MJ is the only goat-level athlet that was great shooter from either mid-range or 3 PT

[3ball]

Wilt, Dr. J, Lebron, Giannis, etc can't shoot

only Jordan can shoot at a "great" or "goat" level

goat athleticism + goat skill = goat = 6/6 goat modern accomplishment

[90sgoat]

Who is better from midrange, MJ or Dirk?

[3ball]

Who is better from midrange, MJ or Dirk?
only 1 guy led the league in scoring from 96-98' almost entirely on mid-range jumpshots - the stats show that he was making 600 mid-range jumpers a year.. no one is remotely close to that

[SpaceJam2]

The NBA 3pt line was shortened, set to WNBA in 95, 96, and 97.

Take away MJs WNBA years and he shot 28% from 3 with over 1000 attempts :lol

28%

Next

[FKAri]

Depends how you define GOAT level athlete. If you are defining it as the athletic guys who couldn't shoot, then ya.

[Manny98]

LeBron was a better long distance shooter than MJ

[JohnMax]

Jordan played 11 and half seasons with the Bulls and won 10 scoring titles, 3 steals titles, 5 MVPs, 1 DPOTY, 6 rings, 6 Finals MVPs, 9 ALL NBA DEFENSIVE 1ST TEAM selections.

LeBron James in 17 seasons has 1 scoring title, 0 steals titles, 4 MVPs, 0 DPOTY, 3 rings, 3 Finals MVPs, and 5 ALL NBA DEFENSIVE 1ST TEAM selections.

[Hey Yo]

Jordan played 11 and half seasons with the Bulls and won 10 scoring titles, 3 steals titles, 5 MVPs, 1 DPOTY, 6 rings, 6 Finals MVPs, 9 ALL NBA DEFENSIVE 1ST TEAM selections.

LeBron James in 17 seasons has 1 scoring title, 0 steals titles, 4 MVPs, 0 DPOTY, 3 rings, 3 Finals MVPs, and 5 ALL NBA DEFENSIVE 1ST TEAM selections.
Only could play 7 straight full seasons before needing to quit the league to rest up.

MJ has 3 rings. His other 3 "rest up and recover" rings don't count.

[G0ATbe]

MJ was never good at real 3s. Stern had to give him the training wheels treatment and shorten the line. A guy like Demar who's considered a dreadful 3pt shooter today would be looked at as a sniper in the 90s.

[Vino24]

MJ was a 28% 3pt shooter without a WNBA distance. Imagine listing that as a quality :roll: :roll: :roll:

[ImKobe]

MJ was never good at real 3s. Stern had to give him the training wheels treatment and shorten the line. A guy like Demar who's considered a dreadful 3pt shooter today would be looked at as a sniper in the 90s.

Shot above 38% in 3 straight title runs from 91-93..didn't have a single bad 3-point shooting season when he actually shot the three at a volume (37.6% from three on 3 attempts in 1990, 35.2% from three with 2.9 attempts in 1993).

[Vino24]

Shot above 38% in 3 straight title runs from 91-93..didn't have a single bad 3-point shooting season when he actually shot the three at a volume (37.6% from three on 3 attempts in 1990, 35.2% from three with 2.9 attempts in 1993).
Yeah let

[egokiller]

What is interesting about MJ is that whenever a 3 needed to be made, he made it. At the end of the quarter, he wasn’t worried about stats so he would just pull up in games and make it to finish off the qtr. Seems like he made far more in these situations than he missed. And let’s not forget when he was against the Blazers and they closed off the driving lanes so he simply set “fvck it” and went into 3 point mode.

If he played today he’d be up there in 3 pt fg%. He would just master that aspect of his game just like the other aspects that were more important back then. We know this because he had weaknesses when he first entered the league that he later perfected.

[Vino24]

[QUOTE=egokiller]What is interesting about MJ is that whenever a 3 needed to be made, he made it. At the end of the quarter, he wasn

[warriorfan]

MJ simply didn

[FKAri]

MJ simply didn’t need the 3 point ball to dominate his competition. Michael Jordan was a skilled enough shooter where he would have easily developed into a 35 to 40% 3 point shooter if the circumstances called for it.
Very low IQ post

[warriorfan]

Very low IQ post

This is actually the least cringeworthy post you have had in months. Good job.

[3ball]

Very low IQ post
in the 80-87 playoffs, prime Bird shot 34.9% on 1.3 attempts

in the 85-93' playoffs, mj shot 35.2% on 2.1 attempts..

yet you give bird credit as a goat shooter from three but not MJ

MJ has goat form and goat Finals shooting in 1992, and also an entire championship run in 1993 where he shot at today's standard for "good" 3-point shooting... all this without really trying; he just intuitively knew that he needed to take them sometimes, even though he preferred killing guys closer to the hoop..

now imagine if he had a giannis/Ben simmons-like demand that he be a great 3-point shooter.. it's over... it would be mj's goat form and shooting vs Curry's

[egokiller]

[QUOTE=Vino24]Let

[Vino24]

[QUOTE=egokiller]Let

[egokiller]

in the 80-87 playoffs, prime Bird shot 34.9% on 1.3 attempts

in the 85-93' playoffs, mj shot 35.2% on 2.1 attempts..

yet you give bird credit as a goat shooter from three but not MJ

MJ has goat form and goat Finals shooting in 1992, and also an entire championship run in 1993 where he shot at today's standard for "good" 3-point shooting... all this without really trying; he just intuitively knew that he needed to take them sometimes, even though he preferred killing guys closer to the hoop..

now imagine if he had a giannis/Ben simmons-like demand that he be a great 3-point shooter.. it's over... it would be mj's goat form and shooting vs Curry's

Of all the things to try and claim are a negative about MJ, these mental midgets choose

[LostCause]

[QUOTE=Vino24]Let

[RRR3]

MJ stans love pretending he was good at 3s. Such a delusion.

[superduper]

MJ stans love pretending he was good at 3s. Such a delusion.

Relative to the meta of the era he wasn't bad.

[ImKobe]

[QUOTE=Vino24]Let

[Bigrichmac]

And let’s not forget when he was against the Blazers and they closed off the driving lanes so he simply set “fvck it” and went into 3 point mode.[quote]

I think the story was, people were comparing drexler to MJ and claimed Drexler was a better 3 point shooter, so MJ started the game by hitting 6 consecutive 3 pointers just because

[Uncle Drew]

Without Stern having to move the line because players back then could barely hit iron beyond 20 feet, Dad Killer barely has a higher 3P% in the NBA than me.

[72-10]

did you say something about him getting eye level with teh rim

[StrongLurk]

MJ can never be considered a GREAT three point shooter, no matter how anyone tries to spin it.

However, he is one of the best mid-range scorers of all time. You could say he was best due to his volume of mid-range shots and I'd be fine with that.

[Manny98]

B-ut but muh mid range :roll: :roll:

Everyone knows that mid range is the worst shot to take in basketball hence why no one takes them anymore

[3ball]

B-ut but muh mid range :roll: :roll:

Everyone knows that mid range is the worst shot to take in basketball hence why no one takes them anymore
No one takes them because the NBA watered down the game to 3-pointers and layups by creating the spacing necessary to achieve this easy shot allocation - the spacing was achieved by hands-off defense that allowed easy penetration and kickouts for maximum 3-pointers/maximum spacing - the NBA has stated this was the objective of the hands-off defense (to create easy penetration and kickouts to max 3-point attempts)

ultimately, midrange is the shot most used in the clutch and with shot clocks winding down - it's real basketball, so it's no surprise that the goat was the best at the toughest/most valuable part of the game

[Manny98]

No the game is advanced, 3 pointers and layups are the two most efficient shots in basketball

Mid range and post ups are not efficient enough to be utilised frequently in basketball

Why would you take mid range shots when you can take a step back and get one extra point :confusedshrug:

Mid range specialists would be trash in this era (see DeRozan) :lol

[3ball]

Mid range specialists would be trash in this era (see DeRozan) :lol


Kawhi is a midrange assassin and he's > Lebron (see the Christmas day game)

and Kawhi destroyed Giannis last year

so the best player in the league is an MJ-clone, midrange assassin... :bowdown:...

MJ influenced Kobe first - and Kobe won rings through 2010... now he's influencing Kawhi, and Kawhi will win rings through 2025... MJ GOAT






No the game is advanced, 3 pointers and layups are the two most efficient shots in basketball


So open shots are advanced and contested ones aren't?

sounds backwards

mj was goat at the contested shots (mid-range jumpshooting) - the goat skillset

[SpaceJam2]

The NBA 3pt line was shortened, set to WNBA in 95, 96, and 97.

Take away MJs WNBA years and he shot 28% from 3 with over 1000 attempts :lol

28%

Next


Anyone?

[3ball]

Anyone?
no attempts though, so who cares... :confusedshrug: … he shot well anytime MJ had real volume, or anytime it mattered (playoffs)

- the only years where he had 3+ attempts is 1990 and 1993, when he shot 38% and 35%...

- he shot 35.2% on 2.1 attempts in the 85-93' Playoffs, and shot 39% in the 93' Playoffs on 4 attempts

- who cares about his old man stats

[Manny98]

Peak MJ (91) 31% from 3 :oldlol:

Great shooter doe

[LostCause]

No the game is advanced, 3 pointers and layups are the two most efficient shots in basketball

Mid range and post ups are not efficient enough to be utilised frequently in basketball

Why would you take mid range shots when you can take a step back and get one extra point :confusedshrug:

Mid range specialists would be trash in this era (see DeRozan) :lol

You don't understand the simple logic of basketball

Midrange shots are considered inefficient/bad because most players today aren't good at taking/making them

Players who are will straight up call you a moron for saying what you just said (ie, KD straight up did this to some similarly inept kid last year via twitter). Here's a good discussion on it with KD
https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/1184134269146320897?s=20

https://twitter.com/KDTrey5/status/1184137600069722112?s=20

I'm sure you can read the rest but since I'm also sure you wouldn't understand it, basically

Midrange shots are bad for players who are bad midrange shooters. Good ones and great ones make them good shots, and that's objectively speaking. Most players aren't good/great midrange shooters today because the game is trending away from the shot because most players arent as able to produce from there

DeRozan, while he shot them often, wasn't really that good or efficient with them. So he's not even a good comparison

[Manny98]

You don't understand the simple logic of basketball

Midrange shots are considered inefficient/bad because most players today aren't good at taking/making them

Players who are will straight up call you a moron for saying what you just said (ie, KD straight up did this to some similarly inept kid last year via twitter). Here's a good discussion on it with KD
https://twitter.com/HPbasketball/status/1184134269146320897?s=20

https://twitter.com/KDTrey5/status/1184137600069722112?s=20

I'm sure you can read the rest but since I'm also sure you wouldn't understand it, basically

Midrange shots are bad for players who are bad midrange shooters. Good ones and great ones make them good shots, and that's objectively speaking. Most players aren't good/great midrange shooters today because the game is trending away from the shot because most players arent as able to produce from there

DeRozan, while he shot them often, wasn't really that good or efficient with them. So he's not even a good comparison
No mid range is BAD period

MJ was a 45% mid range shooter so he makes 4.5 out of 10 mid range shots. That would equal 9 points

Then take An average 3 point shooter like LeBron for instance who shoots 35% from 3 which equates to an average of 10.5 points for every 10 shots

So an elite mid range shooter is still vastly inferior to an average 3 point shooter. And that doesn't even take into account how 3 point shooters have more offensive gravity than mid range shooters which means better spacing for the overall offense

The only situation where mid range is more effective is in clutch situations down the stretch where the players legs are too tired to hit a 3 and a closer mid range shot would be more efficient in that situation

[3ball]

No mid range is BAD period

MJ was a 45% mid range shooter so he makes 4.5 out of 10 mid range shots. That would equal 9 points

Then take An average 3 point shooter like LeBron for instance who shoots 35% from 3 which equates to an average of 10.5 points for every 10 shots

So an elite mid range shooter is still vastly inferior to an average 3 point shooter. And that doesn't even take into account how 3 point shooters have more offensive gravity than mid range shooters which means better spacing for the overall offense

The only situation where mid range is more effective is in clutch situations down the stretch where the players legs are too tired to hit a 3 and a closer mid range shot would be more efficient in that situation

the bolded red above doesn't consider the degree of contest on the shot - good mid-range shooters can maintain good efficiency regardless of contest, which makes midrange more valuable late in shot clocks and clutch time when the defense has taken away threes/layups.

Nylon Calculus says it best:



The difference between many good and great teams — and, indeed, many good and great players — is what they do in the last five seconds of the shot clock when the plan breaks down. Even the most prepared teams will run into those situations, particularly against great defenses. The deeper a team gets in the 24-second shot clock, the more difficult it becomes for that team to find layup and three-point opportunities, and the ability to knock down the mid-range jumper thus becomes king.

https://the-cauldron.com/lost-art-the-mid-range-jumper-64b64fa0f081

[LostCause]

No mid range is BAD period

MJ was a 45% mid range shooter so he makes 4.5 out of 10 mid range shots. That would equal 9 points

Then take An average 3 point shooter like LeBron for instance who shoots 35% from 3 which equates to an average of 10.5 points for every 10 shots

So an elite mid range shooter is still vastly inferior to an average 3 point shooter. And that doesn't even take into account how 3 point shooters have more offensive gravity than mid range shooters which means better spacing for the overall offense

The only situation where mid range is more effective is in clutch situations down the stretch where the players legs are too tired to hit a 3 and a closer mid range shot would be more efficient in that situation

This is a very sly strawman. You're not even arguing your original point

All you're doing here is illustrating how a 3-pt shot is worth more than a 2-point shot. That's common sense. Not something being disputed. However, none of that is showng how a midrange shot is bad when taken by elite midrange shooters. Which is the point

I hope you're able to understand the distinctions

For reference, it's like post scoring, considered dead today by most. For almost everyone in the NBA, posting up isn't worth it because they don't score enough per possession to make it valuable. The only exception to that today is Joel Embiid, who does. Imagine putting Peak Shaq in the NBA today. You're not going to tell him to shoot 3's. His volume and efficiency scoring in the post will force defenses to adjust to him or get beaten (We'll start seeing teams grabbing big bodies again to counter him)

[72-10]

lmao @ 45% mid-range:roll:

[3ball]

lmao @ 45% mid-range:roll:
exactly - he shot 49% from midrange on nearly 600 made midrange jumpers in 1997 - no one is remotely close to that kind of volume and efficiency

mj led the league in scoring for 3 straight years from the mid-range (96-98') - he's easily the best midrange shooter ever...

so kawhi's midrange is great, but MJ's was in a whole different dimension - far superior

[Manny98]

This is a very sly strawman. You're not even arguing your original point

All you're doing here is illustrating how a 3-pt shot is worth more than a 2-point shot. That's common sense. Not something being disputed. However, none of that is showng how a midrange shot is bad when taken by elite midrange shooters. Which is the point

I hope you're able to understand the distinctions

For reference, it's like post scoring, considered dead today by most. For almost everyone in the NBA, posting up isn't worth it because they don't score enough per possession to make it valuable. The only exception to that today is Joel Embiid, who does. Imagine putting Peak Shaq in the NBA today. You're not going to tell him to shoot 3's. His volume and efficiency scoring in the post will force defenses to adjust to him or get beaten (We'll start seeing teams grabbing big bodies again to counter him)
It is bad because even elite 45% mid range shooters are less effective than average 35% 3 point shooters

Even if you were to bump it up to 50% you'll still be less efficient than the average 3 point shooter

[Manny98]

exactly - he shot 49% from midrange on nearly 600 made midrange jumpers in 1997 - no one is remotely close to that kind of volume and efficiency

mj led the league in scoring for 3 straight years from the mid-range (96-98') - he's easily the best midrange shooter ever...

so kawhi's midrange is great, but MJ's was in a whole different dimension - far superior
50% from mid range = 10 points on 10 shots

35% from 3 point = 10.5 points on 10 shots

So average 3 point shooter > GOAT mid range shooter

[3ball]

50% from mid range = 10 points on 10 shots

35% from 3 point = 10.5 points on 10 shots

So average 3 point shooter > GOAT mid range shooter
you aren't considering the contest of the shot - good mid-range shooters can maintain good efficiency regardless of contest, which makes midrange more valuable late in shot clocks and clutch time when the defense has taken away threes/layups.

Nylon Calculus says it best:


[INDENT][I]The difference between many good and great teams 

[egokiller]

Poor manny getting destroyed in this mid-range argument. :roll: