Shooting ability in the 80s, early to mid 90s vs 2000s

[Chris435]

So, I purchased some Dynasty Series DVDs to watch how some of the players from the 80s and 90s played basketball.

I've always heard statements on this board that the shooting ability much worse today then it has been in the past.

After watching some Finals games of the Lakers, Celtics, and Bulls, I was surprised by how often a player with an open look was almost guaranteed to make the shot. The chances of that happening just don't seem as likely in basketball today.

Perhaps its just a few people that have this opinion, but what do you guys think?

[Turisas]

Well I'd argue that nowadays defenses are tougher to play against than in the 80s. I don't think you'll notice much disparity free-throw percentage wise between those eras.

[JordansBulls]

80's and 90's were better because guys didn't focus on dunking the ball and dunking on someone all the time. Guys could actually shoot at that time.

[tsherkin]

Well I'd argue that nowadays defenses are tougher to play against than in the 80s. I don't think you'll notice much disparity free-throw percentage wise between those eras.

That's not actually relevant, since he's discussing a difference in the ability to make open shots.

But I have to agree with JordansBulls... the 80s and early 90s were definitely a time when there were better shooters.

Part of it is that the NBA has seen an influx of a lot of "potential" players as opposed to more polished college players and that's partially because of the way NBA GMs were drafting (the HS focus, for example). It's starting to turn around a bit with more focus on Europeans and the age limit and such, though.

But is that really a surprise? If you draft a lot of freshmen, HSers and project big men that want to shoot instead of post-up, what do you think will happen?

[a-rod]

2000s it's not worth discussing. back in the day they needed one shooter on the team, thats wouldn't work in the NBA today.

[tsherkin]

2000s it's not worth discussing. back in the day they needed one shooter on the team, thats wouldn't work in the NBA today.

This is a fairly ridiculous statement.

There may have been one PROMINENT shooter on the team in earlier eras but that was on account of:

a) the general distribution of shooting talent being greater (if everyone was, on average, better, the need for specialists diminishes)

b) less emphasis on specialists and more on everyone possessing broad skill sets

and

c) the relative novelty of the 3pt shot (if you're talking about the 80s)

So no, you're completely incorrect.

[tsherkin]

The 80s,90s championships teams here is their shooters:
michael cooper (Lakers), Andrew tony(Sixers), Danny Ainge (Celtics), John paxon (bulls 90-93), BJ (bulls 95-98)

^the players around them were average shooters at best with exception of MJ, Larry bird. also in 80s,90s they didn't have international players, not like now anyway.

...

Let's just deal with the 80s Lakers.

1980:

Shooters included Jamaal Wilkes, Michael Cooper and pretty much everyone else could stick open shots. This was the first year the 3-pointer as introduced to the NBA, so the league as a whole had not adjusted to the range as a regular shot.

But you need to remember that even Kareem could score out to 20 feet.

1982:

Still not a lot of emphasis on 3s but Magic's mid-range J was improving, Kareem and Cooper were still there, Bob McAdoo was a nasty shooter, and again, mid-range Js and most shots under the arc were money if they were open.

1985:

Magic was a pretty solid shooter by this point (not a stunner from downtown yet but very good mid-range), Kareem and Cooper were still there, McAdoo was still there, Worthy had been added, Wilkes was still there (and he wasn't called 'Silk' for nothing) and they added Byron Scott.

1987:

Magic, Kareem, Worthy, Scott, Cooper.

1988:

Same deal.

See, your problem is that you equate three-point shooting with shooters.

But you don't realize that, for example, Larry Bird took under 1.0 3PA/g three times in his career. He took under 2.0 for the first 6 years of his career and he only took 3.0+ 3PA/g twice in his career.

And I dare you to tell me Bird wasn't a shooter.

Let's look at the Celtics now:

1981:

Bird was the most notable but as with the other teams, most guys could hit from just about anywhere under where the arc would be. They also had Nate the Skate, who didn't suck at shooting.

1984:

Bird, DJ could hit shots under the arc, Ainge, Wedman.

1986:

Bird, DJ, Ainge, Wedman and Jerry Sichting.

You've really got nothing to this argument.

And yes, I'm aware that in the 80s and 90s, international players were very rare (mostly in the form of Detlef Schrempf and Drazen Petrovic, then Dirk). I was speaking about the modern period as a positive influence on the upswing in shooting ability we're starting to see.

Now, let's look at the Bulls:


1991:

Jordan, Pippen, Paxson...

And how the Christ did you forget 3-time shootout champ Craig Hodges?

He made the final round two other times besides those three wins, as well and is the guy who set the record for consecutive 3s made in the contest that Kapono just tied.

But yeah, "average shooters at best."

1992:

Jordan, Pippen, Paxson, Hodges, BJ Armstrong (7th All-Time in 3P%)

As in '91, Horace Grant was a nice mid-range shooter; didn't have HUGE range but inside 17 feet, he was nasty. Kind of like Kurt Thomas.

1993:

Same as 1992, add in Trent Tucker.

1996:

Jordan, Pippen, Kukoc, Kerr, Harper (under the arc), Buechler.

1997:

Same deal, only Harper started to connect well from beyond the arc.

1998:

Same deal, add in Scott Burrell, remove Trent Tucker.

See what I'm talking about? You're factually incorrect; there were a lot of good shooters on these teams...

Nevermind a team like the Nuggets in the 80s, or the Golden State Warriors of the 90s, or, or or.

[a-rod]

You make some good valid points, but obviously the word shooter has different connotations to different individuals, so lets just agree to disagree.

[tsherkin]

You make some good valid points, but obviously the word shooter has different connotations to different individuals, so lets just agree to disagree.

No?

Your argument is founded solely on the basis of the three-point shot, which wasn't even introduced to the NBA until Magic's rookie season.

All of the guys I named were dangerous out to 22 feet at least and several of them could still hit the three.

Your glaring omission of Craig Hodges and some of the other guys I mentioned indicates to me that whether you define "shooter" to explicitly refer to 3pt shooting or not, you don't have the factual knowledge to backup your claim, so I will most certainly not agree to disagree.

[Promezclan]

Definitely today in terms of 3-pointers. Just look at the 3-pt leaders from the 1990 season (just randomly picked the middle ) vs. last season. The number 20 guy last season would have been #6 back then. The volume is far higher as well. The #20 for total 3PTers made would have been #3 back then!

1. Jim Les-SAC .461
2. Trent Tucker-NYK .418
3. Jeff Hornacek-PHO .418
4. Terry Porter-POR .415
5. Scott Skiles-ORL .408
6. Danny Ainge-POR .406
7. Hersey Hawkins-PHI .400
8. Larry Bird*-BOS .389
9. Glen Rice-MIA .386
10. Tim Hardaway-GSW .385
11. Dennis Scott-ORL .374
12. Jay Humphries-MIL .373
13. Travis Mays-SAC .365
14. Dale Ellis-TOT .363
Reggie Williams-TOT .363
16. Derek Harper-DAL .362
17. Kiki Vandeweghe-NYK .362
18. Reggie Theus-NJN .361
19. Reggie Miller-IND .348
20. John Stockton-UTA .345

1. Jason Kapono-MIA .514
2. Steve Nash-PHO .455
3. Brent Barry-SAS .446
4. Luther Head-HOU .441
5. Anthony Parker-TOR .441
6. Jason Terry-DAL .438
7. Leandro Barbosa-PHO .434
8. Al Harrington-TOT .433
9. Kyle Korver-PHI .430
10. Eddie House-NJN .429
11. Bostjan Nachbar-NJN .423
12. Shane Battier-HOU .421
13. Dirk Nowitzki-DAL .416
14. Matt Carroll-CHA .416
15. Kirk Hinrich-CHI .415
16. Raja Bell-PHO .413
Ben Gordon-CHI .413
18. Cuttino Mobley-LAC .411
19. Ime Udoka-POR .406
20. Mike Miller-MEM .406

FT% is pretty similar, #20 has only risen from .851 to .853. FG% says a lot more about shot selection than shooting skill.

I'd say the reason for the improvement in shooting is an influx of Europeans who tend to focus on shooting rather than physical play and the steady improvement of training techniques.

[Turisas]

^^^

Damn I didn't realise how good Kapono was shooting

[Warspite]

Todays offense is geared to createing open 3pt shots

The 80s era offense was geared to createing open 16-18 ft jump shots.

The defenses have used length and athletisim to take away the 16 ft wing shot (You will see players post up and play with there back to the basket at 16 ft) In there quest to to take away the 16ft shot they drafted athletic long arm raw offensively players.

The NBA drafted defensive players who could dunk but couldnt shoot midrange shots. The defenses improved and forced the players to shoot more 3s. With the bringing in of the 3pt line in the early 90s even bigmen began to shoot outside.

If you ask most teams who there best outside shooter is they will say its there coach or GM. Mike Dunlevey has an open challenge to any of his players that if they can hit more 3s than him they get the day off. Hes never lost. Steve Kerr, Danny Ferry, Joe Dumars, McKey, Skiles and Zeke are all 80s players who routinely beat there own players in 3pt shooting contests.

[The_Believer]

The 90s had better 3pt shooters (Kerr, Miller, etc) for sure.

[Patterns]

Back in the 80's and 90's, teams routinely played defense like the Phx Suns. It was mostly offense with little defense. It was run and gun and shoot open shots. You can all you want about the bad boy Pistons but even they allowed a .447 shooting % which is only 5th best in today's league.

The great 72 win Bulls team allowed a .448 shooting % which is the 6th best.

Even with today's improved defense, 3pt shooters are still shooting better.

There's no doubt in my mind that there are better shooters today.

[hermes]

overall shooting ability would include midrange shots, which i think gives the edge to the 80's-90's

[Kabookalu]

And if you go back further in the 70's and 60's, every time I watch a game in those eras it seems like everyone is hitting their mid range jumpshots, like there was 10 Richard Hamiltons on the court. I'm just thinking to myself how the hell do you defend against this?

[Ryoga Hibiki]

The biggest change I see is in the use of the 3point shot, that is a much more important weapon nowdays. Last year 21.2% of all FGA were 3pters, 35.8% was the accuracy. In 87 it was 5.3% and 30.1%.
What happened is that players are now specialized to take long range shots but less used to hit the mid range ones.
That's the real change, only great natural shooters can hit from anywhere, normal players have their spots where they're comforable from.
I don't think it's lack of fundamentals or anything else, it's just that the game has changed.

[Jordan23Forever]

And if you go back further in the 70's and 60's, every time I watch a game in those eras it seems like everyone is hitting their mid range jumpshots, like there was 10 Richard Hamiltons on the court. I'm just thinking to myself how the hell do you defend against this?

Seriously. I'd like people to watch today's games and look for the amount of open shots made/missed. Guys back then would knock these shots down at least 65-70% of the time; today it's probably around 50-55% of the time. That's also a big part of why teams scored more back then: more talent on each team, but also more good shooters. A defense can look good when you only have one or two weapons and no one else can make you pay by hitting shots (see: SA vs. Cleveland, 2007 Finals), but it's harder to play defense against teams where every player can fill it up respectably.

I also have to LOL @ the guy who noted that Detroit held opponents to 44.7% shooting without mentioning that that was 3% below league average. The 1990 Pistons held teams to 3% FG/8.7 ppg below league average; the 1989 Pistons held teams to 3% FG/8.4 ppg below league average. In the playoffs their defense was even better.

[G35]

Isn't that the key point? "Open shots"?

Players in the 80's and 90's probably did knock down open shots at a high rate.

But players nowadays can knock down open shots at a high rate also.

The difference is how often do players get open looks compared to the 80's and 90's.

Could players then consistently get there shots off against the defenses of today. And remember that's league wide, of course the championship teams are going to look better. What about the scrub teams of the league........

[tsherkin]

Isn't that the key point? "Open shots"?

Players in the 80's and 90's probably did knock down open shots at a high rate.

But players nowadays can knock down open shots at a high rate also.

The difference is how often do players get open looks compared to the 80's and 90's.

This skips the whole point made that guys today DON'T hit open shots at a similar rate, though.

Could players then consistently get there shots off against the defenses of today.

Yes. Remember, we're talking about the 3rd to 5th guys on the floor being more capable of involvement in the offense because their teammates trusted them to hit open looks and their coaches put things into motion that produced scenarios that allowed them to take those shots. You don't see a lot of that in the contemporary period in a lot of offenses besides the Princeton and Triangle offenses.