MU Royalty

[GGGG]

Then it goes back to Pipers question about how long a player needs to wear the MU jersey.  Clearly in your opinion it takes more than one year, no matter how good that year was.  Either way more clarity needs to be applied to your "top players to ever wear the jersey".  I'll ask again, should postseason success be considered?  I would say yes, Markus can possibly leave the programs all time leading scorer, buy a significant margin too.  But if he never plays past the first weekend in the tourney, it should be unanimous that "0" ain't getting raised.

I've stated my criteria.  The whole point of vague criteria is that it isn't supposed to be a black and white exercise.

[Galway Eagle]

I've stated my criteria.  The whole point of vague criteria is that it isn't supposed to be a black and white exercise.

Maybe I'm misreading but it sounds like your criteria is that there isn't one?

Because "If he was one of the top players to ever wear the jersey, then he get's it retired." could be say... Tony smith, why shouldn't he get retired?

[Lennys Tap]

Maybe I'm misreading but it sounds like your criteria is that there isn't one?

Bags,

I think Sultan's stance (one that I agree with) is that disqualifying people who didn't (for example) go to a FF is too arbitrary. I think you throw everything (individual greatness, team success, length of service, etc., etc.) into the hopper and make the best informed decision you can. In the end it comes down to an opinion. Should Jim Chones be denied because freshmen were ineligible during his era or because his 50-1 varsity record at MU doesn't include a FF? I say no - the only mistake I see by the powers that be was honoring Doc Rivers and omitting Chones.

[nyg]

My criteria was not leaving early.  wade played two full seasons, if Chones had stayed that season and led us to a FF Is be all for it. I don't think Doc should be retired, he played on three average teams, I mean Vander has more success to his name.

Let me make this simple for what my criteria would be: at least a Final Four, at least 50% of your collegiate career played at MU. That means the only players I think should be retired are wade, Lucas, Ellis, Tatum. That's not an indictment of the skill set of Kojis, rivers, Chones, meminger, Thompson etc. but the two things that matter to me are tournament results and allegiance to MU.

If that is your criteria, then where does Butch Lee fit in? 

[Galway Eagle]

Bags,

I think Sultan's stance (one that I agree with) is that disqualifying people who didn't (for example) go to a FF is too arbitrary. I think you throw everything (individual greatness, team success, length of service, etc., etc.) into the hopper and make the best informed decision you can. In the end it comes down to an opinion. Should Jim Chones be denied because freshmen were ineligible during his era or because his 50-1 varsity record at MU doesn't include a FF? I say no - the only mistake I see by the powers that be was honoring Doc Rivers and omitting Chones.

Which is fine and good I'd generally agree but that criteria seems to lend itself to a non stop debate, over selection, and issues for when new greats come along because, as we've learned with the constant who's the GOAT conversation for decades now. I agree a FF may seem very arbitrary but to me if you set something like that you eliminate the gray area debate and, unless we start raking in FFs every year, keep it to a group of players that become immortalized in MU lore.

If that is your criteria, then where does Butch Lee fit in? 

Read my response to goose where I said it was an accidental omission...

[nyg]

Which is fine and good I'd generally agree but that criteria seems to lend itself to a non stop debate, over selection, and issues for when new greats come along because, as we've learned with the constant who's the GOAT conversation for decades now. I agree a FF may seem very arbitrary but to me if you set something like that you eliminate the gray area debate and, unless we start raking in FFs every year, keep it to a group of players that become immortalized in MU lore.

Read my response to goose where I said it was an accidental omission...

Very well, my miss. 

[4everwarriors]

Yeah butt, Too Tan Tommy said we're retirin' jerseys, knot numbers, aina?

[Lennys Tap]

Which is fine and good I'd generally agree but that criteria seems to lend itself to a non stop debate, over selection, and issues for when new greats come along because, as we've learned with the constant who's the GOAT conversation for decades now. I agree a FF may seem very arbitrary but to me if you set something like that you eliminate the gray area debate and, unless we start raking in FFs every year, keep it to a group of players that become immortalized in MU lore.

Any Marquette "rafter" that doesn't include George Thompson and Dean Meminger would be a travesty, IMHO.

[jsglow]

Context is everything in these things.  That's why I'm totally opposed to some advanced metric that determines inclusion via some objective measure.

I don't have much quarrel with our current list.  And I'd include Chones because it was a unique situation with respect to the timing of the ABA draft and he left with Al's personal blessing.

[Nukem2]

Context is everything in these things.  That's why I'm totally opposed to some advanced metric that determines inclusion via some objective measure.

I don't have much quarrel with our current list.  And I'd include Chones because it was a unique situation with respect to the timing of the ABA draft and he left with Al's personal blessing.

Agreed, Jimmy needs to be up there.  That was all about Al.  Get it done.

[GGGG]

Maybe I'm misreading but it sounds like your criteria is that there isn't one?

Because "If he was one of the top players to ever wear the jersey, then he get's it retired." could be say... Tony smith, why shouldn't he get retired?

Fine by me. Tony was a joy to watch.

[Goose]

Hurler

Tony Smith is not close to being all time great, worthy of retired number. Very nice player, but hardly in top ten all time great discussion.

Nukem

Of course, 22 should be retired. Really a no brainer. There are too many retired numbers, and having Chones is an error in judgement, IMO.

[mileskishnish72]

Having trouble with the concept that tournament success is a requirement for number retirement.
Doesn't this penalize a great player who may have had the misfortune to play with a bunch of stiffs? It's not like our history is stuffed with Final Fours.

Dean was one of the all-time greats, of that there is no question. Maybe I'm prejudiced because it was my MU era, but Chones deserves # retirement.

[Galway Eagle]

There yall go so we can all see the exact same conversation has been done at least 2x in the past 5 years.

https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=39587.0

https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=54318.0

[dgies9156]

There's two levels of honor that should be considered. The first is numbers that never will be worn again.These are people so special to Marquette that their influence on the program, their achievements on the court and their impact on Marquette will never, ever be forgotten. In my lifetime, these are relatively few people and include:

Al McGuire
George Thompson
Dean Meminger
Butch Lee
Bo Ellis
Maurice Lucas
Dwyane Wade

Without these people, Marquette would be good but not have the memories of what we have been. These are the legends and the very best.

The next group deserves recognition short of uniform number retirement. They were important to the program and made a difference but did not change the direction or lead us into something almost by themselves. They are:

Jim Chones
Larry McNeill
Bob Lackey
Lloyd Walton PhD
Jerome Whitehead
Glenn Rivers
Jimmy Mac
Tony Smith
Jerel McNeal

There are a lot of other good players but these guys stand out. I just don't see most of what's left being so good that they are legends. Perhaps the Hauser boys and Markus Howard, maybe someday, but I want to see people who made a difference. Whose legend was more than big numbers. That's why our one-year-wonder won't make it. That's why I also don't think most of the guys from the last few years or even Mark Marotta make it.

Your thoughts?

[Lennys Tap]

There's two levels of honor that should be considered. The first is numbers that never will be worn again.These are people so special to Marquette that their influence on the program, their achievements on the court and their impact on Marquette will never, ever be forgotten. In my lifetime, these are relatively few people and include:

Al McGuire
George Thompson
Dean Meminger
Butch Lee
Bo Ellis
Maurice Lucas
Dwyane Wade

Without these people, Marquette would be good but not have the memories of what we have been. These are the legends and the very best.

The next group deserves recognition short of uniform number retirement. They were important to the program and made a difference but did not change the direction or lead us into something almost by themselves. They are:

Jim Chones
Larry McNeill
Bob Lackey
Lloyd Walton PhD
Jerome Whitehead
Glenn Rivers
Jimmy Mac
Tony Smith
Jerel McNeal

There are a lot of other good players but these guys stand out. I just don't see most of what's left being so good that they are legends. Perhaps the Hauser boys and Markus Howard, maybe someday, but I want to see people who made a difference. Whose legend was more than big numbers. That's why our one-year-wonder won't make it. That's why I also don't think most of the guys from the last few years or even Mark Marotta make it.

Your thoughts?

Add Earl Tatum and Don Kojis to tier 1.

Move Jim Chones to tier 1.

Add Tony Miller, Lazar, JFB and Jae Crowder to tier 2.

Drop Larry McNeill and Jim McIlvaine from the list.

[Galway Eagle]

Add Earl Tatum and Don Kojis to tier 1.

Move Jim Chones to tier 1.

Add Tony Miller, Lazar, JFB and Jae Crowder to tier 2.

Drop Larry McNeill and Jim McIlvaine from the list.

Was Kojis so good that we forget Terry Rand?

[GooooMarquette]

My opinion, and response to some of the younger folks' concerns:

Chones belongs to the top tier of any list - up with DWade, Butch, Dean and Bo...perhaps one or two others.

Younger people need to remember the context. He would have played 2 3/4 seasons at MU if frosh were eligible back then...which would have been well over half of his possible MU career. The fact that he didn't had nothing to do with his loyalty to MU or his skills or his grades (see DWade). The early departure his junior year was the result of a very unusual situation, with the ABA breaking traditional rules in order to beat the NBA to top talent. And in that situation, Al told him he should go because Chones' family was quite literally out of food. This was not an impulsive kid who bailed without considering the team - he consulted with the coach, and followed his advice.

We were 50-1 during his tenure, and would have been 51-0 but for some horrific calls against Meminger.

If Chones isn't recognized as among the best of the best at Marquette, we might as well just stop recognizing players....

[jsglow]

My opinion, and response to some of the younger folks' concerns:

Chones belongs to the top tier of any list - up with DWade, Butch, Dean and Bo...perhaps one or two others.

Younger people need to remember the context. He would have played 2 3/4 seasons at MU if frosh were eligible back then...which would have been well over half of his possible MU career. The fact that he didn't had nothing to do with his loyalty to MU or his skills or his grades (see DWade). The early departure his junior year was the result of a very unusual situation, with the ABA breaking traditional rules in order to beat the NBA to top talent. And in that situation, Al told him he should go because Chones' family was quite literally out of food. This was not an impulsive kid who bailed without considering the team - he consulted with the coach, and followed his advice.

We were 50-1 during his tenure, and would have been 51-0 but for some horrific calls against Meminger.

If Chones isn't recognized as among the best of the best at Marquette, we might as well just stop recognizing players....

+1.

And for those that suggest Crowder or 'Zar....

Look, I love those guys but please, especially in comparison to someone like Chones.

What you guys have to remember is that it was 1970-72.  There was no Sportscenter or Nike to overhype everything.  There was Jack Baker's nightly radio show.  And if you're old enough to know who Jack was, you know what I'm talking about.

[Goose]

I loved Earl Tatum, but he first guy out, IMO. He was a great player, on some great times, but not at same level of dgies Tier 1 list. Chones is high on the tier 1 list. Anyone after those guys had very, very nice careers, but nowhere near the same level. Honestly, they are way behind the all time best.

[Dr. Blackheart]

No Jerel?  MU leading scorer, AA, All BE, great defensive player.

[Galway Eagle]

I loved Earl Tatum, but he first guy out, IMO. He was a great player, on some great times, but not at same level of dgies Tier 1 list. Chones is high on the tier 1 list. Anyone after those guys had very, very nice careers, but nowhere near the same level. Honestly, they are way behind the all time best.

Goose real question here. Do you feel that maybe have on some youth tinted goggles when it comes to the love for the old timers?

I mean I swear that lazar was 100x better than crowder even though I've been proven wrong a million times over but because when I was in H.S. and a freshman he was awe inspiring. I swear DJO was the greatest three point shooter I'd ever seen but Rowsey and Marcus are obviously better but my freshman to Junior year goggles make me think otherwise. Is it even the tiniest bit possible that you haven't given anybody sans wade their due because of a similar reason?

[Folks,,,]

No Jerel?  MU leading scorer, AA, All BE, great defensive player.

Nope, he didn't play in the 70s and isn't named Dwyane Wade so he should be wiped from the MU record books rather than have his jersey retired.

[Goose]

Hurler

IMO, Wade is the greatest player ever to play at MU and by a very wide margin. I have a love of great, great players and Dwade falls in the group easily. Plenty of very good players have played over last four decades. One of my all time favorites was David Boone. I thought Jae and Jimmy Butler were very good players. Vander had one outstanding season.
 
I love winning more than anything, but second place is appreciating great talent. Aside from Wade, I do not believe we have seen greatness in any one player. A lot of very good ones, but not great. I thought Jae was a very good player. But, to think he was even close to Wade as a player is laughable. Same holds true for Jarel, Wes, Jimmy and Lazar.

A couple disappointments as a fan were Dominic James and Vander Blue. James was very good and I thought he would great before he left. Vander had an outstanding season and left early. I do not think either would have been great, but might have got close.

[Goose]

Dr B

I would not have Jarel in my top five guards of all time, let alone an all time great. I do not think he was better than Doc Rivers and I thought Doc was a talented player, but a long way from being great.