Myth: Curry is more efficient than Jordan

[3ball]

.
Jordan is more efficient on a per POSSESSION basis (ortg), which is more important than Curry's per SHOT efficiency (shooting efficiency).

Jordan's higher per-possession efficiency was due primarily to lower turnovers, but also because his superior midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) efficiency partially offset Curry's 3-point efficiency.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

Jordan's bigger load is also reflected in his higher "usage", which measures the proportion of offensive possessions he was involved in - the stats show he was involved in more possessions (usage) at higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg).. So Jordan simply DID MORE - he gave his team MORE (possessions) of a GOOD THING (per-possession efficiency).

[KingPush]

Strong username to post ratio

[Nilocon165]

3ball is a slang word for 3 pointer

[CuterThanRubio]

Curry shot 56% from inside the arc.

That is a higher percentage than Jordan ever averaged.

Curry is more efficient from outside and inside the arc.


Curry is more efficient.

[3ball]

Curry shot 56% from inside the arc.

So Curry is more efficient from outside AND inside the arc.



You're talking about Curry's per SHOT efficiency - Jordan was more efficient on a per POSSESSION basis:



1991 vs. 2016:



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 125 ORtg (points produced per 100 possessions)
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 125 ORtg



Career



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 117 ORtg

JORDAN PLAYOFFS:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 PLAYOFFS:4 115 ORtg



What's more important: points per SHOT or points-per-POSSESSION?

Jordan's higher per-possession efficiency was due primarily to lower turnovers, but also because his superior midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) efficiency partially offset Curry's 3-point efficiency.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

Jordan's bigger load is also reflected in his higher "usage", which measures the proportion of offensive possessions he was involved in - the stats show he was involved in more possessions (usage) at higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg).. So Jordan simply DID MORE - he gave his team MORE (possessions) of a GOOD THING (per-possession efficiency).
.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Curry averages 30 ppg on 67% TS while taking far more long range shot.

Jordan never averaged 30ppg on 67% TS for a season, his highest was 61% TS.

Curry made almost as many threes in this season than Jordan did in his entire career.

Curry is the most efficient volume scorer of all time

[SouBeachTalents]

Curry > Jordan

[3ball]

Curry averages 30 ppg on 67% TS while taking far more long range shot.



You're talking about Curry's per SHOT efficiency - Jordan was more efficient on a per POSSESSION basis:



1991 vs. 2016:



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 125 ORtg (points produced per 100 possessions)
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 125 ORtg



Career



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 117 ORtg

JORDAN PLAYOFFS:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 PLAYOFFS:4 115 ORtg



What's more important: points per SHOT or points-per-POSSESSION?

Jordan's higher per-possession efficiency was due primarily to lower turnovers, but also because his superior midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) efficiency partially offset Curry's 3-point efficiency.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

Jordan's bigger load is also reflected in his higher "usage", which measures the proportion of offensive possessions he was involved in - the stats show he was involved in more possessions (usage) at higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg).. So Jordan simply DID MORE - he gave his team MORE (possessions) of a GOOD THING (per-possession efficiency).

[Deuce Bigalow]

50/45/90 no one has ever done this as far as I know, especially on the volume he did it on (30 ppg).

[TheMarkMadsen]

So I'm supposed to care about a 1 point different in offensive rating, which is best used as a team stat as it is? :oldlol:

But glad you agree that Curry is more efficient per shot :confusedshrug:

[3ball]

Curry > Jordan


Jordan's higher efficiency (per possession) is remarkable considering he carried a bigger load than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense..

So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.. That means he's far better.

[NBAGOAT]

off rtg isn't exactly ppp. It's affected by how good your team is at oreb. The Bulls were the best oreb team in the league because of guys like rodman and grant and played in a league that put a bigger emphasis on oreb(30% in 96 to 24% in 16). Also Curry's ortg is lower because of turnovers but turnovers is also a part of passing/playmaking ability. Shouldn't Curry get credit for having more assists than MJ and being in general one of the better passers in the league.

[3ball]

50/45/90 no one has ever done this as far as I know, especially on the volume he did it on (30 ppg).



You're talking about Curry's per SHOT efficiency - Jordan was more efficient on a per POSSESSION basis:



1991 vs. 2016:



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 125 ORtg (points produced per 100 possessions)
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 125 ORtg



Career



JORDAN REG SEASON:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 REG SEASON:4 117 ORtg

JORDAN PLAYOFFS:. 118 ORtg
CURRY4 PLAYOFFS:4 115 ORtg



Seriously - what's more important: points per SHOT or points-per-POSSESSION?

Jordan's higher per-possession efficiency was due primarily to lower turnovers, but also because his superior midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) efficiency partially offset Curry's 3-point efficiency.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

Jordan's bigger load is also reflected in his higher "usage", which measures the proportion of offensive possessions he was involved in - the stats show he was involved in more possessions (usage) at higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg).. So Jordan simply DID MORE - he gave his team MORE (possessions) of a GOOD THING (per-possession efficiency).
.

[Young X]

Curry is a more efficient shooter but not offensive player.

[CuterThanRubio]

Splitting hairs desperate to find any arbitrary stat that fits your narrative, typical Jordan fanboy tactics!

According to the numbers you posted they are identical in ORtg during their 16 and 91 seasons, but Curry bests him in PPS, so who had a better season? (Hint: 73-9)

Its not fair to use career averages since Curry recently unlocked his true potential while Jordan had superior athletic abilities and played in a garbage league and was the focal point of his team from day one and put up gaudy yet meaningless totals.

[NBAGOAT]

Curry is a more efficient shooter but not offensive player.

true but he should credit for being more of a playmaker/passer then. Turnovers are a part of a playmaking and scoring ability.

[3ball]

off rtg isn't exactly ppp. It's affected by how good your team is at oreb.


This is incorrect - don't clutter the thread with inaccuracies.

You're referring to TEAM ortg, which is different from the INDIVIDUAL ortg's of Jordan and Curry referenced itt.

Individual ortg is unaffected by a team's offensive rebounding rate.

[CuterThanRubio]

Please recognize the power of the 3ball, 3ball.

Curry is more efficient than Jordan even if his PPP is lower because his PPS allows him to make up for empty possessions with more valuable field goals.

[Young X]

true but he should credit for being more of a playmaker/passer then. Turnovers are a part of a playmaking and scoring ability.Well then you could turn around and say Jordan should get more credit for scoring at a higher volume. It's harder to be efficient when your volume is high.

[3ball]

Please recognize the power of the 3ball, 3ball.

Curry is more efficient than Jordan even if his PPP is lower because his PPS allows him to make up for empty possessions with more valuable field goals.


Jordan is more efficient per possession, which is all that matters and means he's the more efficient player, as further evidenced by his higher Player Efficiency Rating.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

[K Xerxes]

I don't really see what the debate is, other than pointless semantics.

Curry is a better shooter. Jordan is a better scorer, overall offensive player and a far far better defender.

[KingPush]

http://i.makeagif.com/media/5-15-2016/w4nc9Z.gif

[3ball]

http://i.makeagif.com/media/5-15-2016/w4nc9Z.gif



Jordan shot FAR better than Curry inside 20 feet, on 6 times the volume:




.....................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/) <--- link to nba.com data

5-9 ft.......... 49.2%, 126 fga........... 40.3%, 72 fga.......... 48.6%, 72 fga

10-14 ft....... 51.5%, 466 fga........... 52.9%, 85 fga.......... 50.9%, 57 fga

15-19 ft....... 49.5%, 594 fga........... 43.9%, 132 fga........ 37.3%, 102 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:. 42.5%, 200 fga



Interestingly, good shooting isn't needed to be a top scorer in today's game - Lebron, Westbrook, Wade, Derozan and Butler all have poor 3-point AND midrange efficiency (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12338297&postcount=47) for most of their careers, yet they're still top scorers because today's wide open spacing and hands-off defense allows athletic players easier access to the rim than ever before.

Today's spacing and hands-off defense would benefit MJ's athleticism the same way, except he had the goat midrange efficiency shown above, which would put him in Curry's category as a goat shooter, and gave him a similarly massive advantage over the aforementioned non-shooters Lebron, Westbrick and company.

[CuterThanRubio]

Nice post KingPush

https://farzan3.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/1911291.jpg

http://espn.go.com/i/editorial/2006/0519/photo/jordan_kobe_195.jpg

http://cdn.newsday.com/polopoly_fs/1.9918084.1423447888!/httpImage/image.JPG_gen/derivatives/display_600/image.JPG

[NBAGOAT]

This is incorrect - don't clutter the thread with inaccuracies.

You're referring to TEAM ortg, which is different from the INDIVIDUAL ortg's of Jordan and Curry referenced itt.

Individual ortg is unaffected by a team's offensive rebounding rate.

you're the one being inaccurate. http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

ORtg = 100 * (PProd / TotPoss) where

PProd = (PProd_FG_Part + PProd_AST_Part + FTM) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + PProd_ORB_Part and

TotPoss = ScPoss + FGxPoss + FTxPoss + TOV

ScPoss = (FG_Part + AST_Part + FT_Part) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + ORB_Part

This is literally the 1st page you find when you look up calculating individual ortg's. How dumb are u.

[Jameerthefear]

Alltime list:
1. Lebron/Curry
2. Curry/Lebron
3. Michael Ordan

I teach a couple of math classes for elementary school kids. This is the consensus. Jordan will soon be forgotten by the young generation :roll: Pathetic!

[NBAGOAT]

Well then you could turn around and say Jordan should get more credit for scoring at a higher volume. It's harder to be efficient when your volume is high.

Definitely true. I have np with Jordan being called a better scorer. Just making a point about turnovers and ortg in general.

[3ball]

you're the one being inaccurate. http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ratings.html

ORtg = 100 * (PProd / TotPoss) where

PProd = (PProd_FG_Part + PProd_AST_Part + FTM) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + PProd_ORB_Part and

TotPoss = ScPoss + FGxPoss + FTxPoss + TOV

ScPoss = (FG_Part + AST_Part + FT_Part) * (1 - (Team_ORB / Team_Scoring_Poss) * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%) + ORB_Part

This is literally the 1st page you find when you look up calculating individual ortg's. How dumb are u.


Wow, you're really dumb or purposefully lying:

The equation makes sure that differing ORB rates don't affect the calculation - that's the only reason ORB is in the calculation.


Individual ORtg = points produced per 100 possessions

(where the offensive rebounding rate of each player's team has been taken OUT of the equation)

[3ball]

Well then you could turn around and say Jordan should get more credit for scoring at a higher volume.

It's harder to be efficient when your volume is high.


.
Efficiency at high volume - players with 25+ FGA and 45% FG


Regular Season:

Michael Jordan: 1987, 1993
Rick Barry:...... 1967, 1975
Bob McAdoo:.... 1975
George Gervin:. 1982
Kobe Bryant:.... 2006
Elgin Baylor:.... 1963
Tiny Archibald:. 1973
Dominique:...... 1988


Playoffs (10 game min):

*Michael Jordan:..... 1988, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1997, 1998
Elgin Baylor:.......... 1960, 1961, 1968
Bob McAdoo:.......... 1974, 1975
George Gervin:....... 1975, 1982
Jerry West:............ 1966
Rick Barry:............ 1977
Hakeem Olajuwon:.. 1995
Kobe Bryant:.......... 2007
Dominique:............ 1988
Allen Iverson:......... 2005
Kareem Jabbar:...... 1975


* Averaged 25.1 FGA and 48.7 FG% for his playoff career



Curry has never shot high volume (his team is too stacked for that), so this post won't discuss him.

So back to the topic - the real holy grail of basketball skill is good efficiency at high volume while winning championships because the efficient high volume must be achieved within the team concept.. Only 2 players have reached this holy grail of basketball skill (25 shot attempts on 45% during a championship playoff run): MJ did it 4 times (1992, 1993, 1997, and 1998) and Hakeem once (1995).. Ultimately, their elite midrange efficiency allowed them to shoot well at high volume.

Now lets look at Lebron - wouldn't it be nice for Lebron to score 20% more on better efficiency????... Isn't that what any fan would want of their favorite player??.. Well that's what Jordan DID (see the stats below).

If Kobe or Lebron could shoot a higher volume at the same efficiency - they would... But they can't - only Jordan is capable of maintaining the same efficiency at very high volume:


Per 100 Possessions in Playoffs:

JORDAN:. 43.3 pts.. 2.2 oreb.. 6.1 dreb.. 7.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 2.7 stl.. 1.1 blk.. 32.5 fga.. 48.7 fg.. 56.8 ts.. 118 ORtg
LEBRON:. 36.5 pts.. 2.0 oreb.. 9.3 dreb.. 8.6 ast.. 4.5 tov.. 2.2 stl.. 1.2 blk.. 26.8 fga.. 47.3 fg.. 56.5 ts.. 114 ORtg
KOBE:..... 34.7 pts.. 1.4 oreb.. 5.5 dreb.. 6.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 1.9 stl.. 0.9 blk.. 27.7 fga.. 44.8 fg.. 54.1 ts.. 110 ORtg
WADE:.... 32.2 pts.. 2.0 oreb.. 5.4 dreb.. 7.1 ast.. 4.8 tov.. 2.3 stl.. 1.4 blk.. 24.5 fga.. 47.8 fg.. 55.4 ts.. 108 ORtg


Considering the #2 thru #4 guys are between 32 and 36 points, you'd think the #1 guy would be at 37 or 38... But MJ is at 43.3 points, which far above the pack and in another tier - MJ simply did more (higher volume) while still maintaining equal or better efficiency.

[KingPush]

Curry does more than Jordan with less

Could Jordan win 73 games with the current Warriors? Doubt it

[NBAGOAT]

Wow, you're really dumb or purposefully lying:

the equation makes sure that differing ORB rates don't affect the calculation - that's the only reason ORB is in the calculation.

Individual ORtg = points produced per 100 possessions (where the offensive rebounding rate of each player's team has been taken OUT of the equation)

you must've failed math in school. Team_ORB% is factor in the formula which is specific to each team. Example is
ORB_Part = ORB * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%

If the team-orb% is different you get a different team_orb_weight which would mean a different orb_part. That would only affect the scoring possessions and not points produced which would affect your individual ortg.

[3ball]

you must've failed math in school. Team_ORB% is factor in the formula which is specific to each team. Example is
ORB_Part = ORB * Team_ORB_Weight * Team_Play%

If the team-orb% is different you get a different team_orb_weight which would mean a different orb_part. That would only affect the scoring possessions and not points produced which would affect your individual ortg.


Why they have a stat measuring points per possession that is biased by differing offensive rebounding rates?

The equation makes sure that differing ORB rates don't affect the calculation - that's the only reason ORB is in the calculation.


Individual ORtg = points produced per 100 possessions

(where the offensive rebounding rate of each player's team has been taken OUT of the equation)

[3ball]

Curry does more than Jordan with less


Curry produced a lower proportion of his team's points and assists in 2016 than Jordan did in 1991, and Jordan had FAR less turnovers.. Curry also scored a lower proportion of points than old man Jordan in 1997 and 1998 (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23).

So Jordan carried a bigger load on offense, and a FAR bigger load on defense..

You probably don't realize that no all-time great has ever led his team in scoring for every playoff series of their careers, EXCEPT Jordan, who led his team by at least 10 ppg for every series - let that sink in - Jordan was on another level from all other players (edit: there were 2 series where Jordan led in scoring by only 7 ppg and 5 ppg)







http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/7-30-2015/jkrR_v.gif


Could Jordan win 73 games with the current Warriors? Doubt it


Jordan's off-ball game and quick decision-making would fit like a glove into the Warrior's offense.

He would also space the floor better - when a dangerous rim attacker is on the floor, ALL defenders must cheat off their man (see Isiah Thomas above), which leaves 3-point shooters and other teammates more open than otherwise.. This is basketball 101.

Otoh, 3-point shooters only cause a single defender to hug them on the perimeter, which doesn't do shit BY ITSELF - it takes the entire Warrior team shooting 3-pointers TOGETHER to provide floor-spacing.

Essentially, 3-point shooters need teammates to help them space the floor, whereas a single rim attacker frees up teammates for open shots all by themselves, by forcing the entire defense to cheat off their man.

[sd3035]

3 ball got killed in this thread :roll:

[bigkingsfan]

Jordan played in the inflated scoring era.

[pauk]

Per 100 Possessions in Playoffs:

JORDAN:. 43.3 pts.. 2.2 oreb.. 6.1 dreb.. 7.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 2.7 stl.. 1.1 blk.. 32.5 fga.. 48.7 fg.. 56.8 ts.. 118 ORtg
LEBRON:. 36.5 pts.. 2.0 oreb.. 9.3 dreb.. 8.6 ast.. 4.5 tov.. 2.2 stl.. 1.2 blk.. 26.8 fga.. 47.3 fg.. 56.5 ts.. 114 ORtg
KOBE:..... 34.7 pts.. 1.4 oreb.. 5.5 dreb.. 6.4 ast.. 4.0 tov.. 1.9 stl.. 0.9 blk.. 27.7 fga.. 44.8 fg.. 54.1 ts.. 110 ORtg
WADE:.... 32.2 pts.. 2.0 oreb.. 5.4 dreb.. 7.1 ast.. 4.8 tov.. 2.3 stl.. 1.4 blk.. 24.5 fga.. 47.8 fg.. 55.4 ts.. 108 ORtg


Why did you decrease Lebrons stats? You are ashamed he got better allround numbers than MJ?

[LilEddyCurry]

Vassilis Spanoulis > Jordan

[nba_55]

Why did you decrease Lebrons stats? You are ashamed he got better allround numbers than MJ?
What are lebron's real stats? Did he really put false stats?

[CuterThanRubio]

What are lebron's real stats? Did he really put false stats?

He always posts false stats

Curry shot 56% on two pointers this year.

More efficient from Jordan from all areas of the court.

This thread backfired!

[sd3035]

He always posts false stats

Curry shot 56% on two pointers this year.

More efficient from Jordan from all areas of the court.

This thread backfired!

so he's also making up stats? :roll: :roll:

[raprap]

I know we don't really read or care about 3ball's posts but posting fake stats? Really niqqa? :coleman:

[Smoke117]

Curry >>> Jordan

[CuterThanRubio]

so he's also making up stats? :roll: :roll:

Not sure if he's intentionally making them up or simply unable to properly read graphs.

According to him only 81 of Curry's 402 regular season threes were contested/


Give me a break.


I have concluded that he has never watched a live game before, he got into Jordan because of youtube highlights and arbitrary numbers and that's all he knows.

[HighFlyer23]

That little Mulatto girl is more efficient than Michael Air Jordan

[LAKingKobe]

Roy Hibbert and D'Angeo Russell are more efficient than Jordan. What does point per possession even mean.

[3ball]

Roy Hibbert and D'Angeo Russell are more efficient than Jordan.

What does point per possession even mean.


Don't play dumb - you understand what points per SHOT means, but you don't understand what points per POSSESSION means?

Gimme a break.

The real question is which one is more important - obviously, per-possession efficiency is more important, and Jordan was more efficient per possession than Curry.

[Draz]

Didn't Jordan take it to the rim more in terms of dunking/layup (penetrated more in the paint) than Curry does? It would be one of the key reasons why he's more efficient, obviously.

[CuterThanRubio]

Didn't Jordan take it to the rim more in terms of dunking/layup (penetrated more in the paint) than Curry does? It would be one of the key reasons why he's more efficient, obviously.

Except Curry is more efficient for that same reason, he scores more points on less shots, that is the entire argument.

Curry also makes twos at a higher percentage than Jordan ever could, but why would he bother fighting for inside jumpers when he can get more from outside?


Less shots for more points = more efficient.

[WolfGang]

Holy shit! There is finally a player people can say is better than Jordan and not get executed for it!

I might hop on the bandwagon especially if GS wins it all.

[3ball]

Less shots for more points = more efficient.


Per-possession efficiency is more important than per-shot efficiency, so Jordan was more efficient than Curry.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he produced a higher proportion of his team's points and assists in 1991 on FAR less turnovers, while also carrying a bigger load on defense.

So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load AND being more efficient - that's everything.
.

[CuterThanRubio]

Per-possession efficiency is more important than per-shot efficiency, so Jordan was more efficient than Curry.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he produced a higher proportion of his team's points and assists in 1991 on FAR less turnovers, while also carrying a bigger load on defense.

So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load AND being more efficient - that's everything.
.

No it isn't

Jordan didn't have the capability to put 3 on the board whenever he wanted to, Curry can afford to gamble and have more empty possessions because scoring more points on a single shot is more valuable.

Kerr wouldn't build his offense around outside shooting if PPS wasn't more important.

I can't wait to see what you come up with next round

[GimmeThat]

these are truly better questions to ponder, than say had my Lakers Gasol met Chris Paul in the playoff, would he be able to guard him.

[3ball]

No it isn't

I can't wait to see what you come up with next round


there's nothing to "come up with" because i'm just stating obvious facts:

everyone knows per possession efficiency is more important than per shot efficiency.. :confusedshrug:

lots of guys have good per shot efficiency, such as stiffs like tyson chandler... but almost NO perimeter players have better per possession efficiency than Jordan.. :confusedshrug:

you're the one that must "come up" with narratives to cover up the facts

[CuterThanRubio]

there's nothing to "come up with" because i'm just stating obvious facts:

everyone knows per possession is more important than per shot.. :confusedshrug:

you're the one that must "come up" with narratives to cover up the facts

"Everyone knows"

People don't care about that stuff.

In the actual context of the game itself points per shot is more important

I think I understand now, Kobe's PPS is very close to MJ, no wonder you are afraid of that statistic.

[3ball]

"Everyone knows"

People don't care about that stuff.

In the actual context of the game itself points per shot is more important

I think I understand now, Kobe's PPS is very close to MJ, no wonder you are afraid of that statistic.
lots of stiffs have good per shot efficiency, like tyson chandler... but almost NO perimeter players have better per possession efficiency than Jordan.. (only magic tbh)

just accept the facts.. jordan was more efficient per possession than curry, despite carrying a bigger load - he produced a higher proportion of his team's points and assists in 1991 with FAR less turnovers, while also carrying a bigger load on defense.

So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load AND being more efficient - that covers all the bases.

[CuterThanRubio]

lots of stiffs have good per shot efficiency, like tyson chandler... but almost NO perimeter players have better per possession efficiency than Jordan.. (only magic tbh)

just accept the facts.. jordan was more efficient per possession than curry, despite carrying a bigger load - he produced a higher proportion of his team's points and assists in 1991 with FAR less turnovers, while also carrying a bigger load on defense.

So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load AND being more efficient - that covers all the bases.

Shows how flawed the statistics are

You can make up any numbers you want to.

Curry had the best regular season ever

[3ball]

Curry had the best regular season ever



Jordan's 1991 was on another level:



Per 100 Possessions

JORDAN 1991 RS: 42.7 pts.. 8.1 reb..4 7.5 ast.. 3.3 tov.. 3.7 stl.. 1.4 blk.. 60.4 ts.. 125 ORtg.. 31.6 PER.. 0.321 WS/48
CURRY 4 2016 RS: 42.5 pts.. 7.7 reb..4 9.4 ast.. 4.7 tov.. 3.0 stl.. 0.3 blk.. 66.9 ts.. 125 ORtg.. 31.5 PER.. 0.318 WS/48
JORDAN 1991 PO: 41.8 pts.. 8.5 reb.. 11.2 ast.. 3.4 tov.. 3.2 stl.. 1.8 blk.. 60.0 ts.. 127 ORtg.. 32.0 PER.. 0.333 WS/48



Jordan had higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg) and Player Efficiency Rating, even though Curry's efficiency was boosted by carrying a smaller load on both sides of the ball - Jordan produced a higher proportion of his team's points and assists on far less turnovers, while also carrying a bigger load on defense.

Ultimately, Jordan achieved the highest honor (winning championship and FMVP), while carrying a bigger load on both ends at higher efficiency - that covers all the bases
.

[iamgine]

.
Jordan is more efficient on a per POSSESSION basis (ortg), which is more important than Curry's per SHOT efficiency (shooting efficiency).

Jordan's higher per-possession efficiency was due primarily to lower turnovers, but also because his superior midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) efficiency partially offset Curry's 3-point efficiency.

Jordan's superior efficiency is remarkable considering he carried a bigger LOAD than Curry - he scored a higher proportion (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373006&postcount=23) of his team's points while also carrying a bigger load on defense.. So Jordan accomplished the highest honors (championship and FMVP) while carrying a bigger load and being more efficient.

Jordan's bigger load is also reflected in his higher "usage", which measures the proportion of offensive possessions he was involved in - the stats show he was involved in more possessions (usage) at higher per-possession efficiency (ORtg).. So Jordan simply DID MORE - he gave his team MORE (possessions) of a GOOD THING (per-possession efficiency).
https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif

[3ball]

I can't refute a single thing in the OP


And remember - Jordan didn't have teammates spreading the floor for him like Curry does - teams only attempted 5 threes per game when Jordan won his first ring in 1991, compared to 25 attempts per game for today's teams.

In today's spaced-out game, his stats would explode because he has the same (better) athleticism as Lebron/Westbrook, but they can't shoot (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12338297&postcount=47), and Jordan could - he had goat midrange efficiency (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26), which puts him in Curry's category as a goat shooter, and gives him a similarly massive advantage over non-shooters Lebron and Westbrick.

[iamgine]

And remember - Jordan didn't have teammates spreading the floor for him like Curry does - teams only attempted 5 threes per game when Jordan won his first ring in 1991, compared to 25 attempts per game for today's teams.

In today's spaced-out game, his stats would explode because he has the same (better) athleticism as Lebron/Westbrook, but they can't shoot (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12338297&postcount=47), and Jordan could - he had better midrange efficiency than Curry (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26), which puts him in Curry's category as a goat shooter, and gives him a similarly massive advantage over non-shooters Lebron and Westbrick.
https://media.giphy.com/media/l4Ki2obCyAQS5WhFe/giphy.gif

[3ball]

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


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

[Im Still Ballin]

Michael Jordan's Regular Season Career ISBDB™
0.16 ISBDB™

LeBron James' Regular Season Career ISBDB™
0.15 ISBDB™

Kobe Bryant's Regular Season Career ISBDB™
0.10 ISBDB™