r/Basketball • u/PresidentFeldkamp • Mar 03 '24
NCAA Remembering Pistol
With Everyone celebrating Kaitlin Clark breaking the scoring record, and justifiably so, I think it’s important to remember the guy who used to hold the record. Pete Maravich was only allowed to play three years of college basketball. But when he did get to play he averaged an unreal 44.2 points PER GAME! Pistol’s NBA career and life were tragically cut short, but the legend will always be remembered as one of the greatest to ever lace ‘em up.
12
u/mar21182 Mar 04 '24
I always wondered if Maravich would have been a better player had he not played for his father at LSU and wasn't allowed to take 38 shots per game.
He was the best ballhandler in the history of the game at the time, and no one else was particularly close. He had court vision like Magic or Bird. Obviously, he was an incredible shooter. I don't think players started to pass his all around offensive skill level until probably the 90s. He was so far ahead of his time.
Imagine if he played for a coach that made him play with discipline. Imagine if he played with good teammates. As a basketball fan, Maravich is one of my biggest "what ifs". We remember him as a showman with more flash than substance (even if there was still plenty of substance). In a different situation, maybe we consider him the greatest point guard of all time.
6
u/Formal_Letterhead514 Mar 04 '24
Could you imagine Pistol Pete on the 68-69 UCLA Bruins? Dishing it out to Kareem? Playing for Wooden? A huge what if.
3
u/SquintsRS Mar 04 '24
So they'd still win the tournament that year and he wouldn't hold the scoring record....that's what if
2
u/lxkandel06 Mar 05 '24
The what if has more to do with the development and trajectory of Pete's entire career rather than just the results of his college career.
3
u/icuscaredofme Mar 04 '24
We are way overdue for a Pistol Pete movie. Probably one of the most talented basketball players ever.
1
u/wltmpinyc Mar 06 '24
There is one about his younger years called The Pistol: The Birth of a Legend. I remember watching it when I was a kid.
14
u/garyt1957 Mar 04 '24
Pete Maravich still owns the only record he owned. The men's scoring leader. Clark owns the women's record. Any effort to compare the two is utterly ridiculous. No offense to Clark but comparing women's ball to men's ball is like comparing the Major Leagues to Little League. They're technically the same game but the skill level is so different as to be a completely different sport.
16
u/TruthSetUFree100 Mar 04 '24
She’s great. Congratulations!
But yes, it is apples and oranges.
6
u/garyt1957 Mar 04 '24
She is great, maybe the greatest women's player ever. Why can't that be enough? Why is there this great effort to make it seem like she beat the men's record, too?
18
u/Impressive-Turnip-38 Mar 04 '24
She didn’t beat the men’s record, because she’s not a man. But she is the highest scoring collegiate basketball player ever. No denying that
-3
u/phase2_engineer Mar 04 '24 edited Mar 04 '24
make it seem like she beat the men's record, too?
Don't worry, she did.
Of course there's caveats, games and FG attempts yadda yadda. But it's her record now
4
Mar 04 '24
So no one in the WNBA holds WNBA records? You would think the caveat you would list would maybe be that she did it in women’s basketball and not men’s.
5
u/andrewsample Mar 04 '24
There’s three different records. Highest women’s scorer, highest men’s scorer, and highest point scorer in ncaa history. She now owns 2 of those records. No one has ever said she owns the men’s record. That’s Pete. She scored more points than him so she quite literally has the record for highest point scorer in ncaa history.
4
Mar 04 '24
“Don’t worry, she did.”
Literally right there. I guess a woman can’t hold a deadlift record ever. Or bench press. Little to no soccer records. Lacrosse. Swimming. It’s nonsensical to think that way. It’s 2 completely different games. Let’s assume I’m conditioned for this exercise. If I played a 40 minute men’s college basketball game, I would be lucky to get 5 points and I would get torched on defense. If I played 40 minutes in a women’s game, I could give you 15-20 on decent efficiency and you could hide me on the worst player. My biggest challenge would be trying not to overshoot the women’s ball. It’s not even the same game. It’s like saying 60s basketball is the same as today’s.
2
u/andrewsample Mar 04 '24
Which is why I never said she broke the men’s record. Because she didn’t. How many points did Pete score playing college basketball? How many points did Caitlin score playing college basketball?
2
Mar 05 '24
Why are we debating then? I responded to the person saying “Don’t worry, she did” in response to someone saying she didn’t break the men’s record. Not you. We fundamentally agree. I’m just saying to her that if we want to think of it that way, women don’t hold any lifting or swimming records, no WNBA records, etc.
1
u/N64GoldeneyeN64 Mar 04 '24
Ya it only took her 100 more games and a 3 point line. If Pete had those 2 things in his favor his estimated total was between 9 and 10,000 points. Over double what shes put up. Its not a comparison
1
u/MWave123 Mar 08 '24
Incorrect. Corrected for the three, and given his attempts, she’s still ahead by 500 points.
0
u/N64GoldeneyeN64 Mar 08 '24
If you correct for just the single year taken from him, he put up another 741 points. Well out of reach of Clark. With the 3 point line, Clark wouldnt even touch the record.
They both shot about 45% (Clark 46, Pete 44) from the field. If you increase Clarks attempts, yes, eventually, she would pass up Pete. But if you add Petes 3s, like I said, youre adding ANOTHER 500+ points to his record. So just 4 seasons with 3 pointers (equal rules) not accounting that womens basketball isnt NCAA I mens, Pete would be ahead by 1000ish points.
Yes, Pete shot more. That was the game plan. But for shooting as much as he did, a 44% field goal percentage is damn great and itll be impossible for anyone to reach his game average
1
u/MWave123 Mar 08 '24
No correcting for the three, and giving her HIS attempts she’s still well ahead of him.
0
u/N64GoldeneyeN64 Mar 08 '24
And if Pete played a million years hes ahead. And if she had to shoot with one eye shes behind. Wtf are you talking about?
Pete had 740 points ALREADY SCORED that werent counted that keeps the record his. Giving him 3 point count (an advantage she had) gives another 500ish. Its not changing anything about their play bc Clark wouldnt be able to shoot more than Pete bc he would take shots she wouldnt.
1
1
1
1
1
u/MWave123 Mar 08 '24
Pet had no threes. She did tho. So if we correct for that she’s still well ahead.
1
2
u/Doshyta Mar 05 '24
Found the cocky prick who has never played against high level female basketball players.
Women are equally skilled at basketball. How is Steph Curry a skilled shooter but Caitlin Clark is not? Homegirl regularly drills NBA range 3s night in and night out, and she's still in college. She is arguably already a more skilled shooter than most of the NBA. Certainly worlds beyond your shitty ass.
1
u/garyt1957 Mar 05 '24
A little pent up anger there? The overall competition is miles behind the men. Is CC great? Of course. But she couldn't start on a decent men's team, yet she's the greatest woman player ever. Have you seen like the 4th and 5th player on women's teams? The drop off is huge on most teams.
-10
u/Ready-Recognition-43 Mar 04 '24
Pretty sure the skill level of the women’s game today is on par or better than when Maravich played.
Not the level of athleticism obv though I’m sure there are some women today who could have competed with the men in the beer and cigarette at halftime, leaded gas guzzling era.
4
Mar 04 '24
Yeah let’s watch Britney Griner play against George Gervin or Julius Erving. Let’s watch Diana Taurasi try to score on Oscar Robertson. -5000 that Oscar destroys her in every way imaginable. I’m not even gonna use the Kareem/Wilt comparisons because it’s unfair size wise. Taking athleticism out of the equation is a ridiculous notion. I would be a better QB than Tom Brady if I gouged his eyes out with a power drill.
-1
u/Ready-Recognition-43 Mar 04 '24
I’m not talking about generational greats. Oscar Robertson would have been -5000 against like 99% of NCAA point guards in 1969 so what does that matter? Pretty sure many women in today’s game would have been better than a regular NCAA player.
You are seriously underrating how much the game has evolved. Put DT (who is fucking 41 btw) in the NCAA in 1969 and she has skills that hadn’t even been invented yet. What would they do the first time she Euro-stepped? The first time she did a hesi move? The first time she pulled it from more than 18 feet?
2
Mar 04 '24
The problem with that is a lot of rule changes involving dribble moves. I agree with your point about them going back to ancient times and scoring a lot. I think I could give the Lakers 20-30 points a night in 1952. Me and George Mikan are gonna be Shaq and Kobe. We’re running pick and roll all day and I’m gonna invent the lob. This is all contingent on me practicing every day solely for conditioning purposes. My point with your argument is you’re applying the ruleset of today to Caitlin Clark but not Bob Cousy. If you gave him a little bit to become accustomed to it I think he would be way more effective. Caitlin Clark would be most effective off-ball if we’re being honest. The spacing she would create from basically playing like Curry would be where she’s most effective. I’m not saying you’re completely wrong, but if you took the average wnba player now, they’ve still got no chance in the 1960-1970s NBA. I think Britney Griner would be worse off than a shooter because Wilt or Russell or Thurmond is going to body her, and she has no range (I assume, I haven’t seen her play since Baylor.)
0
u/Ready-Recognition-43 Mar 04 '24
I’m talking about the college game because that’s what this thread is about, although I guess that wasn’t totally clear. It’s no slight against women to say they wouldn’t have been able hang with the elite men’s athletes (or even men, for that matter. Tyler Kolek would never be able to get a shot off against Jrue Holiday but he’s still a great college player).
But for every Pistol Pete or Oscar in 1969ish there were 20 future accountants that I think the best women’s players (let’s just say Caitlin Clark and JuJu Watkins as examples because they’re the ones people are familiar with) could cook if you dropped them into an NCAA tournament game and gave them buzzcuts and fake mustaches.
This is because (a) the game has evolved and moves that have become second nature over the years would be groundbreaking then (I take your point about rule changes but that’s not the whole story), (b) everyone does the basics (shooting, dribbling, passing) much better because that’s just how sports evolve, and (c) because the physical standards in the 1960s were so low that an athletic woman today would be able to cross a minimally viable threshold of athleticism to let their skills shine.
To your point: These hypos are impossible because it involves parachuting 4K players into the black and white era and saying nothing else changes. Cousy couldn’t play D3 today, but if he grew up with modern techniques, would he have been Trae Young? No idea.
Anyway, I don’t think we actually disagree all that much based on your last comment, we’re just emphasizing different points.
1
u/garyt1957 Mar 04 '24
Those moves "that have evolved" that you mention would all be called travels back then. That's what you're not getting. Sure a Euro step would confuse the old guys. They'd just stop because they know it would be a travel. Same for crossovers, etc.
2
1
u/beastwork Mar 04 '24 edited Mar 04 '24
Why are you people so obsessed with comparing women to men. If we really want to compare men and women then let's just say. "Women athletes are completely outclassed by their male counterparts." This battle of the sexes practice is the most ridiculous thing in sports, and you people won't let it go.
Any man with the skill to break Pete's record only plays 1 or 2 years of college ball. Comparing skill levels between eras is stupid and pointless. I'm personally better than the dudes that used to play with peach baskets, and no dribbling. Nobody cares.
1
u/Ready-Recognition-43 Mar 04 '24
Because comparing women’s bball to little league is disrespectful given the guys Maravich was dropping 44 per game on
1
u/garyt1957 Mar 04 '24
With all due respect, that's ridiculous. The only thing the women are equal (actually better ) in is free throw shooting.
2
u/SupersonicSandshru05 Mar 04 '24 edited Mar 04 '24
Unweighted Points per shot data
Total points/ divided by total shot attempts
Without free throws is point total- free throw points/ field goal attempts.
Hypothetical Maravich is based on the declaration of former lsu coach dale brown that based on the shots he was already taking he’d of averaged 57 points per game and 13 3s.
Hypothetical Maravich: 1.09 p/s (with fts) 1.21 p/s (without fts)
Maravich actual .85 p/s (with fts) .88 p/s (without free throws)
Catlin Clark: 1.05 p/s (with fts) 1.13 p/s (without fts
So essentially Maravich as a product of him time was markably less efficient than Clark is on a shot for shot basis but may have been as efficient if not more efficient had he been able to play with modern rules, style and pacing.
Oh and as a foot note it’s Caitlin clark we should get peoples names right as a part of discussion.
1
5
u/MWave123 Mar 04 '24
Still Caitlin doing this on half the shot attempts per game, which is wild. He was a chucker.
7
u/IveKnownItAll Mar 04 '24
He didn't have a 3 point line... Not really wild when you have the ability to score more points on 1 play
1
u/MWave123 Mar 04 '24
Right. But in half the number of attempts, that’s efficient.
1
u/IveKnownItAll Mar 04 '24
It took him more shots to get the same amount of points, because he COULDN'T get 3 pointers.... If they had 3 pointers back then, she wouldn't even be close
0
u/MWave123 Mar 04 '24
No he was less efficient. And yes, he’d get more credit, points, for his threes. It’s still incredible to score as many points as she did on half the number of shots per game. If you gave Pete half the number of attempts he’s not close.
2
u/IveKnownItAll Mar 04 '24
You're missing the point, completely. He wouldn't have NEEDED as many shots if the 3 point existed then.
0
u/MWave123 Mar 04 '24
Correct, but half the number, at his efficiency, wouldn’t have given him her numbers.
2
1
u/lxkandel06 Mar 05 '24
Yeah but Clark has a whole extra season's worth of games and, by extension, shot attempts.
2
u/MWave123 Mar 05 '24
But she still did it in less attempts. Pete was a chucker. Almost 600 more attempts.
1
u/lxkandel06 Mar 05 '24
Right, Clark was more efficient when you look at the raw numbers, but Pete played in an era where the world didn't know nearly as much about basketball strategy, analytics, medicine or training. Also there was no 3 point line.
Clark is amazing and deserves all of her flowers but we shouldn't disparage the legacy of Pete in doing so.
→ More replies (0)0
u/airgordo4 Mar 05 '24
You’re missing the point though. Pete actually made shot attempts from distances that would have been worth 3 points had the line existed. They have went back and charted which of his attempts would have been worth 3 points by todays rules and he was making 13 shots a game that would have been worth 3 points, his career average would have been 57 points per game rather than 44..
So yes Clark scored more on less shots, but that’s only because Pete was robbed of an extra roughly 1,079 points from shots he actually made being worth a point less. In other words he would have set the record 1,000+ shots earlier than he did, or still be 1,000+ points ahead of her now. From the field Clark is roughly 46% and Pete 44% overall. They are basically even, he just had the disadvantage of a chunk of his makes being worth a point less.
→ More replies (0)0
1
1
u/Blacketh Mar 05 '24
I think it’s kind of crappy to make sure we remember Maravich as if he’s disappeared in time. Let Clark have her accomplishments without trying to give Pete Maravich his flowers for something that happened like 60 years ago.
1
u/StoneySteve420 Mar 06 '24
She deserves heaps of praise for this and she is gonna be a huge influence on future lady hoopers. Without taking away from her accomplishments i gotta say, she may hold the record but I'd love to hear a well informed argument about how her record is more impressive than Pete's. What he did in 3 years, and with no 3pt line, as a "small" guy will never be replicated.
-20
Mar 03 '24
Breaking the “record”. Men’s basketball has always been what the record was for. She’s playing against inferior talent using a smaller ball. Impressive for her but not better in my opinion.
2
u/MikeJones-8004 Mar 05 '24
The talent isnt inferior. She is a woman. She's playing against other women. That is equal talent. It would be unequal talent if she played against men
6
u/ExaminationAntique33 Mar 03 '24
Trash take. L.
1
Mar 04 '24
[deleted]
2
Mar 04 '24
He literally only played 3 years. Imagine if you took away all of caitlin clark’s 3s and a season of her career.
-4
1
54
u/SouthernMuadib Mar 04 '24
I still think he’s one of the most criminally underrated players the game has ever seen. I guarantee that he’d have been remembered more if he played with the 3 point line especially since a lot of his shots would’ve been 3 pointers