The perfect 10 man MU roster for 2021?

[MuggsyB]

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.

It's not particularly physical on the perimeter with no hand checking.  You can't blanket guys quite the same way imo.  Would a guy like Rodman be able to play at all in this era? 

[tower912]

Watching videos of Oscar, I rarely saw him use his left hand.  His game was physically dominating the 6'1 defender.   I have no doubt he would expand his game if he were around today.   But at 6'5, 210, would he be able to physically dominate a defender today?  Same size as Sacar.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

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.

I'm sorry but your opinion is crazy. Our national championship team would have been lucky to be a tournament team in today's NCAA. They were dominant in their time, more dominant than any other MU players besides Wade and maybe Jae and deserve all the praise and honors, but the game is different now. Jim Chones was the most dominant center to ever play at Marquette and he would have been considered a stick amongst current big men with no ability to stretch the floor and he's one of the two guys  (Lucas) of your 10 who I think could have a role today.

They did all play in the NBA/ABA but again it was a different era and other than Chones and Lucas, most of them had limited success at the pro levels. Most were career backups and only a few of them had the occasional season as starters. Wade is a top 15 NBA player all time and Jimmy is an All Star in today's game.

[Galway Eagle]

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.

Shaq couldn't keep up today. He's have to stretch the floor and not a chance he was agile enough to guard the ball handling centers of today. Certain players would adapt certain benefitted from being perfect for the era. I think Duncan is proof that some would certainly be able to adapt but Shaq is not one of them.

In boxing Jack Johnson or joe Louis wouldn't be dominant heavyweights today. Hell most of the old champs wouldn't even be heavyweights. Maybe some could've adapted and gotten bouncier and less grappling but a great deal of them also wouldn't have been able to

[MuggsyB]

Shaq couldn't keep up today. He's have to stretch the floor and not a chance he was agile enough to guard the ball handling centers of today. Certain players would adapt certain benefitted from being perfect for the era. I think Duncan is proof that some would certainly be able to adapt but Shaq is not one of them.

In boxing Jack Johnson or joe Louis wouldn't be dominant heavyweights today. Hell most of the old champs wouldn't even be heavyweights. Maybe some could've adapted and gotten bouncier and less grappling but a great deal of them also wouldn't have been able to

It's an interesting conversation....how would they guard Shaq?

[tower912]

Foul him.  Make him defend pick and rolls and on the perimeter to wear him out  Trade 3 for 2.  Front him for 5 seconds with weakside help.

[JWags85]

Shaq couldn't keep up today. He's have to stretch the floor and not a chance he was agile enough to guard the ball handling centers of today. Certain players would adapt certain benefitted from being perfect for the era. I think Duncan is proof that some would certainly be able to adapt but Shaq is not one of them.

You're thinking late 90s Laker Shaq though. Shaq was not even 300 lbs, super explosive, and very athletic all through his LSU and Orlando days. Given the current game, he would have a team making sure he stayed lean and athletic. Thinking of how dominant and impactful younger Dwight Howard was. Shaq was the same model, expect better offensively.  Would he have been stepping out and shooting from deep? Probably not but that Shaq could easily move well enough to defend as well as a Jokic, Vukevic, or Brook Lopez does

[MuggsyB]

Foul him.  Make him defend pick and rolls and on the perimeter to wear him out  Trade 3 for 2.  Front him for 5 seconds with weakside help.

So change your line-up and put your team in the penalty within 5 mins of the quarter? 

[Boston Warrior]

Shaq coming out of LSU was a phenomenal athlete and he was in shape. He would have adapted... he could have been a great defender. Would he have developed an outside shot of free throws... that's another matter.

[MuggsyB]

Suppose this was your 8 man rotation with today's rules vs the greats of the past:

Curry
Lillard
Harden
Jokic
Leonard
Doncic
Booker
Tatum

Could this team hold their own?:

Magic
Jordan
Kobe
Bird
Hakeem
Shaq
Isaiah
West


The modern team has 8 guys that can drill the triple and some with unlimited range. 

But could they defend at all?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Are those your top 8 active player Mugsy? Cause I have some notes.

[MuggsyB]

Are those your top 8 active player Mugsy? Cause I have some notes.

No.  I was just throwing people out there off the top of my head that can drain the 3-Ball.  Obviously Lebron, Durant, Davis, Giannis, Embiid would be in the top 8.

[The Sultan]

So change your line-up and put your team in the penalty within 5 mins of the quarter? 

You wouldn't have to foul him.  Shaq (and other posts) benefitted greatly from the illegal defense rules that basically prevented zones.  Would they have been able to adapt their games to figure out where the double teams are coming from and pass out of them?  Undoubtedly.  But the post game would be deemphasized.  LaMarcus Aldridge would have been a beast in the 80s and 90s NBA.  And he's still really good.  But the game is just very different now.

[tower912]

So change your line-up and put your team in the penalty within 5 mins of the quarter?

The Pistons were able to neutralize Shaq at the end of his prime with the 6'7 Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace and Mehmet Okur.    And Shaq had Kobe, Payton and Malone, so it isn't like there was a lot of double teaming.     Shaq was awesome.    And then he was slow and awesome.    But he wasn't unstoppable for entire games.     

[MU82]

First, aside from the lack of personal insults, this thread is classic Scoop. Started as one topic before quickly and totally going off in another direction.

Otherwise ...

I think some folks are drastically short-selling some of yesteryear's college (and pro) stars and their ability to adjust to today's game.

Rudy Gobert is a multiple All-Star and a game-changer for the team with the NBA's best record, but he has never attempted a single 3 in 8 seasons. Are some folks actually saying that he can be a difference-maker in today's NBA but Shaq and Russell wouldn't be? Really? Giannis can be MVP even though he can't shoot, but Wilt and Kareem wouldn't have been superstars -- especially if they were surrounded by 3 or 4 great shooters who opened things up for them inside? Okey dokey then.

Chones and Lucas would have done just fine in today's college basketball. Better than fine -- they'd be standouts. Yes, Garza can step out and hit an occasional 3, but it's his ability to score inside and rebound that has made him POY. I'd love to have seen a battle between Luka and Luke; I think our guy would have won the battle.

Tatum would be deadly from 3, and he had everything else today's elite college players need, too. Butch would have extended his range and been a fine 3-point shooter. Wade might have been even more dominant because the lane would have been more open in a game that emphasized 3s more. Diener would be even better in today's game.

Dean Meminger wouldn't have been as effective in today's college basketball as, say, Jalen Brunson was for Nova? Please.

[Galway Eagle]

First, aside from the lack of personal insults, this thread is classic Scoop. Started as one topic before quickly and totally going off in another direction.

Otherwise ...

I think some folks are drastically short-selling some of yesteryear's college (and pro) stars and their ability to adjust to today's game.

Rudy Gobert is a multiple All-Star and a game-changer for the team with the NBA's best record, but he has never attempted a single 3 in 8 seasons. Are some folks actually saying that he can be a difference-maker in today's NBA but Shaq and Russell wouldn't be? Really? Giannis can be MVP even though he can't shoot, but Wilt and Kareem wouldn't have been superstars -- especially if they were surrounded by 3 or 4 great shooters who opened things up for them inside? Okey dokey then.

Chones and Lucas would have done just fine in today's college basketball. Better than fine -- they'd be standouts. Yes, Garza can step out and hit an occasional 3, but it's his ability to score inside and rebound that has made him POY. I'd love to have seen a battle between Luka and Luke; I think our guy would have won the battle.

Tatum would be deadly from 3, and he had everything else today's elite college players need, too. Butch would have extended his range and been a fine 3-point shooter. Wade might have been even more dominant because the lane would have been more open in a game that emphasized 3s more. Diener would be even better in today's game.

Dean Meminger wouldn't have been as effective in today's college basketball as, say, Jalen Brunson was for Nova? Please.

Giannis can do things most superstars at any era can't due to body type. I'm just saying maybe comparing him to the proto type for a back to basket Center isn't the best.

Others have a point about Shaq being explosive at LSU, but let's keep in mind this isn't like he got fat in an era where athletic nutrition was no water, smoke a pack, do a line and see what you're made of. He got fat playing in the late 90s early 2000s. So I'm not sure adding 10years to his era would have changed much.

Again there's players that can adapt and some who are great due to when they played. I'll stay away from most of the MU guys because I only have YouTube to see them but I think the argument of George Thompson being a 6'2" forward is a solid one as well with being unable to adapt.

[wadesworld]

The Pistons were able to neutralize Shaq at the end of his prime with the 6'7 Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace and Mehmet Okur.    And Shaq had Kobe, Payton and Malone, so it isn't like there was a lot of double teaming.     Shaq was awesome.    And then he was slow and awesome.    But he wasn't unstoppable for entire games.   

The Pistons "neutralized" him at the end of his prime to the tune of 27 and 11 in the 5 game series.  That's how dominant he was.  On the downswing of his career, he was still considered "neutralized" when he was averaging 27 and 11.  He made an All Star game at age 36 for Phoenix.

Shaq would have dominated in any era.  Especially Orlando Magic Shaq.  But Lakers Shaq would have absolutely no problem in today's NBA.

[The Sultan]

First, aside from the lack of personal insults, this thread is classic Scoop. Started as one topic before quickly and totally going off in another direction.

Otherwise ...

I think some folks are drastically short-selling some of yesteryear's college (and pro) stars and their ability to adjust to today's game.

Rudy Gobert is a multiple All-Star and a game-changer for the team with the NBA's best record, but he has never attempted a single 3 in 8 seasons. Are some folks actually saying that he can be a difference-maker in today's NBA but Shaq and Russell wouldn't be? Really? Giannis can be MVP even though he can't shoot, but Wilt and Kareem wouldn't have been superstars -- especially if they were surrounded by 3 or 4 great shooters who opened things up for them inside? Okey dokey then.

Chicosesque strawman argument.  Nobody said this.

I said they would have to adapt their game to how it is played now because they wouldn't be as effective if they approached it like they did in the 70s and 80s.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

82, I can't speak for others, but I'm not saying that players wouldn't be able to adapt. I'm saying that if you took a time machine, picked them up in the 1970s and dropped them off in 2021 and asked them to scrimmage players today, they wouldn't do well. The game is different, the athletes are much bigger, much faster, and much stronger, and today's players have been playing the game much longer. Chones was able to dominate because he was a mountain being guarded by foothills most of the time in addition to being incredibly skilled. In today's Big East, he would be considered skinny and would need to put on muscle to avoid being manhandled by bigger players like John, Wahab, Whaley, Obiagu, etc.

It's not an insult to them. They were among the absolute best of their time given the conditions in which they were raised and learned the game. The players today have way more advantages when it comes to athletic training, coaching, and youth leagues. It's not a fair comparison.

There are certainly a few generational talents who would be stars in any era. But they are few and far between.

[JWags85]

Others have a point about Shaq being explosive at LSU, but let's keep in mind this isn't like he got fat in an era where athletic nutrition was no water, smoke a pack, do a line and see what you're made of. He got fat playing in the late 90s early 2000s. So I'm not sure adding 10years to his era would have changed much.

No, but being big and relatively slow of foot didn't hurt him in LA.  If a superstar, super competitive, super successful Shaq was suddenly getting smoked and not having success cause he's too fat, adjustments would have been made.  He lost a good amount of weight going to Miami and played lighter in Boston than he did in the late LA years. Shaq loved not having to watch his diet at times and realized his size could be his advantage, but this wasn't a middling player who ate himself out of the league.

[oldwarrior81]

have any of you tried the WhatIfSports site?
SimMatchup > NCAA Basketball

You can run simulations matching up any NCAA teams over the past 20 seasons.  NBA back to 1952.  Rearrange depth charts etc..
There also are a few older teams from seasons of note.  But, imho, those older NCAA teams really under perform.

You also can build Dream teams which allows you to compile a team made up of any season of any player from those eras.
Not to difficult to create old school vs. new school matchups.

[muwarrior69]

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.

I would've picked George over Toone.

[tower912]

The Pistons "neutralized" him at the end of his prime to the tune of 27 and 11 in the 5 game series.  That's how dominant he was.  On the downswing of his career, he was still considered "neutralized" when he was averaging 27 and 11.  He made an All Star game at age 36 for Phoenix.

Shaq would have dominated in any era.  Especially Orlando Magic Shaq.  But Lakers Shaq would have absolutely no problem in today's NBA.

So, not a difference maker against Detroit.  He got his, but didn't carry his team.   Which is another way to defend a big.

[wadesworld]

So, not a difference maker against Detroit.  He got his, but didn't carry his team.   Which is another way to defend a big.

In the sense that his team did not win the title no he didn't carry his team.  But he went for 27 and 11 and Kobe went for 23 and 4.  Shaq's roll was not to get other people involved.  The problem for the Lakers was nobody else showed up.  The next highest scorer was Derek Fisher at 6.4 ppg.  To be quite honest, the Lakers just weren't nearly as good as they had been.  Their third leading scorer for the season was 35 year old Gary Payton and their 4th was 40 year old Karl Malone.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Got beat out by Gary Rosenberger.

Gary had a higher career FG% than Markus, btw, with a stellar senior year. Different era and rules, but he was a great shooter.

#hangthejersey