NCAA Men’s Basketball Tournament Thread
- Thread starter nycfan
- Start date
- Replies: 733
- Views: 11K
- Sports
Who is claiming that d00k 2025 is the best team ever? I’d just rather have had their results than ours.
d00k 2002 also had an outstanding team - 31-4 (13-3); Ranked #1, #2, or #3 all season; 2nd in the ACC; ACC Tourney Champs; Sweet 16. Disappointing end to an excellent season. UNC was 8-20. I’d rather have had d00k’s season.
- Messages
- 1,191
I agree that his defense was suspect and that was the main concern everyone had. His rebounding, however, was fine for a player of his position and role (5.5 rpg his junior year) and his shooting % was very good his junior year (.428 from 3 / .523 from 2). While his 3-point % wasn’t particularly good his freshman and sophomore years (it wasn’t awful either), he shot 3s at a lower volume then. He did lead his conference in 2-point % his freshman year.
While the WCC may not have been the toughest conference, Gonzaga did play a strong non-conference schedule that included— among other ranked and/or high major conference opponents— UConn and Memphis, who finished the season ranked 2nd and 4th, respectively. And Morrison really helped make a name for himself by putting up good numbers against those ranked and/or high major conference opponents (25 points and 9 rebounds vs. Maryland, 43 points and 7 rebounds vs. Michigan State, 43 points vs. Washington, 25 points vs. OK State and UVA, 34 points vs. Memphis). He finished his season in the Sweet 16 with 24 points on 10-17 shooting in a 2-point loss to UCLA, who finished the season with a #7 ranking and reached the national championship game.
And as far as him not taking showers, that makes him sound like a great locker room guy. More room for the players in the showers.
Last edited:
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 6,773
His per minute rebound rate was poor, and for a forward he really should have done better.
Look, I get the argument for Morrison. Had he been picked at #10, I would have thought it a bad pick but not outrageously so because the opportunity cost is lower. Personally, I wouldn't have taken him in the top 15, and though it was a long time ago and my memory is not perfectly accurate, that's my best recollection of my position on him.
He wasn't like Rafael Araujo, who was picked #8 having zero chance to succeed in the NBA. I guess he had a slight chance. And it turned out not to be as bad as selecting Bennett #1 (though that was an especially weak draft).
In a draft that weak, it’s not hard to understand taking Morrison at #3. You can shuffle most of those guys from the first and second rounds and it wouldn’t matter much. Very low impact draft.
And, again, #3 was justified by his rookie season relative to his peers — 4th in ROY, second team all-rookie. Relatively, it’s a solid season. Then his ACL injury, which it is very reasonable to infer, killed his chances of improving the way many rookies with solid seasons do.
But I don’t doubt that you will continue with your numbered responses going round… and round… and round… and round… with neither of us saying anything new.
rodoheel
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,765
Morrison was extremely bad as a rookie. As I said before, he had negative win shares and a PER of 7. He just got lucky the rookie class in general was so bad, few other guys stood out above him. Also he played the most minutes of anyone in the rookie class, which made his counting stats look better than they were.
You’re saying somewhat the same thing I am, only you’re discounting the term “relative” that I used and you didn’t, despite you describing a relative comparison anyway. Round and round we go.
aGDevil2k
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,264
I get the argument on Maryland with JWill. Arizona? Nah. They just sucked.
aGDevil2k
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,264
I dont think even our fans were claiming that. Well Not rational ones. 99 was the best Duke team ever...and they tripped at the end. Literally.
IMO 1991 UNLV was the best team I ever saw play.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 6,773
Part of what rubs me the wrong way about your posts, and I think others feel this way also, is that you accuse people of bias for no reason. I have a view of Adam Morrison that differs from yours. It's unclear why you assume that's because I'm being irrational about it. Why would I be biased for or against Adam Morrison?
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 6,773
1995 was fun but that team wasn't amazing.
The 98 Heels team was truly amazing. I'm with you on the most fun part -- I don't think I've ever enjoyed a basketball game more than UNC Duke that year at the Dean Dome. And I think it was definitely the best starting lineup ever. Well, the best first five. The team's fatal flaw was no bench.
But I also think if Okulaja had found his shooting form of freshman or senior year -- hell, even his sophomore year -- we would have been very, very hard to beat. The ability for defenders to sag off Okulaja was the Achilles Heel.
Oh, the irony…
Ignoring the context of it being such a weak and forgettable draft, one of if not THE worst of the era… while initially claiming he was one of the worst draft picks of all-time, which you did — that’s a huge factor you keep ignoring that makes your assessment incomplete (at best) given the extenuating circumstances. If you want to call that “irrational” (which I didn’t)… if the shoe fits.
It’s not like he was drafted over a clear-cut can’t-miss prospect (e.g. Oden/KD), since there weren’t any in that draft (and please don’t give me Tyrus f’ing Thomas like he was some can’t-miss stud, or even Brandon Roy who most of the country hadn’t even seen play). That weak draft alone keeps a guy like him (or the Anthony Bennett’s of the world) from reasonably being listed among the worst draft picks of all-time. Along with performing among the top of that rookie class. There’s nothing to lose in drafts like that, so if you’re unable to deal the picks then it’s pretty damn reasonable to take a flyer and cross your fingers. If people want to neener-neener you years later, that’s ignoring the circumstances, unwarranted, and revisionist. And likely comes from a bias. If it doesn’t in your case, fine.
Go back and read my original points. “He gets a bad rap, IMO…” out of balance relative to all extenuating circumstances, including his injury. The fairly innocuous claim and points I made hold up just as well despite all the advanced stats anyone can waste their time dragging out. The context is what absolves him (and MJ, effectively) from being reasonably listed among the worst draft picks of all-time.
If you disagree, oh well. Have at it, but I’ve said all there is to say, way, way too many times. Which is a realization that seems like it’d be foreign to you, but would serve you just as well.