NCAA Tournament Playalong Thread

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Only counting players that didn't enter the NBA until 1995 since that is when Izzo started you have all of the following that have averaged 10+ PPG in a season in the NBA:

Shane Battier
Carlos Boozer
Elton Brand
Chris Duhon
Mike Dunleavy
Grant Hill
Corey Maggette
Luol Deng

That's a lot more NBA talent than what Izzo has had to work with and that doesn't even include Jay Williams who averaged 9.5 as a rookie before the accident ruined his career.

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

Laettner's first five seasons in the NBA:
18.2 and 8.7 boards
16.8 and 8.6
16.3 and 7.6
16.4 and 7.3
18.1 and 8.8

I'd HARDLY call putting up those kinds of numbers in the NBA as a failure. He even made the All-Star game once.

Dawkins barely played as a rookie but after that, in seasons 2-4:
15.8 and 7.4 assists
14.2 and 7.0
14.3 and 7.4
He was at 15.8 and 7.0 before getting hurt after four games in the next year.

Again, you don't put up those kinds of numbers at the NBA level if you are a failure.

Dunleavy has averaged double figures every season in the league after his rookie year, including 19.1 a game last year. You think scoring 19 a game in the NBA is embarrassing?

Hill is not a superstar? You are letting his years since the injuries cloud your judgement. Starting with averaging 20 a night as a rookie and being named co-rookie of the year, look at what he did after that:
20 points, 10 board, 7 assists (10 triple doubles)
21, 9, and 7 (13)
21, 8, and 7 (4)
21, 7, and 6 (1)
26, 7, and 5

He was an all-star every season. He made second team all-league in his second season and first team in his third. He was second team the next three years. He was second in the league in defensive rebounds one year (top 10 overall), top 10 in the league in assists the next year, then third in scoring a few seasons after that. There wasn't a thing Grant couldn't do on the court. He also had 29 triple-doubles in that period.

Brand has only averaged 20-10 four times and his career averages are 20 and 10. Compare him to a guy like Tim Duncan:

Duncan 21.4, 11.7, 3.2 asts, 2.4 blks, .507 fgp
Brand 20.0, 10.1, 2.6 asts, 2.1 blks, .503 fgp

One is a first ballot hall of famer and the other isn't even a star? Please.

Michigan St. +7.5

330/300

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Laettner's first five seasons in the NBA:
18.2 and 8.7 boards
16.8 and 8.6
16.3 and 7.6
16.4 and 7.3
18.1 and 8.8

I'd HARDLY call putting up those kinds of numbers in the NBA as a failure. He even made the All-Star game once.

Dawkins barely played as a rookie but after that, in seasons 2-4:
15.8 and 7.4 assists
14.2 and 7.0
14.3 and 7.4
He was at 15.8 and 7.0 before getting hurt after four games in the next year.

Again, you don't put up those kinds of numbers at the NBA level if you are a failure.

Dunleavy has averaged double figures every season in the league after his rookie year, including 19.1 a game last year. You think scoring 19 a game in the NBA is embarrassing?

Hill is not a superstar? You are letting his years since the injuries cloud your judgement. Starting with averaging 20 a night as a rookie and being named co-rookie of the year, look at what he did after that:
20 points, 10 board, 7 assists (10 triple doubles)
21, 9, and 7 (13)
21, 8, and 7 (4)
21, 7, and 6 (1)
26, 7, and 5

He was an all-star every season. He made second team all-league in his second season and first team in his third. He was second team the next three years. He was second in the league in defensive rebounds one year (top 10 overall), top 10 in the league in assists the next year, then third in scoring a few seasons after that. There wasn't a thing Grant couldn't do on the court. He also had 29 triple-doubles in that period.

Brand has only averaged 20-10 four times and his career averages are 20 and 10. Compare him to a guy like Tim Duncan:

Duncan 21.4, 11.7, 3.2 asts, 2.4 blks, .507 fgp
Brand 20.0, 10.1, 2.6 asts, 2.1 blks, .503 fgp

One is a first ballot hall of famer and the other isn't even a star? Please.

ahhh you with the numbers.
I watched Dawkins played.
He did not come close to expectations.
He was a decent player, but we expected wins with
him... those were in the days of hyped up numbers (had to play man to man)
and the Spurs a run and gun team.

Hill is not a superstar. He could not possibly be.
He has been injured. I am not sure what a superstar is.
He definitley had the talent. But he was out soo much.
I cannot put him there, not his fault.

Laettner the same as Dawkins. Decent numbers,
but hardly as expected. Laettner would have been #1 in draft,
Shaq and Mourning went ahead of him. He was thought to be a franchise
player. If you have to put those guys
up against NC guys, its a laugher.

Dunleavy is not a failure, defintely not compared to expectations.
But he aint that good.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Now give the failures.
Start with the superstar Laettner. The Spurs drafted Johnny Dawkins and Gene Banks. They were big disappointments. The list is long... I dont want to go through them all. Many highly reguarded going into the draft. The guys you put up are hardly superstars.

I will give you that Hill and Brand could be remembered as very good players but because they are so injury prone. They are hardly superstars.
Maggette would be the anti-Duke type.
Putting Dunleavy up there... sort of embarassing.
Deng... has just not played long enough to make any statement.

Boozer has been a nice the nice surprise imo.
Sorry thats a very short list for a team that is tops in college
basketball. Which I must give K credit for. He does a good
job with the kids he gets.

How could you even put those guys up there as failures when compared to Mateen Cleaves and Shawn Respert? Either way, that isn't the point. Duke has had far more successful NBA players than Michigan State in the past 15 years yet Michigan State has been almost as successful. Can you really think of anyone else that had three solid pros or less that has been anywhere remotely close to as successful as Michigan State in that time? I think the job Izzo does there is extremely underrated.

[otisotisotis]

Can I get an over/under on Hansbrough flops tonight?

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

How could you even put those guys up there as failures when compared to Mateen Cleaves and Shawn Respert? Either way, that isn't the point. Duke has had far more successful NBA players than Michigan State in the past 15 years yet Michigan State has been almost as successful. Can you really think of anyone else that had three solid pros or less that has been anywhere remotely close to as successful as Michigan State in that time? I think the job Izzo does there is extremely underrated.

Oh hell I agree. BTW Matteen Cleaves was exactly who I was thinking of.

But Duke has been bad compared to what they have done
in the NCAA. Look at the past 20 years and look at Duke's record.
Look at UNC, and look a their players in the pros.

Actually Magic would make up for all Michst. failures,
but he was with Judd Heathcombovercoat.




My point is Duke has NC type NCAA numbers, but pros...
no way. Something amiss.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by pgardn

My point is Duke has NC type NCAA numbers, but pros...
no way. Something amiss.

I don't think there is any doubt. Duke is a college basketball program. North Carolina is an NBA factory. I'm pretty sure Rashad McCants went to North Carolina for three years without ever intentionally throwing a pass once.

Michigan State really nutted up tonight. I love losing money on basketball.


Football starts in 5 months!!!

[King Glorious]

The team that was a strong and deserving favorite won like they were supposed to. Too much athleticsm and talent across the board. For all the talk about the Big East this year, it's funny that the best team came from the ACC yet again. Duke has a title, UNC has two, and Maryland has one in this decade.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The team that was a strong and deserving favorite won like they were supposed to. Too much athleticsm and talent across the board. For all the talk about the Big East this year, it's funny that the best team came from the ACC yet again. Duke has a title, UNC has two, and Maryland has one in this decade.

While the big East was so much better than the other conferences, its been known all year how good UNC was... pretty much the only real good team in the ACC. this was no surprise.

Originally Posted by King Glorious

The team that was a strong and deserving favorite won like they were supposed to. Too much athleticsm and talent across the board. For all the talk about the Big East this year, it's funny that the best team came from the ACC yet again. Duke has a title, UNC has two, and Maryland has one in this decade.

Definitely.
People sort of shoved them under the rug
after they lost in the ACC tourney.

Mich ST. did a hell of a job just getting to the
final. Izzo did a great job with this bunch.

Postscript:

This was one of the least exciting tournaments I have
witnessed. The number of close games in the later rounds
was just not there (my vote for best game Vill v. Pitt which
actually lived up to expectations).

Still a great event.

[GPK]