RealGM

25.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 3.7 apg, 45% FG, 8.4 3PA on .412%

Ray would be pretty nasty in today's game. Obviously not your contemporary helio guy, but he was scoring as well as anyone, and he was basically the first focal scorer shooting threes at that volume. Reggie came close, I guess, but also wasn't as athletic, nor as dynamic off the bounce. And he never got to 6+ 3PA/g outside of the shortened-line seasons (in fact, ONLY in 97).

Top 15 ish? Decent but mostly unremarkable defender. Decent playmaker but nothing special. Donovan Mitchell-ish. The tier beneath Jayson Tatum.

Only 8.4 3PA per game wouldn't cut it in THIS era. He might be a decent sixth man on a bad team.

ronnymac2 wrote:Only 8.4 3PA per game wouldn't cut it in THIS era. He might be a decent sixth man on a bad team.

But seriously, could you imagine what kind of green light he'd have now? I wonder between pace and how accepted 3's have become if he might reach 15 attempts a night. Peak Steph was at 13 a game, and I'd argue Ray was a better pure shooter than Steph that had close to the same ability to get his own shot in his prime (Steph quicker/more slippery, Ray taller and more physical).

It also makes me wonder the inverse of the common question, we always think about what players couldn't cut it in past eras. But what other 3 point shooters would have been bigger stars if not superstars in the current era? Another one that comes to mind is Mitch Richmond, he had such a pure shot. Glen Rice maybe too.

Tim_Hardawayy wrote: I'd argue Ray was a better pure shooter than Steph

Based on what? I can't see anything which would support that.

tsherkin wrote:

Tim_Hardawayy wrote: I'd argue Ray was a better pure shooter than Steph

Based on what? I can't see anything which would support that.

Just eye test/shooting form mostly. The percentages between them are almost indistinguishable, Steph is 2 percentage points higher in 3's and free throws, its close enough that I wouldn't have any issue with someone that chose Steph but I always felt Ray's shot looked better.

This is actually the rare example of a player that probably would be better in another era than he was in his own. I think peak Ray Allen would maybe be a top 10 player today, which I don’t think he ever quite was in his own era.

Tim_Hardawayy wrote:Just eye test/shooting form mostly. The percentages between them are almost indistinguishable, Steph is 2 percentage points higher in 3's and free throws, its close enough that I wouldn't have any issue with someone that chose Steph but I always felt Ray's shot looked better.

Aesthetics don't really matter much to actual shooting ability.

Ray's career FT% is 89.4% on 3.8 FTA/g. Steph's is 91.1% (leads the NBA all-time) on 4.3 FTA/g. He's working on his 5th season leading the league in FT%, which Ray never did (although 2009 was pretty wild for him). And Ray's career 40.0% was maintained on 5.7 3PA/g. 02-07, when he was shooting 7+, he posted 39.5%. Close, but still a little lower.

Steph, on the other hand, is at 42.4% on 9.3 3PA/g. That's a BIG difference in volume. And it's still 42.2% in all of his seasons of 7+ 3PA/g (2013 forward). He's taken about 2000 more 3PA and has shot about 3% better. That's a pretty big deal. The FT shooting margin is a little smaller, but that's a pretty sizeable difference in shooting ability put together. He also shoots a little better than +3% over Ray in the 16-23 foot range and from 10-16 feet... and he's doing all that on 34.9% assisted from 2pt range and 61.8% from 3, compared to Ray's 43.3% and 84.0%.

So again... higher volume, higher percentage, lower passing support. Kind of hard to author a real pro-Ray argument there. There's no angle, no seam in their difference in shooting ability. Ray was extremely good. Arguably the best of his era, and certainly the next step after Reggie in the evolution of major volume shooters. But he wasn't as successful by raw percentage, didn't sustain what he did on comparable volume, AND he was considerably less dynamic with a live dribble, which is another large point of deviation in Steph's favor.

Curry is averaging 11.2 3 point attempts per game, slightly beyond his prime. Ray Allen is definitely averaging 10+ attempts.

I think a couple years ago Ray Allen would have been top 10 (like in that prime Warriors 2015-2019 kind of era) because everyone was so caught up in 3 point shooting and everyone would have wanted such an elite volume 3-point shooter but there are so many guys who can shoot and make 3s at a high volume now that Ray Allen doesn't stand out as much.

He could no doubt be a first option but would probably see his basketball value at his highest next to a facilitating star like a Jokic/Luka/LeBron type.

giordunk wrote:Curry is averaging 11.2 3 point attempts per game, slightly beyond his prime. Ray Allen is definitely averaging 10+ attempts.

Seems likely that he would, sure. Why wouldn't he, especially with his ability?

I think a couple years ago Ray Allen would have been top 10 (like in that prime Warriors 2015-2019 kind of era) because everyone was so caught up in 3 point shooting and everyone would have wanted such an elite volume 3-point shooter but there are so many guys who can shoot and make 3s at a high volume now that Ray Allen doesn't stand out as much.

I dunno. On a list of guys who've ever shot 7+ 3PA/g and hit 40%+ over 40+ games while playing 30+ mpg, you'll find 46 player-seasons across NBA history. 10 of them are from Steph Curry. 6 are Klay Thompson.

Ray's one of 5 people to do it 2+ times. He stands out pretty well, to be honest. He was never a helio guy, though he had more variety to his game than many remember, to be sure.