Best NCAA teams of Decade?

[roywhite]

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/pgStory...&photo=9429708

Well, I like the results in this piece.

I think I would rank the 2009 Heels above their 2005 team.

[RelativeWays]

The 05 UNC team was good, but Duke, WF and BC were right there talent wise (UNC had more depth though than either). The 09 team really stands out among the rest of the field that when they play their best, nobody could match them. It would be a really interesting matchup to see the two square off, particularly Lawson and Felton. As an objective college BB fan, I'd love to see this matchup.

[Hancock 4 Duke]

We all new this would be the results. Dukes '01 team was just amazing.

[Matches]

Yeah, I think '09 UNC > '05 UNC too. '05 UNC was very good but rode May playing out of his mind for half a season.

[Tom B.]

http://msn.foxsports.com/cbk/pgStory...&photo=9429708

Well, I like the results in this piece.

I think I would rank the 2009 Heels above their 2005 team.

Interesting, though it could use a little fact-checking. It says that Boozer was the "sixth man" on the 2001 Duke team, which is misleading. Boozer was a starter for almost the whole season until he suffered a stress facture in his foot during the next-to-last regular season game (a loss to Maryland in Cameron). He missed the regular season finale against UNC, the ACC Tournament and the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament. When he was healthy enough to play again, K wanted to ease him back in and didn't want to upset the good chemistry that had developed with the starting lineup that he'd used in Boozer's absence, so he brought Boozer off the bench rather than re-inserting him into the starting lineup. So Boozer technically was the "sixth man" for Duke's last four games in the NCAA Tournament, but there's no doubt he'd have been a starter if not for the injury -- and by the time the final weekend rolled around, he was playing starter-like minutes again (25 minutes in the semifinal against Maryland, 30 minutes in the final against Arizona).

It also says that the starters on the 2001 Duke team were Jason Williams, Chris Duhon, Mike Dunleavy, Nate James and Shane Battier. That's also misleading -- as noted above, Boozer was a starter for most of the season, and Chris Duhon was not. Duhon replaced Nate James as a starter late in the regular season, so Duhon should only be listed as a starter if we're talking about the late-season lineup. If that's the case, though, Nate James shouldn't be listed as a starter. The fifth starter would be Casey Sanders.

[KyDevilinIL]

The '01 Duke team stands at least a head above every other champion this decade, save perhaps for '07 Florida and yes, '09 UNC. Those are the two teams that I think could give the '01 Devils a run for their money.

The '01 team's overwhelming talent, combined with the refuse-to-lose attitude of especially Shane, J-Will and Nate, made that squad exceptional.

[crimsondevil]

I think I would rank the 2009 Heels above their 2005 team.

You all do understand these are not rankings, per se. They're in order of their records in simulated games played between the 10 teams. Of course we can argue whether the simulations are accurate, but I'm not going to when Duke comes out way in front.

Agree with Tom B about their fact-checking. Could also throw Reggie Love's name in there since he and Casey together basically filled Boozer's minutes after the injury.