I tried bracketing the top players per decade from JB's tenure as HC

[Col. Bleep]

Those Santifer/Rautins/Bruin teams were so much fun to watch, even if not as successful as other JB teams. The 1981 BE championship game (at the Dome) was electric.

Still have the newspaper headline: "Cinderella Wore Orange" after Leo Rautin's tip in the 3rd OT.

It's not possible to have a "best SU players" list without Leo.
Forget stats.
He had an almost unparalleled set of skills.
Very few played the game better.
Terrifically talented at every aspect of the game.
He had three career triple doubles...no SU player besides Dave Bing ever had more than one.
And Leo had two of them against BE foes BC and G-town... not cupcakes.

Who knows the numbers he would have put up if his knees weren't bad?

 

[sufandu]

Man I miss the '80's. We'll never see that again. Blue chip players that we got to enjoy for 3-4 years. Such a fun era.

 

[OrangeAl]

Man I miss the '80's. We'll never see that again. Blue chip players that we got to enjoy for 3-4 years. Such a fun era.

SU basketball will never have that family feel as long as our top players breeze through town and leave as undeveloped talent. They arrive as boys and they leave as boys.

 

[rrlbees]

Triche arrived as a fully formed all-around player, showed up every night for four years, played through injury, and found a way to contribute even when struggling with his shot. Give me one or two of those guys on every team and I'd be thrilled.

I'd take Triche over scoop for 2 reasons. Triche could play either guard spot but more importantly, he was far better defensively, which is being overlooked.

 

[sufandu]

SU basketball will never have that family feel as long as our top players breeze through town and leave as undeveloped talent. They arrive as boys and they leave as boys.

It was one thing when Melo left. It was clear he was on a different level. Even when Flynn left I was disappointed but I got it. He took over games at times and was an electric player, often the best one on the floor. But when guys that are role players, and many nights are the third best player on their team, are leaving after one or two years, it just kills my interest.

I don't blame the players. I'd become an instant millionaire too, if given the chance. But that doesn't mean I have to like the current culture.

 

[OrangeDW]

I'd take Triche over scoop for 2 reasons. Triche could play either guard spot but more importantly, he was far better defensively, which is being overlooked.

Yup. The number of Scoop "close-outs" that consisted of him standing on his feet flat footed with one arm up a half second too late drove me nuts. That's how I play D in pickup runs when I'm tired.

That said, I liked Scoop a lot. Triche was the better overall player though.

 

[OrangeDW]

Man I miss the '80's. We'll never see that again. Blue chip players that we got to enjoy for 3-4 years. Such a fun era.

Every school can say this. But yeah. 80's and first half of the 90s...the hyped up and great matchups between loaded and experienced teams that had developed over the years and that most everyone watching knew all about...we won't see that again.

 

[sufandu]

Every school can say this. But yeah. 80's and first half of the 90s...the hyped up and great matchups between loaded and experienced teams that had developed over the years and that most everyone watching knew all about...we won't see that again.

Absolutely. I knew so many more players from other teams back then.

 

[NateW]

I'd take Scoop over Triche and just abt everyone on that 10's list besides MAYBE Dion, CJ, Arinze

Scoop is ridiculously underrated on this board.

 

[Trueblue25]

Would take Triche over scoop every time, talent wise.

Scoop was a leader though.

 

[pfister1]

Would take Triche over scoop every time, talent wise.

Scoop was a leader though.

I would take Scoop over Triche. Scoop was a leader and generally came through in tough situations. I always felt like Triche was a great talent, but didn't consistently fulfill his promise and never reached the production level that I thought he was capable of. That's not to say I don't think he was an outstanding player at SU, because he was.

 

[OttoMets]

I would take Scoop over Triche. Scoop was a leader and generally came through in tough situations. I always felt like Triche was a great talent, but didn't consistently fulfill his promise and never reached the production level that I thought he was capable of. That's not to say I don't think he was an outstanding player at SU, because he was.

Also, the reality of Triche's ball security matches the myth surrounding Scoop's. For a kid who allegedly had point guard skills, he turned the ball over a lot.

 

[Cusefan0307]

FWIW Scoop's Turnover percentage was higher than Triche's when he was here 21% to 17. Triche also had a higher Box Plus Minus. His JR and Senior year were better than any season Scoop had here.

 

[IthacaMatt]

FWIW Scoop's Turnover percentage was higher than Triche's when he was here 21% to 17. Triche also had a higher Box Plus Minus. His JR and Senior year were better than any season Scoop had here.

You tend to make more turnovers when you are trying to make a pass to create an opportunity. Triche was the secondary ball handler most of the time, so of course he would have fewer turnovers. How many assists did he create compared to his turnover percentage, and how many did Scoop create? That would tell us the full story.

 

[Cusefan0307]

You tend to make more turnovers when you are trying to make a pass to create an opportunity. Triche was the secondary ball handler most of the time, so of course he would have fewer turnovers. How many assists did he create compared to his turnover percentage, and how many did Scoop create? That would tell us the full story.

Fair point, but their usage is identical. You are correct that scoop had a slightly higher assist percentage, but Triche's TO% was lower than most of our big's those years. I think JB trusted him with the ball more against pressure than say MCW. There were times MCW was taken off the point against teams like Louisville/Nova because his pocket got picked a lot.

 

[Fat tire 13]

Still have the newspaper headline: "Cinderella Wore Orange" after Leo Rautin's tip in the 3rd OT.

It's not possible to have a "best SU players" list without Leo.
Forget stats.
He had an almost unparalleled set of skills.
Very few played the game better.
Terrifically talented at every aspect of the game.
He had three career triple doubles...no SU player besides Dave Bing ever had more than one.
And Leo had two of them against BE foes BC and G-town... not cupcakes.

Who knows the numbers he would have put up if his knees weren't bad?

Don't forget the unparalleled hair too

 

[Alsacs]

Bump as it is the offseason now.
Does anyone move up in the 2010s now?

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I don't see Warwick

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

The majority of your career counted as the decade I put you in.

1970s-80s bracket
1. Pearl Washington
2. Derrick Coleman
3. Sherman Douglas
4. Billy Owens
5. Roosevelt Bouie
6. Rony Seikaly
7. Stephen Thompson
8. Louis Orr

1990s bracket
1. John Wallace
2. Laurence Moten
3. Etan Thomas
4. Jason Hart
5. Adrian Autry
6. Otis Hill
7. Todd Burgan
8. Dave Johnson(originally Mike Hopkins)

2000s
1 . Carmelo Anthony
2. Hakim Warrick
3. Gerry McNamara
4. Jonny Flynn
5. Preston Shumpert
6. Eric Devendorf
7. Demetris Nichols(I put u before)
8. Josh Pace

2010s
1. Dion Waiters
2. Michael Carter-Williams
3. Wes Johnson
4. CJ Fair
5. Michael Gbinije
6. Arinze Onuaku
7. Rick Jackson
8. Scoop Jardine


Are there any obvious misses?

Rak needs to be in there, one of the Philly cousins needs to be bumped. And G needs to move up.

 

[sufandu]

Rak needs to be in there, one of the Philly cousins needs to be bumped. And G needs to move up.

I don't know. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not sure. I feel like Jackson and Scoop were good for a greater span of time and Rak had one year that was better than any one year either of those two had. Which gets weighed heavier?

 

[Trueblue25]

Kueth over Pace?

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

I don't know. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not sure. I feel like Jackson and Scoop were good for a greater span of time and Rak had one year that was better than any one year either of those two had. Which gets weighed heavier?

yep, it's a judgement call. I think Rak's development over 4 years, and the way he carried the program as a Sr gives him the nod over Scoop, who always had a better supporting cast.

 

[sufandu]

yep, it's a judgement call. I think Rak's development over 4 years, and the way he carried the program as a Sr gives him the nod over Scoop, who always had a better supporting cast.

I can see that.

 

[OttoMets]

yep, it's a judgement call. I think Rak's development over 4 years, and the way he carried the program as a Sr gives him the nod over Scoop, who always had a better supporting cast.

Rakeem had a season of excellence. Very few SU players have had that. Though Scoop was more valuable to more teams with a lot more wins. But I can see your argument.

 

[AlaskaSU]

Sweet D, and Z come to mind. And, of course, Kid Kohls.