Dsinner

Very bad idea for both our starting lineup and our bench. It's a lose/lose..

You guys are absolutely insane to discredit MJ as the greatest ever simply because he was a SG. Look at his supporting cast. Nearly every one of the players you are mentioning were on teams that were asolutely loaded. MJ had Pippen and that's it. And this isn't coming from an MJ "hugger" as I absolutely loathed the guy. MJ was the best ever because he made every single player on his team better.

Wilt and Kareem had the advantage of being freaks of nature especially in their era. MJ was an average sized SG who didn't have a single athletic superior advantage over any other player in his era. Sure he was a great leaper and athlete but not a "freak" by any measure. Add that to the fact that his supporting cast was by far the weakest of any "dynasty" MVP and IMO the "best ever" title should go to MJ.

I'm going to go blow chunks now.

Actually, here are 3 very good reasons that Laettner didn't deserve the spot on the Olympic team:

The team should have been about the best players on the same team, i.e., the "Dream" team. With that in mind:

(1) Dominique Wilkins was better and would have made the team better;

(2) Isiah Thomas was better and would have made the team better;

(3) Shaq was better and would have made the team better which is why Laettner's name being called with the first or second pick of the NBA draft would have shocked people whose job it is to identify the best basketball players (i.e., NBA scouts and GMs).

[i have yet to hear an argument for Laettner as the greatest player of all time but if you think there is a credible one, please feel free to share it - especially one that doesn't make it seem like Robert Horry is an all-time great.]

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.

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.

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... :white flag:

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.

I'll bite.

It seems like you think "greatest of all-time" is the same as "one of the greatest of all-time." Let me tell you the difference so we can define our terms. Greatest means better than all others. When people say "one of the greatest" that means that others are better than the player in question but he is among the elite.

Ok, I see what you're saying there. Regardless, he is in the conversation by some (which is one of my two original points that led to this ^^^ discussion). When you are considered ONE of the greatest ever than an argument can be made (see his tourney records, which is by a some more important than empty reg season stats) that he is. Again, I don't think he is but I have heard and read convo's in which a very good argument was made and by non Duke fans mind you.

My other point, and the orignal point that lead to this "best ever" discussion, is that Laettner CLEARLY deserved to be the college player on that team. There simply is no other argument, other than a keen "best ever" deflection, that can be made to that point. If you want to continue this conversation let's stick to this point. I concede that Laettner is not in the the best ever conversation and will even erase all memory and ignore future references that say otherwise. So, if you have any clear justification as to why the unanimous player of the year, one of the best to ever play the game (that better lol?), and perhaps the best tourney player of all time (don't even start) didn't deserve to be on that squad by all means let's hear it. And showing Shaq had better numbers isn't going to get it done.

His history as a primary scorer is that of an inefficient scorer with problems on the defensive end. He is much better suited for the role he had last year where he is not the primary focus of the defense.

Yeah, he's great coming in and scoring all the points for our bench but in no way is he a primary scorer for ANY winning team.

Oh my mistake, between THE Stanford Cardinal, playing in the bay area and some subtle racist confusion over him and Mark Madsen that I'm not too proud of I mistakingly mislabeled the former boilermaker. Is that your war cry now? "Oh CTC made a flub in an argument I'm getting my *ss kicked in so I'm going to make that my focus!" None of that changes the fact Cardinal had an awesome season that year that made Jerry West go crazy over him. No I wouldn't trade Smoove for Redick because not suprisingly Smoove is top twenty in Defensive Rating himself. You may go ahead and poo poo the inverse of the ORTG stat now, argue that one why don't ya "Smoove is not a great defensive player because that stat favors guys that sneer at coaches." Not without notice but I may not be the GM in Miami but the GM in Orlando thought enough of Redick to match his deal with the GM of Chicago. Clearly they (and I) are smarter than you and don't waste their time just trying to argue one stat when a player is clearly great in a larger amount of metrics in addition to that. The stats are not just noticed by GMs considering that the coaches whose opinion you value more than any "message board homer" also gave the nod for Al to be on his 1st allstar team. Your argument is still without merit because you are trying to paint being an efficient scorer as being useless, why even bother keeping percentage stats then?you are gointg to feebly try and keep a focus on me when it has been proven by I and others that without a doubt, Al is great at rebounding, defense and efficient scoring all while still having plenty of growth within him. Will his soon to be minted max contract convince you of this or will your subjective view still cloud your assesment of this player?

My favorite was that employee #8 would have led that stat if he could have shot better. LOL, no f'n sh*t. Diesel, give it up. You got yours handed to you in this one. Lick your wounds and move on.

What'd you do, just pull the names out of the post without reading it.

I was talking about offensive ability. Both of those guys (in their prime) run circles around Al offensively. Both of those guys had midrange games and post games. McDyess led the Denver Nuggets and was an offensive goto guy. Al has more potential because of his defense, but offensively, he can't enter the room...

Why do people keep comparing other player's strengths VS Horf and give that reason as to why they don't understand his hype. Sure they would run circles around other players more than Horf, but not around Horf himself because he is better at D. That's the thing, Horf might not be as good a shooter as player X or as good a rebounder as player y or as good a defender as player Z but players XYand Z all usually have an extreme weakness (Kukoc couldn't guard a fire hydrant McDyess couldn't dribble and walk at the same time) . Hor'f all around game is what makes him already that good. Take the fact that he's only played two seasons and right now I'd take him over every other player mentioned in this thread. Even if he's already peaked he's still a decent player but I think he's going to be even better.

As was said, it's easy to game plan when you have Deke and Mookie. We, as it seems, have the exact opposite...A PF playing C, although a good defensive PF and the worst defensive starting PG in the league. Kinda hard to game plan that one. Good LD, at least you're not going to go down doing the same ol same ol.

On another note, good thing we got rid of that defensive minded coach lol.

As I have read through some of this, I think that some of you must be delusional. Al is good, but he's not a guaranteed point. The bottom line is that in all of this hype on Al, he hasn't developed his offense to the point that he's even our 3rd option. He's a guy who scores a lot because of wide open looks and put backs. That does not make a Timmy Duncan. Certainly doesn't make a Toni Kukoc or a Antonio McDyess. As History goes, Horf is far down the totem pole on offense. Where Horf makes his mark is rebounding and in some cases positional defense. Horf has a great body and he's an oldschool bruiser type (i.e. he likes the contact). However, offensively, he's still under construction. Fortunately for us, we don't need him to be a guaranteed point. We would like that, but he's not needed in that way. I often think, if we moved Smoove for a C (like B. Lopez) and we moved Al to PF, we would struggle offensively because I don't see Horf creating shots or making high percentage shots.

And I love Horf. But I love him for his attitude, his defense/style of play and the potential he has on offense. I think one day, he could be like Karl Malone.

Kukoc or McDyess?? I'd take Horford over any one of those. Kukoc isn't even worth discussion, McDyess, in his prime, is a very good player to compare Horf to only Horf will be a better player.

Who said "He's the best midrange shooter, period" (Al)?

I'll remind you, I didn't. You did. He is a good-very good player. That All-Star selection and his pedigree lends most to believe he has arrived. He may in time but not yet. That's all.

You're right crawford said it but then you argued that Tim was a better shooter. He proved you wrong so you resorted to a "Al vs Timmy" deflection. Timmy's the better player (NO ONE should argue that) and, as surprising as it seems, Al is now the better midrange shooter which is something he obviously worked on after his rookie season. That's the thing with Horf, all of you are asking why everyon'e is so high on him and I can tell you the reason I am is because he's willing to work on his negatives. Very good rebounder, now a very good midrange shooter who is a decent passer with decent handles who averages a double/double. The question shouldn't be why all the love but rather why all the hate.

Of those 14, how many of those have played worthy of their pick or their press?

Has Shelden played worthy of his pick?

How about Reddick (co-player of the year in college basketball)?

Uhm,,,Daniel Ewing?

Luol Deng playing like a 7th pick?

Most of the Duke players are players with good fundamentals who come off the bench because they lack the pro talent. They have been taught to play in a system and when they get to the pros, there is no system. You either have talent and can do anything or you don't, The only player who played all four years and was not systematized was Grant Hill. His father played a strong role in him developing though. The rest of these guys are bound to come off the bench as a specialty player. Since the days of Danny Ferry Duke has never been a college that you finished and came out as a star.

No Duke player from the last three decades has been a core player on an NBA titlist, and just four—Grant Hill, Christian Laettner, Elton Brand, and Carlos Boozer—have played in an NBA All-Star game.

Think of that List....

Elton Brand = Didn't finish at Duke and was a consistent street baller at the Ruck.

Carloz Boozer = Left Duke Early.

Grant Hill played all 4 years at duke but had his father's guidance towards becoming a star.

Christian Laettner probably rode the fame of Dream Team 1 to the Allstar game.

We had the ability to watch Shelden. You know what happened to Shelden? It wasn't that h couldn't.... it's that when he got to the pros, there was no Coach K constantly pushing him! Coach K pushes, motivates, and directs, but sometimes, you have to let a player find their own way. I think that's the failure in the systematization of Dukies. They become peices of Caoch K's chess board but when they get to the pros, they are expected to be able to move themselves. So yeah, coach K can fuss, cuss, and snort his players to wins, but when they leave, there's no pro coach that is going to baby them like that. In the words of Jim Rome, "It's a grown man's game!!"

Problem with your argument is with two things... 1)you're admitting they are overhyped players (meaning they weren't as good as the golden arches made them out to be going into Duke anyway and Duke made them better than they actually were). So coach K didn't ruin them, they simply weren't NBA material when they got to Duke and weren't NBA material when they left. If you ever watch any of Dukes games you would see that Sheldon, Reddick, Ewing etc. weren't ever going to be NBA stars from day one before coach K "ruined" them. This is a no-brainer, or at least should be.

2.) Coach K has taken a group of Superstars (not All-stars mind you) and accomplished something that hasn't been done in a loooong time. So, you're whole Coach K's system isn't for a pro athlete, coach K ruins pro talent is complete utter sh*t.

It's basketball thinking at it's worst to believe that Duke's program takes a bunch of Pro talented players and turns them into average to good college players at their max. I can't even begin to explain how short sighted this argument is.

So, the players that made it did so despite Duke and had possible other outside influences that were truly the reason for their success? So with that logic the Dukees that didn't make it didn't so because of outside influences as well. Diesel why do you always argue out of both sides of your mouth? It's like talking to a parrot. You have no idea what you're saying you just respond based on a reaction.

"Duke players can't play pro ball except these and they did it because of blah blah blah". Or," Coach K can yell, cus and snort at his players all he wants but when they get to the pro's they're not going to be babied. " LOL do you even read what you type? Cussing, snorting and yelling is babying?!?! LOL, Diesel the parrot.

Sounds like yet another self fulfilling prophecy type person on Hawksquawk.. Get ready Sy! Cause no matter what you do, it won't be good enough because we have found your antagonist!

Yeah, not sure I read where anyone said he was the next Ginobili. He's going to be a surprise because no one had even heard of him, much less worked him out. Watching him play against legit NBA players in summer league showed me enough that he isn't scared of them and has the handles and slashing ability to make the NBA. He needs to work on finishing and possibly his mid range game. Not sure of all his pluses or minuses on such a small sample but did see enough to know he's a legit NBA'r.

Will have no Impact whatsoever, and never be inserted unless we are playing the magic

If healthy you will be completely surprised by him I see.

I have to disagree with you there.

Many times, college coaches prepare players for pro careers. They teach them the things that they would need to be good defenders, good offensive players, and good. I just don't see that jump in Duke players.

In the 2009 season alone Duke had 14 guys in the leage. That was the most out of any ACC team (arguably the strongest basketball conference). Explain that please and that was just one season.

Jesus, Laettner (a loooong NBA career) Brand,Ferry, Boozer, Battier and HIll to name just a few and these are all Forwards which Duke is even further famous for not developing. Besides college systems are way over hyped when it comes to their determining a players development. Ask Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Tracy McGrady, LeBron James, Amare Stoudemire, and Dwight Howard if they fetl coach K would have prevented them from becoming the players they are. Wait, they didn't even go to college. Point being Duke is just as successful as any other school at producing NBA players. The problem is people expect every Duke player to be an NBA all-star. That simply doesn't happen in the real world.

To answer the other post, not sure what the other questions were but the point I was trying to make is that IF a college player had to be on the Dream Team,. Laettner was the deserving candidate. Which then turned into Laettner is considered by many to be the greatest college player ever. Those were the only two points I was making.

I have to disagree with you there.

Many times, college coaches prepare players for pro careers. They teach them the things that they would need to be good defenders, good offensive players, and good. I just don't see that jump in Duke players.

In the 2009 season alone Duke had 14 guys in the leage. That was the most out of any ACC team (arguably the strongest basketball conference). Explain that please and that was just one season.

Jesus, Laettner (a loooong NBA career) Brand,Ferry, Boozer, Battier and HIll to name just a few and these are all Forwards which Duke is even further famous for not developing. Besides college systems are way over hyped when it comes to their determining a players development. Ask Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Tracy McGrady, LeBron James, Amare Stoudemire, and Dwight Howard if they fetl coach K would have prevented them from becoming the players they are. Wait, they didn't even go to college. Point being Duke is just as successful as any other school at producing NBA players. The problem is people expect every Duke player to be an NBA all-star. That simply doesn't happen in the real world.

To answer the other post, not sure what the other questions were but the point I was trying to make is that IF a college player had to be on the Dream Team,. Laettner was the deserving candidate. Which then turned into Laettner is considered by many to be the greatest college player ever. Those were the only two points I was making.

I don't think the system at Duke hurts the pro careers of the players there. It has never been about Coach K ruining guys with great pro tools. It has always been about the hype setting the bar too high for hyped players without the tools to be stars whether at Duke, UK, or wherever.

On Alcinder/Laettner, if there is not a meaningful criteria by which Laettner was the better player then Laettner is not in the discussion. He is in the discussion of greatest college players but not the conversation of the[\u] greatest college player except to say "you can argue for x based on this or y based on that ... Laettner had a great career but here is where he falls short of the top guys."

Why would I argue Laettner vs Alcinder when I agree? My point, the point you are arguing despite being shown PROOF otherwise, is that by many other people Laettner is indeed in the conversation. Maybe not by your criteria, maybe not by mine but by many is without a doubt (I've already linked you the proof to back that up) in the conversation. You're obviously not going to admit this since no one is better than Alcinder in your eyes but just remember not everyone else has the same basketball vision err goggles that you have.

I think you've penned it right Gray. A lot of our fanbase believes that we need Brook Lopez to be competitive. If Horf is willing to play C (starting) then having BUs who are tough like Thomas and Zaza is good.

I want to see the hands of them who would trade Smoove for Lopez and move Horf to PF.

If Horf can't stop good C's WTH makes you think Thomas and ZaZa can? I lke our FAs but they clearly won't be enough compared to the rest of our division's pick ups. The only way we progress out of the 2nd round (hopefully) is that this new offense gets Joe some rest, Marv to step up BIG TIME and Josh grows to become elite. Other than that we'll be lucky to make it to the 2nd round.

Sy is absolutely fearless. He's not scared of NBA talent and is a slasher who draws fouls. Something we desperately need on this team. I like him and think, if given the chance, will be a very valuable bench player at the least.

Name your criteria for greatest player ever and tell me why Laettner exceeds Alcinder. Every criteria you mention is one where Alcinder clearly excess Laettner.

As for the links, the first several I read said he was considered "one if the greatest" ever and some had lists where he was not in the top 5.

Give me the criteria by which Laettner exceeds Alcinder and why that is the most meaningful criteria.

Individual stats - Not close

Individual awards - Not close

Postseason success - Fewer MOPs and fewer championships. (I see you like to exclude his freshman year for career averages but include it for career totals, though). Not close to the best on per game postseason numbers.

Team success - Worse W/L; fewer chamionships

Great player? Absolutely.

Arguably better than Alcinder? Only if you are an absolute Duke homer

Are you not even reading my posts? I NEVER said he was better than Kareem man. I'm pretty sure I even said Kareem was the better player in at least two of my posts. Please re-read a little more carefully. I'm simply saying he is in the discussion by MANY.

The Bottom line here is that Laettner was a product of the Duke system. Coack K doesn't build great pros. Think of all the guys who he has coached who didn't make it. I can only think of a few who did:

Brand, Maggette, and Hill. All three would have been great pros without going to Duke. Then you have your Hurley, Laettner, Ferry, JWilliams, SWilliams, Avery, Carrawell, Riddick, Battier, Wojo, Amaker, Duhon, etc. None of these guys were as great as their college legend would have lead you to believe that they were.

It's the system, It's not pro friendly.

Wrong thread man. Not the discussion. But, for the record, you can't say that the Duke system doesn't make good pros and then say they good pro's that came from duke had nothing to do with the system. That's an argument that might have meant something 10 years ago but is completely BS now. Old news, wrong thread.

Which of those links argues he is the best player in college basketball hostory? None as far as I can see.

If you want to say that when some people talk about great college players that Laettner is discussed, I won't argue that. Some people argue Amare Stoudamire is one of the greatest players in the NBA today. No one argues Amare is the best. No one other than homers thinks Laettner was the greatest college player.

I mention Lew because he is the greatest college player ever. I could talk Bill Russell or other superior players as well, but to be in the conversation for greatest ever you have to arguably have been better than Lew.

Laettner is not in that conversation.

What? Each one of those links quoted word for word "Laettner is considered by many to be the greatest college basketball player ever." That's nearly word for word in each of those links (there are plenty more links I can post that quote the exact same line. What that means is that he is obviously in the conversation by many.

Some season facts from that year. I don't think Shaq or Zo were in the convo for these either...

Laettner won the 1992 USBWA Player Of The Year, AP Player Of The Year, Naismith Player Of The Year, Adolph F. Rupp Trophy, NABC Player Of The Year, and the Wooden Player Of The Year awards.

We rank an NBA players worth by what he does in the playoffs but regular season doesn't mean jack. Ask JJ about that. Here are a few "Playoff" facts about Laettners career...

NCAA Tournament Records Held: *Most points scored: 407 *Most free throws made: 142 *Most free throw attempts: 167 *Most games played: 23

Laettner is one of only four players (including teammates Greg Koubek and Brian Davis) to play in four consecutive NCAA Men's Division I Final Fours, and the only one to ever start in all four Final Fours. He owns the record for most tournament games played, which may never be beaten (to do so, someone would have to play in four straight Finals). This is an interesting point, considering that no player, not even Laettner himself, has played in four consecutive finals. His performance in the 1991 NCAA Tournment earned him the 1991 NCAA Tournment's Most Outstanding Player. He earned a place on the All-NCAA Tournament Team in 1991 and 1992.

AHF I respect you on here as much as one can be but you have some foggy UK goggles on if you don't think the unanimous player of the year didn't deserve to be the college player on that team. Should he have been over Nique? Absolutely not. Over Shaq and Zo? It's not even a discussion man. Their careers and year don't even register on the same map as his career, or more importantly for this thread, his year.

Are you guys insane!?!? The man has an air thinning house. Which means, he has golden lungs.

http://www.mysticgames.com/famouspeople/ChristianLaettner.htm

http://www.kosmix.com/topic/christian_laettner

http://www.daylife.com/topic/09kwf5hc329Lx

http://www.mahalo.com/christian-laettner

http://www.biographicon.com/view/1p6qd/Christian_Laettner

http://www.heraldsun.com/printer_friendly/6459428

I can keep going if I need to?

Laettner kicked UK's butt in that classic matchup so I understand the ribbing for sure. That game was an absolute classic even if it didn't come out the way I wanted.

Laettner really isn't in the conversation for greatest college player ever, either. He was at the height of his hype and hasn't been for a decade once perspective set in. Let's exclude his freshman year since you think that would unfairly prejudice him and see where his stats are compared to a player who was clearly his superior in every way in college:

Laettner: v. Alcinder

19.2 ppg v. 26.4 ppg

55.6 FG% v. 63.9 FG%

8.7 rpg.... v. 15.5 rpg

1-time POY v. 2-time POY

1-time NCAA Tournament MOP v. 3-time NCAA Tournament MOP

95-20 college record v. 88-2 college record

2-time champion v. 3-time champion

By every measure, Lew Alcinder is heads and shoulders above Laettner. It isn't even close.

For the record I'm not saying he WAS the greatest or that he was even greater than Alcinder (which seems to be the only player you are mentioning) but he is in the convo with a lot of people that are even Duke haters. Most people that don't include Laettner do so because of his lackluster NBA career (even though by most standards it wasn't that bad). Players were different back in Al's days. You can compare numbers all you want but I gurantee you Wilt wouldn't put up 100 vs Shaq or Ewing. I don't really like to compare players from different eras either collegeor pros. Again, I don't think Laettner is the greatest college player ever but by most he is top 5 easily.

Man, what a waste. The guy had al the skills in the world and he just wasted it. :cant believe:

That's part of what made me despise this guy. I've never despised a hawks player in my life but this guy changed that. Not only could he have been one of the best in the game ever, but he had to take the place of Smitty. JR Rider is the poster child for idiot athletes. I remember the guy getting busted for selling stolen cell phones. WTF is a multi millionaire doing with stolen cell phones. What a waste of God given talent.

All of the one's mentioned are great so I won't repeat them. But another game that sticks out with me (although not really a great "game") was the '96? Hawks vs Supersonics when Smitty went off on a 3 point barrage. I was at that game and I've never seen a player get that hot from down town. Def one of the greatest performances I've ever seen.