I've seen enough...Curry is the greatest offensive player of all time at his peak...

[plowking]

The poster PHILA compiled stats from like 150 games from 1990-1993 and Jordan was at 51% midrange. There is selection bias there (these were likely his better games), but not enough to make 51% become 44%. Pretty sure he was in the 47-49% range at a minimum.

So then he must not have been that great a finisher at the ring as claimed. The numbers don't add up.

[PP34Deuce]

I do believe the 3 point shot has completely changed the game.

I was watching early 2000's NBA games and when there was a drive and kick, it kicked out to a 3 but if it wasn't a "good" 3 point shooter, they funneled it back inside. It was completely an inside game.

Now, I watch teams purposely looking for the 3 point shot rather than taking the 18 footer or the post up Opp.

It makes a lot of sense why the 3 point shot is used.

It saves your body from pounding in the post. It's also a lazy play.

[OldSchoolBBall]

So then he must not have been that great a finisher at the ring as claimed. The numbers don't add up.

Sure they do. For instance, he shot 54% in 1991 on 22 FGA. Let's say he drove and had 6.5 FGA (29% of his total FGA/gm) at the rim per game and finished at 70% conservatively:

.29 x .70 = .203

Then say he shot 14.5 midrange shots (65% of his total FGA/gm) at 49% FG:

.65 x .49 = .322

Then he took 1 three per game, converting at 31%:

.04 x .31 = .04

.203 + .322 + .04 = ~53%

So I actually undershot it a bit. But since we don't know the exact percentage of his FGA that were in the paint, you can play with the numbers a bit. But to say the numbers don't work out is wrong.