dice wrote:MrSparkle wrote:dice wrote:classic strawman argument. you brought up an argument that nobody else did just so you could tear it down
nobody said anything about kerr, stockton and allen. but if you don't think they were way better 3 pt shooters than MJ, and would be today as well, i don't know what to tell you
he couldn't even be deadly on LOW volume! he was given the 3 pt shot whenever he wanted it, surely worked on it, yet wasn't particularly good at it
no, they absolutely would not. because they were spot-up point guards. they were not shooting guards who were very active off the ball running around screens trying to get open and they did not have the capability of creating their own shots
george hill career per 100 possessions: 21p 6a 2to 38.5% 3pt, 6 3pt attempts
steve kerr career per 100 possessions: 18p 5a 2to 45.5% 3pt, 5 3pt attempts
steve kerr would have been a better shooting version of george hill, whose volume is only slightly higher. kerr took 3 pt attempts at every opportunity because he was a specialist. that would not change today other than perhaps increased ball movement would find him slightly more attempts
the main reason 3 pt attempts are much higher today is that players who in prior eras were NOT 3 pt specialists are now shooting them. including big men and perimeter guys who would have been mid-range specialists in the past
It's not a straw man argument. The argument is that the great players of the 90s shot much less 3Ps than they do today.
and that's a fine argument. except that kerr and stockton would NOT be shooting many more 3s than they didYou are using statistics to argue that Jordan would not have been able to adapt to shooting the 3-ball as well as other stars in today's game
no i'm not. i'm using common sense. people are arguing that michael jordan in specific would be able to substantially raise both his volume as well as his PERCENTAGES in today's league. which is absurd. i mean, anything's possible, but it's simply not reasonable to think that jordan would abandon the rest of his scoring acumen to devote the amount of time necessary to become the kind of 3 pt shooter that teams take pains not to leave openJordan ranked #34 in 3P% in 92/93 (respectable 35% on 2.9 attempts), and FWIW, only 47 players qualified (probably needed at least 50 makes or something): https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1993_per_game.html This was the year before they moved the line closer.
how does citing the fact that jordan was 34th out of 47 in percentage support your point?Durant ranked #86 last year in 3P% (with a respectable 35% on 5 shots per game). The reason I make the comparison is because both are high-usage ball-handlers who also shared the rock with high-usage ball-handlers. Durant is considered one of the game's best 3P shooters, and he was only good for #86 while playing with the best 3P backcourt of all-time.
why are you cherry picking one of his worst seasons? he was 42% the previous season with the same teammates. he's 38% for his career on high volumeJordan was #11 in 3P% come 95/96. Sure the line was closer, but it was also closer for everybody else in the league.
jordan was also really good with the mid-range shot. which is probably why he improved so much more than other 3 pt shooters those years. because the line was closer to his more natural range
and as someone who has excellent natural shooting range myself, i can tell you that when a person becomes accustomed to bombing away from a certain distance, moving in a bit doesn't necessarily help muchThe argument is complicated because you're hypothetically saying that Jordan couldn't keep up with today's 3P demands, but all the data shows that he kept up with the 3P demands of his eras, and would likely continue meeting that demand in today's era. Obviously not on Curry's level, but on Lebron's or Durant's level.
lebron is not on durant's level. i agree that MJ would be on lebron's level, if not a bit better. lebron is at 34.4% for his career on 5.8 attempts per 100 possessions. jordan was 32.7% on 2.2 attemptsYou can't say that Jordan's shrug game was a magic lucky night. It was a high-volume night, which was uncharacteristic.
what does it tell you when a guy shoots really well on uncharacteristically high volume? it tells you that he's in the zone. a zone that abandoned him after halftime. i've experienced being in the zone as well. and yes, it is magical. your brain chemistry goes into an altered state. your body feels more fluid. the basket seems twice as big. and then, *poof*, it's goneIf Ben Simmons or Dennis Rodman made 6 3Ps, I would consider that a magical night.
about as freakish as MJ making 6 in a row
a guy who makes 1/3 of his 3 pt attempts and who had as many attempts as jordan did in his career could be expected to make 6 in a row about 4 times in his career. just by sheer random luck. not even taking into account the "in the zone"/"feeling it" phenomenon, which happens to every shooter now and then
why are we pretending that MJ was trying real hard to make 3 pointers in the first half of one game in his career but didn't care if they went in for the remaining 1000+ games?
We’re gonna have to agree to disagree if you think Rodman making 3 in a row is equally freakish to Jordan making 6.
I’ll put my money on Jordan’s 6 , 7 days out of the week.
