Are you worried about MD getting tired?

[Avsfan]

Why don't we just name Wilcox, or Simpkins, or Terrance Morris...hell Gilchrist (those are just the first few names that popped in my head)

Top 5 Terps:

Bias

Dixon

Smith

Lucas

McMillan

It's not about talent...its not about importance....it those two things combined. I'll take my 5 and stand proud, any day of week....I just think Greivis falls a bit short (unless we go on some magical run this year in March)

[Birds of B'more]

Well, he was clearly "important." It's just that his post mortem importance wasn't positive.

Unless you think of all the kids who stayed away from drugs because of what happened to Lenny. While not entirely quantifiable, it's both important and something positive to emerge from a tragedy.

[Birds of B'more]

Why don't we just name Wilcox, or Simpkins, or Terrance Morris...hell Gilchrist (those are just the first few names that popped in my head)

Top 5 Terps:

Bias

Dixon

Smith

Lucas

McMillan

It's not about talent...its not about importance....it those two things combined. I'll take my 5 and stand proud, any day of week....I just think Greivis falls a bit short (unless we go on some magical run this year in March)

If the objective is to put the best team on the floor, give me:

Smith

Williams

Bias

Vasquez

Lucas

[Lucky Jim]

Unless you think of all the kids who stayed away from drugs because of what happened to Lenny. While not entirely quantifiable' date=' it's both important and something positive to emerge from a tragedy.[/quote']

It's not quantifiable at all, that I know of. But more importantly, that's not an importance to the Maryland program.

[Birds of B'more]

It's not quantifiable at all, that I know of. But more importantly, that's not an importance to the Maryland program.

Not quantifiable, but you never know either. Maybe Len Bias was one of the reasons Juan Dixon never went down the same road as his parents?

[mweb]

I was a big Joe Smith fan but Vasquez has been a more valuable player and a better player for MD. His stats speak for themselves. I would also put him in front of Lucas or at least even with him. Only Dixon and Bias were clearly better IMO. I think you're evaluating him more as an NBA talent rather than based on his contribution while at MD. That is a reasonable thing to discuss but I don't think it belongs in this particular discussion. Just my 2 cents...

Vasquez may get the edge over Joe due to amount of years played, but he is not a better player than Smith was. We're talking about the national player of the year here. Averaged 20.2 points, 10.7 boards, and 3 blocks while shooting 55% during his two years. He also was the star player of the team that brought MD back on the map and in his second year, led the team to a better record than this years team, at least up to this point.

Edit: Well I see this has already been pretty much covered.

[mweb]

No disrespect to Lucas of course, and clearly he was a terrific player..I guess my "issue" is more with Dixon over Vazquez. Unless most just hold that special place in their hearts for Dixon (which is absolutely understandable) based on those teams and that era of Terps Basketball. Like I said, I'd take Vazquez over Dixon in a pickup game 100 times out of 100.

Juan was a great scorer, but did play with three draft picks including a lottery guy. I can't think of one Maryland player Greivis has played with who would sniff the league. Did he play with Strawberry?

First of all, Lucas had a better career than Vasquez and was likley more talented given his reputation.

Concerning Dixon, well we aren't picking guys for a pickup team here. Dixon was the better college basketball player imo. We're talking about an all american here.

One thing to consider about the teammates angle is Greivis is able to dominate the ball which suits his game. That helps his stats other than FG%. You put him on that MD instead of Dixon and his numbers go down and that team doesn't win the title imo. Put him on the team instead of Blake and they have a good shot at winning it all, but again, you would see a reduction in his numbers and Juan would still be considered the top guy imo.

[Avsfan]

Juan was one of the top 10 players of the decade in the ACC...Greivis not so much.

Juan was really special, and not to just people who were MD fans during those 4 years.

[mweb]

Juan was one of the top 10 players of the decade in the ACC...Greivis not so much.

Juan was really special, and not to just people who were MD fans during those 4 years.

Yeah, Juan was the clear best player on two Final 4 teams including the title team, Greivis has been the best player on bubble teams and now a team that doing very well, but in a weak ACC, without beating anyone that is currently ranked, and is obviously unlikely to reach the Final 4.

I know that doesn't prove much, but I think it's hard to be the clear best player on back to back tremendous teams without being a truly great college basketball player.

[Birds of B'more]

Yeah, Juan was the clear best player on two Final 4 teams including the title team, Greivis has been the best player on bubble teams and now a team that doing very well, but in a weak ACC, without beating anyone that is currently ranked, and is obviously unlikely to reach the Final 4.

I know that doesn't prove much, but I think it's hard to be the clear best player on back to back tremendous teams without being a truly great college basketball player.

Steve Blake > Eric Hayes

Byron Mouton = Sean Mosely

Chris Wilcox > Landon Milbourne

Lonny Baxter > Jordan Williams (at least for this year)

Drew Nicholas > Adrian Bowie

Tahj Holden > Dino Gregory

Ryan Randle > James Padgett

Basketball is a team game. When comparing one player from one era to another player from another era, you have to look at more than just wins and losses.

[mweb]

Steve Blake > Eric Hayes

Byron Mouton = Sean Mosely

Chris Wilcox > Landon Milbourne

Lonny Baxter > Jordan Williams (at least for this year)

Drew Nicholas > Adrian Bowie

Tahj Holden > Dino Gregory

Ryan Randle > James Padgett

Basketball is a team game. When comparing one player from one era to another player from another era' date=' you have to look at more than just wins and losses.[/quote']

And of course I've done that.

As I said before, if Greivis has a much better team around him, he doesn't get to dominate the ball nearly as much as he does or get as many rebounds as he does. Thus his numbers go down some, although likely would have a higher shooting %.

Dixon was a first team all american, don't think that will be the case for Vasquez.

[Birds of B'more]

And of course I've done that.

As I said before, if Greivis has a much better team around him, he doesn't get to dominate the ball nearly as much as he does or get as many rebounds as he does. Thus his numbers go down some, although likely would have a higher shooting %.

Dixon was a first team all american, don't think that will be the case for Vasquez.

True, Vasquez's style is much more suited for this team than the 2001-02 teams, and vice-versa for Dixon. In the case of those two, I'm just looking at who has more pure talent, and I lean towards Vasquez. Taking into account the intangibles, it's much more even and may favor Dixon a little.

[mweb]

True' date=' Vasquez's style is much more suited for this team than the 2001-02 teams, and vice-versa for Dixon. In the case of those two, I'm just looking at who has more pure talent, and I lean towards Vasquez. Taking into account the intangibles, it's much more even and may favor Dixon a little.[/quote']

I think when people argue who has the most talent, they're often not consistent from person to person on how they define talent. For instance, SG mentioned recently that Mason Plumlee is the most talented player between MD and Duke. I guess that may be the case depending on how you define talent, but if he's the answer, than that's not a debate I care to participate in. I care about who is or was the better player.

I think Dixon was the better player.

If we're just going by how most seem to measure talent, maybe Vazquez has the edge, but at the same time, Chris Wilcox beats out Baxter in that comparison, and lots of guys beat out various undersized or less than athletic players that were very good college players.

Talent is something more for NBA scouts or people like us predicting a guys future in college or pro ball to consider than for people considering who was the better college player imo.

[ccbird]

There is no debate between Dixon and Vasquez. Dixon was the better player and the more important player. It's not even that close. Instead of listing all of them myself I'm just going to post a link link Juan's career achievements at the bottom of my post. Aside from the personal accolades and being the unquestioned leader of two Final Four and a National Championship team, Juan was also the more efficient and better defensive player as well. He was a 47% FG and 39% 3pFG shooter. Vasquez is at 43% and 33%. They both are at 16PPG for their career but Dixon did it in less minutes and with better scorers around him. Finally, Vasquez has been an average defender at best for his career. Juan was a very good defender. 2nd all time in steals in the ACC and 9th in NCAA history. He was also a good rebounder for his size. For their careers Juan is at 4.2 RPG and Grieves at 4.8. Juan was the better college scorer, better defender and just as good, if not better, leader. Beyond their college careers, Juan was a 1st round draft pick and 7 year NBA vet. I don't think Vasquez will make it in the NBA but if he does I don't see him having a better career.

http://www.umterps.com/sports/m-baskbl/history/honored_jerseys.html#Dixon

I won't comment on guys I didn't watch play the game. I can't compare guys like Lucas, McMillan, King, Bias,etc to the guys form the '90s and on. I'll just say that personally I would have Grieves behind Dixon, Baxter, Booth, and Smith. That being a combination of who was the better player and contribution the program. As far as contributions to the program I think he still behind Juan and Lonny and on par with Booth and Smith. As far as better player goes I think he is behind all of of the guys I listed along with Francis and Walt Williams. Listen, Vasquez has been outstanding this year and his final chapter hasn't been written yet so my list may change before it's all said and done. I've come around on having his jersey retired. Between his career stats and the year he is currently having he has earned that honor. Still, the pedestal some fans are putting him on is too high. The problem is he was overrated the last few years because of the pure numbers he put up even though he wasn't efficient and at times hurt his team as much as he carried it. He was the leader of 2 bubble teams that combined for a losing ACC record. Now, he is finally having an outstanding year, one worthy of all the praise being heaped on him. His play has become much more efficient and he's lead his team to a lot more wins. The problem is, the overrated standard that was set in previous years has pushed his status through the roof. For some, he has become one of a few iconic player for this program. He is not worthy of that distinction. When I think of Maryland basketball, Vasquez isn't going to be on the short list of names that come to mind.

[Sports Guy]

Dixon was also better defensively than Greivis.