[81alum]

Tara has been so good for so long, that I'd have to put at least 20 players on her top 10 list.

I would entirely agree!

We have had a few of these "top 10" lists in WBB before, and they always turn into a "top 15" since you can have 15 on a team, etc.

How about a "top 5."  The problem is that you can pick the 5 best players, but the 5 best players might not make the best team.  What if you took the five best players, allocated by position 5-4-3-2-1.  

Then do you pick them on the basis of absolute ability, or on the basis of their impact in their day?  Wiggins may have been better than Azzi, but had less of an impact on the program.

So many permutations on how to pick the best, with the final answer always being the same--you can't really.

[81alum]

Tara has been so good for so long, that I'd have to put at least 20 players on her top 10 list.

I would entirely agree!

We have had a few of these "top 10" lists in WBB before, and they always turn into a "top 15" since you can have 15 on a team, etc.

How about a "top 5."  The problem is that you can pick the 5 best players, but the 5 best players might not make the best team.  What if you took the five best players, allocated by position 5-4-3-2-1.  

Then do you pick them on the basis of absolute ability, or on the basis of their impact in their day?  Wiggins may have been better than Azzi, but had less of an impact on the program.

So many permutations on how to pick the best, with the final answer always being the same--you can't really.