Empire 8

[Bombers798891]

In the Burton/McAdam debate its not even close who was a better shooter.  Burton shot 37% while getting double teamed near the three point line.  McAdam takes wide open threes because teams go under his screens because his outside shot is his offensive weakness (although he shot a respectable 32%). McAdam's threes would be stand-still setshots that he only took to keep defenses honest. That being said he was alot better at getting to the rim and getting to the line.  Mcadam was a better passer in my opinion too.

Another factor not being mentioned is Mcadam was a gambler on defense.  He had lots of steals but often was out of position and somewhat lost on defense.  If I recall correctly, he would guard the worst offensive player a majority of the time and hid on defense. I would almost say he was a liability -- but correct me if I'm wrong. Burton often guarded the teams quickest guard and was a solid defender overall  -- he wasn't lockdown but was definitely not a liability.  Although Mcadam got more steals (and he got a TON), I think Burton was a better defender overall.

Also here are the overall career records:

Mcadam: 61-46 (57%)  2 Empire 8 Tournament Championships, 0-2 in NCAAs
Burton: 72-38 (65%)  2 Empire 8 Regular Season Championships, 1 ECAC championship, Second round loss in NCAAs (0-1)  

Go Naz -- you're biased and took Mcadam. I'm biased and will take Burton

The other thing about McAdam is that he wasn't a threat to hit three pointers. More so than the 32%-37% was that McAdam wasn't a guy that you needed to worry about lighting it up from downtown.

I did hear from a few people that Burton could have been a better defender than he was, he just chose not to work on it and focused mostly on offense.

But this "Burton played with better players" thing is so overblown it's insane. That McAdam didn't have help is so comical it makes me laugh. Was Nazareth ever as deep as the IC team from 2009? No. But come on:

2010: Stephens 12.1 PPG, Corletta 11.7 PPG, Scaffldi 10.2 PPG
2009: Ryan McAdam 17.8 PPG; Jeff DeHimer 15.1 PPG
2008: Joe Canori 20.3 PPG; R. McAdam; 14.9 PPG; Higdon 10.5 PPG
2007: Canori 19.6 PPG; Tyler Smith 14.2 PPG,

In his four years, he's played with 10 other guys who had double-digit point totals in a season. Compared to Burton:

2006: Jim Bellis 18.9 PPG
2007: Jeff Bostic 15.5 PPG, Sean Leahy 12.2 PPG
2008: Bostic 14.0 PPG, Leahy 13.6 PPG
2009: Chris Cruz 13.0 PPG, Brendan Rogers 11.4 PPG, Leahy 11.1 PPG, Jordan Marcus 10.2, Bostic 10.2

Hey, that's 10 guys! Amazing!

I also like how people talk about how phenomenal Burton's supporting cast was so great, and neglect to point out how terrible they were in most playoff games compared to the guys McAdam got to play with.

In 2009 in the E-8 game the two teams played, those five guys listed above went a combined 14-38 from the floor. Meanwhile, McAdam's awful teammates Ryan McAdam and Jeff DeHimer go 18-for-23. In the final they go 13-for-22.

!n 2008, Cruz, Leahy, Rogers and Bostic go 11-for-30 from the floor in the E8 1st round game while Canori, R. McAdam and Higdon go 19-for-36. In the championship, they went 14-29.

So in two E8 playoff games spanning those two years, the best teammates Burton had fire up a combined 25-68 (.367) while the best ones Corey McAdam plays with go 64-110 (.581) in four games. Seems to me like McAdam's teammates stepped up while Burton's left him hanging. Heck, DeHimer went 18-for18 from the floor in the 2009 Tournament.

So please, let's stop acting like McAdam played with a bunch of scrubs. Bostic was a stud in the middle and might have been the best player on either team besides those two, but it's not like Canori and Ryan McAdam weren't excellent. And DeHimer raised his game as the stakes rose.

Note: I'm not trying to rip on the rest of IC's team, I'm just tired of people acting like McAdam was going it alone while Burton just got to watch his teammates light it up. I'm also not saying McAdam's teammates were always great, because they struggled this season in the playoffs. But overall, in the playoffs, give me McAdam's teammates

[bomber3]

In the Burton/McAdam debate its not even close who was a better shooter.  Burton shot 37% while getting double teamed near the three point line.  McAdam takes wide open threes because teams go under his screens because his outside shot is his offensive weakness (although he shot a respectable 32%). McAdam's threes would be stand-still setshots that he only took to keep defenses honest. That being said he was alot better at getting to the rim and getting to the line.  Mcadam was a better passer in my opinion too.

Another factor not being mentioned is Mcadam was a gambler on defense.  He had lots of steals but often was out of position and somewhat lost on defense.  If I recall correctly, he would guard the worst offensive player a majority of the time and hid on defense. I would almost say he was a liability -- but correct me if I'm wrong. Burton often guarded the teams quickest guard and was a solid defender overall  -- he wasn't lockdown but was definitely not a liability.  Although Mcadam got more steals (and he got a TON), I think Burton was a better defender overall.

Also here are the overall career records:

Mcadam: 61-46 (57%)  2 Empire 8 Tournament Championships, 0-2 in NCAAs
Burton: 72-38 (65%)  2 Empire 8 Regular Season Championships, 1 ECAC championship, Second round loss in NCAAs (0-1)  

Go Naz -- you're biased and took Mcadam. I'm biased and will take Burton

The other thing about McAdam is that he wasn't a threat to hit three pointers. More so than the 32%-37% was that McAdam wasn't a guy that you needed to worry about lighting it up from downtown.

I did hear from a few people that Burton could have been a better defender than he was, he just chose not to work on it and focused mostly on offense.

But this "Burton played with better players" thing is so overblown it's insane. That McAdam didn't have help is so comical it makes me laugh. Was Nazareth ever as deep as the IC team from 2009? No. But come on:

2010: Stephens 12.1 PPG, Corletta 11.7 PPG, Scaffldi 10.2 PPG
2009: Ryan McAdam 17.8 PPG; Jeff DeHimer 15.1 PPG
2008: Joe Canori 20.3 PPG; R. McAdam; 14.9 PPG; Higdon 10.5 PPG
2007: Canori 19.6 PPG; Tyler Smith 14.2 PPG,

In his four years, he's played with 10 other guys who had double-digit point totals in a season. Compared to Burton:

2006: Jim Bellis 18.9 PPG
2007: Jeff Bostic 15.5 PPG, Sean Leahy 12.2 PPG
2008: Bostic 14.0 PPG, Leahy 13.6 PPG
2009: Chris Cruz 13.0 PPG, Brendan Rogers 11.4 PPG, Leahy 11.1 PPG, Jordan Marcus 10.2, Bostic 10.2

Hey, that's 10 guys! Amazing!

I also like how people talk about how phenomenal Burton's supporting cast was so great, and neglect to point out how terrible they were in most playoff games compared to the guys McAdam got to play with.

In 2009 in the E-8 game the two teams played, those five guys listed above went a combined 14-38 from the floor. Meanwhile, McAdam's awful teammates Ryan McAdam and Jeff DeHimer go 18-for-23. In the final they go 13-for-22.

!n 2008, Cruz, Leahy, Rogers and Bostic go 11-for-30 from the floor in the E8 1st round game while Canori, R. McAdam and Higdon go 19-for-36. In the championship, they went 14-29.

So in two E8 playoff games spanning those two years, the best teammates Burton had fire up a combined 25-68 (.367) while the best ones Corey McAdam plays with go 64-110 (.581) in four games. Seems to me like McAdam's teammates stepped up while Burton's left him hanging. Heck, DeHimer went 18-for18 from the floor in the 2009 Tournament.

So please, let's stop acting like McAdam played with a bunch of scrubs. Bostic was a stud in the middle and might have been the best player on either team besides those two, but it's not like Canori and Ryan McAdam weren't excellent. And DeHimer raised his game as the stakes rose.

Note: I'm not trying to rip on the rest of IC's team, I'm just tired of people acting like McAdam was going it alone while Burton just got to watch his teammates light it up. I'm also not saying McAdam's teammates were always great, because they struggled this season in the playoffs. But overall, in the playoffs, give me McAdam's teammates

Chose not to work on defense? I would say 99.999% of d3 players do not work on defense and the ones that do are marginal players that need to fill a niche.  You get better on defense by gettng faster, quicker, stronger, and smarter -- which he did over the course of his career. And who did you hear this from? I would guess it is not a reliable source.

And we're referring to the whole body of work here -- not just three playoff games. McAdam did have a few solid players but most were one dimensional (ie Canori).  Overall, Burton played on alot better teams.  Burton's junior/senior years his teams went 41-12 (77%) -- McAdam's went 31-24 (58%) in his junior/senior years.  Two of his four years Naz didn't even reach .500!! (Freshman year went 11-14 junior year went 13-14).

[Bombers798891]

In the Burton/McAdam debate its not even close who was a better shooter.  Burton shot 37% while getting double teamed near the three point line.  McAdam takes wide open threes because teams go under his screens because his outside shot is his offensive weakness (although he shot a respectable 32%). McAdam's threes would be stand-still setshots that he only took to keep defenses honest. That being said he was alot better at getting to the rim and getting to the line.  Mcadam was a better passer in my opinion too.

Another factor not being mentioned is Mcadam was a gambler on defense.  He had lots of steals but often was out of position and somewhat lost on defense.  If I recall correctly, he would guard the worst offensive player a majority of the time and hid on defense. I would almost say he was a liability -- but correct me if I'm wrong. Burton often guarded the teams quickest guard and was a solid defender overall  -- he wasn't lockdown but was definitely not a liability.  Although Mcadam got more steals (and he got a TON), I think Burton was a better defender overall.

Also here are the overall career records:

Mcadam: 61-46 (57%)  2 Empire 8 Tournament Championships, 0-2 in NCAAs
Burton: 72-38 (65%)  2 Empire 8 Regular Season Championships, 1 ECAC championship, Second round loss in NCAAs (0-1)  

Go Naz -- you're biased and took Mcadam. I'm biased and will take Burton

The other thing about McAdam is that he wasn't a threat to hit three pointers. More so than the 32%-37% was that McAdam wasn't a guy that you needed to worry about lighting it up from downtown.

I did hear from a few people that Burton could have been a better defender than he was, he just chose not to work on it and focused mostly on offense.

But this "Burton played with better players" thing is so overblown it's insane. That McAdam didn't have help is so comical it makes me laugh. Was Nazareth ever as deep as the IC team from 2009? No. But come on:

2010: Stephens 12.1 PPG, Corletta 11.7 PPG, Scaffldi 10.2 PPG
2009: Ryan McAdam 17.8 PPG; Jeff DeHimer 15.1 PPG
2008: Joe Canori 20.3 PPG; R. McAdam; 14.9 PPG; Higdon 10.5 PPG
2007: Canori 19.6 PPG; Tyler Smith 14.2 PPG,

In his four years, he's played with 10 other guys who had double-digit point totals in a season. Compared to Burton:

2006: Jim Bellis 18.9 PPG
2007: Jeff Bostic 15.5 PPG, Sean Leahy 12.2 PPG
2008: Bostic 14.0 PPG, Leahy 13.6 PPG
2009: Chris Cruz 13.0 PPG, Brendan Rogers 11.4 PPG, Leahy 11.1 PPG, Jordan Marcus 10.2, Bostic 10.2

Hey, that's 10 guys! Amazing!

I also like how people talk about how phenomenal Burton's supporting cast was so great, and neglect to point out how terrible they were in most playoff games compared to the guys McAdam got to play with.

In 2009 in the E-8 game the two teams played, those five guys listed above went a combined 14-38 from the floor. Meanwhile, McAdam's awful teammates Ryan McAdam and Jeff DeHimer go 18-for-23. In the final they go 13-for-22.

!n 2008, Cruz, Leahy, Rogers and Bostic go 11-for-30 from the floor in the E8 1st round game while Canori, R. McAdam and Higdon go 19-for-36. In the championship, they went 14-29.

So in two E8 playoff games spanning those two years, the best teammates Burton had fire up a combined 25-68 (.367) while the best ones Corey McAdam plays with go 64-110 (.581) in four games. Seems to me like McAdam's teammates stepped up while Burton's left him hanging. Heck, DeHimer went 18-for18 from the floor in the 2009 Tournament.

So please, let's stop acting like McAdam played with a bunch of scrubs. Bostic was a stud in the middle and might have been the best player on either team besides those two, but it's not like Canori and Ryan McAdam weren't excellent. And DeHimer raised his game as the stakes rose.

Note: I'm not trying to rip on the rest of IC's team, I'm just tired of people acting like McAdam was going it alone while Burton just got to watch his teammates light it up. I'm also not saying McAdam's teammates were always great, because they struggled this season in the playoffs. But overall, in the playoffs, give me McAdam's teammates

Chose not to work on defense? I would say 99.999% of d3 players do not work on defense and the ones that do are marginal players that need to fill a niche.  You get better on defense by gettng faster, quicker, stronger, and smarter -- which he did over the course of his career. And who did you hear this from? I would guess it is not a reliable source.

And we're referring to the whole body of work here -- not just three playoff games. McAdam did have a few solid players but most were one dimensional (ie Canori).  Overall, Burton played on alot better teams.  Burton's junior/senior years his teams went 41-12 (77%) -- McAdam's went 31-24 (58%) in his junior/senior years.  Two of his four years Naz didn't even reach .500!! (Freshman year went 11-14 junior year went 13-14).

It's not like the Bombers guys weren't good. I'm just not willing to say that they're so much better than McAdam's that somehow McAdam gets bonus points when we debate "Burton vs. McAdam" while Burton gets docked because his teams were loaded

The argument Naz people seem to make is that McAdam was always the stud and his teammates weren't at his level and so somehow he had more responsibility than Burton did. Canori was one dimensional, but he'd still go for 20 on you.Ryan McAdam was really good, and DeHimer was good in his senior season. Some of the other guys I mentioned were very good.

Burton had one very good team(2008) and one great team (2009) and two that were just ok (2006 and 2007). There was nothing about those first two teams that made them different than most of the ones in the previous 8 or 9 years.

And yeah, if we're going to talk about how great those two teams were then we DO have to talk about the postseason. And despite the fact that Naz's 2009 team was under .500 and IC's was the best in the East, Nazareth rose up when it mattered. Ithaca didn't. McAdam's teams went 5-1 in the conference tournaments. Burton's went 0-2. That's relevant. And yeah, it's a small sample size. But who's to blame for that? We'd have a larger sample size of conference championship/NCAA games to work from if IC could've won one one of these years.

[bomber3]

And yeah, if we're going to talk about how great those two teams were then we DO have to talk about the postseason. And despite the fact that Naz's 2009 team was under .500 and IC's was the best in the East, Nazareth rose up when it mattered. Ithaca didn't. McAdam's teams went 5-1 in the conference tournaments. Burton's went 0-2. That's relevant. And yeah, it's a small sample size. But who's to blame for that? We'd have a larger sample size of conference championship/NCAA games to work from if IC could've won one one of these years.

It is relevant but it isn't the be all end all.  I'm not saying it shouldn't be looked at but it shouldn't be the only reasoning.  Maybe Naz underacheived greatly in the regular season and then played to their potential twice a year in the playoffs.  So then if they underacheived and went 13-14 should that count against McAdam? I would say yes.

And I dont think Burton should get docked for stacked teams.  I think he should get more credit for putting up such good numbers on good teams.  It's easy to put up big numbers and go .500 (see Coco, Herring, etc.).  In my opinion he should get more credit for doing so, not less.

[Bombers798891]

And yeah, if we're going to talk about how great those two teams were then we DO have to talk about the postseason. And despite the fact that Naz's 2009 team was under .500 and IC's was the best in the East, Nazareth rose up when it mattered. Ithaca didn't. McAdam's teams went 5-1 in the conference tournaments. Burton's went 0-2. That's relevant. And yeah, it's a small sample size. But who's to blame for that? We'd have a larger sample size of conference championship/NCAA games to work from if IC could've won one one of these years.

It is relevant but it isn't the be all end all.  I'm not saying it shouldn't be looked at but it shouldn't be the only reasoning.  Maybe Naz underacheived greatly in the regular season and then played to their potential twice a year in the playoffs.  So then if they underacheived and went 13-14 should that count against McAdam? I would say yes.

And I dont think Burton should get docked for stacked teams.  I think he should get more credit for putting up such good numbers on good teams.  It's easy to put up big numbers and go .500 (see Coco, Herring, etc.).  In my opinion he should get more credit for doing so, not less.

When did I mention it being the only thing? Wasn't I the guy who put in their career shooting numbers? I'm pretty sure I was the guy who said he would take Burton. I just think that the "Burton's teammates made him better and McAdam's hurt him" argument is flawed, and in my opinion, the playoff games illustrate that because many of Burton's teammates struggled in them and McAdam's often played better--had DeHimer ever shot that well in his career? Or in video games? 18-for18? Insane

For example, in the three playoff games:

Leahy: 22 points in three games on 2-19 shooting from three and 9-33 overall.
Bostic: 26 points in three games and hampered by an injury in 2009, only playing 48 minutes in those games.
Marcus: 16 points in two games on 5-18 and 3-13 from three in his one year.
Cruz: 23 points in three games

Rodgers had a couple of nice games, but overall, if anything, it was Burton who had to carry the team and do it all--AKA "Pulling a C. McAdam". In three games spanning those two seasons, he scored more points (74) then Leahy, Bostic and Cruz did combined (71)

To me, this shows that, yeah, most of the times, Burton's teammates were a boon. But for people to say that his stats wouldn't have been as good had he not had good teammates, or that they created opportunities for him McAdam never got, well that's just not the case, because Burton was plenty capable of scoring even when his teammates didn't and I'm pretty sure McAdam got help from DeHimer and Canori and his brother, especially in some of those postseason games.

[bombersquadron]

I would take o'brien. Especially if it comes down late in the game.  Throw stats out the door, you can't compare stats when comparing a fisher player as the stats are spreadout as all 5 players are typically very good and they play well as a team.  I think burton is the most polished skills wise, McAdam is great for the stats but Ive never caught him play that great even when he put up good stats I woudl always say i didnt even notice him doing well how did he get all of those stats.  O'brien is the best to get in the lane and create, he is also probably the best defender out of the 3.  Burton is very good but is hard to compare is he much different.

O'brien strentghs:
Stongest
Best defender
Winner

Burton
Best Shooter
most fluid

McAdam
best stats
Best rebounder

It is also safe to say that if you are a Ithaca fan 99% of you are taking Burton, if you are a Naz fan 99% of you are taking McAdam, if you are a Fisher fan 99% of you are taking O'Brien. They all were great players and as FisherDynasty as they all had their individual strengths that might have topped the other two.

I happened to cross paths with all 3 of these guys. To me it all depends on the "type of show you want to run" to make your choice of which of these 3 guys you would take. They all had solid supporting casts, I think it comes down to more of the system they were in and the system you want to play if you were they guy picking .That is what makes it so tough to pick between these three because they all fit their system so perfectly and made their teams go, which is why they are the three guys that were thrown into the discussion. I have a lot of respect for O'Brien (He won the big game over and over with Fisher) and McAdam (Josten's Award Finalist) but I have to pick Burton (best skills wise in my opinion), best shooter/ scorer, still had a lot of assists, great competitor and was a solid rebounder and defender for his size and the style of play Ithaca used (even more so over Burton's last two years when he was pushing the ball up the floor for 35-40 a night).

You can pick apart any poster's argument or these three as players, the system played in and how that helped them, or how they players they played with either helped or hindered them. The only way to find an answer is to get input from fans of other teams. Does someone know how to start a poll so that we can maybe have a vote on this subject?

[FisherDynasty]

I would rather have Burton than McAdam if starting a team from scratch.

[Bombers798891]

I put up a poll, just for fun

[magicman]

Having seen all three play, and being a neutral observer, as I have no allegience to any of the 3 schools involved, I voted for Burton. I do agree with bombersquadron that it depends on the system you want to play as to which guy you might choose. Couldn't go wrong with any of these guys, as all three were darn good players.   

[with age came?]

Another factor in the great debate is coaching.  Personally O'Brien definitely had the best coach of the three which matters when it comes to winning games.  Daley was a nice guy but I do not think he achieved maximum results with the talent he had. Did not see a lot of the IC coach but I did see him have his team full court pressing in the second half against a "really modest" Albany Pharmacy team when he was up by 30.  I was not "impressed" by the decision to "press".  Kornacker always has his teams ready and they are always well coached.  Again not having seen McAdam play I do not feel qualified to vote.  Burton vs O'Brien - neutral observer - Burton for me. Truly an awesome discussion and question.

[Go Naz]

Ok...its 3am and I'm still wide awake so I'm gonna go ahead and stir the pot a little bit.  You have one game to win....Corey Mcadam....Sean Burton or Sean O'Brien....who do you want to run the show for your team?  Obviously I am biased but I take Mcadam... I believe that he is arguably the best player in Empire 8history and I take him over the other two in any situation....thoughts??

One thing that I feel people are failing to take into account here is the fact that I said "You have one game to win"...if this is the case, I have to take Burton out of the running from the other two.  No disrepect to him, he was a great player, but in arguably the biggest three games of his career he went 0-3 (two E-8 games and one NCAA game)  Both Mcadam and O'Brien won big games, a career record of 13-1 in Empire 8 tournament games and 6 Conference Championships.  Answering this question from the perspective of having just one game to win, I have to take Corey first, followed by O'Brien and then Burton.  Who had the better career is a totally different discussion all together.

[Bombers798891]

Ok...its 3am and I'm still wide awake so I'm gonna go ahead and stir the pot a little bit.  You have one game to win....Corey Mcadam....Sean Burton or Sean O'Brien....who do you want to run the show for your team?  Obviously I am biased but I take Mcadam... I believe that he is arguably the best player in Empire 8history and I take him over the other two in any situation....thoughts??

One thing that I feel people are failing to take into account here is the fact that I said "You have one game to win"...if this is the case, I have to take Burton out of the running from the other two.  No disrepect to him, he was a great player, but in arguably the biggest three games of his career he went 0-3 (two E-8 games and one NCAA game)  Both Mcadam and O'Brien won big games, a career record of 13-1 in Empire 8 tournament games and 6 Conference Championships.  Answering this question from the perspective of having just one game to win, I have to take Corey first, followed by O'Brien and then Burton.  Who had the better career is a totally different discussion all together.

Well, if we're debating Burton/McCadam and the concept of winning, wouldn't the fact that Burton won more games than McAdam matter? Yeah, thought not.

When Naz fans talk about Ithaca not winning games they basically mean: "Burton didn't win the three playoff games Ithaca had."

Of course, they don't mention the 24 points and 6 assists he averaged in those games. I'm sure if Jeff Bostic could have done what Jeff DeHimer did in 2009 (18-for18) instead of limping around on one good ankle and Sean Leahy could have put up as many points in all three games (22) as Ryan McAdam did in the one game against IC (23) instead of firing up bricks from three-point range the Bombers might have been able to win one of those three games.

Basketball's a team game, not an individual show. If you're going to talk about winning in the playoffs you have to look at how the supporting cast performed.

I haven't mentioned O'Brien because I really don't remember him, but didn't some other Fisher poster point out that you "throw out the stats" when it comes to O'Brien because on those Fisher teams, everyone was a solid contributor? That's sort of what Fisher's known for isn't it? That overall, team game? How often did you see O'Brien scoring 34 of his team's 76 points because no-one else could hit a shot?

Interesting side note on that 2009 Naz/IC playoff game: Of the 158 points scored, 136 (86%) of them were scored by six guys, three on each team.

[bomber3]

I know McAdam had his moments but Burton hit plenty of big shots down the stretch of games and was a player that loved the last minute of the game.  One in particular moment comes to mind:

IC is down two with under two seconds to go in front of a packed gym @ RIT the year they went 24-1 in the regular season.  Burton gets fouled with under two seconds to go with a chance to tie the game if he makes both.  RIT calls timeout to ice Burton -- IC coaches are so confident hes going to make both they setup their defense and basically assumed the shots were in.  If I recall correctly they didn't even mention what happens if he misses.  With a packed gym he calmly nails both foul shots to tie the game --swished them both.  Of course it was to no avail however since Korinchek nailed a half courter at/after    the buzzer to win.  But everyone forgets those were two pretty darn clutch free throws...

[Bombers798891]

I know McAdam had his moments but Burton hit plenty of big shots down the stretch of games and was a player that loved the last minute of the game.  One in particular moment comes to mind:

IC is down two with under two seconds to go in front of a packed gym @ RIT the year they went 24-1 in the regular season.  Burton gets fouled with under two seconds to go with a chance to tie the game if he makes both.  RIT calls timeout to ice Burton -- IC coaches are so confident hes going to make both they setup their defense and basically assumed the shots were in.  If I recall correctly they didn't even mention what happens if he misses.  With a packed gym he calmly nails both foul shots to tie the game --swished them both.  Of course it was to no avail however since Korinchek nailed a half courter at/after    the buzzer to win.  But everyone forgets those were two pretty darn clutch free throws...

Yeah, Burton had a triple-double that game. But apparently only three games he played for IC actually matter...

[sjfcards]

The Burton, O'Brien, McAdam discussion is a great debate. I stated earlier that if I had to win one game I would take the one that did the most winning, O'Brien. But since the conversation seems to have turned to who has the better skill set I think I would have to go with Burton. All three were incredible players, but Burton was the one that I always felt had the smoothest stroke, and ran the offense the best. Naz did a lot of clear outs, and let McAdam go to the basket. Burton, in my oppinion, made the players around him better, better than McAdam (If that makes any sense).

I can understand the Naz Fans argument that in the biggest games IC had Burton did not get a win. And, I can understand the IC fans argument that IC won more games than Naz, just lost those three big ones.

Burton should get some love for winning the regular season title twice. I think that accomplishment says more about who is a better player than a small sample of post season games. It made sense in the "if you had to win one game" argument, but not so much now. If we are talking about one game, I can not understand why anyone would not take O'Brien.