![]() ![]() In the Top 10, only he and Oscar Robertson played in less than four years and appeared in less than 100 games. Maravich is the all-time scoring leader in college basketball history. Maravich topped the 1,000 point mark in each of his three years in college. Curry never scored at least 1,000 points in a single NCAA season. Steph scored 1,032 fewer points than Pistol Pete in 21 more games played. If you translate that to college career points totals, Pete Maravich still tops Stephen Curry, even if the latter played in more collegiate games than Pistol Pete. That's one hell of a difference right there. That's just half of what Pistol Pete scored per game. Take that number away from his college career scoring average of 25.3, that would result to a 21.3 points per game scoring average. That means he scored an extra four points per game because of the three point shot. Not On The Same LevelĬurry made 4.0 three pointers per game on the average. But on the other hand, we can compute Stephen Curry's college scoring average without the benefit of the three point shot. That's almost a 20 point scoring difference per game in favor of Pistol Pete, and without the benefit of the three point line at that.Īs we said, we can only imagine Pistol Pete's scoring average would've been had there been a three pointer during his time. We said 'only' because Pete Maravich averaged an astounding 44.2 points per game during his three years at LSU. Even with he three point line, Stephen Curry 'only' averaged 25.3 points per game during his collegiate career. 412 of his trifectas, he became a super scorer in college. 54% of his shot attempts per game were from beyond the arc, and with him making. Considering he averaged just 4.4 two point makes per outing, Curry virtually lived by the three pointer. In three seasons at Davidson, Curry averaged 4.0 three pointers made per game. On the other hand, Stephen Curry thrived with the three point shot. Given that he averaged 44.2 points per game at LSU, we can only imagine what his scoring average would've been had there been a three point line back then. He just kept on shooting the leather and scored almost at will. The absence of the three point line didn't stop Pete Maravich from hoisting up long distance bombs. Yep, every basket that Maravich scored was just worth two points, whether he shot the ball from 20, 30 to even 40 feet away from the hoop. If you watch Pistol Pete's highlights at Louisiana State, notice that there is no three point arc on the basketball court. ![]() But before we put him on the same NCAA pedestal as Pete Maravich, let us remember first that that back in the 1960's, college basketball had a different rule book. Stephen Curry is the best pure shooter today and is perhaps the best we've seen in this generation. But is he the better scorer than Pete Maravich? Different Rule Book ![]() Curry is considered as one of the greatest shooters ever ( if not the greatest ), given his range and accuracy. He and backcourt partner Klay Thompson have been dubbed as the Splash Brothers because of their ability to put points on the board. Still, he was one of the best scorers of his era.Ĭurry meanwhile is one of the NBA’s top gunners. While Maravich led the NBA in scoring once in his career, he never averaged the same ridiculous numbers in the big league. When he played in the NBA though, it became a different story. No one has been able to score in college like Pistol Pete did, not even Stephen Curry. The Pistol is considered as one of the greatest offensive talents the game of basketball has ever seen. Maravich led the nation in scoring in each of his three seasons at LSU. Curry led the nation in scoring during his final season at Davidson and his scoring outbursts were often likened to the ones produced by the man they called Pistol in the 60’s. The main reason for the comparison is Curry’s ability as a pure scorer. Ever since he was in college, Stephen Curry has been compared to the great Pete Maravich. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |