Legendary Question: Was Lue Huskers’ Best?

[Huskermedic]

Discuss.

Randy York’s N-Sider
Dave Hoppen is a financial analyst, so it should come as no surprise that Nebraska’s leading basketball scorer of all-time poses two important questions as he prepares to receive the 2013 Whitehead Distinguished Alumni Award at Friday night’s Nebraska Basketball Hall-of-Fame Banquet at Lincoln Station.
Hoppen’s first question: Was Tyronn Lue Nebraska’s best professional basketball player in history? His second question cuts closer to Husker real estate that Hoppen has owned for 27 years: Would Lue be Nebraska’s all-time leading scorer if he had returned for one more season 14 years ago instead of turning pro?

http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.d...CLID=206405560

[mjw11]

Mikki Moore?

[NavyWarrant]

I think Lue benefited from being on a very talented Laker squad. I would say Piatkoski was the more complete pro, just on horrible teams.

[speedy44]

Lue shutting down Iverson is Nebraska basketball’s shining moment in the NBA. One day he will come back to DONU and restore the order.

[bilsker]

Interesting question. Obviously it comes down to Pike or Lue. Strickland had a nice career and his PPG weren't too much different than those two but his shooting wasn't as good.

PPG. Lue 8.5 v. Pike 7.5
3%: Lue 39% v. Pike 40%
FG%: Lue 44% v. Pike 43%
Minutes: Lue 22.7 v Pike 18.5

Some of the other states aren't fair to compare since they were different positions. Shooting-wise they are a wash. Lue scored a little more (13% more) per game and played a little more. If you don't concede that it's a wash I'd have to go with Lue...by a wisker.

[SoCalRed]

Best pro career was Piatkowski, albeit on subpar teams. Lue was good, but hardly exceptional.

[SoCalRed]

Interesting question. Obviously it comes down to Pike or Lue. Strickland had a nice career and his PPG weren't too much different than those two but his shooting wasn't as good.

PPG. Lue 8.5 v. Pike 7.5
3%: Lue 39% v. Pike 40%
FG%: Lue 44% v. Pike 43%
Minutes: Lue 22.7 v Pike 18.5

Some of the other states aren't fair to compare since they were different positions. Shooting-wise they are a wash. Lue scored a little more (13% more) per game and played a little more. If you don't concede that it's a wash I'd have to go with Lue...by a wisker.

Played different positions, and their roles were completely different. Pike was the scoring forward and the Clips relied on him to make three-pointeers. Lue was a PG, not necessarily the scoring guard.

Based on length of career and importance to their respective teams, Pike arguably had the better career.

Does that mean he was a better player? Hard to say; neither was the key to their respective teams and neither will go down in anyone's pantheon of great players.

[bilsker]

Played different positions, and their roles were completely different. Pike was the scoring forward and the Clips relied on him to make three-pointeers. Lue was a PG, not necessarily the scoring guard.

Based on length of career and importance to their respective teams, Pike arguably had the better career.

Does that mean he was a better player? Hard to say; neither was the key to their respective teams and neither will go down in anyone's pantheon of great players.

This particular conversation is like discussing blondes v. brunettes. Neither can really be wrong because the stats (albeit from different positions) are so close and the careers themselves rather unremarkable. It's not like comparing Paul Silas and Kyle Korver (sorry for the creighton reference)...while Korver actually scores a little more than silas ever did it's impossible to come to any other conclusion than that Silas had the more remarkable NBA career. 100 out of 100 NBA experts would make that call. I bet it would be close to 50-50 on Lue v. Pike.

So it's so close between the two it's really a wash IMO. And like I said...at least to me...if you made me pick I say Lue.

But since it's friday and I don't feel like working....

Pike was a slightly better scorer if you take their minutes and extend them to a 48 minute game: 19.5 v. 18. But again, you are talking about a "scoring forward" v. a PG. Obviously, the NBA has changed over the years but a 1.5 differnce between a "scoring forward" and a PG isn't much, if anything. For the clips Pike never averaged more than 1.6 3s a game...and 1.1 for his career. So while that was his calling card more or less...he was far from prolific. So was he better at HIS position than Lue was at his? Like I said...neither was remarkable...both were certainly servicable role players based on their relatively long careers.

I guess the tipping point for Lue might be that he has a little more notoriety than Pike...lots of people will remember the Name "tyron lue" from that finals against the lakers..."isn't he that guy that harrassed Iverson?". Only real NBA junkies will recall eric piatkowski.

Coin flip though.

[CrnhskrBob]

Discuss.

For my money, Eric Piatkowski was the best, hands down!



http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.d...CLID=206405560

For my money, Eric Piatkowski was the best, hands down

[Underdog]

Nate Branch - long time Harlem Globetrotter. I know nothing about his career with Nebraska, but I did see him with the Globetrotters. Could be the best pro to come out of Nebraska.

[Underdog]

Stu Lantz also had a decent pro career back in the early 70's. 8 seasons and averaged 12 ppg. I think that's better than Lue?

[BurbankHusker]

Interesting question. Obviously it comes down to Pike or Lue. Strickland had a nice career and his PPG weren't too much different than those two but his shooting wasn't as good.

PPG. Lue 8.5 v. Pike 7.5
3%: Lue 39% v. Pike 40%
FG%: Lue 44% v. Pike 43%
Minutes: Lue 22.7 v Pike 18.5

Some of the other states aren't fair to compare since they were different positions. Shooting-wise they are a wash. Lue scored a little more (13% more) per game and played a little more. If you don't concede that it's a wash I'd have to go with Lue...by a wisker.

A wisker is even a smaller margin than a whisker....