Curry's PPG and true shooting %.... without the 3-point line

[3ball]

.
Formula for true shooting = PTS/(FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

*STEPHEN CURRYK 2016:. 24.9 ppg on 56.5% ts
*MICHAEL JORDAN 1988:. 34.9 ppg on 60.1% ts

*thru 55 games


steph would be a good player in the 70's, but nowhere NEAR the best player in the league.

today's 3-point obsession has provided spacing, which has watered down the game, including the skill, players, and brand of basketball.

[1987_Lakers]

Another Jordan stan feeling threatened, what else is new?

[Im Still Ballin]

I ****ing love you bro. The best to ever do it. Nobody does it like you. NOBODY!

[SouBeachTalents]

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4285139/CUQ4eCSUkAAcrU2.0.png

[3ball]

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4285139/CUQ4eCSUkAAcrU2.0.png
See, that's what the 3-point line and soft rules has done:

it makes perfect sense that the arbitrary, artificial creation of the 3-point line would eventually enable a team that shoots them well enough to break the wins record..... especially if the league removed barriers to penetration to increase drive-and-kick.

Who cares if Curry and Klay can't hold a godamn candle to MJ and Pippen... Heck, MJ could beat them both by himself if it was all 2-pointers.. But WITH the 3-point line, these preppy kids can say they're good basketball players.. It's a joke

[Achilleas]

See, that's what the 3-point line and soft rules has done:

it makes perfect sense that the arbitrary, artificial creation of the 3-point line would eventually enable a team that shoots them well enough to break the wins record..... especially if the league removed barriers to penetration to increase drive-and-kick.

Who cares if Curry and Klay can't hold a godamn candle to MJ and Pippen... Heck, MJ could beat them both by himself if it was all 2-pointers.. But WITH the 3-point line, these preppy kids can say they're good basketball players.. It's a joke
they will destroy jordan ,cryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyy

[plowking]

Hey, guess what? 3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it. Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif

[GrapeApe]

.
Formula for true shooting = PTS/(FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

*STEPHEN CURRYK 2016:. 24.9 ppg on 56.5% ts
*MICHAEL JORDAN 1988:. 34.9 ppg on 60.1% ts

*thru 55 games


steph would be a good player in the 70's, but nowhere NEAR the best player in the league.

today's 3-point obsession has provided spacing, which has watered down the game, including the skill, players, and brand of basketball.

I actually agree with this. I'm not a fan of what the game is becoming, and when the 3 point line was introduced I doubt that anyone envisioned that it would completely dominate the game. It wasn't that long ago that shooting a lot of 3 pointers was considered a BAD thing. Teams that shot a lot of 3's often did so because they were incapable of getting higher % shots. Man how times have changed.

[AirBonner]

Just because Jordan wasn't a good 3 point shooter doesn't mean you have do drag Curry down to that level.

[Spurs m8]

Another Jordan stan feeling threatened, what else is new?


http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/1%20Miami%20Heat/michaeljordantrophies-umad-lebron.jpg

[Round Mound]

Prime Barkley is the greatest scorer inside the 3-pointline that ever lived.

[3ball]

Prime Barkley is the greatest scorer inside the 3-pointline that ever lived.
He was top 10, but nowhere near Jordan

I could post 1000 different shots or moves in the halfcourt that Barkley can only dream of doing.

Jordan led the league in scoring for 10 straight seasons shooting almost all 2-pointers just like Barkley.

Barkley had his chance to outplay MJ, and it didn't happen - MJ averaged 41 ppg - Barkley doesn't come close.

[Duffy Pratt]

Flip side may also be true. Jordan might not be the best player in today's league because his game was not crafted to today's rules. You like the old game better. So do I. My dad thinks that it's not real football if a player doesn't play both offense and defense. My answer to him is the same as my answer to you and me. The game changed, get over it, or stop watching.

As for the other point, I don't see why anyone would have foreseen why the three point line would create such a disparity in talent. As a shooter, Curry is as much of an outlier now as Jordan was as a freak athlete and competitor. By their very nature, people don't foresee outliers of this sort. It remains to be seen whether other people start to develop shooting skills similar to Curry's, or if in years to come, people will be anticipating the "next Curry" in the same way that every new star was the "next Jordan." On that, I simply don't know.

[Duffy Pratt]

And the greatest scorer was Chamberlain. He has 5 of the top 6 leading scoring averages. And I know, you always exclude Chamberlain from your discussions, but its not legitimate.

[Achilleas]

He was top 10, but nowhere near Jordan

I could post 1000 different shots or moves in the halfcourt that Barkley can only dream of doing.

Jordan led the league in scoring for 10 straight seasons shooting almost all 2-pointers just like Barkley.

Barkley had his chance to outplay MJ, and it didn't happen - MJ averaged 41 ppg - Barkley doesn't come close.

post them right here right now,all of the 1000 different moves

[Smoke117]

The insecurity is real.

[Spurs m8]

Hey, guess what? 3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it. Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.
[/IMG]

LOL this kid has such rookie takes so often hahah

[AirBonner]

post them right here right now,all of the 1000 different moves
This is 3ball you know. He has them on file :lol

[SyRyanYang]

You do know that the game of basketball is an artificial creation by humans for entertainment right?

[AirFederer]

Come on now 3ball. Why try to take away form Curry?

[plowking]

LOL this kid has such rookie takes so often hahah

Not all of us appreciate the veteran and accustomed taste you have for balls.

[jongib369]

This isn't the argument to use against true shooting %.


Per36 2016 Curry gives you 31.8PPG, with 5.2 made freethrows

Per36 87 Jordan gives you 33.4, with 9.1 made freethrows

What they actually did on the floor?

Curry 29.8PPG, 4.9, most attempts this season 14, on 46:55 minutes played

Jordan 37.1PPG, 10.2, 4 games of 14 attempts, 8 15 attempts, 2 16 attempts, 3 17 attempts, 5 18 attempts, 2 19 attempts, 1 20 attempts, 1 21 attempts, 2 22 attempts, 1 27 attempts. The 27 attempt game was on 37 minutes played.

[Gileraracer]

Dude everyone knows (except the retarded Lebron stans) that MJ is GOAT. You don't have to defend him against youngsters

[3ball]

Jordan might not be the best player in today's league because his game was not crafted to today's rules.


6'3" Westbrook and 6'4" Wade led today's NBA in scoring, even though they're worse 3-point shooters than Jordan and FAR worse midrange shooters.. And let me know when they can jog up to the FT line while dribbling and double-pump with ease.. In their dreams.. Jordan was a taller, longer, stronger, smarter, more athletic and better-shooting version of Westbrook and Wade.

It would be much easier for Jordan to win the scoring championship over Westbrook and Wade than guys like Dominique, Bird, King, Hakeem, Shaq, Robinson, Barkley, and Malone........ especially with today's rules favoring perimeter players and giving Jordan an extra boost.
.

[3ball]

3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it.

Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.


In Jordan's era, they didn't have today's spacing or the resulting shot strategy that optimizes efficiency (layups/3-pointers).

But even though Jordan was playing a brand of basketball that resulted in tougher midrange shots, he still had 4 straight seasons with 31+ PER and 60+ true shooting, which Curry will never do.

Otoh, without today's easier shot allocation or the 3-point line, Curry wouldn't be anywhere NEAR the best player in the league and his efficiency would be ordinary..

It's annoying because even though guys like Curry/Klay aren't as good as MJ/Pippen, the 3-point line allows them to achieve similar stats.. But it's clear that MJ/Pippen destroy Curry/Klay as basketball players - their team (the bulls) were just as good WITH the 3-point line, and obviously FAR better without.

[LakersForlife]

loled at every jordan stans... jordan is done hes not playing nor the GOAT anymore... go back to the past if you cant handle it.. we Welcome AMC the NEW GENERATION kind of goat.. half court shot? no biggie swish

[LakersForlife]

See, that's what the 3-point line and soft rules has done:

it makes perfect sense that the arbitrary, artificial creation of the 3-point line would eventually enable a team that shoots them well enough to break the wins record..... especially if the league removed barriers to penetration to increase drive-and-kick.

Who cares if Curry and Klay can't hold a godamn candle to MJ and Pippen... Heck, MJ could beat them both by himself if it was all 2-pointers.. But WITH the 3-point line, these preppy kids can say they're good basketball players.. It's a joke
soft rules? you cant guard a player who shoots from half court with 50% shooting accuracy from that distance.. jordan can lick curry shoes.

[SexSymbol]

He'd focus more on the 2point shot and just average 30+ pts that way...

[finchyyy]

See, that's what the 3-point line and soft rules has done:

it makes perfect sense that the arbitrary, artificial creation of the 3-point line would eventually enable a team that shoots them well enough to break the wins record..... especially if the league removed barriers to penetration to increase drive-and-kick.

Who cares if Curry and Klay can't hold a godamn candle to MJ and Pippen... Heck, MJ could beat them both by himself if it was all 2-pointers.. But WITH the 3-point line, these preppy kids can say they're good basketball players.. It's a joke


Just like over-expansion and a shorter 3 point line helped the Bulls in '96?

[ShawkFactory]

If curry finishes this year off strong, Warriors break the record and win the championship, then the "Kobe/Curry fam" will truly see that 3balls Lebron hate really isn't about Lebron in the slightest. It'll be awesome

[AintNoSunshine]

Curry better player than Jordan without rim doe. What about without a bsketball?

[Stout]

.
Formula for true shooting = PTS/(FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

*STEPHEN CURRYK 2016:. 24.9 ppg on 56.5% ts
*MICHAEL JORDAN 1988:. 34.9 ppg on 60.1% ts

*thru 55 games


steph would be a good player in the 70's, but nowhere NEAR the best player in the league.

today's 3-point obsession has provided spacing, which has watered down the game, including the skill, players, and brand of basketball.
Jordan had access to a three point line too. It is part of the game, so you can't discount it when evaluating players. This thread wreaks of desperation.

[Overdrive]

http://i304.photobucket.com/albums/nn200/nbacardDOTnet/zz%20NBA%20Photo%20Gallery/y%20NBA%20etc/1%20Miami%20Heat/michaeljordantrophies-umad-lebron.jpg


I don't get the FMVPs in that picture. Up to 2004 they looked like a basketball. Similar to the 3pt shootout trophy.

[sd3035]

https://giant.gfycat.com/FavorableParchedDarwinsfox.gif

[Stout]

https://giant.gfycat.com/FavorableParchedDarwinsfox.gif
:applause:

[3ball]

Jordan had access to a three point line too. It is part of the game, so you can't discount it when evaluating players. This thread wreaks of desperation.
In Jordan's era, they didn't have today's 3-point shooting/spacing or the resulting shot strategy that optimizes efficiency (layups/3-pointers/FT's).

But even though Jordan was playing a brand of basketball that resulted in tougher midrange shots, he still had 4 straight seasons with 31+ PER and 60+ true shooting - Curry can never reach this level of sustained efficiency.

Otoh, without today's easier shot allocation or 3-point line, Curry wouldn't be anywhere NEAR the best player in the league and his efficiency would be ordinary..

It's annoying because even though guys like Curry/Klay aren't as good as MJ/Pippen, the 3-point line allows them to achieve similar stats.. But it's clear that MJ/Pippen destroy Curry/Klay as basketball players - their team (the bulls) were just as good WITH the 3-point line, and obviously FAR better without.

[Segatti]

https://cdn3.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/4285139/CUQ4eCSUkAAcrU2.0.png

If the Warriors played in the place of the 96 Bulls in that washed-up league they would easily go 77-5.

[Stout]

In Jordan's era, they didn't have today's 3-point shooting/spacing or the resulting shot strategy that optimizes efficiency (layups/3-pointers/FT's).

But even though Jordan was playing a brand of basketball that resulted in tougher midrange shots, he still had 4 straight seasons with 31+ PER and 60+ true shooting - Curry can never reach this level of sustained efficiency.

Otoh, without today's easier shot allocation or 3-point line, Curry wouldn't be anywhere NEAR the best player in the league and his efficiency would be ordinary..

It's annoying because even though guys like Curry/Klay aren't as good as MJ/Pippen, the 3-point line allows them to achieve similar stats.. But it's clear that MJ/Pippen destroy Curry/Klay as basketball players - their team (the bulls) were just as good WITH the 3-point line, and obviously FAR better without.
You always talk about how the paint is more clogged/protected in Jordan's era. This means it would be easier to step back and have space for a 3. So which is it, because you can't have it both ways.

By the way, how much do you cry every night?

[sd3035]

You always talk about how the paint is more clogged/protected in Jordan's era. This means it would be easier to step back and have space for a 3. So which is it, because you can't have it both ways.

By the way, how much do you cry every night?


:roll: :roll: :roll:

[plowking]

You always talk about how the paint is more clogged/protected in Jordan's era. This means it would be easier to step back and have space for a 3. So which is it, because you can't have it both ways.

By the way, how much do you cry every night?

The courts were only a lane back in the 90's, and the ball was bigger than the ring.

No space. Anywhere.

[sd3035]

The courts were only a lane back in the 90's, and the ball was bigger than the ring.

No space. Anywhere.

threes were also worth one point

[plowking]

threes were also worth one point

Wow, didn't know that.

Surprised 3ball didn't mention it sooner.

[ralph_i_el]

Hey, guess what? 3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it. Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif



Truth


And if 3's weren't worth so much, Curry wouldn't shoot as many of them. It would still hurt him, but you gotta bump that projected TS% up a few points, and he'd probably be scoring 28ppg

[24-Inch_Chrome]

If Jordan didn't kill his dad, maybe he doesn't bitch out into a two year retirement. Hypotheticals

[sd3035]

If Jordan didn't kill his dad, maybe he doesn't bitch out into a two year retirement. Hypotheticals

coincidentally, that happened around the same time as his two year gambling suspension

[24-Inch_Chrome]

coincidentally, that happened around the same time as his two year gambling suspension
:cryingjordan:

[choppermagic]

.
Formula for true shooting = PTS/(FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

*STEPHEN CURRYK 2016:. 24.9 ppg on 56.5% ts
*MICHAEL JORDAN 1988:. 34.9 ppg on 60.1% ts

*thru 55 games


steph would be a good player in the 70's, but nowhere NEAR the best player in the league.


This is simply ridiculous. To take away the 3 pointer and re-adjust his stats is a joke. Curry is shooting 22-23 feet out only because there is a 3 point line. He would not be taking those if he could get the same points at 12-15 feet. You can factor in eFG% that way.

[3ball]

the packed paints in previous eras means it would be EASIER to step back and have space for a 3.


This isn't true.

Defenders didn't allow Reggie Miller, Larry Bird and Dell Curry to shoot open 3-pointers.. Defenders have always guarded good 3-point shooters tightly, regardless of era.. This is basketball 101.. And defenders guarded shooters tighter back then because defenders were allowed to make contact with players on the perimeter (hand-checking).. Otoh, today's perimeter defense is hands-off - this MANDATES space between defender and offensive player, which makes it easier to shoot jumpers and drive.

But the most important point is that 3-point shots were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out.. But this type of easy drive-and-kick is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for all their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick... If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did... Again, it was a different game.. A tougher one.






You always talk about how the paint is more clogged/protected in Jordan's era.


Indeed - the lack of 3-point shooting and resulting packed paints allowed defenders to be in closer proximity to help on penetration or post-ups without needing any of today's rotation scheming.. Without spacing, defenders were already in closer proximity and the rotations aren't necessary.

Spacing and defensive movement offset each other, which is why league-wide offensive rating (the stat measuring how hard it is to score) has been stable for 30 years - you either have extra rotations required by spacing and defensive 3 seconds (today's game), or the rotations aren't necessary because there is no spacing or defensive 3 seconds (previous eras).
.

[ralph_i_el]

This isn't true.

Defenders didn't allow Reggie Miller, Larry Bird and Dell Curry to shoot open 3-pointers.. Defenders have always guarded good 3-point shooters tightly, regardless of era.. This is basketball 101.. And defenders guarded shooters tighter back then because defenders were allowed to make contact with players on the perimeter (hand-checking).. Otoh, today's perimeter defense is hands-off - this MANDATES space between defender and offensive player, which makes it easier to shoot jumpers and drive.

But the most important point is that 3-point shots were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out.. But this kind of easy drive-and-kick is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for all their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick... If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did.




Indeed - the lack of 3-point shooting and resulting packed paints allowed defenders to be in closer proximity to help on penetration or post-ups without needing any of today's rotation scheming.. Without spacing, defenders were already in closer proximity and the rotations aren't necessary.

Spacing and defensive movement offset each other, which is why league-wide offensive rating (the stat measuring how hard it is to score) has been stable for 30 years - you either have extra rotations required by spacing and defensive 3 seconds (today's game), or the rotations aren't necessary because there is no spacing or defensive 3 seconds (previous eras).
.


:biggums: I watch old school games and see plenty of kick-outs, they are just for 2's

[3ball]

:biggums: I watch old school games and see plenty of kick-outs, they are just for 2's


Wow bro, I think you're on to something - you should tell Steve Kerr to stop positioning Curry's teammates behind the 3-point line, since Curry can get the same kick-outs for 3-pointers with his teammates standing in 2-point territory like previous eras.. :rolleyes:

The sky is blue bro - the reason why today's coaches position multiple players behind the 3-point line on every possession, is because THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE - that's the recipe for getting the best 3-point looks via drive-and-kick.

If you could get all the same great 3-point looks by positioning Curry's teammates in 2-point territory, then coaches would do that - but that isn't what you see - today's coaches position multiple players behind the 3-point line, because that's the best way to get 3-point looks via drive-and-kick.

Today's teams base their offenses on drive-and-kick, while previous eras based their offenses on post-ups... Obviously, it's easier to get 3-point looks in the era that is based on drive-and-kick, rather than the era based on post-ups.

[StrongLurk]

Hey, guess what? 3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it. Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif

LOL what a gif slay!

[sd3035]

Jordan would have to evolve or get wrecked by today's advanced defensive schemes

[3ball]

Jordan would have to evolve or get wrecked by today's advanced defensive schemes
How specifically would he need to evolve or improve?

Jordan would be a better version of 6'3" Westbrook or 6'4" Wade, who led the league in scoring with the same 3-point shot as Jordan and FAR worse midrange shooting... Also, let me know when those guys can jog up to the FT line and double-pump with ease.

MJ was a rich man's Westbrook or Wade - better athlete, taller, longer, bigger hands, much smarter and much better shooter.. It would be amazing to see a rich man's Westbrook or Wade in today's game.

[ralph_i_el]

Wow bro, I think you're on to something - you should tell Steve Kerr to stop positioning Curry's teammates behind the 3-point line, since Curry can get the same kick-outs for 3-pointers with his teammates standing in 2-point territory like previous eras.. :rolleyes:

The sky is blue bro - the reason why today's coaches position multiple players behind the 3-point line on every possession, is because THAT'S HOW IT'S DONE - that's the recipe for getting the best 3-point looks via drive-and-kick.

If you could get all the same great 3-point looks by positioning Curry's teammates in 2-point territory, then coaches would do that - but that isn't what you see - today's coaches position multiple players behind the 3-point line, because that's the best way to get 3-point looks via drive-and-kick.

Today's teams base their offenses on drive-and-kick, while previous eras based their offenses on post-ups... Obviously, it's easier to get 3-point looks in the era that is based on drive-and-kick, rather than the era based on post-ups.


Players today are better shooters, and strategy is better. If players back then could do it, and people had figured out it was a good strategy, they would have done it.

[3ball]

Players today are better 3-point shooters.... If players back then could do it, and people had figured out it was a good strategy, they would have done it.


That's my whole point - previous eras didn't have the necessary 3-point shooting personnel to position multiple players behind the 3-point line, which means they couldn't execute today's drive and kick and get all those easy 3-point looks.

Without today's drive-and-kick, Curry wouldn't be able to just stand there and get a kick out - he would have to work much harder for 3-point looks by running off a ton of screens like Bird and Reggie did... Those guys would KILL it today, where they would just have to wait behind the line for a kickout..
.

[j3lademaster]

But there is a 3 point line... it's part of the game whether you or I like it or not.

And some day there's going to be a Kevin Durant with a Lebronesque body who will take MJ's throne. You just have to deal with it. Isn't that the fun in watching any kind of competitive sport anyway? Watching greats trying to top each other?

[3ball]

But there is a 3 point line... it's part of the game whether you or I like it or not.

And some day there's going to be a Kevin Durant with a Lebronesque body who will take MJ's throne. You just have to deal with it. Isn't that the fun in watching any kind of competitive sport anyway? Watching greats trying to top each other?
Or maybe the league will introduce a 4-point line and further dilute the skill and brand of basketball into a bigger joke than it already is

[Derka]

Did you wake up in a panic today or something, prompting you to post this horrendous thread?

"Shit, the people on ISH might think Curry is better than Jordan. NO TIME FOR SLEEP OR BREAKFAST, MOM...I GOTTA GET ON THE INTERNET!"!

[3ball]

Did you wake up in a panic today or something, prompting you to post this horrendous thread?

"Shit, the people on ISH might think Curry is better than Jordan. NO TIME FOR SLEEP OR BREAKFAST, MOM...I GOTTA GET ON THE INTERNET!"!


Apparently, the facts posted in the OP have unnerved you.

Here's more facts - 3-point looks were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out..

But this type of easy drive-and-kick for 3-pointers is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick...

If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did... Again, it was a different game.. A tougher one.

Today's teams base their offenses on drive-and-kick to get 3-point looks, while previous eras based their offenses on post-ups... Obviously, it's easier to get 3-point looks in the era that is based on drive-and-kick, rather than the era based on post-ups.

[j3lademaster]

Did you wake up in a panic today or something, prompting you to post this horrendous thread?

"Shit, the people on ISH might think Curry is better than Jordan. NO TIME FOR SLEEP OR BREAKFAST, MOM...I GOTTA GET ON THE INTERNET!"!I still think 3ball is a group of sociology grad students conducting an experiment on how many weak minded bball fans they can get to turn on Jordan.

[Overdrive]

Or maybe the league will introduce a 4-point line and further dilute the skill and brand of basketball into a bigger joke than it already is

Jordan had a three point, for some time even a shorter one, to use. He was just incapable of exploiting that.

[sd3035]

Jordan had a three point, for some time even a shorter one, to use. He was just incapable of exploiting that.


Offensive skillset was very limited in that era

[j3lademaster]

Apparently, the facts posted in the OP have unnerved you.

Here's more facts - 3-point looks were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out..

But this type of easy drive-and-kick for 3-pointers is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick...

If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did... Again, it was a different game.. A tougher one.

Today's teams base their offenses on drive-and-kick to get 3-point looks, while previous eras based their offenses on post-ups... Obviously, it's easier to get 3-point looks in the era that is based on drive-and-kick, rather than the era based on post-ups.I do agree with some of this. I honestly feel coaches in previous eras will kind of "handcuff" him and not give him the offensive freedom to shoot those in and out crossover stepbacks 3 feet behind the line.

But regardless, this current season is right up there if not better than Jordan's best offensive season. He's not a better player or even an offensive player because he hasn't sustained it for a decade like MJ has but one single best season from both players Steph is right there on that end. It's a joy to watch.

[3ball]

This is simply ridiculous. To take away the 3 pointer and re-adjust his stats is a joke. Curry is shooting 22-23 feet out only because there is a 3 point line. He would not be taking those if he could get the same points at 12-15 feet.


Curry simply isn't a midrange player.. He's lived off the 3-point line his entire career... Without it, he'd be much worse.

10-15 foot shots (midrange) are DIFFERENT from 3-pointers - a player can't just decide to replace all their 3-pointers with midrange... Midrange shots are more contested - they require a totally different type of game and the player must endure more physicality..

Also, Curry isn't a good midrange shooter compared to MJ, at least not in games:



.....................MJ 1997 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/893/stats/shooting/?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)...................Cur ry 2015 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)............ Curry 2016 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/)

5-9 ft.......... 49.2%, 126 fga........... 40.3%, 72 fga.......... 47.2%, 53 fga

10-14 ft....... 51.5%, 466 fga........... 52.9%, 85 fga.......... 54.8%, 42 fga

15-19 ft....... 49.5%, 594 fga........... 43.9%, 132 fga........ 41.1%, 73 fga



Overall midrange % (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)

JORDAN 1997: 49.3%, 1202 fga
CURRY.. 2015: 41.1%, 285 fga
CURRY.. 2016: 46.0%, 139 fga
LEBRON 2015: 37.0%, 343 fga
LEBRON 2016: 31.9%, 119 fga

[3ball]

Jordan had a three point, for some time even a shorter one, to use. He was just incapable of exploiting that.


Why would he change his game when he was already the GOAT and 6/6 perfection WITHOUT 3-pointers?... Also, anytime there was an opportunity to exploit an opponent with 3-pointers, Jordan did - see Game 1 of 1992 Finals.

So obviously, Jordan wasn't INCAPABLE of shooting 3-pointers like you erroneously claim - he simply didn't WANT to shoot 3-pointers because he felt it took away from his game (which was already goat):


"My 3-point shooting is something that I don't want to excel at because it takes away from all phases of my game.. My game is to fake, drive to the hole, penetrate, dish off, dunk or whatever.... And when you have that mentality like I did in Game 1 of making threes, you don't go to the hole as much.. You go to the 3-point line... And that's not my mentality and I don't want to create that mentality because it takes away from the other parts of my game."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2CyJdCq-zU&t=0m6s

[3ball]

Jordan would have to evolve or get wrecked by today's advanced defensive schemes
How specifically would he need to evolve or improve?

Jordan would be a better version of 6'3" Westbrook or 6'4" Wade, who led the league in scoring with the same 3-point shot as Jordan and FAR worse midrange shooting... Also, let me know when those guys can double-pump from the FT line with ease.

MJ was a rich man's Westbrook or Wade - taller, longer, bigger hands, better athlete, much smarter and much better shooter.. It would be amazing to see a rich man's Westbrook or Wade in today's game.

[Hey Yo]

Dude everyone knows (except the retarded Lebron stans) that MJ is GOAT. You don't have to defend him against youngsters
as we see above your avatar that you have proclaimed yourself the #1 retard of the board...:applause:

[Hey Yo]

Overall midrange % (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)
Mid-range is pretty much considered 12-17 feet. Anything before 12 and after 17 (to the 3pt line) is referred to a short/long 2.

[Overdrive]

Why would he change his game when he was already the GOAT and 6/6 perfection WITHOUT 3-pointers?... Also, anytime there was an opportunity to exploit an opponent with 3-pointers, Jordan did - see Game 1 of 1992 Finals.

So obviously, Jordan wasn't INCAPABLE of shooting 3-pointers like you erroneously claim - he simply didn't WANT to shoot 3-pointers because he felt it took away from his game (which was already goat):


"My 3-point shooting is something that I don't want to excel at because it takes away from all phases of my game.. My game is to fake, drive to the hole, penetrate, dish off, dunk or whatever.... And when you have that mentality like I did in Game 1 of making threes, you don't go to the hole as much.. You go to the 3-point line... And that's not my mentality and I don't want to create that mentality because it takes away from the other parts of my game."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2CyJdCq-zU&t=0m6s

Perfection would be 15/15 not 6/6, because he failed more often than coming through. Bill Russell was the only one to come close.

Pretty sure Shaq could also claim that he didn't want to hit FTs, because it would take away from his post game.

Think about what Jordan could've done with Curry's range. Guys would've had to honor his fakes up until the halfcourt. Fakes are nice, but only idiots honor fakes beyond some players range no matter if it's Jordan or anyone else.

btw guys like you remind me why I hated Jordan, or more accurately his fans, back then. A player of his magnitude doesn't need anyone to defend him, but people like you would do it anyway and shove it down anyone's throat - unasked.

That said KAJ = GOAT.

[Stout]

But the most important point is that 3-point shots were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out.. But this type of easy drive-and-kick is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for all their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick... If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did... Again, it was a different game.. A tougher one.



:facepalm
You realize that Curry's 3s don't depend on others driving and kicking it out to him, right? He does that for others, but he mostly creates his own shots on 3s. Do you even watch the games?

[3ball]

Perfection would be 15/15 not 6/6, because he failed more often than coming through. Bill Russell was the only one to come close.


In the modern era, MJ has the highest championship frequency of all time: 6/15, or 40%.. That's the GOAT standard in the modern era.





Pretty sure Shaq could also claim that he didn't want to hit FTs, because it would take away from his post game.


Shaq doesn't have the option of NOT shooting free throws... When he's fouled, he MUST attempt free throws.

Otoh, Jordan has the option of not taking 3-pointers, so your analogy is a really bad and desperate one.





Think about what Jordan could've done with Curry's range. Guys would've had to honor his fakes up until the halfcourt. Fakes are nice, but only idiots honor fakes beyond some players range no matter if it's Jordan or anyone else.


Bullshit - Curry is 9/20 on shots past 30 feet - those shots are a miniscule, negligible part of his offense.

And MJ didn't need 3-pointers - his career was already GOAT perfection - he was 6/6 with the highest championship frequency in the modern era.. So why ruin something that's already perfect?

Furthermore, I agree with MJ that the 3-point shot makes him a worse player - his 2-point ability, aggressiveness and playmaking is what made him the unstoppable GOAT, especially in the clutch - midrange scoring STILL rules in the clutch and always will.

MJ was a rich man's Westbrook or Wade - he had their same aggressiveness but with superior athleticism, size and skill... A 3-point shot would've turned him into a soft, unaggressive ***** with a weak, diluted skillset, like Paul George.
.

[Overdrive]

But the most important point is that 3-point shots were HARDER to get in previous eras... Most of today's 3-pointers are generated via drive-and-kick where the shooter just stands there and waits for the kick out.. But this type of easy drive-and-kick is a MODERN invention - it requires multiple shooters stationed behind the line, which previous eras didn't have.. Bird and Miller had to run off screens for all their 3-pointers - they didn't get to stand and wait for a drive-and-kick... If Curry played in previous eras, he wouldn't get all the kick out 3-pointers that he gets today - he'd have to run off a million screens for a much higher proportion of his 3-pointers, just like Bird and Miller did... Again, it was a different game.. A tougher one.

There have always been three types of three point shooter:

-The as you mentioned "through screen runners"
-The spot up shooters
-And the creators

Some combine those attributes. That makes/made Ray, Miller, Curry and Bird so great shooters.


In the modern era, MJ has the highest championship frequency of all time: 6/15, or 40%.. That's the GOAT standard in the modern era.

You said perfect, 100% is perfect. Would you call Kobe the perfect shooter?



Shaq doesn't have the option of NOT shooting free throws... When he's fouled, he MUST attempt free throws.

Otoh, Jordan has the option of not taking 3-pointers, so your analogy is a really bad and desperate one.

That was a tongue in cheek comment, but you take everything dead serious mister off ball passing.

You could use Bargnani and rebounds or anyone who lacks on in one department. I'm sure adding a 3 pt shot wouldn't have taken anything from Jordan's game.



Bullshit - Curry is 9/20 on shots past 30 feet - those shots are a miniscule, negligible part of his offense.

And MJ didn't need 3-pointers - his career was already GOAT perfection - he was 6/6 with the highest championship frequency in the modern era.. So why ruin something that's already perfect?

Furthermore, I agree with MJ that the 3-point shot makes him a worse player - his 2-point ability, aggressiveness and playmaking is what made him the unstoppable GOAT, especially in the clutch - midrange scoring STILL rules in the clutch and always will.

MJ was a rich man's Westbrook or Wade - he had their same aggressiveness but with superior athleticism, size and skill... A 3-point shot would've turned him into a soft, unaggressive ***** with a weak, diluted skillset, like Paul George.
.

Do you understand what a hyperbole is?

Of course beyond 30ft isn't needed, but adding a 3 point shot wouldn't have hurt Jordan. It would just have diversified his game. Just think about what happened when he hit 3s at a high rate.

http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view/105205/jordan-shrug-o.gif

[FKAri]

http://i.imgur.com/GPEPhWS.jpg

Video discussing the findings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YYNPnql9YI

[Chadwin]

Curry simply isn't a midrange player.. He's lived off the 3-point line his entire career... Without it, he'd be much worse.

10-15 foot shots (midrange) are DIFFERENT from 3-pointers - a player can't just decide to replace all their 3-pointers with midrange... Midrange shots are more contested - they require a totally different type of game and the player must endure more physicality..

Also, Curry isn't a good midrange shooter compared to MJ, at least not in games:



.....................MJ 1997 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/893/stats/shooting/?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)...................Cur ry 2015 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)............ Curry 2016 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/)

5-9 ft.......... 49.2%, 126 fga........... 40.3%, 72 fga.......... 47.2%, 53 fga

10-14 ft....... 51.5%, 466 fga........... 52.9%, 85 fga.......... 54.8%, 42 fga

15-19 ft....... 49.5%, 594 fga........... 43.9%, 132 fga........ 41.1%, 73 fga



Overall midrange % (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)

JORDAN 1997: 49.3%, 1202 fga
CURRY.. 2015: 41.1%, 285 fga
CURRY.. 2016: 46.0%, 139 fga
LEBRON 2015: 37.0%, 343 fga
LEBRON 2016: 31.9%, 119 fga

When did the NBA put shot distance stats for MJ that far back on there? Where did they get this?

[red1]

OP is legit insane.

[3ball]

There have always been three types of three point shooter:

-The as you mentioned "through screen runners"
-The spot up shooters
-And the creators

Some combine those attributes. That makes/made Ray, Miller, Curry and Bird so great shooters.


You've missed the point.

Teams in today's game attempt a whopping 24 threes per game by running screen-roll/drive-and-kick - that's the mechanism used by today's teams to shoot that many 3-pointers - and obviously, in order to kick the ball out, shooters must be camping behind the line WAITING on the kick out.

Previous eras didn't have the necessary 3-point shooting to camp players behind the 3-point line, so drive-and-kick wasn't the force it is today.. The style of play was completely different - players were positioned closer to the basket, not at the 3-point line to set up a drive-and-kick.. So if 3-point shooters like Bird or Miller wanted to get 3-point looks, they had to run off a million screens - they couldn't just stand behind the 3-point line and wait for the screen-roll/drive-and-kick like today's player.

Heck, guys like Ibaka and Bosh are expert 3-point shooters in today's game and they don't run off a SINGLE screen.. They just stand behind the arc and WAIT - it's a lot easier for a player to get 3-point looks when he has the necessary 3-point shooting teammates to make drive-and-kick viable.
.

[3ball]

Curry isn't a good midrange shooter compared to MJ, at least not in games:



.....................MJ 1997 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/893/stats/shooting/?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)...................Cur ry 2015 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)............ Curry 2016 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/) <----- links to nba.com data

5-9 ft.......... 49.2%, 126 fga........... 40.3%, 72 fga.......... 47.2%, 53 fga

10-14 ft....... 51.5%, 466 fga........... 52.9%, 85 fga.......... 54.8%, 42 fga

15-19 ft....... 49.5%, 594 fga........... 43.9%, 132 fga........ 41.1%, 73 fga



Overall midrange % (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)

JORDAN 1997: 49.3%, 1202 fga
CURRY.. 2015: 41.1%, 285 fga
CURRY.. 2016: 46.0%, 139 fga
LEBRON 2015: 37.0%, 343 fga
LEBRON 2016: 31.9%, 119 fga




When did the NBA put shot distance stats for MJ that far back on there? Where did they get this?


The titles bolded above are links to NBA.com's advanced stat pages.

Click on "MJ 1997", "Curry 2015", and "Curry 2016" in the post above for the actual data.

[3ball]

Of course beyond 30ft isn't needed, but adding a 3 point shot wouldn't have hurt Jordan. It would've diversified his game.


Only if he developed an elite 3-point shot AFTER he was already in the NBA (kind of like Kawhi did).

Otherwise - if he grew up practicing the 3-point shot as a major part of his game like today's player does, he'd be a FAR worse player - he wouldn't have developed anywhere NEAR the expansive repertoire, footwork, moves, skill, and aggressiveness that he did.

Btw, if MJ played in TODAY'S game, fans wouldn't get to watch him make crazy hangtime, dipsy-doo shots - those shots simply aren't necessary in today's game because the paint is less congested and pretty open.. And his passing would be basic like today's player too - no need to thread needles in no-spacing environments anymore.. The spacing makes today's game easier on offense, so we wouldn't see MJ use all the skill he used in the no-spacing 80's and 90's.

[sd3035]

Only if he developed an elite 3-point shot AFTER he was already in the NBA (kind of like Kawhi did).

Otherwise - if he grew up practicing the 3-point shot as a major part of his game like today's player does, he'd be a FAR worse player - he wouldn't have developed anywhere NEAR the expansive repertoire, footwork, moves, skill, and aggressiveness that he did.

Btw, if MJ played in TODAY'S game, fans wouldn't get to watch him make crazy hangtime, dipsy-doo shots - those shots simply aren't necessary in today's game because the paint is less congested and pretty open.. And his passing would be basic like today's player - no need to thread needles anymore in no-spacing environments.. The spacing makes today's game easier, so we wouldn't see MJ reach down into his bag of tricks.

http://sneakerhistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Michael-Jordan-Switching-Hands-.gif

[ralph_i_el]

Previous eras didn't have the necessary 3-point shooting personnel to make drive-and-kick the force it is today, so the style of play was completely different - players didn't hang out at the 3-point line and were positioned closer to the basket.. So if 3-point shooters like Bird or Miller wanted to get 3-point looks, they had to run off a million screens - they couldn't just stand behind the 3-point line and wait for the screen-roll/drive-and-kick like today's player.



What was stopping teams from running a PnR towards the side of Bird or Miller spotting up?

[ralph_i_el]

Btw, if MJ played in TODAY'S game, fans wouldn't get to watch him make crazy hangtime, dipsy-doo shots - those shots simply aren't necessary in today's game because the paint is less congested and pretty open.. And his passing would be basic like today's player too - no need to thread needles in no-spacing environments anymore.. The spacing makes today's game easier on offense, so we wouldn't see MJ use all the skill he used in the no-spacing 80's and 90's.

What you are saying is that we wouldn't get to see him go 1-on-1 against a set defense, because that shit doesn't fly today an teams win because of good team ball movement.

[dunksby]

What you are saying is that we wouldn't get to see him go 1-on-1 against a set defense, because that shit doesn't fly today an teams win because of good team ball movement.
Team ball scares armchair stans.

[Round Mound]

He was top 10, but nowhere near Jordan

I could post 1000 different shots or moves in the halfcourt that Barkley can only dream of doing.

Jordan led the league in scoring for 10 straight seasons shooting almost all 2-pointers just like Barkley.

Barkley had his chance to outplay MJ, and it didn't happen - MJ averaged 41 ppg - Barkley doesn't come close.

Jordan Had More Moves Cause He Is a SG. Barkley Was More Efficient Not Pretty But More Effective:

Barkley Inside the 3-Pontline for 16 seasons: 21.6 PPG Only 12.9 Two-Point FGAs PG Taken and 58.13% FG.

.

[3ball]

What you are saying is that we wouldn't get to see him go 1-on-1 against a set defense, because that shit doesn't fly today an teams win because of good team ball movement.


Every championship team in history played great team ball and the 6/6 Bulls played some of the best team ball ever.

So no - Jordan wasn't going 1-on-1 every play and pounding the ball 25 feet from the rim like Westbrook, Lebron and Harden do on every play..

Jordan's skill was in a different dimension from those guys - Jordan played OFF-BALL, which facilitated the best teamwork and allowed his teammates to thrive alongside him... You should watch some old Jordan footage because it sounds like you have no clue how the GOAT played.

[3ball]

Jordan Had More Moves Cause He Is a SG. Barkley Was More Efficient Not Pretty But More Effective:

Barkley Inside the 3-Pontline for 16 seasons: 21.6 PPG Only 12.9 Two-Point FGAs PG Taken and 58.13% FG.

.
Who cares about efficiency when we're talking about 2 guys that had great efficiency.

Jordan was a way better scorer than Barkley - everyone knows this - again, Barkley is top 10 two-point scorer, but Jordan is #1 (maybe #2 behind prime Wilt... actually no... I forgot about playoffs... MJ's #1)

If Barkley was such a better scorer than MJ, he would've averaged 41 ppg in 1993 Finals, led the league in scoring for 10 straight seasons, or be the all-time PPG leader in regular season or playoffs... But he isn't.... JORDAN IS.... Barkley's scoring doesn't compare to Jordan's - it's kind of ridiculous that I have to say that in a basketball thread.
.

[Round Mound]

Who cares about efficiency when we're talking about 2 guys that had great efficiency.

Jordan was a way better scorer than Barkley - everyone knows this - again, Barkley is top 10 two-point scorer, but Jordan is #1 (maybe #2 behind prime Wilt... actually no... I forgot about playoffs... MJ's #1)

Jordan is the best perimeter player and total player of all time but Prime Barkley was more deadly inside the 3-pointline than any player ever. I would add McHale and Jabbar in the top 5 scorers of all time too. Efficiency is the real measure for great scorers. Great scorers score alot for every fg attempt taken.

[sd3035]

Curry getting ready to put on a show, load up your 120p brazilian stream 3ball :cheers:

[Black and White]

The 3 point line existed when MJ played.........

[sd3035]

The 3 point line existed when MJ played.........
No it didn't, people played in a phone booth, and headbutts n flying knees were obligatory on defense

[Black and White]

No it didn't, people played in a phone booth, and headbutts n flying knees were obligatory on defense

And the rim was also 14ft high

[sd3035]

And the rim was also 14ft high

:lol

[3ball]

Efficiency is the real measure for great scorers.


Ridiculous bullshit - if that was the case, then Horace Grant is a better scorer than Jordan too along with about 1000 other simple-dunking big men.

Efficiency is NOT the measure of great scorers.

Also, Barkley can't be more "deadly" inside the 3-point line - Jordan was a 2-point scorer just like Barkley and I'll take Jordan's 35 ppg on 60% TS over Barkley's 25 ppg on 65% TS.. It's a no-brainer.
.

[3ball]

What was stopping teams from running a PnR towards the side of Bird or Miller spotting up?
Those teams didn't have enough 3-point shooters OTHER than Bird or Miller to make that play as effective as it is today... But you've missed the whole point.

In today's game, teams attempt a whopping 24 threes per game.. The mechanism used to get this many 3-pointers is screen-roll/drive-and-kick, which requires shooters to camp behind the line (otherwise there's no one to kick it out to).

Previous eras didn't have the necessary 3-point shooting to camp players behind the 3-point line, so the style of play was completely different - players were positioned closer to the basket, not at the 3-point line to set up a drive-and-kick.. So if 3-point shooters like Bird or Miller wanted to get 3-point looks, they had to run off a million screens - they couldn't just stand behind the 3-point line and wait for the screen-roll/drive-and-kick like today's player.

Heck, guys like Ibaka and Bosh are expert 3-point shooters in today's game and they don't run off a SINGLE screen.. They just stand behind the arc and WAIT - it's a lot easier for Ibaka to get 3-point looks when he has the necessary 3-point shooting teammates to make drive-and-kick viable.

[nba_55]

LOL this is so stupid:lol

[Round Mound]

Ridiculous bullshit - if that was the case, then Horace Grant is a better scorer than Jordan too along with about 1000 other simple-dunking big men.

Efficiency is NOT the measure of great scorers.

Also, Barkley can't be more "deadly" inside the 3-point line - Jordan was a 2-point scorer just like Barkley and I'll take Jordan's 35 ppg on 60% TS over Barkley's 25 ppg on 65% TS.. It's a no-brainer.
.

Yes it is. If not All Iverson is the 2nd GOAT scorer. Despite he shot like 41% FG. Both Barkley and Jordan are pretty close. But Jordan did have the best perimeter defender of all time and one of the goat all around playmakers in Pippen and All Defensive 1st Teamer Horace Grant to ballance the table and let Jordan be free to score as he pleased. While Barkley had nobodies from 87-92.

Jordan
Shaq
Kareem
Wilt
Barkley

Those are the top 5 goat scoreres per shot taken imo

[Smoke117]

Yes it is. If not All Iverson is the 2nd GOAT scorer. Despite he shot like 41% FG. Both Barkley and Jordan are pretty close. But Jordan did have the best perimeter defender of all time and one of the goat all around playmakers in Pippen and All Defensive 1st Teamer Horace Grant to ballance the table and let Jordan be free to score as he pleased. While Barkley had nobodies from 87-92.

Jordan
Shaq
Kareem
Wilt
Barkley

Those are the top 5 goat scoreres per shot taken imo

Grant was never first team all defensive.

[stalkerforlife]

But like...there is a three point line.

[Round Mound]

Grant was never first team all defensive.

2nd All Defensive I Believe He Was. He Was Among The Best Defensive PFs and Was Missed in 94-95. Thats why they added Rodman the GOAT Rebounder among PFs and One of the Defensive GOATs at that position as well. Jordan was blessed with great teams 1988 unwards. Unlike Barkley who played with bunch of stiffs from 87-92: Where he was shooting like 63-64% 2-Point FG on like 24-25 ppg on only 15-16 2-Point FGAs taken.

[3ball]

Pippen and Grant's defense let Jordan be free to score as he pleased.


^^^^ Pure bullshit - In the 1991 Finals, MJ guarded Magic for 14 of the 20 quarters (70%) to Pippen's 6 of 20 quarters (30%).

Specifically, Pippen guarded Magic for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters of Game 2... the 2nd and 3rd quarters of Game 3... the last 4 minutes of Game 4, and none in Games 1 or 5.. Here's all 5 games in their entirety:


Game 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncUC9fSFdik
Game 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S6AWPT6fG0
Game 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cueGQChyFuU
Game 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO0LJVxaqD0
Game 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCNFQSBUe5c





Pippen and Grant's defense let Jordan be free to score as he pleased.



^^^^^Pure bullshit - Jordan locked down all these guys:


1) Magic (43% shooting in 1991 Finals)
2) Drexler (42% shooting in 1992 Finals)
3) Majerle/KJ (43% shooting for both in 1993 Finals)
4) Reggie Miller (41% shooting in 1998 ECF)
5) MJ guarded Payton for 2 games in 1996 Finals, while Pippen never did
6) MJ guarded Isiah Thomas a super-ton, while Pippen never did


A simple study was done where someone actually looked back at all the playoff series - it was clear that Jordan guarded the other team's best player FAR more often than Pippen did:

http://nobodytouchesjordan.blogspot.com/2015/08/section-21-case-for-jordan-as-best.html





But Jordan did have the best perimeter defender of all time in Pippen


Before new fans started to revise history, it was common knowledge AT THE TIME that Jordan was the Bulls' best defender:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOgJhzj4W9M&t=35m00s


Pippen couldn't guard quick point guards or quick, ballhandling guards.. Jordan was the far better defender on point guards and SG's, while still defending SF's as well as Pippen.





But Jordan did have one of the goat all around playmakers in Pippen



Pippen wasn't a goat playmaker and Jordan had a LARGER playmaking responsibility:


Assist Percentage 1991-1993 Playoffs:

Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced



Assist Percentage 1996-1998 Playoffs:

Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced


As you can see, Jordan assisted on 30% more teammate FG's during 1st three-peat, while still scoring between 50% and 200% more.. That's the GOAT load on his shoulders.. During 2nd three-peat, he still assisted more, with the same massive gap in scoring.






Yes it is. If not All Iverson is the 2nd GOAT scorer. Despite he shot like 41% FG.


You can't have horrific efficiency like Iverson and be considered a top 5 scorer....

That's obvious.. But you don't need the BEST efficiency either... You need the best combination of volume and efficiency, and that's Jordan... by a MILE





Both Barkley and Jordan are pretty close.



Both had good efficiency, but MJ was the far better scorer:


JORDAN .REG SEAS: 30 ppg on 57% TS
BARKLEY REG SEAS: 22 ppg on 61% TS

JORDAN .PLAYOFFS: 34 ppg on 57% TS
BARKLEY PLAYOFFS: 21 ppg on 58% TS


I'll take Jordan and so will everyone else.





Jordan was blessed with great teams 1988 unwards.


From 1985-1989, Jordan's teams were every bit as horrible as Barkley's.

In 1989, Jordan's 2nd option was 14/6 Pippen, who was a 2nd year player and basically sucked as a 2nd option... Pippen averaged 10/5 in the 1989 ECF.

Btw - in 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without MJ's 33/8/8/54.. So without MJ, that roster WAS a lottery roster heading into the 1990 season, instead of ECF veterans and 1 season away from starting the 3-peat.. So MJ did the same thing in 1989 that Lebron did in 2015: lead a lottery roster to 6 games with the champs - except MJ had to lead the lottery roster all regular season and playoffs, while Lebron only had a lottery roster for the Finals.

Also, the Bulls would've won the championship in 1990 if Pippen hadn't choked in Game 7 (2 points on 1-10)... They beat the Blazers in the Finals, since the Pistons only needed 5 easy games to beat Blazers, but 7 tough games and Pippen choke to beat Bulls.. The Pistons had massive edge in ORtg vs. Blazers, but razor-thin edge vs. Bulls.






While Barkley had nobodies from 87-92.


Barkley had EVERYONE in 1993, while Jordan didn't.. The Bulls only had 4 guys averaging over 20 minutes and 6 ppg (MJ, Pippen, Grant, BJ) - everyone else was a stiff that averaged LESS than 20 minutes and 6 ppg.

And we know what happened - MJ averaged a Finals record 41/9/6 on 51% to destroy Barkley...

He even hit the crucial shot in Game 4 by overpowering Barkley, which sent Barkley to his knees in anguish and defeat - I'm sure you remember it well, but let me refresh your memory:


https://media.giphy.com/media/11VKUmNe5mA4dG/giphy.gif

[Akhenaten]

Hey, guess what? 3 point line existed when Jordan played, and he even had the benefit of a shortened version of it. Not anyones fault but his own he couldn't be a more efficient scorer than Curry.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif

This gif is fuccing hilarious :roll:

[3ball]

Jordan was blessed with great teams 1988 unwards.


From 1985-1989, Jordan's teams were every bit as horrible as Barkley's.

In 1989, Jordan's 2nd option was 14/6 Pippen, who was a 2nd year player and one of the worst 2nd options in the LEAGUE... Pippen averaged 10/5 in the 1989 ECF.

You're forgetting that in 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without MJ's 33/8/8/54.. So without MJ, that roster WAS a lottery roster heading into the 1990 season, instead of ECF veterans and 1 season away from starting the 3-peat.. So MJ did the same thing in 1989 that Lebron did in 2015: lead a lottery roster to 6 games with the champs - except MJ led the lottery roster all regular season and playoffs, while Lebron only had a lottery roster for the Finals.

Also, the Bulls would've won the championship in 1990 if Pippen hadn't choked in Game 7 of ECF (2 points on 1-10)... It's clear the Bulls would've beaten the Blazers in the Finals, since the Pistons only needed 5 easy games to beat Blazers, but 7 tough games and Pippen choke to beat Bulls.. The Pistons had massive edge in ORtg vs. Blazers, but razor-thin edge vs. Bulls.
.

[sd3035]

3ball must have enjoyed the Warriors game tonight :applause:

[3ball]

3ball must have enjoyed the Warriors game tonight :applause:
how many threes did Curry need tonight?

[sd3035]

how many threes did Curry need tonight?

livid :oldlol:

[Round Mound]

^^^^ Pure bullshit - In the 1991 Finals, MJ guarded Magic for 14 of the 20 quarters (70%) to Pippen's 6 of 20 quarters (30%).

Specifically, Pippen guarded Magic for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters of Game 2... the 2nd and 3rd quarters of Game 3... the last 4 minutes of Game 4, and none in Games 1 or 5.. Here's all 5 games in their entirety:


Game 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncUC9fSFdik
Game 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S6AWPT6fG0
Game 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cueGQChyFuU
Game 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO0LJVxaqD0
Game 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCNFQSBUe5c




^^^^^Pure bullshit - Jordan locked down all these guys:


1) Magic (43% shooting in 1991 Finals)
2) Drexler (42% shooting in 1992 Finals)
3) Majerle/KJ (43% shooting for both in 1993 Finals)
4) Reggie Miller (41% shooting in 1998 ECF)
5) MJ guarded Payton for 2 games in 1996 Finals, while Pippen never did
6) MJ guarded Isiah Thomas a super-ton, while Pippen never did


A simple study was done where someone actually looked back at all the playoff series - it was clear that Jordan guarded the other team's best player FAR more often than Pippen did:

http://nobodytouchesjordan.blogspot.com/2015/08/section-21-case-for-jordan-as-best.html



Before new fans started to revise history, it was common knowledge AT THE TIME that Jordan was the Bulls' best defender:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOgJhzj4W9M&t=35m00s


Pippen couldn't guard quick point guards or quick, ballhandling guards.. Jordan was the far better defender on point guards and SG's, while still defending SF's as well as Pippen.




Pippen wasn't a goat playmaker and Jordan had a LARGER playmaking responsibility:


Assist Percentage 1991-1993 Playoffs:

Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced



Assist Percentage 1996-1998 Playoffs:

Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced


As you can see, Jordan assisted on 30% more teammate FG's during 1st three-peat, while still scoring between 50% and 200% more.. That's the GOAT load on his shoulders.. During 2nd three-peat, he still assisted more, with the same massive gap in scoring.




You can't have horrific efficiency like Iverson and be considered a top 5 scorer....

That's obvious.. But you don't need the BEST efficiency either... You need the best combination of volume and efficiency, and that's Jordan... by a MILE




Both had good efficiency, but MJ was the far better scorer:


JORDAN .REG SEAS: 30 ppg on 57% TS
BARKLEY REG SEAS: 22 ppg on 61% TS

JORDAN .PLAYOFFS: 34 ppg on 57% TS
BARKLEY PLAYOFFS: 21 ppg on 58% TS


I'll take Jordan and so will everyone else.



From 1985-1989, Jordan's teams were every bit as horrible as Barkley's.

In 1989, Jordan's 2nd option was 14/6 Pippen, who was a 2nd year player and basically sucked as a 2nd option... Pippen averaged 10/5 in the 1989 ECF.

Btw - in 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without MJ's 33/8/8/54.. So without MJ, that roster WAS a lottery roster heading into the 1990 season, instead of ECF veterans and 1 season away from starting the 3-peat.. So MJ did the same thing in 1989 that Lebron did in 2015: lead a lottery roster to 6 games with the champs - except MJ had to lead the lottery roster all regular season and playoffs, while Lebron only had a lottery roster for the Finals.

Also, the Bulls would've won the championship in 1990 if Pippen hadn't choked in Game 7 (2 points on 1-10)... They beat the Blazers in the Finals, since the Pistons only needed 5 easy games to beat Blazers, but 7 tough games and Pippen choke to beat Bulls.. The Pistons had massive edge in ORtg vs. Blazers, but razor-thin edge vs. Bulls.




Barkley had EVERYONE in 1993, while Jordan didn't.. The Bulls only had 4 guys averaging over 20 minutes and 6 ppg (MJ, Pippen, Grant, BJ) - everyone else was a stiff that averaged LESS than 20 minutes and 6 ppg.

And we know what happened - MJ averaged a Finals record 41/9/6 on 51% to destroy Barkley...

He even hit the crucial shot in Game 4 by overpowering Barkley, which sent Barkley to his knees in anguish and defeat - I'm sure you remember it well, but let me refresh your memory:


https://media.giphy.com/media/11VKUmNe5mA4dG/giphy.gif

Im not hating on Jordan i think he is the best of all time too dummy :rolleyes: :confusedshrug: but you are too sensitive regarding MJ....Barkley is definetly one of the Top GOAT Efficiency Scorers Per Shot Taken aswell.

I do however see Jordan as having better teams 1988 unwards than Barkley which is true

Jordan had:

- Grant: All Defensive 2nd Team: Solid Jumper and Rebounder. Great Role Player
- Pippen: GOAT Perimeter Defender (Could Guard 1-4), One of The GOAT Play Making-Point-Forwards and Drive & Finish Players.
- Kukoc: Great Ballhandler, Shooter and Passer at 6`11 ft Missmatch: All Star In Any Other Weaker Team

***Pippen Was Top 4 in PER in The Whole League the 1993-94 season and Top 10 in Defensive Rating as a SF in The Mids 90s (Only SF in The Top 10 In Defensive Rating). Also Top 6 in Plus/Minus for Like 6 Season in the 90s. Oh All Star MVP in 94 Aswell.

Grant and Pippen Both All Stars, BJ All Star the Season MJ Left...

MJ..leaves and the Bulls Win 55 Games...Just 2 Less Games Than The Season Before With Jordan.

Then Grant Leaves The Bulls and He Goes to the Finals With The Magic Over Jordan and Pippen. Guess What Happened?

-Jordan and Pippen Got Dennis Rodman: The GOAT Rebounder and Among The GOAT Defensive Players.

Jordan Was Blessed With a Team Capable of Winning 55 Games Without Him. Thats How Good The Bulls Where Without Jordan.

Period!

[3ball]

livid :oldlol:
Looks like it was 10 threes... I rest my case

I don't think players are great if they rely on the 3-point line to be great.

Let's face it - without the 3-point line, guys like Curry, Ray Allen and Reggie Miller would NOT be great players - they'd be GOOD players, but not all-time greats..

Half of their shots would go from being the most efficient in the game (a 3-pointer at 45%), to the least efficient (a 2-pointer at 45%).. :confusedshrug:

[24-Inch_Chrome]

If Jordan was a better three point shooter he might have been able to be as good offensively as Curry. Sucks to suck.

[Smoke117]

I love how Curry "relies" on the three point shot to 3ball. Jordan played his entire career with the same 3pt line...PLUS he played with it shortened for two seasons. How pathetic is it that 3ball's argument against Curry is that he's the greatest shooter of all time? That he has the most ridiculous range of all time? That Curry should be penalized for being the greatest shooter of all time by far? You're a bitch and a joke 3ball.

[!@#$%Vectors!@#]

is 3ball black? I hope he isnt Black. I hope hes like some random native tucked in the middle of no where.

Please tell me he isnt black. I might have to go bleach my skin .

[CuterThanRubio]

If players and coaches in the past had a higher basketball IQ they would have been aiming for threes the year it was introduced into the league.

3 is more than 2, should we not be trying to get more points on a single shot?

The oldschool pack the paint and hack defense seems like it would be inviting people to take outside shots but they never did, I don't understand why it took so long to catch on.

By the way, Jordan didn't "destroy" Barkley, he was mostly guarded by a bunch of white scrubs, of course he was bound to steamroll.

[ShawkFactory]

OPs ass is puckering so hard right now. Not that he should actually be worried..but you know that hundreds of new essays are going to come forth in the next few months :lol

[3ball]

I do however see Jordan as having better teams 1988 unwards than Barkley which is true from 87-98


From 1985-1989, Jordan's teams were every bit as horrible as Barkley's.

In 1989, Jordan's 2nd option was 14/6 Pippen, who was a 2nd year player and one of the worst 2nd options in the LEAGUE... Pippen averaged 10/5 in the 1989 ECF.

You're forgetting that in 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without MJ's 33/8/8/54.. So without MJ, that roster WAS a lottery roster heading into the 1990 season, instead of ECF veterans and 1 season away from starting the 3-peat.. So MJ did the same thing in 1989 that Lebron did in 2015: lead a lottery roster to 6 games with the champs - except MJ led the lottery roster all regular season and playoffs, while Lebron only had a lottery roster for the Finals.

Also, the Bulls would've won the championship in 1990 if Pippen hadn't choked in Game 7 of ECF (2 points on 1-10)... It's clear the Bulls would've beaten the Blazers in the Finals, since the Pistons only needed 5 easy games to beat Blazers, but 7 tough games and Pippen choke to beat Bulls.. The Pistons had massive edge in ORtg vs. Blazers, but razor-thin edge vs. Bulls.





- Grant: All Defensive 2nd Team: Solid Jumper and Rebounder. Great Role Player


Grant was a solid defender that made ONE 2nd team all-defense alongside Jordan... But offensively, he was a simple dunker and play-finisher..

Overall, he was just a good ROLE player - this is common knowledge - every team in the league has one or more 11/8 play-finishers like Grant on their roster.





Kukoc: great ballhandler, Shooter and Passer at 6`11 ft Missmatch: All Star In Any Othe Weaker Team


He was a Harrison Barnes equivalent, except Kukoc was a little worse.. I always laugh when Jordan haters start giving props to ordinary role players that EVERY TEAM HAS..

Btw, Kukoc was nowhere near all-star caliber - I think you're actually LAZERUSS that bolds his posts as a disguise, because you're statements are just as ridiculous as his are.





Jordan Was Blessed With a Team Capable of Winning 55 Games Without Him. Thats How Good The Bulls Where Without Jordan.


We know the 55 wins wasn't due to talent because this was the same core that needed MJ to achieve GOAT stats to win any rings.. MJ wasn't winning rings by averaging 25 and 28 ppg like Lebron on his stacked Heat teams in 2012 and 2013 - MJ averaged 36/7/8 during the 1991-1993 Finals, so we know he had a weaker cast.

But who cares about the regular season record of defending 3-peat champions.. The 1994 Bulls were a 2nd Round team without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him... That's the GOAT impact bar none.. If we wanted to verify Jordan's 3-peat to 2nd Round impact, we'd ask him to come back and 3-peat again... Done and done.

Btw, the Bulls' DRtg in 1994 (6th) wasn't any better relative to the league than the first 3-peat (7th, 4th, 7th).. Accordingly, the massive decline from 3-peat dynasty to 2nd Round team was due entirely to the absence of MJ's goat offense (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12082990&postcount=185), which caused their ORtg to crater from #1 all-time (during the 3-peat) to 14th in the league in 1994.

[sd3035]

OP is fuming mad because Jordan didn't have the range of Curry

[Smoke117]

OP is fuming mad because Jordan didn't have the range of Curry

Didn't Jordan have one of the worst showings ever in the 3pt contest...even though it was during a line shortened season?

https://usatftw.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/steph1.gif

[3ball]

OP is fuming mad because Jordan didn't have the range of Curry



Not at all because MJ was the FAR greater shooter inside 20 feet:


.....................MJ 1997 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/893/stats/shooting/?Season=1996-97&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)...................Cur ry 2015 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)............ Curry 2016 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/stats/shooting/) <----- links to nba.com data

5-9 ft.......... 49.2%, 126 fga........... 40.3%, 72 fga.......... 47.2%, 53 fga

10-14 ft....... 51.5%, 466 fga........... 52.9%, 85 fga.......... 54.8%, 42 fga

15-19 ft....... 49.5%, 594 fga........... 43.9%, 132 fga........ 41.1%, 73 fga



Overall midrange % (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)

JORDAN 1997: 49.3%, 1202 fga
CURRY.. 2015: 41.1%, 285 fga
CURRY.. 2016: 46.0%, 139 fga
LEBRON 2015: 37.0%, 343 fga
LEBRON 2016: 31.9%, 119 fga



Plus, MJ could make a TON of jumpshots that Curry (and all players) can only dream of:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=390366
.

[Round Mound]

3-ball stop the stupidity we all know MJ is the GOAT but stop trying to hype him as if he was god or something. :no: :rolleyes: :facepalm. If a player has a 2nd option that is 4th in per, top 10 in defensive rating (as a SF btw) and top 10 in plus/minus: that means he has a great team and 2nd option. Jordan scored that much because thats what he was basically a scorer and a big time ball hogg. If it wasn`t for Pippen`s point-forward play and the way he made others better at timing plays and play making overall: the bulls would have won nothing!

[Prime_Shaq]

Didn't Jordan have one of the worst showings ever in the 3pt contest...even though it was during a line shortened season?

https://usatftw.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/steph1.gif
He did worse than Kevin Hart did

[Stout]

Looks like it was 10 threes... I rest my case

I don't think players are great if they rely on the 3-point line to be great.

Let's face it - without the 3-point line, guys like Curry, Ray Allen and Reggie Miller would NOT be great players - they'd be GOOD players, but not all-time greats..

Half of their shots would go from being the most efficient in the game (a 3-pointer at 45%), to the least efficient (a 2-pointer at 45%).. :confusedshrug:
This is beyond flawed logic.

[sd3035]

Kevin Hart is a better shooter than Ordan, 3 ball is furious :roll:

[JohnFreeman]

Kevin Hart is a better shooter than Ordan, 3 ball is furious :roll:
:roll:

[CuterThanRubio]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg

[plowking]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[ClipperRevival]

3ball,

I kind of get what you're saying. The elimination of hand checking, soft rules, illegal D and the emphasis on the 3 creates spacing which allows a great shooter like Curry to thrive in this era better than in the past. But give credit where its due. Curry is the best PURE shooter ever and he makes it look effortless. His quick release, range and ability to shoot off a live dribble is amazing, not to mention his amazing handles and ability to break down set defenders.

It's like taking away shots MJ took within 10 feet and judging him. That's not fair. Give credit to Curry for being an innovator. The game has never seen a guy quite like him. That doesn't take away from MJ's legacy. In the end, the truth will play itself out. If you saw MJ like I did, we know what we saw. And when we see someone on par with MJ, our eyes will just know. Right now, Curry's on par with MJ level of impact but he's got to do it for many more years to get into MJ's class. But still special stuff.

[OldSchoolBBall]

3ball,

I kind of get what you're saying. The elimination of hand checking, soft rules, illegal D and the emphasis on the 3 creates spacing which allows a great shooter like Curry to thrive in this era better than in the past. But give credit where its due. Curry is the best PURE shooter ever and he makes it look effortless. His quick release, range and ability to shoot off a live dribble is amazing, not to mention his amazing handles and ability to break down set defenders.

It's like taking away shots MJ took within 10 feet and judging him. That's not fair. Give credit to Curry for being an innovator. The game has never seen a guy quite like him. That doesn't take away from MJ's legacy. In the end, the truth will play itself out. If you saw MJ like I did, we know what we saw. And when we see someone on par with MJ, our eyes will just know. Right now, Curry's on par with MJ level of impact but he's got to do it for many more years to get into MJ's class. But still special stuff.

I agree he's special - his creativity is great, as is his bball IQ. But what if you feel, as I do, that he only has the impact he does because of the time he's playing in, and on the team he's playing on? I think he'd be a HOF'er in any era, but he wouldn't be someone who people are calling the GOAT offensive player if he played 25-30 years ago imo.

This is not even taking into account that Jordan shits on him defensively, and is also a better clutch/big game player (though Curry is no slouch).

[ClipperRevival]

I agree he's special - his creativity is great, as is his bball IQ. But what if you feel, as I do, that he only has the impact he does because of the time he's playing in, and on the team he's playing on? I think he'd be a HOF'er in any era, but he wouldn't be someone who people are calling the GOAT offensive player if he played 25-30 years ago imo.

This is not even taking into account that Jordan shits on him defensively, and is also a better clutch/big game player (though Curry is no slouch).

No doubt he wouldn't be as dominant in an era where physicality and hand checking was allowed. People who actually played the game when hand checking was allowed know how much of a difference it can be to be able to extend that arm and physically funnel the offensive player. If not funnel, just throw off his rhythm because the thing you see when you see Curry today is he has room to work, so he's allowed to shoot in rhythm, play in rhythm and dribble in rhythm. Defenders just aren't allowed to get physical and try to break that rhytm. And that is what I don't like. You are hand cuffing the defenders. It gives the offensive player too much of an advantage. He is special but the rules do allow his talents to shine a lot brighter than other eras.

[sd3035]

I agree he's special - his creativity is great, as is his bball IQ. But what if you feel, as I do, that he only has the impact he does because of the time he's playing in, and on the team he's playing on? I think he'd be a HOF'er in any era, but he wouldn't be someone who people are calling the GOAT offensive player if he played 25-30 years ago imo.

This is not even taking into account that Jordan shits on him defensively, and is also a better clutch/big game player (though Curry is no slouch).

Curry would have been banned from the league for being too good if he had played in that soft era of absolutely no defense

[AirBonner]

Curry would have been banned from the league for being too good if he had played in that soft era of absolutely no defense
while curry would be good in that era I don't think he would be this good. Unless of course you are dragging iggy klay and green to that era as well to cover up his defensive deficiencies.

[plowking]

while curry would be good in that era I don't think he would be this good. Unless of course you are dragging iggy klay and green to that era as well to cover up his defensive deficiencies.

Which defensive deficiencies?

He is 2nd in steals, 15th in defensive win shares, 2nd on his team in defensive win shares only to Draymond Green who is a DPOY type.
Then he is 3rd in defensive rebounds per game for PGs.

He is one of the best defensive players at his position. Everything backs that claim up.

[plowking]

Whats funny about this all, is that I posted a Reggie Miller game where he went off for 50, and not one of the old school fans could point out where the extra physicality was. Same calls were being made.

[ClipperRevival]

Whats funny about this all, is that I posted a Reggie Miller game where he went off for 50, and not one of the old school fans could point out where the extra physicality was. Same calls were being made.

Miller was primarily an off ball, run through picks and catch and shoot shooter. Hand checking applies primarily to players with the ball, on the perimeter.

[plowking]

Miller was primarily an off ball, run through picks and catch and shoot shooter. Hand checking applies primarily to players with the ball, on the perimeter.

There were plays where he drove and got cheap, ticky tacky fouls. Go look for yourself. Game against Charlotte, 57 points.

If now is soft, so was then.

[navy]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpgDamn. This is an ether. :oldlol:

[ImKobe]

See, that's what the 3-point line and soft rules has done:

it makes perfect sense that the arbitrary, artificial creation of the 3-point line would eventually enable a team that shoots them well enough to break the wins record..... especially if the league removed barriers to penetration to increase drive-and-kick.

Who cares if Curry and Klay can't hold a godamn candle to MJ and Pippen... Heck, MJ could beat them both by himself if it was all 2-pointers.. But WITH the 3-point line, these preppy kids can say they're good basketball players.. It's a joke

Talk shit

3s are harder to make than the wide open layups/dunks MJ got due to his athleticism, why is it that the 3pt shooting is not more impressive than making layups? Jordan couldn't make a jump shot to save his life when he entered the league but he shot over 50% because he could always get to the rim

Curry is more efficient shooting the ball than MJ BUT he's doing it from the 3pt line... do you know how hard that is? But to discredit Curry because he isn't playing the same way guys 20/30 yrs ago did is stupid...shows how much you are stuck in the past.

Curry's here to stay. There's nothing you can do about the 3pt shot. The defense can run around the perimeter and try to take it away but Golden State is just as efficient inside.

[plowking]

Jordan would average 0ppg if basketball was never invented. I just can't give him any respect if he didn't invent the game.

[G0ATbe]

No matter what stat you come up with Currys better than Jordan ever was.

[fragokota]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[LakersForlife]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg
savage

[LakersForlife]

if anything ive learned from this thread .. kevin hart is better 3 point shooter than jordan thanks 3ball

[livinglegend]

Curry this season > peak Ordan

/thread

[Achilleas]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg
please change your name to 2ball,3s aren't for ordan :roll:

[julizaver]

.
Formula for true shooting = PTS/(FGA + 0.44 x FTA)

*STEPHEN CURRYK 2016:. 24.9 ppg on 56.5% ts
*MICHAEL JORDAN 1988:. 34.9 ppg on 60.1% ts

*thru 55 games


steph would be a good player in the 70's, but nowhere NEAR the best player in the league.

today's 3-point obsession has provided spacing, which has watered down the game, including the skill, players, and brand of basketball.

Man, you are probably right that removing the 3pt line you will robbed Curry from his greatest asset, but there is no sense in it - especcialy when comparing him to a player who played his whole career with the 3pt line !!! MJ concentrated on fadeaway jump shots, Curry on the 3 point shooting - that is. During MJ time 3pt shooting doesn't have the same significanse as today.

[Stout]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg
:roll:

[Stout]

http://i64.tinypic.com/zjw8si.jpg
please change your name to 2ball,3s aren't for ordan :roll:


Seriously, a poster named 3ball is complaining about the advantage of shooting 3s. Can't make this stuff up. :roll:

[Stout]

If you eliminate shots beyond the 3 point line, Jordan is better.

BUT, if you eliminate shots within the 3 point line, Curry is the GOAT. :bowdown:

[PejaTheSerbSnip]

Hahaha. Ok. I'm gonna lie to myself about this being a huge waste of time, and take 5 minutes out of my life and indulge you on this one.

Let's take away every single 3 pointer Curry has made this year. Let's turn them all into 2 pointers. He's still averaging:

25.5 ppg

on

57.5 ts%

Now this begs a number of questions:

1) why the hell would we do that?
2) what would Jordan's statistics look like if you arbitrarily took away his most efficient means of scoring, his drives to the hoop?
3) what personality disorder are you afflicted with?


Seriously, the guy is efficient from every spot on the floor, and is averaging 58% on two point shots. He's shooting 36-53 from 28 to 50 this year, and his true shooting% when there's a hand in his face is over 60. He shoots the 3 because it's his biggest weapon, and because it opens up the floor for his teammates. The mere threat of him shooting it makes his team extraordinarily better. It's why they're 117-17 with him in the lineup the past two years, 1-4 without him in. He's a freaking offensive savant. He eschews long-goddamn-2's because, well shit, they wouldn't help his team win basketball games. If he wanted to become a great mid range player he sure as shit could, but that would be missing the forest for the trees as his team would CLEARLY NOT BE AS GOOD.


Anyways, back to the original statistic I presented: turn every 3 pointer Curry made this year into a two pointer, and he is STILL averaging 25.4 ppg on 57%ts.

Basically, take away the greatest shooter of all times greatest strength, a strength that has been pivotal in propelling his team to heights not reached in almost 20 years, and he's still one of the premier scorers in the game. And you have the nerve to hate on this guy? What the fck is wrong with you?

Mind you, I think we can all safely assume that Currys efficiency would have been much much higher than that if he lost his mind and chose to not attempt a single 3 this year, as he would have had a lot more free throw attempts and those 24-50 feet circus shots would be replaced by the "more prudent" (;)) mid range shots that you jack off to. But forget that. Let's just cater to your insatiable lust for long 2's with a foot on the line and arbitrarily subtract 276 points from Curry's total. Since we're in this business of nullifying players strengths, let's also shave off 5 free throw attempts per game off MJ's totals in his best years while we're at it.

(disclaimer: Jordan is the GOAT and I don't think Curry has a snowballs chance in hell of surpassing him. Nonetheless, you're insane).

[Duffy Pratt]

Eliminate the ***** foul rules and guys like Jordan wouldnt be any good at all. They rely on getting an advantage by penalizing their competition for acting like men. Without the foul rule, Shaq would be God. It's only because the League is soft that he is not.