Grantland Power Poll has list of all-time best Orange teams

[HOFCeluck]

Just so I'm not offering an empty complaint without some contribution of my own:

He calls this a list of the "best Syracuse teams ever," but leaves off two retroactive national champions (1918 and 1926 teams that combined for 35-2 record) and the Bing/Boeheim team that went to the Elite Eight and almost averaged 100 points per game.

Then he leaves off 1986 (which has to be darn close to anyone's top 5) and 1988.

Then he includes 2013. Is that even in our top 15?

1990 and 1987 are probably too high.

Good find on 1994, though. That actually was an underrated team, as discussed in a recent thread on here.

1987 Is my personal "best ever."

 

[OttoMets]

1987 Is my personal "best ever."

One problem with outsiders compiling these polls (other than their tendency to overrate more recent teams) is their preference for more familiar players.

To your average national pop culture/sports writer, Billy Owens > Howard Triche.

You witnessed a team that was better than the sum of its parts; that's something that someone who's scanning rosters and looking at records can't recognize.

 

[Shawn91111]

It's understandable that an outsider would give the edge to the '12 team. From strictly a results standpoint it was a little better, didn't lose at home, was 2-0 vs L'ville instead of 0-2...
But I don't think it's a coincidence that most of us fans are saying '10 was better. How much of the L'ville results was just Kuric making a higher % of the same shots in '10? We were lucky in a couple of those '12 home games (vs WVU & G'town). Ya Cincy got hot in the BET but Waiters was also in 'NBA Jam' mode or else we would've gotten blown out...with Fab. Plus Jospeh's knees/legs at the end of the year looked like Dan Marino's circa 1999.



Fair question. I was only 8 myself so not really sure. I think it was just a combination of not being that great defensively and other teams being more stacked as well. But we did lose to Pitt/Nova/Uconn/St John's teams who I don't think had many pros (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).
Definitely our best team on paper imo...
I'm guessing this was roughly when the "JB rolls the ball out there" crowd became really vocal.

The 88-89 team lost to teams they shouldnt have, especially Nova when Thompson and Owens didnt have great games and 3 starters fouled out. But teams like St Johns had Williams and Sealy, UConn with Robinson and Smith. Just lack of focus especially during the later half of the games they lost. They out of all 8 losses only 1 or 2 were by more than 6 points. They lost 4 games by 3 or less. Just lack of focus

 

[Shawn91111]

One problem with outsiders compiling these polls (other than their tendency to overrate more recent teams) is their preference for more familiar players.

To your average national pop culture/sports writer, Billy Owens > Howard Triche.

You witnessed a team that was better than the sum of its parts; that's something that someone who's scanning rosters and looking at records can't recognize.

He wasnt?

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

I have a genuine question about the 1989 team (I was born in 1982 and wasn't old enough to remember it) - if it was so great, then why did they lose 8 games? Did we suffer from injuries?

That Illini team is regarded as their best ever, so not one of the JB losses that keeps me up at night. It was an epic up and down, well played game, and thay had a couple of good pros on their squad, like Turner Kendall Gill, Kenny Nick Anderson, and Kenny Battle, who was unstoppable down the stretch. Also Stephen "Posters are being sold in the Lobby!" Bardo was on that team, a really great college team that they ran into, when all players still stayed for all 4 years.

I remember watching it on spring break and it was entertaining to say the least.

 

[Eric15]

There is no doubt in my mind that the 2000 team could have went to the Final Four if they had just beat Georgetown in the BET quarters that year. We had a very talented and well-balanced roster with Hart/Bland/Damone/Blackwell/Etan starting and Shump/DeShaun/Griffin/Duany off the bench. Losing that BET game dropped us to a 4 seed in Michigan State's region, when in reality we were a 2/3 seed caliber team.

 

[OttoMets]

He wasnt?

No, of course he was a much more talented and well-rounded player (Owens, that is), but that doesn't necessarily mean that the 1989 team was better than 1987.

I think some non-fan writers can get blinded by the stars; a lot of our best teams have featured role players. I was addressing doc's opinion about '87; an argument can be made for either of those teams, but I think the teams without the big-name guys like Owens are often overlooked on lists like these.

 

[senorpalmer]

Results have to count for something in this discussion. The 89 team had some great names, but 10-6 in conference, and a failure to win a Big East tournament or make a Final 4 cannot = best SU team ever. Its impossible to know how a team from 25 yrs ago would fare vs a modern day team. I would argue that the 89 team was nothing to write home about defensively. It also had little perimeter shooting beyond Matt Roe (though the 3 pointer wasn't utilized as often as it is today). I would also argue that despite having two outstanding forwards, that the team was undersized. The traditional, textbook center was more prevalent in those days, and the only other guy on the roster who could offer anything in the middle was freshman Rich Manning. The team had some great pieces but they didn't fit together perfectly.

Compare that last statement with the 2010 team, where the parts complemented each other beautifully. Maybe not the best collection of sheer talent ever at SU, but good at every position and just about every facet you could think of.

2012 is indeed underrated. One regular season loss, and 3 losses total, best winning % of any JB era team. Fab Melo may have left a bad taste for many and that may contribute to some downplaying how good that squad was.

 

[Brian Orange]

I can't speak for any teams pre-1999, but as far as 2009 vs 2012, I always thought 2012 was viewed a bit differently than 2009 because people liked the '09 team so much more.

 

[Shawn91111]

Results have to count for something in this discussion. The 89 team had some great names, but 10-6 in conference, and a failure to win a Big East tournament or make a Final 4 cannot = best SU team ever. Its impossible to know how a team from 25 yrs ago would fare vs a modern day team. I would argue that the 89 team was nothing to write home about defensively. It also had little perimeter shooting beyond Matt Roe (though the 3 pointer wasn't utilized as often as it is today). I would also argue that despite having two outstanding forwards, that the team was undersized. The traditional, textbook center was more prevalent in those days, and the only other guy on the roster who could offer anything in the middle was freshman Rich Manning. The team had some great pieces but they didn't fit together perfectly.

Compare that last statement with the 2010 team, where the parts complemented each other beautifully. Maybe not the best collection of sheer talent ever at SU, but good at every position and just about every facet you could think of.

2012 is indeed underrated. One regular season loss, and 3 losses total, best winning % of any JB era team. Fab Melo may have left a bad taste for many and that may contribute to some downplaying how good that squad was.

Not like the teams of the last few years limiting opponents to fewer points but the 89 team created a lot of steals, blocks creating a lot of turnovers and getting out and running.

What you said about the lack of size in the middle can be said about the 2010 team. Once Arinze went down, they lacked the size inside

 

[BuffOrange]

Reading thru the season recaps on orangehoops, the description of every loss from '88-89 reads something like:
"Coleman did work with 25 and 15, but an abysmal 9-24 from the FT line was their undoing...". :bang:

Interesting article on Rak today...Hopkins was saying practicing mid-range jumpers helps w/ FT's.

 

[senorpalmer]

Not like the teams of the last few years limiting opponents to fewer points but the 89 team created a lot of steals, blocks creating a lot of turnovers and getting out and running.

What you said about the lack of size in the middle can be said about the 2010 team. Once Arinze went down, they lacked the size inside

Rick Jackson would disagree, as would I. But obviously that team took a hit when AO got hurt. For the sake of this discussion, I'm envisioning a healthy AO.

 

[billsin01]

That was awesome. One question: anyone know who the play-by-play guy was for the hall game starting around the 6 minute mark? I remember that voice and always loved that guy as a kid. Did the BC games a lot too.

 

[BuffOrange]

Dave Simms?

 

[doc05]

I can't speak for any teams pre-1999, but as far as 2009 vs 2012, I always thought 2012 was viewed a bit differently than 2009 because people liked the '09 team so much more.

I agree - it almost seems like the 2012 squad is underrated on this forum. And in my opinion that was a better team than the 2010 team. The problem was Kentucky was a definite favorite that year (with Cuse being 1B with the most legit shot to beat them), whereas there really wasn't a dominant team in 2010.

On PAPER, the 87-88 squad should have won the title...but that was a severely underachieving team. Won the BE tournament - but losing to Rhode Island in the second round was a travesty (and they had some serious What losses that year). A team with Sherman, Seikaly, Coleman, and Thompson should have won it all (that was the KU - Danny Manning year).

 

[OttoMets]

I agree - it almost seems like the 2012 squad is underrated on this forum. And in my opinion that was a better team than the 2010 team. The problem was Kentucky was a definite favorite that year (with Cuse being 1B with the most legit shot to beat them), whereas there really wasn't a dominant team in 2010.

On PAPER, the 87-88 squad should have won the title...but that was a severely underachieving team. Won the BE tournament - but losing to Rhode Island in the second round was a travesty (and they had some serious What losses that year). A team with Sherman, Seikaly, Coleman, and Thompson should have won it all (that was the KU - Danny Manning year).

The year of the free throws. We lost 9 games all year; 8 of those were by a total of 17 points (one in overtime, three -- including the Big East regular season championship -- by one, two by two, our season-ender by three, and one by four).

Too many talented starters were liabilities from the line, and we went 99-170 (.582) in those eight losses, missing well more than the margin of defeat in each one.

We deserved to be preseason number one - that was a great team that did nearly everything well. But we didn't shoot free throws well enough for that team to reach its potential. Unfortunate waste of a very good group.

 

[OrangeDW]

I have a genuine question about the 1989 team (I was born in 1982 and wasn't old enough to remember it) - if it was so great, then why did they lose 8 games? Did we suffer from injuries?

I'm pretty sure Douglas got hurt and missed a game that they lost, and Coleman played but was severely limited by an injury when they lost in the BET finals to that mid-major that runs the Princeton offense.

 

[RF2044]

I have a genuine question about the 1989 team (I was born in 1982 and wasn't old enough to remember it) - if it was so great, then why did they lose 8 games? Did we suffer from injuries?

Because we weren't a good outside shooting team, and we sucked at the FT line. Rhetorically, it seemed like we lost a lot of close games--not exaggerating, several 2-3 point losses--where we'd dominate the other team in many respects, but go 15-27 from the FT line.

This was the ultimate fast break team, triggered by the ultimate up tempo point guard. Rebounding. Versatility. Everything except shooting [and yes, I am aware of Matt Roe's statistics / three point %, but increasingly as that year went on he got parked on the bench while Dave Johnson got run].

Best team we've ever had, pound for pound, IMO.

 

[doc05]

Because we weren't a good outside shooting team, and we sucked at the FT line. Rhetorically, it seemed like we lost a lot of close games--not exaggerating, several 2-3 point losses--where we'd dominate the other team in many respects, but go 15-27 from the FT line.

This was the ultimate fast break team, triggered by the ultimate up tempo point guard. Rebounding. Versatility. Everything except shooting [and yes, I am aware of Matt Roe's statistics / three point %, but increasingly as that year went on he got parked on the bench while Dave Johnson got run].

Best team we've ever had, pound for pound, IMO.

Ah - the Illinois game in the Elite 8 still eats me up to this day. Illinois was great - but we totally had them (up 11 at one point if I remember correctly). And I think they got worn out to some degree because they went to overtime against Mizzou in the Sweet 16, and just kind of faltered at the end of that game. That's another team that could/should have won it all. There was no way that team was losing to either Seton Hall or Michigan in the FF.

 

[Rocco]

2010 (AO doesn't get hurt, we win the NC; I miss Rautins)
2003 (explosive offensively)
2013 (best zone ever; you refs)
2014 (Ennis has been unreal, Fair a steady ship and Cooney/Grant/Rak playing well)
2012 (with Fab, no question we would've been in the Final 4)

Too young to honestly rank these teams:
1987
1989

Boeheim made a great move not retiring 5 years ago like he said he was contemplating. What a 5 year run.

 

[NortheastOHSUfan]

Thanks DW. I really enjoyed the fast break destruction we used to inflict.

 

[NortheastOHSUfan]

Thanks DW. I really enjoyed the fast break destruction we used to inflict.

 

[NortheastOHSUfan]

Always thought the 89 team that lost to Illinois was the best ever. Just talent everywhere.

I agree 100% Shawn. That team could do some serious damage. So much fun to watch and we really had teams fear us.

 

[JoeSU]

Basketball porn.
Loved it.

 

[realorange]

Understand when JB said we don't have any great teams, he was saying that we have a lot of good teams but none that compare with the 80s+ teams that had four year NBA types.