Originally Posted by
Jeffrey
Here's where we disagree. Why don't we use Jim's post to measure the best 6th man?
Best scorer: IMO, this is much closer than most believe. Chris scored 1,455 points at Duke which is tied for 27th all-time at Duke.
Play multiple positions: Chris, by far. He could play/back-up the 1-4 positions. We could have substituted Chris for anyone but Elton.
Embrace the concept: Chris, by far. Corey did not embrace the concept and this became a real issue.
Instant shot of adrenalin: IMO, this is close. Unlike Corey, Chris could have sparked energy on both sides of the court.
I disagree that 37 wins and ACC dominance is the best measure. The goal, and best measure, was winning a National Championship. We had the best team, got the match-ups we needed (6th was the highest seed we faced before the Final Four) , and should have won.
Corey was the 2nd best player on our team and he needed and wanted to start. Only Brand had a higher win share per 40 minutes played. Per 40 minutes, Corey (24.0 pts.) provided as much offense as Brand (24.2 pts.) and more than Langdon (22.3 pts.) or Avery (19.2 pts.). I disagree that adding his scoring to that lineup makes it worse. We needed points in the Final Four when we only scored 68 and 74 total points. I also disagree that the sole issue was not playing Corey at the end UConn game. According to my calculator, all points are equal and the real issue was barely playing Corey in the UConn game (11 total minutes, while all starters played 31+ minutes and looked like it at the end) because of the tension (over the issues we're debating) which had developed between Coach K and Corey.