Your MBB Wine Cellar Team
I thought this would be fun for a Monday morning... In Bill Simmons's "The Book of Basketball" he spends what was probably my favorite chapter on "The Wine Cellar" team. The premise is "If aliens come to earth with a time machine and demand to play basketball for the sake of the world, who do you pick?" The time machine is because you don't just pick Michael Jordan - you have to decide which vintage (like wine) of Mike you pick (Simmons took 1992 MJ over 96 MJ). The game is taking place today - meaning 2014 NCAA rules like the 3 point line length are in play.
With that theory in place, who makes your Wine Cellar Team? Does 2013 Trey Burke start over 1992 Jalen Rose? Does Tournament McGary get one of your 12 roster spots? Does Cazzie's game translate with a shot clock, 3 pointer, and 7 footers? 91 or 92 CWebb? Simmons's team was quite versitile, able to go big or small, run a press, have a lockdown 5 for defense, and able to score lots of ways.
Build your starting 5 (or full roster of 12) and defend your picks/years.
You blockquoted a section that said "basketball isn't just about scoring" and then argued that's why you picked Gary Grant, one of the better scorers Michigan has had. Gary Grant IS a scorer - that was my point.
I think, ultimately, we agree, since I landed on the same conclusion you did - Burke starts and Grant backs him up. Both can score, but both also do a lot more. Trey had a better A/TO ratio and Grant was a bigger defensive presence.
The career average comparison isn't especially insightful since it's across very different eras of college basketball. In the world of Gary Grant, Trey comes in and backs up Darius Morris for a couple years. In that scenario his career ppg average plummets. Compare Trey and Grant's best 2 years and you have a difference of ~5 ppg.
I suspect that you were not a contemporary of the era. Gary Grant, throughout his entire college career, was known for his defense.
Yeah, nicknamed "The General" and the assists and all that, it was Grant's defense that really separated him from his peers. He had some decent numbers offensively, but this was against over-matched teams.
Your last paragraph is incomprehensible. Trey was the better clutch player, and was the better college player (you essentially said previously that Grant had better players so he didn't need score - so why didn't the team only get past the 2nd round only once in his senior season?).
After Trey's sophomore season, he was a better player than Grant ever was in any season as a college season. And Trey's pro career is in the process of proving it.
I agree with you about scoring. There's only so many shots to take - that's why I went with Hardaway over guys like Jamal Crawford and Manny Harris. Even Darius Morris, who you portray as a kind of role player, averaged more points than Hardaway.
Also - if you're arguing for picking people who aren't scorers, Grant's a strange guy to bring up. He averaged more points than Trey Burke, had more turnovers, and never reached his assist average. Trey's greatest asset was his game management and decision making -- the miniscule turnover rate for how heavy his ball-handling responsibilities were is unreal. The strongest argument for Grant lies primarily on defense, IMO, but I feel Trey was a bit underrated on that end too. So yeah, I think Trey's the easy pick ahead of Grant, but maybe the best Michigan team includes them both in the backcourt. Depends how willing to share they are. The 89 team did go farther without Grant dominating the ball...
That all said, in some cases scoring is an idicator of talent. Bosh is an example of guy who scored a ton but now did a lot less of that to focus on other areas.The key is having other skills to bring to the table. That's why I included Rose -- he could bring whatever a team needs and was selfless enough to be a bit of a glue guy.
In my mind, Trey initiates your offense and distributes to Rice and Webber. Trey and Tim hit open 3s around those two stars - Chris was a very good passer. Jalen fills in around them, passing and rebounding, and depending on oppoenent and game flow, with ball-handling or scoring as needed. I remember him being pretty good on entry passes and lobs to Chris.
Again, I agree with you in spirit, that's why I'm not putting some of our best offensive players on the team. It'd be more obvious if Michigan ever had a Tony Allen or Roy Hibbert type of lock-down defensive impact player. But they really haven't, at least not enough to boot people like Trey or Jalen off the starting line. Hardaway was about as close as it gets for really talented guys - he's a solid 3 and D guy.
-------
I didn't include years because every guy plays at his best in his last year. Maurice Taylor is probably the only guy I can remember getting worse as he got older. Nearly everyone else gets better.
-----
Cazzie Russel was before my time, so I excluded him. I'm fairly biased against older players because I don't think basketball was nearly athletic then and I wonder how people who thrived in the 60's and 70's would translate their games to today's.
How about we look at the all bench team to pull some names out of the past? As an '89 grad, it has to be JP Oosterbahn and Steve Stoyko to start with
Tom Staton, Alan Hardy, Steve Grote...
I once gave Tom Staton a bloody nose at CCRB. I was on his team and we were beating up the other team pretty badly because, Tom Staton. I had a breakaway after he stripped some poor schmuck and hit me on the outlet. Rather than laying it in, I threw a no-look behind the back pass... directly into his face. That was the end of Tom's day and the end of our team's winning streak.
I know... cool story bro...
I'm happy to see some love for Steve Grote. I realize there are a lot of great guards to choose from, but I think one reason Grote is being overlooked is because he played over 30 years ago.
My buddy and I used to play this game in college to pass the hours. As good as Michigan's team is, it is scarry what UNC, UCLA, and Kentucky can roll out.
It's really interesting to look at teams you think would be great, but have a few holes. A team like Georgetown has great post players, but only a couple truly elite gaurds. Even a program like Duke has some positions where you would say other teams have clear advantages (center being the biggest weakness). A team like Indiana is even more interesting. So much success and so many good players, but I don't think they have a single player I would pick as the top 5 at their position in the history of the NCAA.
Joubert?
The Judge... from 1982 (high school). He never lived up to expections.
Starters:
- PG: 2011 Darius Morris
- SG: 1966 Cazzie Russell
- SF: 1989 Glen Rice (best player Michigan has ever had, hands down)
- PF: 1993 Chris Webber
- C: 1965 Bill Buntin
Bench:
1) PG: 2013 Trey Burke
2) PG: 1988 Gary Grant
3) SG: 2014 Nik Stauskas
4) PF/C: 1979 Phi Hubbard
5) PF/C: 1998 Tractor Traylor
6) PF: 1970 Rudy T
7) PF/C: 1994 Juwon Howard
Starters:
Rice is your go-to scorer, as he is the all time Michigan leader and once shot over 50% from three for an entire year. He's our "MJ" of this team. Webber is the Scottie Pippen to Rice's Jordan. Webber was never, ever any good at being "the guy", so playing second banana on this team will do him wonders of good.
Cazzie is a no-brainer at SG, sorry Nik. He'll be part of the "big three" with Glen and Chris.
I'm going with DMo at PG because I think all you want out of your PG is someone that can check the ball handler on D and create opportunities for the true scorers on the team. I've been watching M basketball since the Glen Rice days and I've never seen another PG as good as distributing the ball as DMo (he ain't the season single record holder for assists for nothing).
Buntin would be remembered by a lot more Wolverine fans if his life didn't end so tragically and suddenly. His number is retired for a reason.
Bench:
I like having three point guards on my roster just in case things get nutty. Burke can provide excellent bench scoring from that spot, and Grant can eat Morris' minutes if Darius is struggling.
Nik is a no brainer for the bench - he'll come in and provide minutes at the 2 and the 3 when we need scoring.
Given that we have PG on lock, and tons of scoring at the 2/3 from Cazzie, Glen, and Nik - the rest of my bench is big men that can play the 4 or the 5 - get rebounds, play defense, and draw some fouls on the opposing team's bigs.
[Edit: Hardest one to leave off here was Jalen. His main value, on the court, was leadership, scoring, and passing - which I think we have in spades with the other guys. His defense was always suspect.]
I like your list but would debate three of your selections:
PG: Ricky Green could do everything Darius could do, was much, much faster and was a better (IMO) on ball defender. He gives up about four inches in height but Green & Grant were essentially the same player and would cause all sorts of problems defensively.
SF: Nik Stuaskas: I'd take Jalen over Nik. Much better defender and at 6'9" was a matchup nightmare. Nik could get shut down completely - I dont remember too many games where somebody took Jalen out of the game. Campy and I were both from Pontiac and I can tell you he doesnt get his due for just how good he was. He would kill Nik head to head let me assure you.
PF: Tractor Traylor: That one's a head scrather to me on your team. He was a beast but I'd rather have Loy Vaught on my team. A lunchpail guy who could score and grab rebounds consistently each and every game.
Howard v Tarpley to me is just which flavor of ice cream you prefer. Same player - largely the same skill set.
Nice list!
Rickey Green was the fastest point guard I ever saw. He could go the length of the court in an eye blink. It's amazing that hardly anyone remembers him. Especially considering he spent 12 years in the NBA.
Starters: Burke, Stauskas, Rice, Webber, Howard.
Bench: Vaught, Grant, Blanchard, Rose, Bernard Robinson Jr, McGary, Dion Sims, Jamal Crawford.
Leon Derricks!......DONE
pre 80s is keeping up with today's athletes, so...