No, you attribute it to one guy shooting more, particularly when he shoots the 3 at a lower percentage!
Bazz didn't need to shoot more. He shot when he needed to, and his selection was phenomenal. That's one of the reasons he was so great.
But you're basing a lot of your opinion on talent, which is not the question. It's not just semantics. "Talent" and "Great" are not directly connected, but rather connected by "Will," Else Ryan Leaf is one the greatest QBs to ever play.
It's revisionist.
Curry lost to College of Charleston in the semi-finals (not finals) of his conference tourni his last year (shooting 5-18), then lost in the NIT second round to St. Mary's (shooting 11-27).
Sorry, not "great PG" results in his final year.
But that's the point, isn't it, and it's not semantics. It's the heart of the question - what makes great?
And? Bazz shot 38% from the field in the AAC tournament his senior year. He also shot 7 of 22 and turned it over four times in the opening round against St. Joes, only to be bailed out by a miracle shot from his freshman center that sent the game to overtime. He then picked up two early fouls against Villanova in the next round and sat on the bench until halftime as his teammates erased a ten point deficit.
From there on, he was sensational, but a guy like Curry had no luxury of easing his way into tournaments. Keep in mind this is the same guy who, early in his senior season, was held to two shot attempts in a game because the opponent
was literally double-teaming him the entire game. They chose to play 3 on 4 instead of defend a Curry-led offense.
My point is not that talent and great are directly connected - my point is that there is a correlation between the two that becomes clear sometimes only in hindsight. Chances are Johnny Maniel was not a better college quarterback than Tom Brady, but even that example might undersell my point given the fact that Curry was considerably better than Bazz statistically. He shot slightly worse from three on nearly twice the attempts, he shot far better from two, and he went to the line a little bit more. His true shooting% was higher than Bazz's despite shouldering a much greater workload.
And if we're cherry-picking stats, how about mentioning the fact that Curry averaged 32 points per game in the 2008 NCAA tournament, or that he brought Davidson of all schools to the brink of toppling an all-time great Kansas team in the elite eight? Or how about the fact that he played a seven seed, a two seed, a three seed, and a one seed in the process? Were those teams in the Southern conference?
I hate you for putting me in a position to argue against Shabazz, but we're talking about an all-time great in Curry who was a legend even
before he became a two-time MVP and two-time champion. He was
the story of the 2008 tournament, perhaps in a way that even Bazz and Kemba could not replicate. Of all guys to take issue with from that list, Curry is an odd one.
