Rafters

[Kung Wu]

The point is Van Vleet asisst totals which you cited as a reason he should have his jersey retired are the exact same as a player whose jersey is not retired so not sure how you can put in one with out the other.

That's one data point of many.

To get a jersey in the rafter takes a tremendous amount of accomplishment and is based on a complete body of work. It's not about AA. It's not about points. It's not about assists. It's not about Final Fours, and Sweet 16s, and NBA drafts, and Wooden lists, and MVC POYs, and championships, and being selected to represent the United States in international competition.

It's about ALL OF IT (and more).

[wufan]

How is Paul lowering the bar fairly significantly? He was Honorable Mention AA just like Baker.

Baker was also 2nd team USA Today. That's the big difference. Everyone else was at least third team. There are 50 AP HM AAs every year.

[ShockTalk]

Carr - 1982 2nd team AA Basketball Times 1983 1st team AA Sporting news
Livingston -- 1982 1st team AA Playboy

Please let me know if I need to re-calibrate my meter.

My list that you quoted only included those "All American" teams that were recognized by the NCAA for use in picking the "Consensus All Americans" in each particular year. The ones that mattered, if you will. Sporting News was not one of the ones used in 1983. Don't know if and when Basketball Times was ever used and AA Playboy is what it is, nothing.

[wufan]

The point is Van Vleet asisst totals which you cited as a reason he should have his jersey retired are the exact same as a player whose jersey is not retired so not sure how you can put in one with out the other.

Was that other player an All-American? No.

[wufan]

Please let me know if I need to re-calibrate my meter.

My list that you quoted only included those "All American" teams that were recognized by the NCAA for use in picking the "Consensus All Americans" in each particular year. The ones that mattered, if you will. Sporting News was not one of the ones used in 1983. Don't know if and when Basketball Times was ever used and AA Playboy is what it is, nothing.

They didn't start doing consensus teams until 1984.

Cliff was on the Playboy Team, but they pick those in the preseason.

[ShockTalk]

This is true there is no clear cut guidelines, which is why there is a debate in the first place however I think some people on here would just like to retire every ones number I prefer that it be a very exclusive club made up of guys who were consensus all Americans and not Honorable mention All Americans. I agree the Fred and Ron a probably top 10 shockers of all time but to date being in the Top all time hasn't ensured that a number gets retired.

1) Most here prefer the "jersey" be retired not the number.

2) The rafter club is already made up of 3 non-consensus All Americans and 2 of those are technically just AP HMs, so that criteria is already out the door.

3) As far as top 10 Shockers of all time, I'm pretty sure that all 5 in the rafters are included in this this and not all would necessarily be in the top 5, so this may be the best barometer so far. I'm guessing if you had 100 very knowledgeable Shocker basketball voters and had a list of 20 potential Top 10 players, all 5 that are currently in the rafters, Fred, and Ron would make that Top 10 cut.

[ShockTalk]

They didn't start doing consensus teams until 1984.

Cliff was on the Playboy Team, but they pick those in the preseason.

That was the beginning of an official point system, but the NCAA has gone back to 1905, selecting the All American sources for each of the years and recognizes Consensus All Americans in previous years.

[Topshock]

Carr - 1982 2nd team AA Basketball Times 1983 1st team AA Sporting news
Livingston -- 1982 1st team AA Playboy

Please let me know if I need to re-calibrate my meter.

My list that you quoted only included those "All American" teams that were recognized by the NCAA for use in picking the "Consensus All Americans" in each particular year. The ones that mattered, if you will. Sporting News was not one of the ones used in 1983. Don't know if and when Basketball Times was ever used and AA Playboy is what it is, nothing.

I know Playboy was considered a secondary list but Sporting News was considered a very prestigious list in that time period.

[ShockTalk]

I know Playboy was considered a secondary list but Sporting News was considered a very prestigious list in that time period.

Playboy AA was not secondary, it was off the radar.

The Sporting News was known as primarily a baseball magazine, but did have other sports. In the mid 80s it became more diverse, but it wasn't until the late 90s, I believe, that it was used as an honorary "consensus" list for the NCAA.

[Topshock]

Playboy AA was not secondary, it was off the radar.

The Sporting News was known as primarily a baseball magazine, but did have other sports. In the mid 80s it became more diverse, but it wasn't until the late 90s, I believe, that it was used as an honorary "consensus" list for the NCAA.

It not only covered college basketball but devoted many covers to it in the early 80's and I still contend it's AA List was prestigious at that time whether it was used by the NCAA or not. In fact if it was not part of the NCAA "concensus" list that might

be why Carr was 1st team AA in that list and not some of the others as the NCAA was on a crusade against WSU at that time. You are right it was primarily a baseball magazine as most were then.

[pinstripers]

At that time, the biggest sports were MLB, Boxing, and Horse racing.

[tgcshock]

Van Vleet and Baker were not near as dominant nor did they stand out individually as much as X and Carr did. Carr averaged 22.6 PPG and 6.9 Reb as a sr, X Leb the nation in scoring and reb as a SR., Even cliff who is the weakest number up there averaged 18.5 and 11.4 during his best shocker year. Bakers and van vleets stats do not add up. They are shocker hall of famers and that is a great honor. They had the best collection of teammates ever assembled in shocker history. If you use Bob Lutz list of top 100 players since 1950 Baker and Van Vleet have played with 6 other top 100 players besides themselves. That is a number the may grow if Mcduffie or someone else goes on to have a great career. Putting number in the rafters is an individual award. Also when your only argument is because I said so, sarcasm, and to attack someones shocker fanhood then you have no argument at all. Please give me facts to back up your stance.

I notice that you did not say a word about defensive numbers. Fred is the all time steals leader and he and Baker led some of the best Shocker defensive units ever (#1 in the nation this year). That does have to be part of the discussion (as does an undefeated regular season and a Final Four run).

[ShockTalk]

It not only covered college basketball but devoted many covers to it in the early 80's and I still contend it's AA List was prestigious at that time whether it was used by the NCAA or not. In fact if it was not part of the NCAA "concensus" list that might be why Carr was 1st team AA in that list and not some of the others as the NCAA was on a crusade against WSU at that time. You are right it was primarily a baseball magazine as most were then.

At that time, the biggest sports were MLB, Boxing, and Horse racing.

The Sporting News was known as the "Baseball Bible". I still have several of the old Baseball Registers it produced. I also said they did cover other sports, particularly in the off season for baseball, so stories and covers regarding other sports is nothing unusual.

If one is going to use All American status as a singular or, better, one of the qualifiers, you need to draw the line somewhere. I have no problem with using those polls in the particular year that were part of the NCAA group to develop consensus teams. Using only Consensus Teams is more restrictive than in the past. However, opening it up to whatever other poll makes the qualifier less meaningful.

I also don't believe, if a committee uses several qualifiers, that a WSU player has to meet all the qualifiers, but the honor does need to be made special.

[Kung Wu]

Your comment is nonsense. Those three players individual accomplishment's speak for themselves. They were all upper 1st round draft picks. They clearly separated themselves from other great players in our program.

Of course my comment is nonsense -- that's the point.

The argument is that Baker and Van Vleet only succeeded because they were surrounded by great players. Well ... maybe X doesn't get that "individual accomplishment" of leading the scoring in the nation if he doesn't have great players feeding him the ball? Maybe Carr doesn't get his excellent PPG average if he doesn't have another great player constantly getting him an open look or clogging up the lane?

The ridiculousness of all that is exactly the point I am making. Those players DID achieve greatness, and saying it is "only because of others" is a nonsense argument. They did what they did and they get the credit.

[Shockerman]

Would prefer to do it like KU and retire Jersey's, not numbers. I am not sure what their requirements are but for us something along the lines of...

Final Four MVP
First team NCAA All tournament team
1-3 team All American
Some sort of Ambassador role in case a late bloomer becomes an NBA star, becomes President, finds a cure for cancer etc