RealGM

The folks over at 538 blog seem to think so.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stephen-curry-is-the-revolution/

not 50, but he could probably average 40 a night. Making 3 point buckets, or anywhere on the court for that matter has become like him throwing a scrunched up paper ball into an office wastebasket.

He has achieved the ultimate muscle memory

So this article doesn't actually say he could average 50 ppg.

It DOES say:

While arguing with that Warriors fan, I may have said some things I shouldn’t have. Like that Curry has an outside shot at breaking Wilt Chamberlain’s season record of 50 points per game. Even as MVP, Curry scored only 24 points per game last year, so obviously I was exaggerating for effect … right?

He never goes on to actually state that he could handle the burden prerequisite to that sort of scoring average, and does specifically state that the numbers are vague as to what kind of burden he could handle. There's a whole pile of support for him making tough shots, being immune to the clock, etc, etc, etc. But nothing that conclusively proves he could shoot well enough over sufficient volume to average 50 ppg.

Realistically, it's an inference he draws with that ...? comment, not something he outright says.

Could he? Sure...let him take every shot.

Should he? No.

Will he? No.

How about waiting till the end of the season to see if he can even average 30 PPG. Or if he even has to when they start resting their players in the last 10-15 games of the season.

If curry was on the 2006 lakers (or a bad team like them)

He would have the freedom to shoot as much as he wanted, although surely his effieceny would drop.

I'm sure curry would rather not play any 4th quarters, than say, score 40+, or 50+ or multiple games in a row.

tsherkin wrote:So this article doesn't actually say he could average 50 ppg.

It DOES say:

While arguing with that Warriors fan, I may have said some things I shouldn’t have. Like that Curry has an outside shot at breaking Wilt Chamberlain’s season record of 50 points per game. Even as MVP, Curry scored only 24 points per game last year, so obviously I was exaggerating for effect … right?

He never goes on to actually state that he could handle the burden prerequisite to that sort of scoring average, and does specifically state that the numbers are vague as to what kind of burden he could handle. There's a whole pile of support for him making tough shots, being immune to the clock, etc, etc, etc. But nothing that conclusively proves he could shoot well enough over sufficient volume to average 50 ppg.

Realistically, it's an inference he draws with that ...? comment, not something he outright says.

Yeah I should have used better wording in the title

He should definitely shoot more often, and he could play more minutes per game. If this were his real level, he could reach 50 per game by playing unnecessary MPG and taking shots away from the other schlubs on the team.

But 1) He's definitely running a bit hotter than he can sustain, and 2) If the Warriors already win every game, they have no reason to suddenly crank him up to 40 mpg.

I hate articles like these because they are built fallacious reasoning and crackpot extrapolations.

Curry couldn't score 50ppg because as good as he is his efficiency would dramatically decrease as his minutes piled up and he'd more than likely get injured or wear out.

If he played every single minute of every game and just jacked up shots, so no, no he couldn't

Sure he could, and a couple of other players as well, but their teams wouldn't win as many (or maybe even many?) games. They would need to average around 35-40 FG attempts.

DaddyCool19 wrote:How about waiting till the end of the season to see if he can even average 30 PPG. Or if he even has to when they start resting their players in the last 10-15 games of the season.

They won't rest their players if the record is close, just no way, the team would riot.

DaddyCool19 wrote:How about waiting till the end of the season to see if he can even average 30 PPG. Or if he even has to when they start resting their players in the last 10-15 games of the season.

Most of your points are well taken, but realistically we're already resting Curry because in most games we don't need him playing big minutes. He has sat out quite a few fourth quarters, including his 40 point game recently.

ofcourse he can. But Warriors would be 10 times worst team than now. That's the difference between winning teams and "Charles Barkley teams".

I made a bet with a friend before the season that Steph will have a 60 point game this year. So far, it doesn't look like he'll play enough minutes for it to happen!

A number of players could average 50, but it'd come at the expense of efficiency.

Curry would fall victim to fatigue if he tried that. Although last season he averaged under 33mpg, his work rate is among the highest in the league, if not the absolute highest. I think there was a stat that he does more running around than any player in the league. That's why the W's sit him for entire 4th quarters if they can get away with it.

It's just more ridiculous speculative number crunching from stat geeks.

Oh my. Sure, all he has to do is do the Wilt and play 48 minutes every night, without tiring and falling off pace. Speaking of pace, the Warriors would also have to help by quit being such slugs and starting to actually RUN to make up for any Step fatigue falloff. With any luck he might be able to sustain the pace through Christmas before breaking down.

I know a lot of people on this board are very young, but there used to be this guy named Jordan. Now what Curry is doing this year is quite remarkable because he's scoring at almost the rate Jordan did in his greatest year (Jordan peaked out at 46.4pts/100 possessions, Curry is currently at 45.3). But even at that absolute peak Jordan averaged less than 38pts a game.

TKainZero wrote:If curry was on the 2006 lakers (or a bad team like them)

He would have the freedom to shoot as much as he wanted, although surely his effieceny would drop.

The point of the article is that stats show how Curry's efficiency doesn't drop with volume. Actually it improves.
And his efficiency doesn't drop even if he shoots with a defender close to him.
That's scary.

tsherkin wrote:So this article doesn't actually say he could average 50 ppg.

It DOES say:

While arguing with that Warriors fan, I may have said some things I shouldn’t have. Like that Curry has an outside shot at breaking Wilt Chamberlain’s season record of 50 points per game. Even as MVP, Curry scored only 24 points per game last year, so obviously I was exaggerating for effect … right?

He never goes on to actually state that he could handle the burden prerequisite to that sort of scoring average, and does specifically state that the numbers are vague as to what kind of burden he could handle. There's a whole pile of support for him making tough shots, being immune to the clock, etc, etc, etc. But nothing that conclusively proves he could shoot well enough over sufficient volume to average 50 ppg.

Realistically, it's an inference he draws with that ...? comment, not something he outright says.

Yeah, the problem was ESPN's click-baity link to the full fivethirtyeight article - which actually does say that fivethirtyeight claims Steph Curry could average 50 points. I suppose it depends on whether or not Benjamin Morris had say in the way ESPN advertised his article, but it's understandable how OP came to that conclusion:



http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/id/14266237/steph-curry-average-50-points

DaddyCool19 wrote:How about waiting till the end of the season to see if he can even average 30 PPG. Or if he even has to when they start resting their players in the last 10-15 games of the season.

They are already resting him in 4th quarters. Over the past 6 games he has only played in one 4th quarter. With that said I agree it is no shoe-in that he will average 30 because of the rest he gets. Curry is currently on pace to play the fewest minutes per game of any 30+ point scorer ever (1946-47 season the beginning of basketball-reference data).