Steph Curry is shooting 50% on 10.8 3pt attempts per game, 52% overall

[The4thHorseman]

This is such a weird argument. He's en elite mid range shooter but also an elite 3pt shooter, but in order to call him the GOAT shooter of all time, you want him to take more inefficient mid range shots instead of 3s where he's averaging 50%?

For his career, .077% of his FGA are from mid-range while making 45% of them. That's just simply not enough mid-range attempts to qualify and say he's an elite mid-range shooter / greatest shooter of all time.

Why is 10-16ft the only distance being considered mid range? Why isnt 16ft<3 not also being considered? Mid range shots extend past the FT line. And again this idea that Curry doesnt take enough bad shots to be considered the GOAT shooter is a weird argument to make, especially when he takes those shots he is elite at them.

Because anything past 17ft is considered a long 2. If a players foot is on the 3pt line in the act of shooting, then surely you're not going to call that a mid-range shot. It would be considered a long 2, like it's been forever.

I'm not saying that he needs to take more mid-range, just saying he hasn't taken enough in his career to be lumped in with past and present shooters who used the whole floor as part of their arsenal.

[Edrees]

Is there any shooting stat that normalizes the stat for the league average that year? For example, if theoretically league avg 3pt % was 45% this year, 50% is only 5% above, however in 2016 if league average was like 36 and he got 44% it would be way more impressive I'm making these numbers up just to explain what I mean, these are obviously not the real values.

I'm just curious if there are any stats that normalize for league average, as I would find those stats a lot more interesting in determining just how much better curry actually got or if it's just a result of rules changes and the league changing.

[mihail_petkov]

Is there any shooting stat that normalizes the stat for the league average that year? For example, if theoretically league avg 3pt % was 45% this year, 50% is only 5% above, however in 2016 if league average was like 36 and he got 44% it would be way more impressive I'm making these numbers up just to explain what I mean, these are obviously not the real values.

I'm just curious if there are any stats that normalize for league average, as I would find those stats a lot more interesting in determining just how much better curry actually got or if it's just a result of rules changes and the league changing.

2015-2016 8.5 FG on 24.1 3PA 35.4%
2018-2019 11.0 FG on 31.3 3PA 35.1%

[Edrees]

Is there any shooting stat that normalizes the stat for the league average that year? For example, if theoretically league avg 3pt % was 45% this year, 50% is only 5% above, however in 2016 if league average was like 36 and he got 44% it would be way more impressive I'm making these numbers up just to explain what I mean, these are obviously not the real values.

I'm just curious if there are any stats that normalize for league average, as I would find those stats a lot more interesting in determining just how much better curry actually got or if it's just a result of rules changes and the league changing.

2015-2016 8.5 FG on 24.1 3PA 35.4%
2018-2019 11.0 FG on 31.3 3PA 35.1%

Thanks. That makes it look even more impressive. people shooting more threes but the average players haven't gotten better at them (while Curry has)

[valrond1]

And to think some people still believe he's not the best shooter to play the game. Insanity.

Best shooter? Yes. Best player? Nope. There are a lot more things to playing basketball than shooting.

[Franco]

For his career, .077% of his FGA are from mid-range while making 45% of them. That's just simply not enough mid-range attempts to qualify and say he's an elite mid-range shooter / greatest shooter of all time.

Why is 10-16ft the only distance being considered mid range? Why isnt 16ft<3 not also being considered? Mid range shots extend past the FT line. And again this idea that Curry doesnt take enough bad shots to be considered the GOAT shooter is a weird argument to make, especially when he takes those shots he is elite at them.

Because anything past 17ft is considered a long 2. If a players foot is on the 3pt line in the act of shooting, then surely you're not going to call that a mid-range shot. It would be considered a long 2, like it's been forever.

I'm not saying that he needs to take more mid-range, just saying he hasn't taken enough in his career to be lumped in with past and present shooters who used the whole floor as part of their arsenal.

And long 2s are what? Layups?

[Hubert44]

50/50/90 club! Lonelier than a Hearts Club Band.

[Pennebaker]

The guy is insane

He and LeBron (another guy who has really extended his range) are the 2 biggest anomalies in the sport right now bar none.

It's good to see curry at the 2016 level

He's the greatest shooter of all time, and if I'm building an all-time starting 5 team, I'm starting Steph Curry at PG over Magic Johnson - you don't need Magic Johnson when you have LeBron James starting at SF.

[Ice Trae]

And to think some people still believe he's not the best shooter to play the game. Insanity.

Best shooter? Yes. Best player? Nope. There are a lot more things to playing basketball than shooting.

obviously... i mean the premise of this thread is exclusively about his shooting.

[Duke4life831]

For his career, .077% of his FGA are from mid-range while making 45% of them. That's just simply not enough mid-range attempts to qualify and say he's an elite mid-range shooter / greatest shooter of all time.

Why is 10-16ft the only distance being considered mid range? Why isnt 16ft<3 not also being considered? Mid range shots extend past the FT line. And again this idea that Curry doesnt take enough bad shots to be considered the GOAT shooter is a weird argument to make, especially when he takes those shots he is elite at them.

Because anything past 17ft is considered a long 2. If a players foot is on the 3pt line in the act of shooting, then surely you're not going to call that a mid-range shot. It would be considered a long 2, like it's been forever.

I'm not saying that he needs to take more mid-range, just saying he hasn't taken enough in his career to be lumped in with past and present shooters who used the whole floor as part of their arsenal.

No its considered a mid range shot and yes some mid range shots are long 2s. Most places that I can find that say a definition of a mid range shot is a shot outside of the key and inside the 3pt arc. So by their definition a mid range shot is 15ft<3. Ive also seen any 2pt shot that isnt a layup or dunk. Hard to find anywhere that says a mid range shot is basically from the free throw line and in.

Again I just find it a weird premise that Curry is elite everywhere on the court, but just because only 7% of his shots come from 10-16ft, that takes him out of the best shooter conversation. Only 8% of Dirks shots came from 3-10ft. So by your definition he didnt use the whole floor as part of his arsenal, therefore he shouldnt be lumped in with the rest of the elite shooters either, but you lumped him in. KD has had multiple seasons where only 10% or less of his shots came from the 3-10ft range, his career is only 12% of his shots come from that range. Does that take him out of the running as well?

[Karate Diop]

I can't believe people are trying to debate whether or not Curry is the greatest shooter of all-time... Makes me want to make a Kobe vs. Curry shooting thread just to see the insane takes people come up with to try and knock Steph.

[HelloFriends]

Curry already became the goat shooter in 2016.

2017 and 2018 just cements him wayyyyyy above everyone else

[Poohdini1]

Convinced he's an alien sent here to steal rings from LeBron and destroy Ray's 3 point record

[Lenneth]

He's the best "3pt / long distance" shooter to play the game. That's why he chooses to take more 3pa than 2pa. He doesn't take enough shots from various spots inside the arc to say he's the best "shooter" of all time.

He shot 60% from mid range last season, and is constantly in high 60s at the rim, and has led the league in FT% four different times. But you want him to take more mid range shots to prove he's the best shooter of all time?

From 10-16ft,(close to true mid-range) he shot 53%, but only .073% of his FGA were from that distance. Hardly enough attempts to lump him in with other great shooters, past or present.

In order to call someone the best shooter of all time, his arsenal should be from anywhere on the floor, like Bird, Dirk or KD. Guys who can get their shot off form just about anywhere w/o needing screens.

Sooooooo, if someone like Shaq dunk over people 80%, but shoots only 20% of layups and hook shots, he is not the most dominating force inside? If a math wiz skip algebra/calculus and go directly to college/master math courses, he isn't a math wiz, because he didn't go through easier courses? Curry takes 3 point shots, because 3>2. There is no point of shooting long 2, when he can knock down 3 pointers better than anybody in the league, and that's why less than 10% of his shot are long 2. Players like Dirk, Bird, KD shoots more long 2 than Curry, not because they are better mid range shooter than Curry, but because they can't knock down 3 like Curry. I think it's pretty common knowledge...

[An Unbiased Fan]

Great shooter, but benefiting from era rules

[clyde21]

For his career, .077% of his FGA are from mid-range while making 45% of them. That's just simply not enough mid-range attempts to qualify and say he's an elite mid-range shooter / greatest shooter of all time.

Why is 10-16ft the only distance being considered mid range? Why isnt 16ft<3 not also being considered? Mid range shots extend past the FT line. And again this idea that Curry doesnt take enough bad shots to be considered the GOAT shooter is a weird argument to make, especially when he takes those shots he is elite at them.

Because anything past 17ft is considered a long 2. If a players foot is on the 3pt line in the act of shooting, then surely you're not going to call that a mid-range shot. It would be considered a long 2, like it's been forever.

I'm not saying that he needs to take more mid-range, just saying he hasn't taken enough in his career to be lumped in with past and present shooters who used the whole floor as part of their arsenal.

So you're not only asking Steph to take more inefficient shots to prove he's the all time best shooter, but you also want those shots to fit YOUR idea of what a mid range shot is?

Whack argument per usual.

[xdrta+]

Because anything past 17ft is considered a long 2.

I see this argument occasionally, and to me it makes no sense at all. Pick an arbitrary number, 17, and decide that is the limit of mid-range. As others point out, inside the arc (and outside the key) is mid-range, some are longer mid-range, some are shorter mid-range. Usually, trying to squeeze in another metric (long 2, for instance) is to try and prove some pre-conceived point, something like, Curry isn't really that good a shooter.

[SlowPaced]

Insanity. Just absurd numbers.

It pains me that there are "pundits" that think he's not a Top 5 player. Completely bereft of any understanding of where the guy's impact comes from. No idea about the gravity of his range, no idea what his off-ball play does to the team.

[tyguy]

Convinced he's an alien sent here to steal rings from LeBron destroy Ray's 3 point record

Durant is the real guy sandbagging and continues to do it with those comments about how stars like Kawhi shouldn't play with lebron (but come join me homie).

[xfactor]

Convinced he's an alien sent here to steal rings from LeBron destroy Ray's 3 point record

Durant is the real guy sandbagging and continues to do it with those comments about how stars like Kawhi shouldn't play with lebron (but come join me homie).