Replies

For the record, Maravich played little or no defense in college. He was an outstanding ballplayer, but he scored forty points a game because he took forty shots a game. His dad was the coach which is often the case of players who score that many points. He never shot better than 45% from the field in college or the pros. Maravich was taller and faster than Fredette and obviously a better passer. But Fredette has YMCA hops? Fredette has a 36 inch vertical leap. Not too many white kids and not a lot of black kids can’t jump that high. He’s got better range than Maravich, heck he’s got better range than anybody I’ve ever seen.

And Fredette was hitting 48% (waaaaay above Maravich's 44-45%) while averaging 16 points per game?

Maravich also averaged more assists per game and doubled Fredette's rebounds per game.

And I don't know how old you are, but anything past the half-court line was Maravich's range. Honestly, find me anyone who coaches or writes colleges sports for a living who watched both Maravich and Fredette play who thinks Fredette belongs in the same gym.

Basically, then, Fredette's FG average is around 47%, Maravich's around 45%. Maravich was taller, faster, and a better passer, had more assists per game (despite scoring all of those extra points), and more more rebounds per game (despite Fredette's 'YMCA hops"), is the all-time NCAA scoring leader, despite playing only three years, was the NBA rookie of the year, scoring over 22 PPG, played for the Hawks and the Jazz (with no supporting cast); retired after a knee injury and is one of the youngest players ever elected into the NBA Hall of Fame, and was named of the 50 Greatest NBA Players of All Time. Maravich was probably the best ball handler the HBA ever saw.

But Fredette has that 36-inch leap and better range than anyone you've ever seen. And he has that potential thing going for him.

So yeah, I guess that makes them equal, or maybe Fredette even has the edge.

Checking the stats . . . Maravich did okay in the NBA during an injury-shortened ten-year career. A 68-point game. Five 50+-point games. 35 games with 40+ points.

A little Pistol Pete:

68, Shot by Shot - against Walt Frazier, Earl Monroe and Spencer Haywood

Maravich LSU Mix - Check 2:18, 2:24, 2:29, 2:33

I'm 61 and was a big fan of Maravich. I'm not saying Fredette wil be as good, I'm just saying he has offensive capabilities that can make him valuable in the NBA. All the people criticizing Fredette are pointing out his weaknesses and omitting his strengths. You forget that a lot of people said the same thing about Maravich when he went into the NBA. They said he played little defense in college (they were right) and that he would have a tough time fitting in due to his ballhogging style and wild shots he grew accustomed to in college (he did). But Pete's strengths were such he adjusted, his overall talent eventually shone, and he became a star.

Fredette is not just a great outside shooter, he has excellent moves, he can get to the basket, and he can find the open man. Name someone else who has his range. I've never seen anyone hit shots that far out with such facility.

P.S.If someone like Steve Nash, who is about as slow as any good player I've ever seen, can become a star in the NBA, then so can Fredette. Fredette is bigger, stronger, faster, jumps higher, shoots better, and has a quicker release than Nash.