As someone who held a career scoring record in basketball, only to have it broken by a once-in-a-generation talent, I feel for the legacy of “Pistol Pete” Maravich. Maravich held the NCAA career Division I scoring record of 3,667 points for 54 years before the University of Iowa’s Caitlin Clark finished her collegiate career with 3951 points.
In my case, I held the career scoring record (2,483 points) at Davidson College for thirty years before a guy by the name of Steph Curry came along and tallied 2,635 points.
Before moving forward, I want to be crystal clear about a few things. First, it is not my intent to throw shade on Clark or women’s basketball. Scoring that many points on any collegiate level is an incredible feat. And, Clark’s role in building on the work done by women’s basketball icons such as Cheryl Miller, Cheryl Swoopes, Jennifer Lobo, Maya Moore, Sue Bird, Diana Taurasi, and others, in taking the visibility and popularity of women’s basketball to unprecedented levels is extraordinary. For proof of her impact, simply consider the fact that for the first time in NCAA history television ratings, for the 2024 women’s Final Four were higher than those of the men. That is a groundbreaking achievement.
It’s about time!
Frankly, I prefer the women’s game to the men’s. There’s less dribbling and one-on-one play and more passing and movement. While women can’t produce gravity-defying slam dunk highlight moments, the game flows better and is a much more beautiful, no pun intended, game to watch.
So, make no mistake. I am a big fan of women’s basketball and of Caitlin Clark. She is simply amazing. And while we marvel at her shooting and scoring ability, she is an even better passer. Not only did she lead the country in scoring last year, she also led it in assists. Clearly, she is a once-in-a-generation player. And what she has done to elevate the popularity of the game has been nothing less than sensational. So, when it comes down to which player will have had more of an impact on the game of basketball, Clark’s impact will be far greater than Maravich’s. Kids all over the world will be emulating and imitating her many moves ensuring her impact will be broad, deep, and long-lasting.
I fully understand the power and reach of such an impact. Pistol Pete had that type of impact on me when I was a basketball-obsessed thirteen-year-old in Northern New Jersey in 1970. That was before today’s ubiquitous television coverage of college basketball. I had heard about and read in magazines such as Street and Smiths and Sports Illustrated about the exploits of this skinny, floppy-haired basketball sensation from Louisiana State University with his signature floppy socks who was putting up incredible scoring numbers.
So when LSU received an invitation to play in the National Invitational Tournament in New York City and I learned that the game would be televised by a local New York station, I was glued to our black and white television in anticipation. To this day, that introduction to Pistol Pete Maravich remains seared into my memory.
The first time he touched the ball was when he controlled a defensive rebound. While there was nothing notable about securing a rebound, what he did immediately afterward was. He took one dribble and unleased a perfectly placed behind-the-back full-court length pass into the hands of a streaking teammate for an uncontested layup. My jaw dropped and my head almost exploded. Did I just see what I just saw? A perfectly placed full court perfectly behind the back pass? Really? I knew Louisiana was a long way from New Jersey, but this dude was from another planet.
Later that afternoon, I was back on my usual playground basketball court practicing behind-the-back passes. I also begged my mother to buy me some floppy socks, just like Pistol Pete’s.
But contemplating who has a more profound, long-term impact on the game is not what this comparison is about.
It is about the pure act of scoring. Of putting points on the board. In this context, despite having tallied more career points than any Division I player, man or woman, Caitlin Clark is not the greatest scorer to ever play college basketball. That honor belongs to Pete Maravich. While Clark is a better pure shooter (46.2% from the field and 85.8% from the foul line vs. Maravich’s 43.8% and 77.5% respectively), Pistol Pete was a better scorer. There is a difference. Being a good shooter is about the simple act of shooting the basketball. Being a good scorer requires more than simple shooting ability. Specifically, scorers have a unique ability to be creative and persistent in being able to create shots, often when being double or even triple-teamed against defenses that are designed specifically to stop them from scoring. Again, the point is not to diminish Clark’s otherworldly ability to score points, both as a pure shooter and scorer who can create her own shots. She’s both a tremendous shooter and scorer.
But as a pure scorer? Maravich is in another category.
Let’s consider the numbers.
Clark scored 3,951 career points over the course of four years and a total of 139 games for a career average of 28.4 points per game. This, versus Maravich’s college career total of 3,667 points scored in just 83 total games. That averages out to an astounding 44.2 points per game! That’s more than one point per minute. And that was before the 3-point shot! It is an astounding statistic. The next closest men’s career scoring average is 33.8 points per game by the great Oscar Robertson.
If your team counts on you to score, doing so becomes an obsession. If you successfully fulfill your role as defined by your coaches and teammates, the chances of your team winning games improves. Thus, I approached each game with a “scorer’s mentality,” which means that you are obsessed with figuring out ways to score points. Or, to put it another way, I never met a shot I didn’t like.
I did my fair share of putting points on the board during my college career with a per-game average of 23.4. As much as I was obsessed with scoring and as hard as I worked to score points, I simply cannot imagine anyone averaging 44.2 points per game over three seasons. The only scoring feat more impressive was Wilt Chamberlain averaging 50.4 points per game in 80 games for the Warriors during the 1961-62 NBA season.
Again, the purpose of this essay is not to diminish the brilliance of Caitlin Clark. It is simply to suggest that while we celebrate her brilliance that we also give due respect and pay homage to Pistol Pete Maravich, the greatest scorer in the history of the college game.