Better basketball player : Ant or Drexler

[One_and_Done]

Let's go back to the question of Edwards v. Drexler rather than derailing the thread any further. My apologies to everyone not involved in this sub discussion for continuing to engage.

Agreed. Ant is better than Drexler at pretty much everything, except for being a few inches shorter. This is easily Ant. That would have been obvious if they'd played at the same time. Dribbling, shooting, passing, D, etc. It's all Ant.

All that fancy dribbling that you're swooning over would have been prohibited under 80s/90s rules.

Completely inaccurate. The dribbling of the 80s is mostly similar to today. Minor tweaks would be needed, mostly amounting to 'well, just don't do a crab dribble, etc, cos those particular moves will often get a whistle'.

[One_and_Done]

Brook Lopez, Paul Millsap, Serge Ibaka and Al Horford all started out shooting no further than midrange (or strictly inside in Ibaka's case) and eventually started shooting threes at respectable percentages.

Why? Because learning to shoot threes isn't that hard. Almost everyone does it, which means it's not particularly difficult.

Tell it to guys like Demar, MCW, MKG, and Shaun Livingston. Not everyone can do it.

I clearly said almost everyone does it. A few exceptions don't disprove the trend.

There are tonnes of guys who don't ever do it.

[SportsGuru08]

Agreed. Ant is better than Drexler at pretty much everything, except for being a few inches shorter. This is easily Ant. That would have been obvious if they'd played at the same time. Dribbling, shooting, passing, D, etc. It's all Ant.

All that fancy dribbling that you're swooning over would have been prohibited under 80s/90s rules.

Completely inaccurate. The dribbling of the 80s is mostly similar to today. Minor tweaks would be needed, mostly amounting to 'well, just don't do a crab dribble, etc, cos those particular moves will often get a whistle'.

Actually no it isn't. Kyrie and many others would committ a turnover on almost every possession if they tried to play the way they do now.

[SportsGuru08]

Tell it to guys like Demar, MCW, MKG, and Shaun Livingston. Not everyone can do it.

I clearly said almost everyone does it. A few exceptions don't disprove the trend.

There are tonnes of guys who don't ever do it.

No there really isn't. The fact that a number of players can go from never shooting beyond 15 feet to suddenly shooting threes at respectable percentages shows that shooting threes is not the arcane skill you're making it out to be.

[One_and_Done]

I clearly said almost everyone does it. A few exceptions don't disprove the trend.

There are tonnes of guys who don't ever do it.

No there really isn't. The fact that a number of players can go from never shooting beyond 15 feet to suddenly shooting threes at respectable percentages shows that shooting threes is not the arcane skill you're making it out to be.

It's not 'arcane', it's just not a skill everyone can develop. Even if, for the sake of argument, we granted the premise that 'most' could learn it... it would be unfair to grant someone the ability to do so. You only get credit for the things you actually proved you could do. We have no way to be sure if they would be a Lopez or a Demar.

[lessthanjake]

DeRozan is a weird example to use here since his 3P% in the last four years is 9% higher than it was in his first four years. He actually has improved a great deal at three point shooting! He’s still not very good at it, but he’s certainly developed a lot in this regard. Drexler would be a 41% three point shooter if he improved as much as DeRozan has.

[penbeast0]

DeRozan is a weird example to use here since his 3P% in the last four years is 9% higher than it was in his first four years. He actually has improved a great deal at three point shooting! He’s still not very good at it, but he’s certainly developed a lot in this regard. Drexler would be a 41% three point shooter if he improved as much as DeRozan has.

Ah, but then the claim would be that he was making those shots against primitive 3 point defenses that weren't set up to defend out into space the way modern defenses do. Once you have decided the conclusion you want, you can always find some rationalization to back it up.

[One_and_Done]

DeRozan is a weird example to use here since his 3P% in the last four years is 9% higher than it was in his first four years. He actually has improved a great deal at three point shooting! He’s still not very good at it, but he’s certainly developed a lot in this regard. Drexler would be a 41% three point shooter if he improved as much as DeRozan has.

Obviously the types of shots you take, and the way they are being defended, is hugely relevant here.

[OhayoKD]

DeRozan is a weird example to use here since his 3P% in the last four years is 9% higher than it was in his first four years. He actually has improved a great deal at three point shooting! He’s still not very good at it, but he’s certainly developed a lot in this regard. Drexler would be a 41% three point shooter if he improved as much as DeRozan has.

Ah, but then the claim would be that he was making those shots against primitive 3 point defenses that weren't set up to defend out into space the way modern defenses do. Once you have decided the conclusion you want, you can always find some rationalization to back it up.

Huh? Do you not think there's a difference in difficulty between wide open 3s and 3s which are actually defended?

[penbeast0]

I think that if they put modern offenses in that were spamming 3's like they do today, defenses would quickly change to come out and guard those threes. And, the stakes being high and coaches being intelligent, it would end up in a similar situation like we have today.

[jojo4341]

I think that if they put modern offenses in that were spamming 3's like they do today, defenses would quickly change to come out and guard those threes. And, the stakes being high and coaches being intelligent, it would end up in a similar situation like we have today.

Very true. It kind of goes both ways on offense too. Today, we have offenses DESIGNED to get open threes from players or at least in rhythm. Back then, it was mostly threes from a broken play, the clock running out or as mentioned, leaving someone with too much space. You throw in young Brook Lopez or Al Horford into the 80s or 90s, they likely never develops a 3 point shot because it wasn't the norm and we never see their progression. Then we'll say they would be unplayable in today's game (well not really, they can still defend). With Drexler or many other players back then who didn't fish for threes, we'll never truly know. We could make an educated guess based on their midrange and free throw shooting and willingness to develop their game.

How often do we see modern players who are bad free throw shooters and/or midrange, but hit that magical 38-40% from three? Bruce Bowen is a prime example, albeit, not current. But he specialized out of necessity as do many role players today.

[OhayoKD]

I think that if they put modern offenses in that were spamming 3's like they do today, defenses would quickly change to come out and guard those threes. And, the stakes being high and coaches being intelligent, it would end up in a similar situation like we have today.

Very true. It kind of goes both ways on offense too. Today, we have offenses DESIGNED to get open threes from players or at least in rhythm. Back then, it was mostly threes from a broken play, the clock running out or as mentioned, leaving someone with too much space. You throw in young Brook Lopez or Al Horford into the 80s or 90s, they likely never develops a 3 point shot because it wasn't the norm and we never see their progression. Then we'll say they would be unplayable in today's game (well not really, they can still defend). With Drexler or many other players back then who didn't fish for threes, we'll never truly know. We could make an educated guess based on their midrange and free throw shooting and willingness to develop their game.

How often do we see modern players who are bad free throw shooters and/or midrange, but hit that magical 38-40% from three? Bruce Bowen is a prime example, albeit, not current. But he specialized out of necessity as do many role players today.

Bruce Bowen is a bad 3 point shooter by today's standards. Bwing able to hit wide open looks at a good clip is not enough for drexler to keep pace

[Hair Jordan]

The attempts Ant takes are of a far higher degree of difficulty, in higher volume, both of which increase difficulty. Cooper shot wide open shots with terrible form. Cooper would be a bad shooting option today.

Higher degree of difficulty? Also, higher volume increases your percentages and not the other way around.

There are many posters on this forum who disagree with me about many things. This is not one of them. I doubt you will find a single person here who will support either of these rather bizarre propositions.

Who cares? There are lots of posters on this forum who think Kobe is top 5 or KG and KD are top 10. I could agree with you or them but then we’d all be wrong. I’d rather be right.

[One_and_Done]

Higher degree of difficulty? Also, higher volume increases your percentages and not the other way around.

There are many posters on this forum who disagree with me about many things. This is not one of them. I doubt you will find a single person here who will support either of these rather bizarre propositions.

Who cares? There are lots of posters on this forum who think Kobe is top 5 or KG and KD are top 10. I could agree with you or them but then we’d all be wrong. I’d rather be right.

You're definitely wrong in this instance.

[lessthanjake]

There are many posters on this forum who disagree with me about many things. This is not one of them. I doubt you will find a single person here who will support either of these rather bizarre propositions.

Who cares? There are lots of posters on this forum who think Kobe is top 5 or KG and KD are top 10. I could agree with you or them but then we’d all be wrong. I’d rather be right.

You're definitely wrong in this instance.

I don’t think the answer to this question is all that simple. Something is easier the more you repeat it. Repetition helps a lot with hand-eye coordination tasks, because practicing something makes you better and doing something over and over gets you in a rhythm with it. At the same time, in order to produce higher volume of shots of a particular kind, you probably need to take some higher-difficulty shots. Which effect is bigger? It’s hard to say. It’ll depend on various factors.

For instance, maybe the higher volume doesn’t increase the difficulty too much, because the offensive system in the higher-volume scenario is designed to produce those looks as much as possible. Maybe with increased volume the percent of threes that are just bailout shots goes down, so the average difficulty of the three-point shots doesn’t actually go up with higher volume. Furthermore, different players probably benefit more or less from repetition than others. Overall, the effect of higher volume really could go either way, depending on how these effects cut.

I certainly don’t think it’s “definitely” the case that higher-volume of threes must decrease the FG% on those shots. For instance, prior to the three-point line being shortened (which makes comparisons really difficult), Michael Jordan had two seasons in which he shot dramatically more three-point shots than other years. And his 3P% in those years was also dramatically higher than in other years. In that case, increasing three-point volume actually resulted in higher 3P%. It was probably due to a combination of increased rhythm and a smaller percent of them being bailout shots. As another example, Anthony Edwards himself just dramatically increased his three-point-shooting volume this season, and simultaneously put up easily his highest 3P%. As another very pertinent example, in the pre-three-point-line-shortening-era, Clyde Drexler shot easily the most threes in the 1992 season, and that year also was the year with the highest 3P%. I’m sure you could find examples that go the opposite way, but it’s certainly more than plausible for higher three-point volume to lead to higher 3P%. We’ve actually seen it with both of the two players that are the subject of this thread!

[One_and_Done]

Who cares? There are lots of posters on this forum who think Kobe is top 5 or KG and KD are top 10. I could agree with you or them but then we’d all be wrong. I’d rather be right.

You're definitely wrong in this instance.

I don’t think the answer to this question is all that simple. Something is easier the more you repeat it. Repetition helps a lot with hand-eye coordination tasks, because practicing something makes you better and doing something over and over gets you in a rhythm with it. At the same time, in order to produce higher volume of shots of a particular kind, you probably need to take some higher-difficulty shots. Which effect is bigger? It’s hard to say. It’ll depend on various factors.

For instance, maybe the higher volume doesn’t increase the difficulty too much, because the offensive system in the higher-volume scenario is designed to produce those looks as much as possible. Maybe with increased volume the percent of threes that are just bailout shots goes down, so the average difficulty of the three-point shots doesn’t actually go up with higher volume. Furthermore, different players probably benefit more or less from repetition than others. Overall, the effect of higher volume really could go either way, depending on how these effects cut.

I certainly don’t think it’s “definitely” the case that higher-volume of threes must decrease the FG% on those shots. For instance, prior to the three-point line being shortened (which makes comparisons really difficult), Michael Jordan had two seasons in which he shot dramatically more three-point shots than other years. And his 3P% in those years was also dramatically higher than in other years. In that case, increasing three-point volume actually resulted in higher 3P%. It was probably due to a combination of increased rhythm and a smaller percent of them being bailout shots. As another example, Anthony Edwards himself just dramatically increased his three-point-shooting volume this season, and simultaneously put up easily his highest 3P%. As another very pertinent example, in the pre-three-point-line-shortening-era, Clyde Drexler shot easily the most threes in the 1992 season, and that year also was the year with the highest 3P%. I’m sure you could find examples that go the opposite way, but it’s certainly more than plausible for higher three-point volume to lead to higher 3P%. We’ve actually seen it with both of the two players that are the subject of this thread!

Even if you took that view, it is clearly not the case in this instance. Ant both takes higher degree of difficulty shots, and Cooper's 3pt % would drop like a stone against modern D. Ant is clearly a vastly better 3pt shooter than Michael Cooper

[lessthanjake]

You're definitely wrong in this instance.

I don’t think the answer to this question is all that simple. Something is easier the more you repeat it. Repetition helps a lot with hand-eye coordination tasks, because practicing something makes you better and doing something over and over gets you in a rhythm with it. At the same time, in order to produce higher volume of shots of a particular kind, you probably need to take some higher-difficulty shots. Which effect is bigger? It’s hard to say. It’ll depend on various factors.

For instance, maybe the higher volume doesn’t increase the difficulty too much, because the offensive system in the higher-volume scenario is designed to produce those looks as much as possible. Maybe with increased volume the percent of threes that are just bailout shots goes down, so the average difficulty of the three-point shots doesn’t actually go up with higher volume. Furthermore, different players probably benefit more or less from repetition than others. Overall, the effect of higher volume really could go either way, depending on how these effects cut.

I certainly don’t think it’s “definitely” the case that higher-volume of threes must decrease the FG% on those shots. For instance, prior to the three-point line being shortened (which makes comparisons really difficult), Michael Jordan had two seasons in which he shot dramatically more three-point shots than other years. And his 3P% in those years was also dramatically higher than in other years. In that case, increasing three-point volume actually resulted in higher 3P%. It was probably due to a combination of increased rhythm and a smaller percent of them being bailout shots. As another example, Anthony Edwards himself just dramatically increased his three-point-shooting volume this season, and simultaneously put up easily his highest 3P%. As another very pertinent example, in the pre-three-point-line-shortening-era, Clyde Drexler shot easily the most threes in the 1992 season, and that year also was the year with the highest 3P%. I’m sure you could find examples that go the opposite way, but it’s certainly more than plausible for higher three-point volume to lead to higher 3P%. We’ve actually seen it with both of the two players that are the subject of this thread!

Even if you took that view, it is clearly not the case in this instance. Ant both takes higher degree of difficulty shots, and Cooper's 3pt % would drop like a stone against modern D. Ant is clearly a vastly better 3pt shooter than Michael Cooper

I don’t think you can really say that for sure. For one thing, we see good evidence that increasing volume actually increases Cooper’s 3P%. In the first 7 years of his career, he did not shoot more than 1.5 three-point attempts per game in any season, and then in the last 5 years of his career he shot at 2.0+ three-point attempts per game every year. So there was a clear dividing line between low-volume years and higher-volume years. And guess what? In the higher-volume time period, his 3P% was higher every single year than the highest 3P% he had in any of the 7 lower-volume years. Overall, in the lower-volume years, Cooper shot 27.7% from three, and then in the higher-volume years he shot 36.1% from three.

What would happen if we increased Cooper’s three-point volume even more? Would the percentage keep going up? Or would it plateau around where it was in the last five years of his career? We don’t really know. Maybe he’d be even better at threes with even bigger volume, but the difficulty of the shots would get higher when trying to increase the volume that much and with defenses more keyed in on threes. In that case, maybe the actual 3P% would stay similar, even as he got better at it with repetition. Or maybe the difficulty of the shots wouldn’t really get higher, because his teams would be focused on producing those looks and bailout shots would continue making up an even smaller percent of his threes. In that case, we’d probably expect his 3P% to go up with even higher volume.

We don’t really know how it would shake out. Overall, I’m inclined to think that Michael Cooper could not do the things Anthony Edwards can do offensively, so even if he could shoot a better 3P%, it wouldn’t mean he’d be a superior 3-point scorer. He’s merely Michael Cooper! But this thread is about Drexler, not Cooper. And the point is that we don’t really know what the effect of increasing three-point volume would be for players, and we have a lot of indication that it actually improves lots of players’ percentages (including for like every player being discussed in this thread)—which makes plenty of intuitive sense, given the benefit of repetition/rhythm. In other words, I don’t think we actually need to give a past player skills they didn’t have in order to posit that they could shoot better from three in today’s era. They might well just shoot a lot better from three just by virtue of shooting more threes.