47 replies to this topic

[lethalweapon3]

lethalweapon3, on 04 September 2010 - 03:41 PM, said:

sooooo what was the thread question again?

~lw3

[MaceCase]

lethalweapon3, on 04 September 2010 - 03:41 PM, said:

sooooo what was the thread question again?

~lw3

Perhaps he was busy with other things that summer  
http://www.hawksquaw...th-about-nique/

[AHF]

Dsinner, on 12 September 2010 - 05:56 PM, said:

OK, for starters that slot HAD to go to a college player. Let's go ahead and refresh that point. I already said that IF a college player had to be picked it had to be Laettner so your points 1-2 are pointless as I would completely agree.

That is fair.  

Quote

To point 3...You've already conceeded that Laettner is considered by many to be ONE OF the greatest of all time. Right? Soooo why would you even begin to believe that one of the greatest, who had his best season, and who was VOTED by those who know 10000000X more about college basketball than you and I to be the best player that year didn't deserve to be on that team? Oh yeah, you're a Wildcat.

No.  I am basing the criteria on best player not on best college career.  Every NBA GM in the league would have taken Shaq over Laettner that year.  Every single one of them.  Shaq was the favorite for ROY.  Why?  Because he was the better player.

Quote

Shaq possibly being a better pro shouldn't have anything to do with him playing in the Olympics. FIBA play is more like college play than like the NBA.  So, logic would dictate that it would make more sense to get the better college player and not the better NBA prospect.

Come on man you have nothing to stand on with this. I'll repeat this....Laettner was the COLLEGE PLAYER OF THE YEAR (and the voting was even close) that year despite what you think of Shaq. The argument pretty much ends right there.  You really should do this already...

NBA GMs picked two players over Laettner because he wasn't the best player coming out of college.  Like I said earlier, if you needed a posterboy for the college game then the role of towel-waver deserved to go to Laettner.  There is no question that he had the best college career of the players to consider.  I just don't think he was as good in the international game circa 1992 as Shaq or Mourning would have been (this wasn't an era that resembled the current international game).  I do think this is a very debatable area whether someone is pro-Shaq or pro-Laettner, but there is no debate if you are rewarding someone for their college career and there is no debate if you are picking someone based purely on talent (Shaq was the no-brainer #1 overall pick).  It is debatable because Shaq also had some great college numbers and Laettner was also an excellent second-tier (i.e., non-franchise player) pro prospect.  

On this issue, there are many mainstream people who have put this argument in writing like ESPN's JA Adande's article last year on Isiah Thomas' snub:

Quote

We also know the political nature of the roster. Giving the lone spot slotted for a collegiate player to Christian Laettner instead of Shaquille O'Neal was equally absurd.

My argument is that you take the best players and Laettner doesn't qualify by that criteria - people knew he was not as good as Shaq back then but he had the better college career and was the NCAA POY so I at least understand the argument.

Quote

I'm not continuing with Laettner best ever argument because you're clearly not following me when I say I don't think he was. Yet you somehow want me to make an argument as to why he should be considered. I've already stated that some feel the Tourney is more important than reg season and since he's in that conversation that's enough for them. I'm not going to make an argument for something I don't beleive. It wouldn't be a good one.

Agreed.  There isn't a good argument for Laettner as the greatest college basketball player of all-time.  That is why he isn't in the conversation for greatest college basketball player of all-time.