Watch this 2 minutes please and answer a simple question about Jordan.

[Kblaze8855]

https://youtu.be/XvY1rYnnFTM


Quick 40. Actually his lowest scoring of 3 straight games. 96 shots total. Only had 2 threes.

Do you believe he would have been better served stepping back a foot or two and taking a three on the 5 or so shots that were near the line anyway?

Would you tell early 90s Jordan to take more threes if you could make him listen? Or would you leave well enough alone?

Do you believe those 5 shots…as threes…make him even more effective? When he already won 3 in a row?

Would he actually be better…or just…different?

[SouBeachTalents]

In this era you'd pretty much have to, though like you said, you would be weary to try to have him alter his style. You'd hate to tell him this then then throw him off his game, trying to be mindful to step back behind the 3 point line on these shots. I think I would mention it, but if it threw off his rhythm during the game, it's something I could live with him continuing to do.

[Kblaze8855]

To me that’s just the most beautiful way to play. But I acknowledge it’s also maybe the hardest. Hard to ask anyone to do…but once you’re that good at it? Hard to say “Stop” as well.

[DMAVS41]

I wouldn't change his game. He was dominating the league and the shots in question, the mid-range, he was good enough to not mess with it. You don't mess with arguably the most dominant offensive player in history at his peak. Most players in history, however, aren't good enough to take a lot of long 2's and make enough for it to make sense versus taking more threes.

[BigShotBob]

No.

If you look at some of Lebron and D-Wade's most effecient seasons in Miami you'd see that they kept their 3 point chucking way down to about 2-3 a game, which is about what peak volume MJ would average anyways and what he should average in spot-up moments.

KD on his down 3 point seasons or stretches is still a prolific mid-range shot creator and MJ was arguably even better than him. He'd still be unguardable and dominant

Thanks for this clip though

[Kblaze8855]

I wonder where the math tipping point on such things is. To me the issue is that if we don’t give people who show promise the room to mature into their natural final forms we won’t see guys like Dirk, MJ, Bird, or even KD and Leonard develop in the future. And math wise…is it worth it to allow them to attempt to become that? What’s a 50% mid range shooter Point per shot wise vs a 3 point shooter? A 33 percent guy or something like that.

Would teams rather have a 33% 3 point shooter for the spacing than a 2 at 47%? Isn’t it just a matter of how long the D shows respect to the bad shooter?

I don’t know if modern teams find it worth it to give a guy time to become that and screw up their spacing in the meantime.

[Jasper]

during a game MJ's shots were kinda like daggers , and the opponents had no answers.

Quite frankly when the 3 point line came out NBA players had to adapt to it.
MJ was already past adapting ... he just demoralized opponents.

[AlternativeAcc.]

He wasn't capable of being a good 3pt shooter. His form on midrange shots is horrific for 3pt shooting. It's a totally different game thr farther out you go.

[PANTHALASSA]

1-9.

[BigShotBob]

I wonder where the math tipping point on such things is. To me the issue is that if we don’t give people who show promise the room to mature into their natural final forms we won’t see guys like Dirk, MJ, Bird, or even KD and Leonard develop in the future. And math wise…is it worth it to allow them to attempt to become that? What’s a 50% mid range shooter Point per shot wise vs a 3 point shooter? A 33 percent guy or something like that.

Would teams rather have a 33% 3 point shooter for the spacing than a 2 at 47%? Isn’t it just a matter of how long the D shows respect to the bad shooter?

I don’t know if modern teams find it worth it to give a guy time to become that and screw up their spacing in the meantime.

It's not about points per shot, it's about variance. You're not guaranteed to hit 3's but a 2, even a long one, is still much easier than a 3.

Even Steph Curry in the Finals has 1-11 3 point shooting games. That's not worth more than a mid-range. You'd have easier times to see Curry have disgustingly awful 3 point shooting performances going 2-13 or 3-12 than to see him go 1-12 from mid-range.

You don't shoot 33% from 3 because you shot 33% every game, it's an average. But with a high variance shot, you can go on a stretch where you shoot 10%, and then go on a stretch where you shoot 45%.

It's not worth the gamble under real defensive pressure.

[Kblaze8855]

That goes into the coaching strategy side of it though. As I said a modern coach might value the spacing a steph type provides off the assumption his shots will go in over the make or miss aspect any single game.

They want you to honor the shot of their shooters as much as they want the shooters to make any particular shot. If they didn’t actually need to shoot threes to get you to pull 4 defenders a mile from the basket they would have bums stand out there and let the good slashers slash all day.

They use shooters as decoys to allow driving while they used to use post play to suck defenders in to get shooters open.

If you defend that 33% shooter that’s half the battle to the coach.

[mr4speed]

[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14727043]
https://youtu.be/XvY1rYnnFTM


Quick 40. Actually his lowest scoring of 3 straight games. 96 shots total. Only had 2 threes.

Do you believe he would have been better served stepping back a foot or two and taking a three on the 5 or so shots that were near the line anyway?

Would you tell early 90s Jordan to take more threes if you could make him listen? Or would you leave well enough alone?

Do you believe those 5 shots…as threes…make him even more effective? When he already won 3 in a row?

Thank you for posting this and including the chase down blocked shots and the passes for assists. I would not ask any player displaying this kind of consistency to change and I would leave his play style alone, especially if you have seen a player taking 3 point shots and understand his efficiency is going to dip slightly. If you have a team or player clicking and working = leave it be IMO.
I would love to see a McHale type of player playing today and still believe there is a place for a "back to the basket" skilled player. McHale posted a season of 60% FG and 80% FT shooting and his length and footwork would still present problems defending. And with his wingspan and being close to the basket, McHale would get some of his missed shots and put the rebound back in. Add to this equation the fouls totaled against the other team and this forces the other team to use and expose their bench strength.

[DMAVS41]

I wonder where the math tipping point on such things is. To me the issue is that if we don’t give people who show promise the room to mature into their natural final forms we won’t see guys like Dirk, MJ, Bird, or even KD and Leonard develop in the future. And math wise…is it worth it to allow them to attempt to become that? What’s a 50% mid range shooter Point per shot wise vs a 3 point shooter? A 33 percent guy or something like that.

Would teams rather have a 33% 3 point shooter for the spacing than a 2 at 47%? Isn’t it just a matter of how long the D shows respect to the bad shooter?

I don’t know if modern teams find it worth it to give a guy time to become that and screw up their spacing in the meantime.

It all depends on the team and the role of said player. If we are talking about superstar players...getting your own shot matters and there is more room from a team perspective to allow some math things that could potentially be better...but those teams aren't going to stop posting MJ on the wing or Dirk at the nail because they were such dominant plays for the individual players and the action that came off it. It isn't like a team can just get players the shots they want every time.

Now, a role player? You probably just run the numbers and make them do the more efficient thing...which is almost always going to be 3's and layups.

[iamgine]

Well let Jordan tells you himself:

“My three-point shooting is something I don’t want to excel at because it takes away from all phases of my game,” Jordan said.

“My game is fake, drive to the hole, penetrate, dish-off, dunk. When you have that mentality of making threes, you don’t go to the hole as much. You go to the three-point line and start sitting there, waiting for someone to find you. That’s not my mentality, and I don’t want to create it because it takes away from the other parts of my game.”

[eliteballer]

You can answer this question by looking at the 95, 96, 97, and 98 seasons.

95-97 was the short 3 point line, 98 is when it went back to the regular line.

He was jacking up plenty of 3's with the short line.

Being a legitimate 3 point thread opens up your game because defenses have to guard you more honestly.

[BigShotBob]

That goes into the coaching strategy side of it though. As I said a modern coach might value the spacing a steph type provides off the assumption his shots will go in over the make or miss aspect any single game.

They want you to honor the shot of their shooters as much as they want the shooters to make any particular shot. If they didn’t actually need to shoot threes to get you to pull 4 defenders a mile from the basket they would have bums stand out there and let the good slashers slash all day.

They use shooters as decoys to allow driving while they used to use post play to suck defenders in to get shooters open.

If you defend that 33% shooter that’s half the battle to the coach.

I think what needs to be factored under the new rules is how hard it is to defend the drive since you can barely touch anyone. Dribble penetration to me is more valuable than spacing.

I watch the Nets a lot and one of their main issues is that they don't have enough players that can drive the lane vs a team like the Celtics. Grant Williams spaces the floor but even he drives with the space given.

A player like Yuta Watanabe catches the ball at the 3, takes one dribble, and then looks to pass it off. You shouldn't be able to neutralize a player by standing in front of them imo.

Most of Jalen Brunson's game is dribble penetration and he's on an All-Star level based on that alone because the middle of the floor is the hardest to guard because the offensive player can do anything. A shot/floater/drive/kick to the big. Defense collapse and now a cutter/shooter is open.

MJ would be more valuable doing that than he would be shooting more and I think more players need to have that mentality

But you're right that's more coaching I'm just disappointed in the product I see on the floor nowadays.

These teams are starting to look like the '96 Rockets that got swept out of the building by Seattle. They had gotten too comfortable in their system of inside-out drive and dish/kick that you saw players that used to be threats off the dribble like Kenny Smith Robert Horry and Mario Ellie just float around the perimeter. Of course they missed Vernon Maxwell so they should have played more aggressive to compensate but they didn't.

In essence I'm watching the good teams now figure out that they need a team full of basketball players, not a team full of shooters that can't play basketball