The perfect 10 man MU roster for 2021?

[MU82]

If I went 12 deep, I would actually consider adding Markus, but only as a specialist.  They're aren't many that can get 10+ points in a hurry.

Even Sam Hauser should be considered as a shooter that could at least take up space on defense.

Despite his role in the mutiny, I'm a big fan of Sam's game. But there is 0% chance I'd take him on any roster of all-time Marquette players. I mean, just looking at the list of guys who didn't quite make your cut, Sam vs Jae or Jimmy or Lazar? I mean, it's not even close. I'd take any of those 3 over him - tougher, significantly better defenders, much more well-rounded offensive games. C'mon.

[Galway Eagle]

Despite his role in the mutiny, I'm a big fan of Sam's game. But there is 0% chance I'd take him on any roster of all-time Marquette players. I mean, just looking at the list of guys who didn't quite make your cut, Sam vs Jae or Jimmy or Lazar? I mean, it's not even close. I'd take any of those 3 over him - tougher, significantly better defenders, much more well-rounded offensive games. C'mon.

If you're going to consider Sam you may as well just add Novak IMO. Doesn't have the post as much but gives you more height for roughly the same shooting.

[Viper]

Chones, Lucas, Ellis, Toone, Lackey, Meminger, Tatum, Butch Lee, Whitehead, Walton. I would  take these 10 guys even with a 3 point line.

no Brute Force George Thompson?

[JWags85]

Why no Markus consideration?

Cause everyone is just underselling him due to Wojo hate and lack of success with him on the team.  One of the best shooters and scorers in NCAA history who excelled in today's game is being deemed a "specialist".  Meanwhile, people are suggesting George Thompson or Don Kojis who were inside players while being shorter than most good SGs in the modern game.  It's just over weighting history and ignoring the question.  Kojis given his style and size wouldn't even be high major player in 2021.

Howard, with a very good PG like Butch Lee, or even Diener, with some of the excellent forwards mentioned behind him, would be absolutely deadly.  He shot 42% from 3 while being the sole focal point of the offense, having all the attention, and no PG to get him the ball.  Imagine him if he had space and other offensive weapons around him.

[The Sultan]

Cause everyone is just underselling him due to Wojo hate and lack of success with him on the team.  One of the best shooters and scorers in NCAA history who excelled in today's game is being deemed a "specialist".  Meanwhile, people are suggesting George Thompson or Don Kojis who were inside players while being shorter than most good SGs in the modern game.  It's just over weighting history and ignoring the question.  Kojis given his style and size wouldn't even be high major player in 2021.

Howard, with a very good PG like Butch Lee, or even Diener, with some of the excellent forwards mentioned behind him, would be absolutely deadly.  He shot 42% from 3 while being the sole focal point of the offense, having all the attention, and no PG to get him the ball.  Imagine him if he had space and other offensive weapons around him.

Agreed on all counts.

[The Sultan]

no Brute Force George Thompson?

What exactly would you do with a 6'2" forward in today's game? 

[jficke13]

With 10 spots on this roster it'd be foolish not to include Markus. Ditto Novak. I'm not trotting Novak out for 38 minutes, but as a weapon off the bench he'd be a nightmare to deal with. If you can't find a role for Markus in a 2021 college game, you're not trying.

[jficke13]

And playing along:

1. Meminger, (Diener/Lee)
2. Howard, McNeal
3. Wade, Butler
4. Crowder, Novak
5. Chones, Lucas

I cheated because I couldn't decide between Travis and Butch. It's a message board. Sue me.

Starter, sub. But, to be honest, I could see going big and slotting Wade into the 2 (Meminger-Wade-Butler-Crowder-Chones) or if you're concerned about Markus' defensive liabilities (and tbh, with the rest of the defensive studs on the floor I'm not terribly concerned) swap McNeal in to start and use Markus as firepower off the bench. Lastly, I'd really enjoy a Meminger-McNeal-Crowder-Lucas-Chones team in a street brawl. Those dudes would scrap.

This is probably the best Scoop in years. We've had some good ones wearing blue and gold in our time.

[MU82]

If you're going to consider Sam you may as well just add Novak IMO. Doesn't have the post as much but gives you more height for roughly the same shooting.

I don't want Sam and Novak. I'd consider taking one or the other. Novak is one of the best few shooters I've ever seen.

As for Markus, as others are discussing, folks seem to forget he shot 55% from 3 as a freshman role player. I'm not 100% certain he'd make my 10 because I haven't given the whole thing much thought, but I'd definitely consider him.

[GooooMarquette]

Cause everyone is just underselling him due to Wojo hate and lack of success with him on the team.  One of the best shooters and scorers in NCAA history who excelled in today's game is being deemed a "specialist".  Meanwhile, people are suggesting George Thompson or Don Kojis who were inside players while being shorter than most good SGs in the modern game.  It's just over weighting history and ignoring the question.  Kojis given his style and size wouldn't even be high major player in 2021.

Howard, with a very good PG like Butch Lee, or even Diener, with some of the excellent forwards mentioned behind him, would be absolutely deadly.  He shot 42% from 3 while being the sole focal point of the offense, having all the attention, and no PG to get him the ball.  Imagine him if he had space and other offensive weapons around him.

Well said, Wags!

It's truly disappointing that so many MU fans hold it against Markus that Wojo couldn't get him a better PG.

Markus was an elite scorer, a BE POY, and an excellent representative of the university...yet he gets so little love from many in the MU fanbase.

[shoothoops]

Unpopular opinion, but those guys at their prime would not beat most MU teams from the past two decades. Just like science and technology have come a long ways since the 70s, so has athletics. The players are bigger, stronger, faster, the coaches understand the game better, athletic training/coaching/nutrition are at entirely different levels. Kids are in youth leagues from the time they are 3 learning the game. It's why comparing players from different eras doesn't work. Those 10 were more dominant at their time than any other MU players have been at theirs besides Wade and maybe Jae.

Yep. This is why comparing eras is futile. Give past eras all of those tools mentioned, otherwise it's an apples to oranges comparison.  The best anyone can say or do is to analyze one era at a time, to determine who is the.best and/or among the best of his or her era. And that's fine, that enough, that's plenty.

I remember a Pete Sampras quote, when asked what he would do if he had to face Federer or Djokovjc, or Nadal at their height. He matter of factly said, (assuming he had all of the things mentioned above), "I think I would have adjusted."

There will always be however, some people determined to have a best this or that of all time. It isn't possible. All players cannot and do not play in all eras.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Here's one: If 2021 and today's rules, does Gary Rosenberger start and does Bill Neary back-up Jay at center? Al goes 4 out and 1 in?

[Galway Eagle]

I don't want Sam and Novak. I'd consider taking one or the other. Novak is one of the best few shooters I've ever seen.

As for Markus, as others are discussing, folks seem to forget he shot 55% from 3 as a freshman role player. I'm not 100% certain he'd make my 10 because I haven't given the whole thing much thought, but I'd definitely consider him.

Sorry I wasn't clear I meant Novak over Sam.

[MU90620]

Wade
Howard
Butler
Crowder
Hayward
Matthews
Diener
Novak
Ellenson
McIlvaine

[MuggsyB]

Yep. This is why comparing eras is futile. Give past eras all of those tools mentioned, otherwise it's an apples to oranges comparison.  The best anyone can say or do is to analyze one era at a time, to determine who is the.best and/or among the best of his or her era. And that's fine, that enough, that's plenty.

I get your point but I don't think it's completely apples and oranges.  You can look at certain players and say to yourself they would have no problem and able to adapt to this era.  Guys like Hakeem and Larry Bird come to mind. 

I remember a Pete Sampras quote, when asked what he would do if he had to face Federer or Djokovjc, or Nadal at their height. He matter of factly said, (assuming he had all of the things mentioned above), "I think I would have adjusted."

There will always be however, some people determined to have a best this or that of all time. It isn't possible. All players cannot and do not play in all eras. 


It's  very difficult to know how pure post bigs would adapt but it's also worth noting that guys like Shaq and Chamberlain were so dominant that they would force teams to adapt to their game.  Additionally, guys that were undersized for today's game, like George Thompson, would have no choice but to adapt. 

As far as Pete Sampras?  I'm not sure he, Edberg, Becker, McEnroe would have as easy time adapting as a baseliner.  I believe Pete lost to a 19 yr old Fed at Wimbledon when he was the defending champion.  Because net play is generally only used on grass I believe it would be a much harder adjustment for serve and volleyers.  They didn't have the all-court game of Fed or close to the consistency of Nadal or Djoker.  On the flipside I do believe Borg would have likely adapted much easier.  Sampras did have the best serve in history but the Big 3 are just too good imo.

[shoothoops]

As TAMU Eagle mentioned, it isn't possible to compare eras because many circumstances are much different in various eras.

I used the Sampras quote because the idea of changing, adapting, adjusting from a very young age onward would happen in more recent eras.

Different training, nutrition, coaching, strategy, technology, different tournament emphasis, etc...which ones, how many, when, money has changed dramatically too. So many things are different in different eras. I just enjoy each era for themselves. That's plenty good enough. You will never be able to say more than that in any sport, with any individual or team, and, that's okay.

[dgies9156]

Why no Markus consideration?

Got beat out by Gary Rosenberger.

[Viper]

What exactly would you do with a 6'2" forward in today's game?

do you have any clue...I'll answer for you...you don't...why Al McGuire called George Thompson Brute Force?

[MuggsyB]

As TAMU Eagle mentioned, it isn't possible to compare eras because many circumstances are much different in various eras.

I used the Sampras quote because the idea of changing, adapting, adjusting from a very young age onward would happen in more recent eras.

Different training, nutrition, coaching, strategy, technology, different tournament emphasis, etc...which ones, how many, when, money has changed dramatically too. So many things are different in different eras. I just enjoy each era for themselves. That's plenty good enough. You will never be able to say more than that in any sport, with any individual or team, and, that's okay.

I can't argue with that.  In 2007 I was lucky enough to go to the Rogers Cup in Montreal.  The field was phenomenal with Fed, Rafa, Djoker, Murray, and most of the top 20.  Guys out of the game now like Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian, Safin were also blistering the ball.  TV does not do tennis justice, you can't even believe the spin action and pop these guys had.  Amazingly, Hewitt grinded to the quarters.  I have to say, while it's extremely expensive,  it's definitely worth going to a tournament of this caliber in your lifetime.  I was fortunate to have a connection but it's way up there as the best event I have ever attended if you can afford it..  Djoker took out Roddick, Rafa, and Fed in succession.  The final went three sets with Djoker winning 7-6 in the third.   I still hope to get to Wimbledon or Roland Garros.  The other two G-slam events I'm less interested in seeing live.

[JWags85]

do you have any clue...I'll answer for you...you don't...why Al McGuire called George Thompson Brute Force?

LMAO.  6'2 200 lb Brute Force inside against 6'9 255 Theo John, he'd get embarrassed.  Much less someone like Nate Watson.

You can appreciate someone's skill and accomplishments and fully admit they'd be out of place in today's game.  Bob Cousy is an NBA pioneer and legend, but watch videos of his dribbling "feats" in game and compare it to guys like Kyrie or Steph Curry or even watch the speed and explosiveness that Carton plays the PG position and you realize its barely the same game.

Charles Barkley even admits he'd struggle with the athleticism and freak size of the game today, and he had 3-4 inches and 50 lbs on Thompson

[MU82]

You can appreciate someone's skill and accomplishments and fully admit they'd be out of place in today's game.

Totally agree.

But I don't think the following players would be out of place in today's game:

Meminger, Tatum, Chones, Lackey, Lucas, Wade, Diener, Butler, Crowder, Novak, Matthews, DJO, Lee, Lazar.

I think every one of them would excel today, and several of them would be just as dominant today as they were when they played. Probably a few others, too.

Comparing eras in any sport is tricky. But Mays, Gehrig, Aaron and Gibson would still be incredible ballplayers; Russell, West, Frazier and Julius would still be incredible basketball players; Jim Brown, Joe Greene, Warfield and Fouts would still be incredible football players, etc.

Some athletes were so great, they would have excelled in any era.

I mean, do folks really think that if Jordan played today, he wouldn't have dedicated himself to being a great 3-point shooter?

[JWags85]

Totally agree.

But I don't think the following players would be out of place in today's game:

Meminger, Tatum, Chones, Lackey, Lucas, Wade, Diener, Butler, Crowder, Novak, Matthews, DJO, Lee, Lazar.

I think every one of them would excel today, and several of them would be just as dominant today as they were when they played. Probably a few others, too.

Comparing eras in any sport is tricky. But Mays, Gehrig, Aaron and Gibson would still be incredible ballplayers; Russell, West, Frazier and Julius would still be incredible basketball players; Jim Brown, Joe Greene, Warfield and Fouts would still be incredible football players, etc.

Some athletes were so great, they would have excelled in any era.

I mean, do folks really think that if Jordan played today, he wouldn't have dedicated himself to being a great 3-point shooter?

For sure. Not every dominant player in yesteryear couldn't do the same now. Look at Wilt. Was he playing against a lot of 6'8 stiffs at the center position back then? Sure. But he was a freak athlete who was 7 feet tall, yet agile, graceful and quick. He would have been every bit as capable as versatile big men now. Same with quick and crafty PGs.  But if you were a shorter forward in an era or wouldn't be considered exceptionally athletic by today's standards, it just won't work. 

[bilsu]

Missed George Thompson, maybe the most exciting player in MU history

I did not miss him. I loved George and even watched him when he was on the freshmen team.  I did not put him on, because there was no reason to have a 6'2" power forward, which is what he was in college. I also left off Larry McNeal. I did not forget about Wade. I was just remembering the glory days of my youth. I was at MU 1971 to 1975. My brother was 1974 to 1978 so he got the National championship.

I left off players that were here when Al came. Bob Wolf would of been good with the three point line.

Just my opinion, but a team of McGuire players (13 years) would beat a team made up from all the players that came after McGuire (44 years) 6 out 10 times.

All 10 of my players played in NBA or ABA. The biggest pro bust was Bernard Toone.

[MuggsyB]

For sure. Not every dominant player in yesteryear couldn%u2019t do the same now. Look at Wilt. Was he playing against a lot of 6%u20198 stiffs at the center position back then? Sure. But he was a freak athlete who was 7 feet tall, yet agile, graceful and quick. He would have been every bit as capable as versatile big men now. Same with quick and crafty PGs.  But if you were a shorter forward in an era or wouldn%u2019t be considered exceptionally athletic by today%u2019s standards, it just won%u2019t work.

It's also hard to gauge how perimeter players would respond to far more physicality in past eras.  I think it'a plausible to argue that the great players of the past would have an easier adjustment.  You can't touch guys on the perimeter.  I'm pretty sure guards like Oscar, Archibald, Magic, Jordan, Isiah, Stock, etc would have extended their range and figured it out.  Including the mickey-mouse stuff James Harden does to get FT's.  I'm also certain the great bigs of the past would be just fine.  Kareem, Hakeem, and Shaq would shred people quite easily.

[The Sultan]

It's also hard to gauge how perimeter players would respond to far more physicality in past eras.  I think it'a plausible to argue that the great players of the past would have an easier adjustment.  You can't touch guys on the perimeter.  I'm pretty sure guards like Oscar, Archibald, Magic, Jordan, Isiah, Stock, etc would have extended their range and figured it out.  Including the mickey-mouse stuff James Harden does to get FT's.  I'm also certain the great bigs of the past would be just fine.  Kareem, Hakeem, and Shaq would shred people quite easily.

Maybe. I think we overhype the 80s and 90s NBA and the physicality and how that would impact today's players.  The NBA is still pretty physical today and there were no teams that had the ability to spread the floor back then like they do now.