of Christopherson and Mbawke (players he had no part in recruiting), the LOI defection of Nick Williams (who he had no part recruiting), the LOI defection of Tyshawn Taylor (who he had a small role recruiting), transfer and injury to his top 2 recruits (put the Maymon transfer on Buzz), the loss of Pat Hazel due to violating a program rules.

What's sad is you minimize the talent of Diener and Novak (as junior and sophomores), yet they were key ingredients to MU's Final Four Run the year before...but take away DWade..and now all of a sudden they aren't as talented as MU's 2010 team? 

[ChicosBailBonds]

You asked me to point out where you said a coach was terrible.  I did.  Now you want me to do it again for you?  And when does that stop, until finally I can't find anymore after say 4 or 7 or 9 times?  I'm just asking because I delivered on your request and now you want more.  You sound like my wife.  


Again, I am not disputing that playing ball could be an advantage to coaching (or announcing, etc).  I'm not sure why you continue to go in that direction.  What people are saying is that it's not required or the only linkage to success.  In fact, plenty of former players have sucked at coaching.l

We have a Supreme Court nominee that has never been a judge.  Most Supreme Court justices have been judges, but does that mean this woman can't be a fine justice on her own?  That is what we are saying and it applies not only justice or business but to basketball coaching as well.

I think that is where the disconnect is between you and a number of other posters on this thread.  It's not a zero sum situation.

Now you're saying "the average joe pedestrian fan".  You seem to continue to move the goal posts.  Of course the avg pedestrian fan won't know, but we're not talking about average fans in this situation.

[4everwarriors]

I agree - probably didn't need to share that with the entire board, but after HardsAlumni trotted out his VP of senior class, officer of several clubs, member of prom court...AND being a 3-time letter winner in wrestling...felt it necessary to rebut with my being a high school basketball player, and shape my argument based on my basketball background vs. his wrestling background.  (I did spare y'all with the rest my high school accomplishments, and wrote that I felt cheesy for even listing that I played high school ball.)

Seriously, either of you 2 dudes on the Pom Pom Squad in high school?

[NersEllenson]

You asked me to point out where you said a coach was terrible.  I did.  Now you want me to do it again for you?  And when does that stop, until finally I can't find anymore after say 4 or 7 or 9 times?  I'm just asking because I delivered on your request and now you want more.  You sound like my wife.   


Again, I am not disputing that playing ball would be a hindrance to coaching (or announcing, etc).  I'm not sure why you continue to go in that direction.  What people are saying is that it's not required.

We have a Supreme Court nominee that has never been a judge.  Most Supreme Court justices have been judges, but does that mean this woman can't be a fine justice on her own?  That is what we are saying and it applies not only justice or business but to basketball coaching as well.

I think that is where the disconnect is between you and a number of other posters on this thread.  It's not a zero sum situation.

Now you're saying "the average joe pedestrian fan".  You seem to continue to move the goal posts.  Of course the avg pedestrian fan won't know, but we're not talking about average fans in this situation.

Funny about your wife.  Well played.  The reason I asked for more instances of where I called a coach terrible - was 1) because you offered, 2) because you alleged that in your first post that I called many coaches terrible, and 3) because other than Jerry Wainwright, I don't think I've called/referred to a coach as terrible.

I do feel you are the one trying to make this a zero sum situation..or an all or nothing.  I'm happy to say there are exceptions to the rule or norm  -such as guys like Buzz or Tom Crean - but those guys are exceptions, just as Stan Van Gundy is in the NBA.  I'm not saying a wrestler cannot be a basketball fan or have a degree of insight into the game of basketball - I'm just saying that in most cases, people who have played the game, and coached it, tend to see things in a little bit different and in most cases more informed perspective...which again, is why most color commentators are guys who played the game.

Lastly, I don't want to come off as a complete douche..touting my basketball playing days, since they did end in High School.  It's not like I was some D-1 player.  However, I did play a lot of pick up games with the team from 1993-1997, which is how I got asked to be a camp coach...and I do feel that my experience as a player gives me a pretty good perspective on the game.  Many of you here could run circles around me in other sports, or topics such as technology, finance, law, medicine, engineering, etc...I just feel very strongly about my analysis of basketball.

Incidentally, I tend to agree with a lot of Lenny's Tap analysis..and we just learned he was a 4-year letter winning wrestler.

[NersEllenson]

Seriously, either of you 2 dudes on  in the Pom Pom Squad in high school?

I can't answer for Hards, but yes for me, and quite frequently.

[Doctor V]

Funny about your wife.  Well played.  The reason I asked for more instances of where I called a coach terrible - was 1) because you offered, 2) because you alleged that in your first post that I called many coaches terrible, and 3) because other than Jerry Wainwright, I don't think I've called/referred to a coach as terrible.

I do feel you are the one trying to make this a zero sum situation..or an all or nothing.  I'm happy to say there are exceptions to the rule or norm  -such as guys like Buzz or Tom Crean - but those guys are exceptions, just as Stan Van Gundy is in the NBA.  I'm not saying a wrestler cannot be a basketball fan or have a degree of insight into the game of basketball - I'm just saying that in most cases, people who have played the game, and coached it, tend to see things in a little bit different and in most cases more informed perspective...which again, is why most color commentators are guys who played the game.

Lastly, I don't want to come off as a complete douche..touting my basketball playing days, since they did end in High School.  It's not like I was some D-1 player.  However, I did play a lot of pick up games with the team from 1993-1997, which is how I got asked to be a camp coach...and I do feel that my experience as a player gives me a pretty good perspective on the game.  Many of you here could run circles around me in other sports, or topics such as technology, finance, law, medicine, engineering, etc...I just feel very strongly about my analysis of basketball.
Incidentally, I tend to agree with a lot of Lenny's Tap analysis..and we just learned he was a 4-year letter winning wrestler.

What would ever make you think that you come off that way? Don't be silly...

[Golden Avalanche]

Lastly, I don't want to come off as a complete douche.......

Epic fail.

But don't stop believing.