PDA

View Full Version : Gonzaga May Never Win A Title and It's OK (long)



McZag
04-08-2008, 05:44 PM
In watching the championship game last night it dawned me just how strong of an impact the NBA rules are making on the college game. Pundits discuss it often but I have always told myself that the NBA can do whatever it wants and the outcome to the college season will remain reasonably consistent. The argument being that with over 300 teams vying for roughly the same open talent, the pool will remain diluted and each school will have its fair share at landing top tier talent.

Then I watch a championship game that highlights at least 5 NBA journeymen/all-stars and wonder why they haven't been drafted. Not NBA prospects folks, bonified NBA starters and 6th men that could play tonight. Outstanding talent. Guys worth paying big money to watch play. How do you not cut down F4 nets and hoist championship banners with NBA talent on your floor?

Reminds me of the old days when the tournament took the top 16 or 32 teams, because those teams had the future NBA talent, and were a clear cut above the rest of D1. Those days are with us again as long as the NBA makes the young ones head off to school for a year or two.

This will bring about disagreement, especially in the wake of Calipari's decisions at the end of regulation last night, but with benches loaded with dynamite a number of coaches would have taken Memphis, Kansas, UNC and UCLA to SA.

Give Mark Few the Kansas roster - Championship
the Memphis roster - Championship
UNC? - Championship
UCLA? - F4 maybe more

It's in the horses, not the jockey. The coaches in the college game get all the credit or blame because they are the ones being paid. In the NBA? Just the opposite becaue the players get the coin. But who cuts down nets in April falls on the players and players only. He who has the players, cuts the nets.

There is no doubt in my mind that Few is an elite coach. He's done too much with so little. He has had a fraction of the budget's and support of the teams in this year's final four.

There are those in the GU family that believe that Few has everything he needs to reach F4's and win championships. Not even close. New facilities you say? Higher salary you say? Great recruiting budget? Chartered flights you say? Tip of the ice berg. Those things make Gonzaga merely competitive. Those things are essential if Gonzaga wants to stay relevent. Few achieves far more than what those things bring.

Now, forget how good our roster looks on paper. Paper is worthless. The players performance is all that matters. Coaches cannot force performance they can only prepare and lead. Pitino, Calhoun, Donovan, Olson, Coach K, no question elite coaches - but none of them were in the F4 this year. Why? Player performance. Not what the "papers" say about the pedigree of their players.

Bottom line: Gonzaga should not expect to honestly compete for a F4 birth albeit a National Championship until we see an NBA All-star in K2 -on the floor surrounded by 2 NBA journeymen -on the floor with him. Anything outside of that is an unreasonable expectation. It could happen next year. It may never happen.

I love our guys. I love our team and especially our coach. After seeing what it takes to cut down nets and play in the F4 in 2008, I understand the true quality of players a school needs to achive that today.

It's OK to dream. Let's just make sure not to blame the coaches when the bubble bursts.

former1dog
04-08-2008, 05:50 PM
Villanova

zagster318
04-08-2008, 05:52 PM
Marquette

zag67
04-08-2008, 05:52 PM
Nice post. I whole hearted agree with your statements.

We can dream and enjoy the journey. If everything falls in place, then we might get to the F4. Even this year, we are tied near the end of the game, and Davidson won and went on to win 2 more. We can play with most of the teams and lets enjoy the fun of watching good coaching, good teams, and hopefully watch them improve as the season goes on.

I love watching college ball. And I love GU ball even more.

gueastcoast
04-08-2008, 06:05 PM
Not sure I entirely agree, but a thoughtful post.

One thing I'd add to your point about what it takes (an NBA all-star with 2 NBA journeymen) -- time will tell as they are early in their NBA careers, but I think we were fairly close to that standard in 2004-5.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=254000010

A painful box score, but I'd love to have that lineup back.

kitzbuel
04-08-2008, 06:14 PM
Villanova and Marquette are anomalies. They fall into the less than 15% of Final Four teams to not be from a big 6 conference. I think McZag is pretty dead on. Increase your odds of winning by increasing the caliber of player on the floor. That is a very, very direct correlation.

CDC84
04-08-2008, 06:24 PM
Despite what Bill Self accomplished last night, most coaches and programs need to make a final 4 or two before they "crack the code" and win the national title.

In a given college basketball season, there are usually many more teams that can make a final 4 than who can win it all. It's those extra two games where having the big time talent is almost always a necessity.

For a program like Gonzaga, the importance of making a final 4 or two has to do with program perception, and it turn, recruiting. I have always felt that if this program can make a final 4 or two, the players will come. They may never come at the same rate as North Carolina and Kansas, but I feel you will be seeing McDonald's AA's choosing Gonzaga right out of high school. I know that this staff would recruit with a zeal unmatched if they made it to the final 4. The combination of final 4 success with what makes GU special compared to the huge state universities (smaller class sizes, family atmosphere, a true basketball school, etc.) would be a very enticing thing for several top 30 type kids. Not all, but a respectable percentage. Not every Burger Boy is obsessed with playing in the ACC and going to class with 300 of their best pals, but they do want to have a chance to develop and win a national title. If Gonzaga proves that it can make a final 4 or two with the guys they can get now, it sends a message that a title is within reach, and that a factory school isn't totally necessary to get it.

If Gonzaga can land that talent, and keep some of it around, they'll be better equipped to compete for a national title. But the Zags haven't made a final 4 yet.....I say give them that chance before saying that a national title isn't going to happen.

2 other points....neither Kansas or North Carolina had star freshmen leading their teams. Both of those squads were filled with veteran players. Secondly, not all recruiting classes are the same, and we are not likely going to see any freshmen next year come close to having a Love/Rose impact. I wouldn't be shocked if Greg Monroe isn't a double digit scorer at G'Town next season.

cbbfanatic
04-08-2008, 06:29 PM
Villanova and Marquette are anomalies. They fall into the less than 15% of Final Four teams to not be from a big 6 conference. I think McZag is pretty dead on. Increase your odds of winning by increasing the caliber of player on the floor. That is a very, very direct correlation.

villanova is/was in the big east.

they also had some guys on their roster that year that had pretty good nba careers, not all stars, but guys with longevity that saw the court. and they had the right role players around them. they were actually a pretty talented team, and played gtown really tough multiple times earlier that year. as an upset, i think that game is a little overrated, its just crazy how well they shot the ball.

the marquette run was before my time, but is probably a better comparison as they were outside of the power conferences, probably with a significantly lower talent level

agree with the initial post

thespywhozaggedme
04-08-2008, 06:56 PM
I've got news for ya Mc. We've got at least 5 NBA players on this squad. Maybe not stars but they will be in the league.

cbbfanatic
04-08-2008, 06:58 PM
I've got news for ya Mc. We've got at least 5 NBA players on this squad. Maybe not stars but they will be in the league.

who?

i count daye for sure, most likely pargo, then a bunch of guys that will have a fighting chance at sticking on a roster, of which maybe 50% do...

zag67
04-08-2008, 07:03 PM
And if things go well, we will be making a run next year.

1) We need to have the people return next year
2) Keep away from injuries
3) have the players work this summer and improve what the coaches and what they feel needs to be improved.
4) The freshmen come in and give a few quality minutes (and hopefully we can pick up Jeff Taylor)

thespywhozaggedme
04-08-2008, 07:03 PM
Daye, Gray, Sacre, Pargo and Heytvelt will all spend time on NBA rosters. Guaranteed. Downs has a chance, Bouldin very slim.

cbbfanatic
04-08-2008, 07:09 PM
guaranteeing gray and sacre will be nba players is pretty far out there man.

gray is way undersized to play the 2 and only really proved that he can bang 3s (which is no small feat, i admit). he would have to play PG in the nba, and i dont think he has proven that he has that skillset. also not convinced that his raw athleticism is in the league yet, but i guess as he becomes more involved in the overall flow of the offense and has the ball in his hands more, we will see more of what this kid is all about.

sacre barely even saw the floor - certainly cant make a strong case for him yet, though he does look like physically he might be able to cut it, one day.

these guys have a shot, but i wouldnt put them in any category over 50% at this time, and surely wouldnt "guarantee" that they are NBAers. a guarantee just seems absurd at this point.

zag944
04-08-2008, 07:23 PM
I liked our chances better when players were coming straight from high school.

We might not have gotten a starting lineup the best players in college bb, but we were getting some of the best guys that were going to stick around for 3 or 4 years.

That said, its single elimination and anything can happen. George Mason made the Final Four and Davidson came a basket away. It could take our most talented team ever, and outstanding health, and some luck, and some getting hot at the right time...but I think any team getting itself in the mix as often as us has a puncher's chance.

Hextall7388
04-08-2008, 07:29 PM
While I agree with your post in relation to the quality of the talent on the floor night in and night out in K2, I have to disagree with some of your comments in relation to coaching.

I disagree with your comment that there are a number of other NCAA coaches that could have led UNC, UCLA, Memphis and Kansas to the Final Four. In my view, coaching star players requires a special skill set, a skill set that very few coaches have. When coaching a team full of stars it is more than just drawing up X's and O's, the coach has to manage egos, try to keep all of the stars happy with enough minutes and touches and most importantly, try to develop some team chemistry. This task becomes especially difficult for the coaches of elite programs that have one and done freshman stars. Each year these coaches have to redesign the focus of their entire offensive system.

This may cause a stir, but I'm not sure Coach Few has the right "make up" to be a coach of an "elite program". I'm not saying he is not an elite coach, I'm simply saying that he does not strike me as "the type". He comes across as a guy who loves basketball, but dreads the part of his job that requires him to interact with the media. Coaching at an elite program requires the coach to be front and center....I don't think that's coach Few's comfort zone. Based on the posts on these boards, a lot of people questioned how he handled Daye's playing time and touches this year. Imagine if he had two or three 5 star recruits to deal with? Few is a loyal guy, and loves to reward the guys that have put their time in with the program (Pendo and Kuso this year). I get the impression that it would go against everything that he believes in to put his team in the hands of a freshman like Rose, Love, Beasley, Mayo or Gordon, regardless of how talented they may be.

cbbfanatic
04-08-2008, 07:39 PM
While I agree with your post in relation to the quality of the talent on the floor night in and night out in K2, I have to disagree with some of your comments in relation to coaching.

I disagree with your comment that there are a number of other NCAA coaches that could have led UNC, UCLA, Memphis and Kansas to the Final Four. In my view, coaching star players requires a special skill set, a skill set that very few coaches have. When coaching a team full of stars it is more than just drawing up X's and O's, the coach has to manage egos, try to keep all of the stars happy with enough minutes and touches and most importantly, try to develop some team chemistry. This task becomes especially difficult for the coaches of elite programs that have one and done freshman stars. Each year these coaches have to redesign the focus of their entire offensive system.

This may cause a stir, but I'm not sure Coach Few has the right "make up" to be a coach of an "elite program". I'm not saying he is not an elite coach, I'm simply saying that he does not strike me as "the type". He comes across as a guy who loves basketball, but dreads the part of his job that requires him to interact with the media. Coaching at an elite program requires the coach to be front and center....I don't think that's coach Few's comfort zone. Based on the posts on these boards, a lot of people questioned how he handled Daye's playing time and touches this year. Imagine if he had two or three 5 star recruits to deal with? Few is a loyal guy, and loves to reward the guys that have put their time in with the program (Pendo and Kuso this year). I get the impression that it would go against everything that he believes in to put his team in the hands of a freshman like Rose, Love, Beasley, Mayo or Gordon, regardless of how talented they may be.

great post. often overlooked, but very important angle.

Texas_ZagFan
04-08-2008, 07:39 PM
The fact that fans are unhappy now just making the NCAA tournament and not ever having advanced to the Final Four shows just how far Gonzaga has come. The team and the school is a RECOGNIZED name all across America. Coach Few is able to recruit nationwide because kids know about the Zags history of success and want to be a part of that. So CHEER UP ! With more success each year, there will be lots of talented athletes who will want to be a Zag.

RenoZag
04-08-2008, 07:43 PM
Daye, Gray, Sacre, Pargo and Heytvelt will all spend time on NBA rosters. Guaranteed. Downs has a chance, Bouldin very slim.

Sacre ? Jury's still out. He wouldn't give Zach Gourde a run for his money based on the way he played this past season.

kitzbuel
04-09-2008, 03:50 AM
While I agree with your post in relation to the quality of the talent on the floor night in and night out in K2, I have to disagree with some of your comments in relation to coaching.

I disagree with your comment that there are a number of other NCAA coaches that could have led UNC, UCLA, Memphis and Kansas to the Final Four. In my view, coaching star players requires a special skill set, a skill set that very few coaches have. When coaching a team full of stars it is more than just drawing up X's and O's, the coach has to manage egos, try to keep all of the stars happy with enough minutes and touches and most importantly, try to develop some team chemistry. This task becomes especially difficult for the coaches of elite programs that have one and done freshman stars. Each year these coaches have to redesign the focus of their entire offensive system.

This may cause a stir, but I'm not sure Coach Few has the right "make up" to be a coach of an "elite program". I'm not saying he is not an elite coach, I'm simply saying that he does not strike me as "the type". He comes across as a guy who loves basketball, but dreads the part of his job that requires him to interact with the media. Coaching at an elite program requires the coach to be front and center....I don't think that's coach Few's comfort zone. Based on the posts on these boards, a lot of people questioned how he handled Daye's playing time and touches this year. Imagine if he had two or three 5 star recruits to deal with? Few is a loyal guy, and loves to reward the guys that have put their time in with the program (Pendo and Kuso this year). I get the impression that it would go against everything that he believes in to put his team in the hands of a freshman like Rose, Love, Beasley, Mayo or Gordon, regardless of how talented they may be.
I don't think it has anything to do with a good relationship with the media. Knight had a bad relationship. Elite coaches often do have a public persona that can be used for a recruiting advantage and Knight did have that.

The persona comes with the wins. Not visa versa.

McZag
04-09-2008, 03:57 AM
Daye, Gray, Sacre, Pargo and Heytvelt will all spend time on NBA rosters. Guaranteed. Downs has a chance, Bouldin very slim.

I got news for ya spy. There is no comparison between NBA All-Stars and journey men with guys who spend time on NBA rosters. It's the difference between true NBA talent and skills versus prospects. Gonzaga has had dozens of NBA prospects over the past 15 years. Some have even spent time on NBA rosters. But Gonzaga has never had an NBA All Star playing in K2 waiting for his ticket to come up. That's the difference.

McZag
04-09-2008, 04:05 AM
As to Villanova and Marquette

If you mean the Nova team that shocked the Hoyas in '85, there was no expectation of a F4 or more there. Nova and G'town were conference rivals and the 'Cats just wanted it more.

If you mean the '77 warriors, there is nothing in today's game that relates to that era. Marquette was an independent-no conference affiliation. No shot clock, no 3 point line, no 65 team dance, no comparison.

If you mean the 2004 Marquette F4 run, they had a guy named Dwayne Wade on their team that not only turned out to be an NBA all star but an NBA finals MVP. Again no comparison.

MickMick
04-09-2008, 04:34 AM
I disagree with the notion that Mark Few has difficulty with star players or big egos as compared to other coaches. He would do as well with the Memphis roster or Kansas roster as any other given coach. Put a healthy Dwayne Wade on the current Zag roster and you have the type of team that McZag is talking about.

One genuine star can make a huge difference. Davidson came very close with the champion Kansas team. Zags don't have that kind of player on the team.

thespywhozaggedme
04-09-2008, 06:08 AM
I got news for ya spy. There is no comparison between NBA All-Stars and journey men with guys who spend time on NBA rosters. It's the difference between true NBA talent and skills versus prospects. Gonzaga has had dozens of NBA prospects over the past 15 years. Some have even spent time on NBA rosters. But Gonzaga has never had an NBA All Star playing in K2 waiting for his ticket to come up. That's the difference.

Okay, you lost a little credibility with that one. Very, I mean very few teams in D1 have more than 2 players on their roster that will spend time on an NBA roster we have twice that amount.

McZag
04-09-2008, 06:41 AM
Okay, you lost a little credibility with that one. Very, I mean very few teams in D1 have more than 2 players on their roster that will spend time on an NBA roster we have twice that amount.


Spy, I just see a huge difference between guys who make an NBA roster but have little or no impact and NBA all stars. The D-1 teams with 1 all-star have a much a greater chance of reaching a F4 than teams with 4-5 guys who will simply spend time on rosters. Just goes back to "potential on paper" versus results on the floor.

I do agree with you that having players that get NBA attention, even slightly, is significant.

TexasZagFan
04-09-2008, 06:52 AM
Daye, Gray, Sacre, Pargo and Heytvelt will all spend time on NBA rosters. Guaranteed. Downs has a chance, Bouldin very slim.

Daye - agree
Gray - not sure
Pargo - agree
Heytvelt - at this point, who can really say? If being drafted in the second round means spending time on an NBA roster, then I agree.
Downs - nope...his potential has fizzled as much as Heytvelt's over the past two years. I could see him going to Europe and make a lot of euros, and perhaps make an NBA team five years down the road.
Bouldin - not at this juncture...he's another one heading off to Europe.

That's just my opinion: Daye & Pargo will play meaningful minutes in the NBA, the remainder are good college basketball players. To make the NBA, you have to be a great college basketball player.

Micah and Josh have an opportunity next year to step up and "recast" their current brand. Next year's team has the strong chance to be really special...to be a consistent top-10 team the entire year. These two seniors could really advance in the draft by having excellent years, so long as they take care of their "bidness", as we say down in Texas.

HillBillyZag
04-09-2008, 06:57 AM
Except that I feel Coach Few & his staff will sooner or later get us to the final four and keep Gonzaga competitive. I am known as a pragmatist, but you took it to another level this time McZag.

cjm720
04-09-2008, 07:08 AM
I get the impression that it would go against everything that he [Few] believes in to put his team in the hands of a freshman like Rose, Love, Beasley, Mayo or Gordon, regardless of how talented they may be.

Um, I'm pretty sure Few wouldn't mind giving it a shot!

Overall, I don't agree with the original post. Gonzaga is a program in relative transition. We're now recruiting against the bigger BCS programs, landing 4 and 5-star talent. This is new (started with Bouldin, in my estimation) to Few and Company, and it has no doubt been a challenge for the staff and team in regard to playing time and chemistry, IMO. However, we continue to have one of the strongest non-conference and TV schedules in the country, which will continue to attract better and better recruits which will likely translate into (some) future pros.

What we have going is a chance to win a national title in the future.

BobZag
04-09-2008, 09:48 AM
Remember, Gonzaga has "only" been to ten straight NCAA Tourneys. The very first came in 1995.

GU is a new kid on the block when compared to the powers like UCLA, UK, KU, UNC, Duke, etc. Their tradition goes waaayyy back. While there are some flashes in the pan and exceptions, newbies like the Zags take a while to get there. It's like a newly formed country versus Great Britain or Italy.

It takes time.

I thought the trio of Ammo-Ronny-Batista might do it in 2005, or the Ammo-Batista-Knight team in 2006. Missed tree-throws by Ronny in 05 killed GU, and we won't talk about the Sweet Sixteen nightmare in 06. But the team was very close talent-wise.

It takes time.

Once and Future Zag
04-09-2008, 10:09 AM
BZ, 2006 I think was the team with the best tourney potential so far... sometimes I still wonder if that game actually is over - that I fell into a coma at halftime and in the waking world GU has a NCAA champ banner hanging from K2.

That loss still feels unreal.

UberZagFan
04-09-2008, 12:54 PM
To say that a team has a better chance of winning a NT with a future NBA All-Star and a couple NBA journeyman is not far off. Whether that is an absolute "need" is another question; but the recent history shows you don't have to have that one All-star plus other NBA players--some NBA guys and/or lots of experience/years with the same guys will work:

Too early to tell if the past three champs (FL, UNC and UConn) had all-stars but they all had more than one NBA player.

Before that you have 'Cuse with Carmelo; Maryland with NBA players but no all-star yet (or on the horizon unless Wilcox goes crazy in OK City); Duke with Battier and Dunleavey (no all-stars between them); Mich St. with Cleaves and Bell (no all-stars); UConn with all-star Rip; Kentucky in '98 had no NBA players; AZ had Bibby (no all-stars); and Kent in '96 had two NBA'ers in Walker (All-star) and Ron Mercer (only all-star club he made was at the strip club); UCLA in 95 with a couple players who sniffed the NBA (Edney, Charles O'Bannon and Ed O'Bannon, former finals MVP and current cars salesman); Arkansas in '94 with Corliss "Big Nasty" Williamson (good NBA player with no All-Stars).

On ten NT teams from '94-'03, only three had all-stars.


So yes NT teams have NBA talent but not all (or even most) necessarily have a future NBA All-star.

sharpzag
04-09-2008, 01:49 PM
Even a number two seed seems a far reach for the program right now, since the highest we've been given was a three seed in 2006 and then we suffered that meltdown that I try not to remember...ever.

GU was a 2 seed in 2004

GoBulldogs
04-09-2008, 02:11 PM
Its hard to remember this far back, but I keep hearing these old folks talk about how Gonzaga was oh what was it.....like 3 minutes from the final 4 one year (before losing to the eventual national champs.) While it will take a lot of luck and toughness (two things that the 1999 team had an abundance of), I don't think that it is impossible to think that we could win a national title any year.

BobZag
04-09-2008, 02:49 PM
While I enjoy warm weather as much or more than anyone, I've never really bought the argument that warm weather is a big factor in what teams recruit the best or are the best. Granted, it can't hurt, but let's face it, 120 degrees for months on end in Arizona is not my idea of paradise, and the humidity in the south can be downright miserable.

Michigan State
Ohio State
UConn
Syracuse
Xavier
Georgetown
Pitt

Even Kansas gets icy cold in the winters.

CDC84
04-09-2008, 02:49 PM
The best chance that Gonzaga has had to make a final 4 was the 2004/05 season. Even if Gonzaga had beaten UCLA in the sweet 16 in 2006, they still had to get by a very powerful Memphis team who had beaten them earlier in the season.

The 2005/06 crew not only had Ammo, Turiaf and Batista on the same team, but they also were in by far the weakest region of the tournament which saw it's best team, the #2 seed Wake Forest (not the #1 seed UW), get upset in the second round. If GU had just pulled out that Texas Tech game, they had 3 teams sitting in the Albuquerque regional - Louisville, UW and West VA - whose frontlines could've been exploited by Batista and Turiaf. I would have had a lot of confidence in Gonzaga's ability to beat any of those teams. Keep in mind....that Gonzaga team had by far the most accomplished non-league resume of any Zag team. They beat 3 Top 10 teams in the same season.

deathchina
04-09-2008, 08:02 PM
"Before that you have 'Cuse with Carmelo; Maryland with NBA players but no all-star yet (or on the horizon unless Wilcox goes crazy in OK City); Duke with Battier and Dunleavey (no all-stars between them); Mich St. with Cleaves and Bell (no all-stars); UConn with all-star Rip; Kentucky in '98 had no NBA players; AZ had Bibby (no all-stars); and Kent in '96 had two NBA'ers in Walker (All-star) and Ron Mercer (only all-star club he made was at the strip club); UCLA in 95 with a couple players who sniffed the NBA (Edney, Charles O'Bannon and Ed O'Bannon, former finals MVP and current cars salesman); Arkansas in '94 with Corliss "Big Nasty" Williamson (good NBA player with no All-Stars)."

couple quick points.

1. Duke also had Jay Williams, who was starting to come around before his horrific injury. And a certain Carlos Boozer, who is an NBA stud in case you haven't heard. Chris Duhon as well.

2. Mich State also had Morris Peterson, who's had a pretty solid NBA career.

3. Kentucky in 98 had Scott Padgett, Nazr Mohammed and Jamal Magloire, who have all spent significant time in the NBA. Magloire was an all-star one year as well, if I'm not mistaken. A couple other guys on the team played in the NBA.

4. The 1996 Kentucky team had a STAGGERING amount of talent. Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson, Nazr Mohammed and Walter McCarty all had long productive NBA careers. Mark Pope, Jeff Sheppard, and Wayne Turner also played in the NBA. That's 9 guys on the roster who played in the NBA.

UberZagFan
04-10-2008, 10:02 AM
1. Duke also had Jay Williams, who was starting to come around before his horrific injury. And a certain Carlos Boozer, who is an NBA stud in case you haven't heard. Chris Duhon as well.

2. Mich State also had Morris Peterson, who's had a pretty solid NBA career.

3. Kentucky in 98 had Scott Padgett, Nazr Mohammed and Jamal Magloire, who have all spent significant time in the NBA. Magloire was an all-star one year as well, if I'm not mistaken. A couple other guys on the team played in the NBA.

4. The 1996 Kentucky team had a STAGGERING amount of talent. Antoine Walker, Ron Mercer, Tony Delk, Derek Anderson, Nazr Mohammed and Walter McCarty all had long productive NBA careers. Mark Pope, Jeff Sheppard, and Wayne Turner also played in the NBA. That's 9 guys on the roster who played in the NBA.

DC:

1. Yeah, Uber missed Boozer--definitely a high level NBA player.

2. Morris Peterson---solid but not All-Star

3/4. The Kentucky teams from '96-98 did have a ton of talent and yes, Magloire was an All-Star one year.

But really the point is many, if not most of those teams, had NBA talent but not necessarily NBA all-star talent. Uber agrees with the initial post that you need NBA talent to win--but saying you need an NBA All-Star is going a bit far--some forget how hard it is to be an NBA All-Star and how few players become All-Stars (especially how few college players have become all-stars over the past decade).

ROOFnZAG
04-11-2008, 09:37 AM
Back to the Duke team...

Boozer was an All Star this season...
Battier is on Team USA and is often considered one of the most important players on that team...

beatProgram
04-11-2008, 10:12 AM
Kansas State looks quizzically in your direction, and wonders how your axiom failed them.

USC wasn't available for comment.