Jim McIlvaine's Tweet about MU/X

[Heisenberg]

https://twitter.com/JimMcIlvaine/status/1614701734278107136?s=20&t=Qz9C7V9V4Lld7KM5V3ohlA

@JimMcIlvaine 16h
In spite of todays outcome, I think this could be the best #mubb team since the final four year.

[Heisenberg]

Even better than the E8 team 10 years ago?

[SaveOD238]

I think there's only a few teams that potentially come close:

2009, before Dom James broke his foot (James, McNeal, Matthews, Hayward, Burke, Butler)
2013 Elite Eight team (Blue, J Wilson, Gardner, Cadougan, Lockett, Anderson)
2019, before the end of season slump (Howard, both Hauser's, Anim, John, Cain, Elliot)
2023

I think I might still take 2009, but it's close

[brewcity77]

Here's how I would rank the best teams since 2003:

1) 2009: They were undersized, but a legit Final Four contender until James' injury.
2) 2008: Thanks to Ousmane Barro, a better defensive team than 2009. This team gets forgotten because of how good the Amigos were as seniors, but if not for that stupid Stanford shot they go to the Elite 8.
3) 2012: This team was unquestionably better than the Elite 8 team, IMO. DJO & Jae gave them legit shooting weapons and they were better defensively.

I would put this team in the mix with those three. I think I might slot them behind 2008 but ahead of 2012. This team has better point guard play than 2012 did and more scoring threats. I also think this team has more upside than any of them because while each team had a flaw (2009's size, 2008's lack of consistency, 2012's limited offense beyond the top-2) this team's biggest flaw is its defense, but we've seen them be able to lock in defensively for stretches. If they can get that 30-40% great defense up to 60-70%, this team can go to the Final Four.

2013 and 2019 were the other two I'd mention as having flashes, but neither were in this conversation, IMO.

[🏀]

Here's how I would rank the best teams since 2003:

1) 2009: They were undersized, but a legit Final Four contender until James' injury.
2) 2008: Thanks to Ousmane Barro, a better defensive team than 2009. This team gets forgotten because of how good the Amigos were as seniors, but if not for that stupid Stanford shot they go to the Elite 8.
3) 2012: This team was unquestionably better than the Elite 8 team, IMO. DJO & Jae gave them legit shooting weapons and they were better defensively.

I would put this team in the mix with those three. I think I might slot them behind 2008 but ahead of 2012. This team has better point guard play than 2012 did and more scoring threats. I also think this team has more upside than any of them because while each team had a flaw (2009's size, 2008's lack of consistency, 2012's limited offense beyond the top-2) this team's biggest flaw is its defense, but we've seen them be able to lock in defensively for stretches. If they can get that 30-40% great defense up to 60-70%, this team can go to the Final Four.

2013 and 2019 were the other two I'd mention as having flashes, but neither were in this conversation, IMO.

I agree with this analysis.

[Lennys Tap]

Here's how I would rank the best teams since 2003:

1) 2009: They were undersized, but a legit Final Four contender until James' injury.
2) 2008: Thanks to Ousmane Barro, a better defensive team than 2009. This team gets forgotten because of how good the Amigos were as seniors, but if not for that stupid Stanford shot they go to the Elite 8.
3) 2012: This team was unquestionably better than the Elite 8 team, IMO. DJO & Jae gave them legit shooting weapons and they were better defensively.

I would put this team in the mix with those three. I think I might slot them behind 2008 but ahead of 2012. This team has better point guard play than 2012 did and more scoring threats. I also think this team has more upside than any of them because while each team had a flaw (2009's size, 2008's lack of consistency, 2012's limited offense beyond the top-2) this team's biggest flaw is its defense, but we've seen them be able to lock in defensively for stretches. If they can get that 30-40% great defense up to 60-70%, this team can go to the Final Four.

2013 and 2019 were the other two I'd mention as having flashes, but neither were in this conversation, IMO.

2013 team was our only Big East regular season champion (14-4 in conference), went to the Elite 8 and finished #11 in the coaches poll. Rating them as "having flashes" like the 2019 burnout team belittles their accomplishments.

[mugrad_89]

This team definitely has the potential to reach the heights of the more recent successful teams, but I don't think they're quite there yet.  To get to the level where a lot of us think they can, there needs to be more focus on team rebounding on the defensive glass and slightly better execution down the stretch in close games.

[MuggsyB]

It's an interesting conversation.  I would agree they're not quite there yet and that both of the aforementioned teams were better defensively.  I do think we're better than 2019.

[The Lens]

Speaking of Mac...

'94 over 03?  College basketball was so deep in 94 that it was a different game then.  H2H it would be a fun one.

We left something on the table in 96.  That team, could play.

[MU82]

We'll have an answer about where the current team ranks in a couple months. Or, preferably, in 77 days.

[tower912]

Come tournament time, MU doesn't have to fear anyone.   That doesn't mean that they will go deep (crapshoot), it just means that they can compete with anybody.

[GoFastAndWin]

Speaking of Mac...

'94 over 03?  College basketball was so deep in 94 that it was a different game then.  H2H it would be a fun one.

We left something on the table in 96.  That team, could play.

Could not agree more with your '94 v '03 point.  Taking nothing away from our FF team, the number of great teams back in the early 1990s was crazy. MU lost to a Duke team with ridiculous in-team depth of its own. 4 NBA players: Bobby Hurley, Cherokee Parks, Antonio Lang, and of course Grant Hill. Duke went on to lose in the NCAA Championship game to Nolan Richardson's Razorbacks.

[brewcity77]

2013 team was our only Big East regular season champion (14-4 in conference), went to the Elite 8 and finished #11 in the coaches poll. Rating them as "having flashes" like the 2019 burnout team belittles their accomplishments.

We're talking about best team, not most accomplished. 2013 did great things, but if put them in a 7-game series with 2009, 2008, or 2012 I think they lose.

If the over the backboard shot doesn't fall, I don't think anyone even compares them to 2008. If Dom doesn't get hurt, I think we win the Big East & are favored to go to the F4 as a 1-seed in 2009, and honestly that 2009 team might have been better than 2003 when healthy. And if 2013 played our current team, I think they lose as well.

2013 is probably the fifth best team since 2003. That's not a slight, it's just that we've had some good teams that came up short in the tourney.

[MU82]

We're talking about best team, not most accomplished. 2013 did great things, but if put them in a 7-game series with 2009, 2008, or 2012 I think they lose.

If the over the backboard shot doesn't fall, I don't think anyone even compares them to 2008. If Dom doesn't get hurt, I think we win the Big East & are favored to go to the F4 as a 1-seed in 2009, and honestly that 2009 team might have been better than 2003 when healthy. And if 2013 played our current team, I think they lose as well.

2013 is probably the fifth best team since 2003. That's not a slight, it's just that we've had some good teams that came up short in the tourney.

I totally hear what you're saying, brew ... but accomplishments are tangible. Accomplishments are evidence. Accomplishments are real. The rest is all just opinion. Which is fun, and it's what fan boards are for. I'll still take the accomplishments 100 times out of 100.

I mean, 1976-77 was what? Al's 4th- or 5th-best team on paper? Maybe not even? But thank goodness for what those Warriors accomplished!

[muwarrior69]

I totally hear what you're saying, brew ... but accomplishments are tangible. Accomplishments are evidence. Accomplishments are real. The rest is all just opinion. Which is fun, and it's what fan boards are for. I'll still take the accomplishments 100 times out of 100.

I mean, 1976-77 was what? Al's 4th- or 5th-best team on paper? Maybe not even? But thank goodness for what those Warriors accomplished!

I think Al's  '71 team was his best.

[brewcity77]

I totally hear what you're saying, brew ... but accomplishments are tangible. Accomplishments are evidence. Accomplishments are real. The rest is all just opinion. Which is fun, and it's what fan boards are for. I'll still take the accomplishments 100 times out of 100.

I mean, 1976-77 was what? Al's 4th- or 5th-best team on paper? Maybe not even? But thank goodness for what those Warriors accomplished!

They are sentiment. I get why people get attached, but when questions like this come up, I try to remove that emotion, even in real time. It's why I was pouring cold water on the 2019 team in January when they were top-10 and before the collapse.

For me, this is kind of the whole essence of the oft silly "knows ball" discussions that go on. It's also why college basketball is so frustrating and fun, because single results determine so much. The NCAA tournament is the best way to crown a champion but the worst way to determine which team is the best.

If you love 2013 for the Big East title and Elite Eight, I don't blame you. I do too. But if you think 2013 was one of the 3 best teams post 2003, you simply don't know ball.

[jfp61]

They are sentiment. I get why people get attached, but when questions like this come up, I try to remove that emotion, even in real time. It's why I was pouring cold water on the 2019 team in January when they were top-10 and before the collapse.

For me, this is kind of the whole essence of the oft silly "knows ball" discussions that go on. It's also why college basketball is so frustrating and fun, because single results determine so much. The NCAA tournament is the best way to crown a champion but the worst way to determine which team is the best.

If you love 2013 for the Big East title and Elite Eight, I don't blame you. I do too. But if you think 2013 was one of the 3 best teams post 2003, you simply don't know ball.

I literally saw that 2013 team lose by 40 to Florida, and lose to UWGB. That really only played well against Miami in the post season. Lost to Jerian Grants Notre Dame, Buzzer beat Davidson, Snuck by Butler, beat on Miami, and then got throttled by Cuse.

[DienerTime34]

If we don't faceplant in March, it will be the first time in 10 years. I'm excited about the potential, but can we wait until we're handing out a few butt-kickings in late Feb or the Big East tournament before starting this hype train?

[jfp61]

If we don't faceplant in March, it will be the first time in 10 years. I'm excited about the potential, but can we wait until we're handing out a few butt-kickings in late Feb or the Big East tournament before starting this hype train?

I just want to roll in our first tournament game to end BS. Everything after would be gravy.

[Daniel]

This team definitely has the potential to reach the heights of the more recent successful teams, but I don't think they're quite there yet.  To get to the level where a lot of us think they can, there needs to be more focus on team rebounding on the defensive glass and slightly better execution down the stretch in close games.

On. The rebounding issue, we have gone over a season and a half with Shaka, and we all talk about improving it and Shaka mentions rebounding but what have they done to change anything about it in either recruiting or game plans?  I hope we can fix it because that is a lot of points given up every game more than likely.

[withoutbias]

"Don't mean a thing without a ring."

Games aren't played on a computer.  People aren't excel cells.  Wins are what matter.  Sure, computer numbers are nice to compare where you are to other teams.  But banners, Ws, and titles are what are fun, not algorithms.

I just can't imagine being a sports fan and having my team win a conference title and being like, "Well actually!" to everything.

Give me a season like last year's Providence team over a season like this year's Creighton season, if Creighton's season continues to go as it is with a lot of losses but nice computer numbers.

[Goose]

I have a soft spot for the '94 team. I was at Duke when that group played down there their freshman year and was at Knoxville for their final game. Started and ended with Duke and it was a great ride. Great group of guys, loved KO and had success on the court and a fun run. 

[MU82]

If you love 2013 for the Big East title and Elite Eight, I don't blame you. I do too. But if you think 2013 was one of the 3 best teams post 2003, you simply don't know ball.

I'm sure the meat eaters would be happy to welcome you to their club, brew.

What I'm saying is that "accomplishments" are nothing to pooh-pooh. Accomplishments matter. One could make a pretty good case that, in high-level sports, accomplishments are all that matter ... with the ultimate accomplishment being the championship each year.

We have probably read hundreds of times on Scoop how our 2009 team "would have gone to the Final Four" if Dominic hadn't gotten hurt. Talk about sentiment! That team could have lost in the first round of the NCAAT just like Virginia did as the No. 1 overall seed, it could have won the national title, or anything in between. Nobody knows ... but that some of our fellow Scoopers have said it with such certainty -- as if it were a fact -- cracks me up. (I know you only said in this thread that they'd have been legit FF contenders.)

It's all fun. But sure, re 2013, I'll give you the semantics of "most accomplished" and I'll let others speculate about the always unprovable "best."

[withoutbias]

They are sentiment. I get why people get attached, but when questions like this come up, I try to remove that emotion, even in real time. It's why I was pouring cold water on the 2019 team in January when they were top-10 and before the collapse.

For me, this is kind of the whole essence of the oft silly "knows ball" discussions that go on. It's also why college basketball is so frustrating and fun, because single results determine so much. The NCAA tournament is the best way to crown a champion but the worst way to determine which team is the best.

If you love 2013 for the Big East title and Elite Eight, I don't blame you. I do too. But if you think 2013 was one of the 3 best teams post 2003, you simply don't know ball.

Algorithms is what you don't know. Thankfully for my entertainment purposes games are played on a basketball court, not an excel spreadsheet. I get the feeling you'd like watching a spreadsheet more.

[dgies9156]

I'll take a slightly different approach.

While I don't disagree with Mr. McIlvaine's Tweet, I liken this team to where Marquette was in 1966-1967 and 1967-1968. I know this may make me a geezer to this board, but that's kinda where we are. Coach McGuire had built some very good teams that weren't terribly respected nationally. It was in this time that he sold George Thompson on Marquette. After two years, things took off.

These were Coach McGuire's third and fourth years. If Coach Smart can sustain this for another year or two, Wow!

The big challenge this year is getting past February in one piece -- preferably without a loss to DePaul!