Who was the best modern Iowa State Men's Basketball Team?

[awd4cy]

Lol, people seriously think any other team than 1999-00?

 

[CascadeClone]

1999-2000 They would have been National Champs.... A little home cooking in Auburn Hills took care of that.

Agree. The Kane-Niang team would be 2nd best, but Tinsley/Fizer and KANTRAIL HORTON would have just out-toughed that team.

 

[CyHans]

My vote is 99-00 as well for all the reasons previously listed.

 

[NoCreativity]

The 99-00 team is the answer. That was the best team in college basketball and as usual we got shafted by the selection committee and then had the title stolen by the refs in Auburn Hills.

Can you imagine the Big 12 regular season and tournament champ getting a 2 seed now? Absolute joke.

 

[Farnsworth]

Lol, people seriously think any other team than 1999-00?

This is probably the correct answer, however I didn't care about Iowa State at all until I came to school as a freshman in 02 so don' have memories of that team.

That team, and if Niang didn't hurt his foot, had a favorable run if they would have won those games.

 

[CyJack13]

Agree. The Kane-Niang team would be 2nd best, but Tinsley/Fizer and KANTRAIL HORTON would have just out-toughed that team.

One of the few teams that would have multiple guys who could take on Kane and not get out muscled. Tinsley, Horton, Nurse, all those guys were built and physical perimeter defenders.

 

[CycloneEggie]

Yeah, like everyone else says 99-00. However I think the 15-16 makes a run for 2nd best. That's a lot of future NBA/Pro players, Even Naz was on that team, but was injured.

 

[AuH2O]

I'm going with the 2014 team. Niang, our best player, breaks his foot in the first round of the tourney, but we still went on to beat a tough UNC team two days later. With Niang I think we would've beat UConn and had the roster to possibly have won the entire tourney. Thinking back on it, it still stings. The 2000 team is second.

It's certainly possible, but my unpopular opinion is ISU doesn't beat UConn with Niang. First, that year Ejim was conference player of the year, Kane was 2nd team all conference, and Niang was 3rd team. I don't think it's fair to say Niang was ISUs best player that season.

Second, a strange circumstance in that game is due to Niang's injury, Hogue was thrust into a prominent offensive role instead of the utility guy he normally was. All he did was play completely out of his mind and go 14-19 and score 34.

Either way, it's got to be '99-00. That wasn't a good team that was positioned to make a run. That was a team that would've been favored over anybody else, and probably even MSU at an actual neutral site. I remember a couple years ago on his radio show Doug Gottlieb saying that '99-00 ISU team was the best team that didn't win a national title, and the seeding/siting was a travesty.

 

[Nococy]

1999-2000 team and it isn’t even close. If they would have been in any other region of the tournament they would have made the final four and probably win the whole dam thing.

 

[theshadow]

1997 isn't the best, but I'd like to see them matched up against some of other teams listed just from a rock fight angle.

F - Pratt (SR)
F - Bankhead (SR)
C - Cato (SR)
G - Willoughby (SR)
G - Holloway (SR)

Allowed just 60.4 ppg and got hosed out of an Elite 8 spot.

 

[CRcyclone6]

Too soon!

 

[CRcyclone6]

99-00 team by a mile. Not that I don't love the others, but...

 

[Land Shark]

It is 99-00. Then, it's a pretty big gap. Massive gap.
Then, it is whatever team you wish to argue about

 

[ISUcyclones11]

13-14 was the best Hoiberg/Prohm team

 

[Farnsworth]

Let's revisit this in a year or 2 and it may be the 23/24 or 24/25 team.

 

[cyfanatic13]

why does anyone say there isn't even a question -when clearly there is a question

Not saying it’s the exact same thing, but this kind of reminds me of when some basketball player a few years ago (can’t remember who for) described their game as a mix between like Lebron, Kobe, and MJ. When asked further about it, he replied “it’s just an honor to be in the same conversation as them” when he put himself in the conversation.

Just cause someone asks the question doesn’t mean it should be close

 

[ZRF]

Was in college for the '99/'00 team. They are the best team I ever saw play at ISU. They had everything a team needs. If they play MSU anywhere besides Michigan that year they win the national title.

If the rumors about them choosing the 2 to be able to play in Minneapolis over the West #1 are true, its a shame that team deserved to go to the Final Four. I remember seeing their and UCLA's second rounds games in MN. UCLA looked absolutely unstoppable; ISU absolutely dismantled them in the Sweet Sixteen.

They would have beat MSU if not for a really bad call and the absolutely justified melt down CLE had.

I would also like to go on the record that ISU would be the only team in the B12 to win the outright regular season and conference tournament and not be definite #1 seed. The fact it was in question baffled me then as it does now thinking back on it. They dominated the B12 that year, KU was good, and ISU was better. They should have been considered the 2nd or 3rd best team in the country at worst and so how ended up in the same bracket as MSU. Which if that was by ISU choosing so be it, but if it was how the committee drew it up, it is completely wrong.

Clearly the 2nd best team in the country at the end of the season. MSU, considering their season and schedule, was a deserved number 1 (overall), but I struggle to find the argument against having us as the 2nd #1 behind them. Then to be put in the same bracket, in their backyard, with the ******** officiating (still hate Cleaves for that) was the ultimate kick in the balls. That should have been the title game that year.

I think it may objectively be the worst seeding gaffe the committee ever made. Simply inexcusable.

 

[boone7247]

Also worth noting Michigan St was the best team that year but Mateen Cleaves missed the first 13 games of the year, and they had several early season losses without him which held them back from being the top overall seed and ending up in the same region as ISU.

Yeah, it was kind of a goofy year. It was also before they ranked the teams publicly. The other #1 were Arizona, Duke and Stanford. I believe AZ was in the regional that played in TX. That is probably where ISU belonged, and AZ and Stanford should have fought over the West #1.

I agree MSU was the best team going into the tournament. Also, ISU wouldn't have had to give up a #1 seed if they did it like they do now. Where the first-round games are determined by the best seed of the group playing there. We could have been the #1 seed in the West and still played in MN if the changes they made were in place, then.

 

[Cyowa 14]

This is embarrassing, 32-5 Big 12 regular and tournament champs, two first round draft picks. Next topic please

 

[cyclones500]

13-14 was the best Hoiberg/Prohm team

I agree for the most part. Definitely my "favorite" Hoiberg team.

14-15 is close, but the coin-flip obviously favors 13-14 due to NCAA tournament performance. That team should've sailed into the Sweet 16.