The art of minimizing an accomplishment.
I will say upfront that what Tyler Hansbrough ends up doing in becoming the all time leading scorer at UNC in no way takes away from the greatness of Phil Ford. They are both legendary, once-in-a-generation players and because of that you usually only see such players every 30 years or so. Still there are plenty of things people will say about Hansbrough breaking the record that either is an attempt to minimize what the senior center is doing or simply casting it as apples and oranges. I honestly think it is a little silly but those comments should make for good discussion among the THF community so here they are:
Phil Ford would have scored more if UNC did not run Four Corners.
This is wrong for two reasons. The first is UNC averaged only a handful of points less during Ford’s career than they right now. Here is what UNC averaged per game as a team during the Ford years:
1974-75: 78.0
1975-76: 85.1
1976-77: 83.6
1977-78: 81.1
Four Yr Avg: 81.9
Given the fact UNC was running a slow down game those averages are pretty good. Here is what UNC has done since Hansbrough has been in Chapel Hill.
2005-06: 79.4
2006-07: 85.7
2007-08: 88.6
2008-09: 97.3(nine games)
Four Yr Avg: 87.75
One caveat. I think UNC will settle back and not finish this season averaging 97 ppg. It should be closer to 90 if that which would make the four year average around 85 ppg. Ford averaged 18.6 ppg in four years which was 22.7% of the offense. Hansbrough has scored 23% of UNC’s points during his career. Both players were equally important offensively. Had UNC scored a few more points on average during Ford’s career, he would have likely been closer to Hansbrough average.
Ford Had Fewer Games
This is true. Teams played fewer regular season games in general and the NCAA Tournament had fewer games. The problem with this as an argument is Hansbrough is eclipsing Ford’s mark in fewer games, nine fewer to be exact. Sure it can be argued that Ford could have had more games and therefore it would take Hansbrough longer to pass him. That still ends up being irrelevant since Hansbrough is averaging more points per game so even if Ford had 20 or so more games, Hansbrough would still pass him theoretically.
Ford Did Not Have The Three Point Shot
Neither has Hansbrough technically with only five made threes in his career at UNC. The three point line did not exist during Ford’s days so speculating how many points he would have gained from having it is tough. The crux of Ford’s scoring, as I understand it from those who saw him play, came from being able to get to the basket. The Four Corners offense, while seen as a stalling offense, actually created isolation with a spread floor which Ford often took advantage of to get to the basket. We can also speculate based on the fact that Ford only took 119 threes in his NBA career that he was necessarily looking to shooting from the perimeter but more content to drive with the option to dish or shoot.
The bottom line is players from different eras are difficult to compare but in this case the differences between the two time periods does not appear hurt the comparison. While Ford might have benefited from current era rules, Ford also never faced the level of parity Hansbrough has seen either. You can argue Hansbrough has earned his points against largely tougher competition than Ford faced.
And ultimatly none of this really matters. What does is the fact we are talking about two great players who performed at the highest level UNC has seen in it’s program. They are both truly once-in-a-generation players and for those who have the priviledge to see both of them play, I am profoundly jealous.
![[Bloglines]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.tarheelblog.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
I don’t even think it is necesssary to compare them. You might see some Hansbrough haters try to do this just to minimize his accomplishments. I am sure some older state fans will try to use this to say that Hansbrough is better because of their hatred towards Ford during that time. I am just happy we had both of those terrific players. Great job on this subject THF.
I’m just glad they are both Tar Heels! Who is/was better is irrelevant to me…
Since today is essentially “Tyler Hansbrough Day,” here is another pretty good column, despite the fact that it was written by Rick Reilly…
http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?section=magazine&id=3770906&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1
Good points, THF. It’s the apples and oranges situation in many ways. There really is no good way to compare the two, especially as they played different positions in different eras. I don’t believe anyone will try to demean Tyler’s new record, nor will Phil’s accomplishments be thought of any less by this scoring record change. Let’s go get Reddick.
I think I saw a comment that Ford was at disadvantage because dunking wasn’t allowed (the dunk was reinstituted in 1976) but that’s funny because Fabulous Phil couldn’t dunk anyway.
I did have the priviledge of seeing him play live twice, once in Carmichael and once in Cameron. Both times from the top row as I remember.
The thing about Phil was his quickness and he handled the ball on a string much like a yo-yo. He was great at getting the ball to middle of the court and “stopping and popping”.
Should be a great moment tonight when Tyler breaks the record, but I believe only the National Championship will give Tyler and all who love the Tar Heels any satisfaction. That truly will be only thing that Tyler will have over Phil.
Having said that, Tyler will have to have a restaurant named “Double-Double” or the “Free Throw” complete with lifesize wall mural as Phil did with the “Four Corners”.
THF you are right about the 4 Corners fallacy. Since Ford had the ball in his hands 90% of the time any points that came in the 4-C were usually scored by Phil. His average was actually increased as a result. Team wise, the shots that we took were most always high percentage lay-ups or free throws so the scoring efficiency was enhanced. Dean continued to use the 4-C for many years after Ford’s departure and we had some very good guards that ran it effectively. However, watching Ford run it was like watching an artist working on a canvas and by comparision everyone else was a mechanic working on a car. Nobody else ever came close to matching his mastery and genius. The fact that Hansbrough and Ford are totally different players is true. I feel blessed that I have gotten to see both play and appreciate that their likes “will never pass this way again”. For me the rest of this year is a celebration for getting to watch Tyler Hansbrough play his senior season for the Tar Heels!
And to pass Redick as well!!!
HP,
What about, “Hustle & Heart,” for Tyler’s restaurant?
^ CM – Excellent. The Bar area could be called “The Elbow”
I tend to be an agnostic on the effectiveness of the 4 Corners offense, without seeing any statistics showing its effectiveness versus Carolina’s generally excellent offense in their normal sets.
Yes, at times the 4 Corners worked great, but there were other times where it didn’t, such as the Marquette game, and the NC State game in the ACC Finals back in 1975, where if you watch the action on youtube, Carolina turned the ball over several times in the 4 Corners. Some of the effectiveness depended upon how rigorously the officials made the opposing team go out and chase. If they chose not to and the officials didn’t push the issue, the game would grind to a halt, as against UVa in the ACC Finals in 1982.
Perhaps the season where it worked best was in 1977, with John Kuester and Phil Ford running it with great success until the game with Marquette where it landed with a thud.
Given Carolina’s injuries that year, virtually every win in the NCAA tourney was an upset and they probably could not have won it all or even gotten to the title game without the Four Corners.
About the last time I remember it used was against UVa in 1982 where Carolina employed it to preserve a lead against UVa, which they accomplished, but they didn’t increase their margin any and one wonders why they couldn’t have won just playing the way they were. They didn’t use it against Georgetown in a similar situation in the finals and won without it.
I think the main reason why most UNC fans remember the spread offense with such fondness is that it annoyed the hell out of Duke, State, USC, Maryland and UVa when we used it and we loved getting their goats. It wasn’t as though Carolina wasn’t better than those teams most years anyway and needed to stall to win.
i want me some psycho tea at the H&H!
I hope this wasn’t for me, I wasn’t trying to minimize anyones accomplishment when I asked the question in the “Phil is coming to game” post. I love all Heels present and past. I would give my left well, you know what to even be in guy at the end of the bench. I think if someone is going to break a legends record it should be a legend.