Let's wait until the playoffs before we start saying Curry's offense = MJ's

[3ball]

It's harder to score now. Harder to score as an individual and dominate the game as one. It is the exact reason why teams like the [COLOR="DarkRed"]Spurs and Warriors who play a team oriented brand of basketball are able to win[/COLOR] so many games, while teams like OKC who are more loaded with talent aren't because they are stuck in the brand of 90's and early 2000's hero ball.

You're conflating winning and individual scoring - when Jordan wasn't winning in the 80's - that's when he put up his biggest stats (33-37 ppg)... When he started winning in the 90's by playing the same team ball that the Spurs/Warriors play, his stats came down to 29-33 ppg.

And you don't seem to realize that MJ's points in the triangle were obtained with minimal dribbling, within the offense - you rarely saw him pound the ball at the top of the key for 5+ seconds and wait on a screen roll or go 1-on-1 off-the-dribble.. That just isn't how he played - this is THE biggest misconception of his game.

Otoh, for today's wing players, the game is based on ball-dominant isolations and running screen rolls to help the ballhandler and initiate automatic, hands-off penetration - Lebron, Harden and virtually any wing or point guard is the ballhandler in screen roll or runs an isolation for literally 40-70% of their offense - this is statistical fact (click on those links).

Zones and smarter team defenses now force star players into worse shots, and force the ball out of their hands in more situations. That is what zones and doubles off the ball, etc, which were not allowed before do.

Previous eras didn't have 3-point shooters to space out defenders - but you aren't acknowledging spacing AT ALL, even though it's the most important aspect of offense.. Defenders are either faced with making extra rotations due to spacing/spaced-out defenders (today's game), or having less rotations due to no spacing/bunched-up defenders (previous eras).

Today's defensive rotations merely offset the spacing, which is why league-wide offensive rating (the stat measuring how hard it is to score) has been stable for 30 years.. ORtg has ranged between 105 and 108 since 1980, excluding a brief downswing from 1999-2004.

The minor shifts within that 105-108 range are due to style of play differences between the eras that affect inputs to the ORtg calculation, such as offensive rebounding rate and FT rate.. Notice how as 3-pointers increase over the years, offensive rebounding rate declines, which reduces ORtg - that's just how ORtg is calculated - the higher proportion of 2-pointers taken in previous eras resulted in higher offensive rebounding rate, which inflated ORtg - this is statistical fact.. Nonetheless, the rule changes in 2005 began to inflate ORtg again, and it reached all-time highs from 2008-2011.

But again, regardless of these minor shifts, ORtg has remained within the 105-108 range for 30 years - stable ORtg over the years proves the difficulty of scoring hasn't changed, and the changes in offensive strategy (spacing) and defensive strategy (extra rotations) are offsetting - you either have extra rotations required by spacing and defensive 3 seconds (today's game), or the rotations aren't necessary because there is no spacing or defensive 3 seconds (previous eras).

[LAZERUSS]

You're conflating winning and individual scoring - when Jordan wasn't winning in the 80's - that's when he put up his biggest stats (33-37 ppg)... When he started winning in the 90's by playing the same team ball that the Spurs/Warriors play, his stats came down to 29-33 ppg.

And you don't seem to realize that MJ's points in the triangle were obtained with minimal dribbling, within the offense - you rarely saw him pound the ball at the top of the key for 5+ seconds and wait on a screen roll or go 1-on-1 off-the-dribble.. That just isn't how he played - this is THE biggest misconception of his game.

Otoh, for today's wing players, the game is based on ball-dominant isolations and running screen rolls to help the ballhandler and initiate automatic, hands-off penetration - Lebron, Harden and virtually any wing or point guard is the ballhandler in screen roll or runs an isolation for literally 40-70% of their offense - this is statistical fact (click on those links).



Previous eras didn't have 3-point shooters to space out defenders - but you aren't acknowledging spacing AT ALL, even though it's the most important aspect of offense.. Defenders are either faced with making extra rotations due to spacing/spaced-out defenders (today's game), or having less rotations due to no spacing/bunched-up defenders (previous eras).

Today's defensive rotations merely offset the spacing, which is why league-wide offensive rating (the stat measuring how hard it is to score) has been stable for 30 years.. ORtg has ranged between 105 and 108 since 1980, excluding a brief downswing from 1999-2004.

The minor shifts within that 105-108 range are due to style of play differences between the eras that affect inputs to the ORtg calculation, such as offensive rebounding rate and FT rate.. Notice how as 3-pointers increase over the years, offensive rebounding rate declines, which reduces ORtg - that's just how ORtg is calculated - the higher proportion of 2-pointers taken in previous eras resulted in higher offensive rebounding rate, which inflated ORtg - this is statistical fact.. Nonetheless, the rule changes in 2005 began to inflate ORtg again, and it reached all-time highs from 2008-2011.

But again, regardless of these minor shifts, ORtg has remained within the 105-108 range for 30 years - stable ORtg over the years proves the difficulty of scoring hasn't changed, and the changes in offensive strategy (spacing) and defensive strategy (extra rotations) are offsetting - you either have extra rotations required by spacing and defensive 3 seconds (today's game), or the rotations aren't necessary because there is no spacing or defensive 3 seconds (previous eras).

I knew it.

Now we all know that Curry, like Lebron, is a POS.

[3ball]

dragonyeuw is making the superior arguments itt.

part of the reason is because he's smartly using COMPARABLES, just like they use in finance to value businesses and real estate to value buildings.

if 6'3" westbrook and 6'4" wade can be 30 ppg scoring champs with far worse midrange and the same 3-point prowess as MJ (having practiced the shot far more and with far worse form), then prime MJ (or any Bulls version of MJ) would do substantially better than they did.

also, i don't think it's speculation to say MJ didn't practice 3-pointers - he said himself that he preferred NOT to shoot three-pointers, because it took away from his insane 2-point game and playmaking.. This is just the way people thought back then, like the world is flat or a Bush should be president... So it shouldn't be a shock or people shouldn't think MJ is lying when he says he didn't want to shoot 3-pointers.

also, everyone in this forum worships 2000 prime Shaq and thinks he's the most-dominant-ever (MDE) - but as the stats show 34/35 year old MJ scored a far higher proportion of his team's points in 1997 and 1998, than Shaq did in 2000... If that doesn't let you know the different animal that MJ was, then nothing will.. (Shaq got twice the rebs and blk, but MJ got twice the assists and stls).
.

[PJR]

Lol this notion that Jordan would all of sudden be a better three point shooter in this era, just because there is more emphasis on the 3 point shot in today's game is fvcking hilarious.


Was the 3 point shot NOT worth 3 points in the 90's? Lmaooo.

Jordan is the greatest perimeter scorer from 20 feet out ever.

He was not a good three point shooter. Let's not be silly.

[3ball]

Lol this notion that Jordan would all of sudden be a better three point shooter in this era, just because there is more emphasis on the 3 point shot in today's game is fvcking hilarious.


Was the 3 point shot NOT worth 3 points in the 90's? Lmaooo.

Jordan is the greatest perimeter scorer from 20 feet out ever.

He was not a good three point shooter. Let's not be silly.

Two questions:

1) How do you rate the form on Jordan's jumpshot?

2) Do you think Jordan is lying here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2CyJdCq-zU&t=0m6s

[PJR]

Jordan had a good looking shot. But he wasn't very accurate from three.

I go by the data. I don't care what he says.

[3ball]

[COLOR="White"]................[/COLOR][COLOR="Red"]Percentage of team points scored while player was on floor[/COLOR]


[COLOR="White"].........................[/COLOR]RS[COLOR="White"].....[/COLOR]RS 4th[COLOR="White"]....[/COLOR] PO[COLOR="White"]....[/COLOR]PO 4th[COLOR="White"]....[/COLOR]Finals[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] Finals 4th


JORDAN 1997... 57.1..... 63.0..... 63.0..... 84.5...... 77.8...... 50.4
JORDAN 1998... 36.3..... 42.1..... 39.7..... 48.8...... 43.6...... 49.1


SHAQ 2000....... 35.0..... 38.1..... 34.0..... 39.4...... 38.4...... 43.9
SHAQ 2001....... 33.9..... 38.0..... 33.9..... 34.0...... 35.4...... 26.2
SHAQ 2002....... 33.1..... 35.3..... 33.5..... 25.7...... 38.1...... 28.2


PIPPEN 1997.... 24.7..... 22.2..... 24.6..... 25.6...... 25.1...... 26.4
PIPPEN 1998.... 24.1..... 19.7..... 21.9..... 15.8...... 22.1...... 14.7


KOBE 2001....... 32.7..... 34.4..... 31.4..... 37.0...... 25.7...... 23.7
KOBE 2002....... 30.9..... 31.3..... 29.9..... 34.0...... 27.2...... 32.4

KOBE 2008....... 31.8..... 36.8..... 33.9..... 41.5...... 30.4...... 32.1

LEBRON 2009.... 35.0..... 39.3..... 41.5..... 42.4
LEBRON 2010.... 34.6..... 44.4..... 32.6..... 40.3
LEBRON 2011.... 32.0..... 32.8..... 28.1..... 30.7...... 21.4...... 14.8
LEBRON 2012.... 34.2..... 33.8..... 34.5..... 34.9...... 30.0...... 33.3
LEBRON 2013.... 32.1..... 32.1..... 30.6..... 36.0...... 29.3...... 39.1
LEBRON 2014.... 33.1..... 38.2..... 35.3..... 32.1...... 39.6...... 29.5
LEBRON 2015.... 30.1..... 38.9..... 35.0..... 42.4...... 40.0...... 44.5

[PJR]

ok

but it wouldn't matter anyway - if 6'3" westbrook and 6'4" wade can be 30 ppg scoring champs with far worse midrange and the same 3-point prowess as MJ (having practiced the shot far more and with far worse form), then prime MJ (or any Bulls version of MJ) would do substantially better than they did.

Overall? Sure. I suppose.

But not from 3. Because just like Westbrook and Wade, Jordan wasn't a good three point shooter.

[3ball]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Jordan had a good looking shot.

But he wasn't very accurate from three.

I go by the data. I don't care what he says.[/COLOR]

ok.. so you don't value context.. got it

Overall? Sure. I suppose (he'd do substantially better than scoring champs 6'3" westbrook and 6'4" wade).

[COLOR="DarkRed"]But not from 3[/COLOR]. Because just like Westbrook and Wade, Jordan wasn't a good three point shooter.

again, I get it - you don't look at context.

btw, everyone in this forum worships 2000 prime Shaq and thinks he's the most-dominant-ever (MDE) - but as the stats show, 34/35 year old MJ scored a far higher proportion of his team's points in 1997 and 1998, than Shaq did in 2000... If that doesn't let you know the different animal that MJ was, then nothing will.. (Shaq got twice the rebs and blk, but MJ got twice the assists and stls).

here's what i mean by different animal - this is a different TIER from what scoring champs 6'4" wade and 6'3" westbrook are capable of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPRyG5bOOtY&t=12m07s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPRyG5bOOtY&t=8m51s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPRyG5bOOtY&t=13m24s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPRyG5bOOtY&t=17m01s
.

[Marchesk]

Lol this notion that Jordan would all of sudden be a better three point shooter in this era, just because there is more emphasis on the 3 point shot in today's game is fvcking hilarious.

I don't know. Who would have thought Kawhi Leondard would be shooting 48% from 3?

He's the thing about MJ. He was extremely dedicated to being the best. So if being the best in this era meant shooting better downtown, then he would have developed a better 3 point shot. But he was drafted in the mid 80s when there was not near the emphasis, especially for someone like him. But he did improve his long range shot as his career went on. 6 threes in a finals first half, remember?

The notion that Jordan, of all people, wouldn't be a better three point shooter today is ridiculous.

[Dragonyeuw]

We don't necessarily have evidence that he's at worse a 35% 3pt shooter, just that he shot that well before. If you look at his yearly splits his 3pt shot wildly fluctuated from year to year that basically screams inconsistency. There isn't any rational or stable data to suggest he'd all of a sudden become Kevin Durant from the 3pt line, suddenly stabilizing as a shooter and sustaining it. He's never shown any sort of sustainability of his outside shot in his career.

But as previously stated, I'm referring to peak MJ when talking about his 3peat shooting. I don't recall what happened in 92 for his 3point shooting to dip, but his 91 and 93 campaigns were 37% and 35%. That's 2 years out of 3 years of his peak, that were above average 3point shooting relative to the era in question. Then he retired, and upon his return shot 42% and 37% in 96 and 97 albeit from a shortened line, 98 his shooting was impacted by injury and was down across the board( including an uncharacteristic sub 80% free throw shooting).

It's not unreasonable to speculate, which we're all doing here, that from 1990 to 1997 MJ could have maintained a 35% to 37% average had he not retired and if the 3point line wasn't moved in. He had reached that level as a shooter, taking into account that he never made the 3 a featured part of his game. I'm not, or never have, made an argument that he'd shoot 3's at a Durant level of volume/efficiency.

But at this point, we're debating over minor percentages as far as the 3 goes. The big picture is, what would his scoring average wind up in this era? Well, let's give him Wade/Westbrook's level of 3 point shooting ( even though at his peak he proved himself capable of greater). We know that those guys were/are capable of 28-30 points while being poor 3point shooters by today's standards. We know that MJ has superior midrange ability to both, so we can assume 50% shooting is a given if a worse shooting Wade can do that and average 30ppg. We know that his slashing and finishing ability around the rim would still be top-tier today. We know that he'd draw a ton of fouls. And we know he's a superior free throw shooter( much better than Wade, slightly better than Westbrook) to both. We know that in addition to on-ball, he was also incredibly dangerous off-ball. What conclusion would you draw from that?

And ultimately, the topic at hand is Curry's offense compared to MJ's. Is he doing some historic level shit? Absolutely. Durant did some historic shit 2 years ago. Kobe did some historic shit, in terms of streak scoring, 10 years ago. Ultimately, Curry needs to do what he's doing now during the playoffs, over a period of years, before we can have an honest discussion on the topic. 2 years ago, people were orgasming over what Durant did in the regular season, but he didn't quite reach that level in the playoffs and the Thunder went nowhere. The brakes need to be applied just a little here.

[sdot_thadon]

But as previously stated, I'm referring to peak MJ when talking about his 3peat shooting. I don't recall what happened in 92 for his 3point shooting to dip, but his 91 and 93 campaigns were 37% and 35%. That's 2 years out of 3 years of his peak, that were above average 3point shooting relative to the era in question. Then he retired, and upon his return shot 42% and 37% in 96 and 97 albeit from a shortened line, 98 his shooting was impacted by injury and was down across the board( including an uncharacteristic sub 80% free throw shooting).

It's not unreasonable to speculate, which we're all doing here, that from 1990 to 1997 MJ could have maintained a 35% to 37% average had he not retired and if the 3point line wasn't moved in. He had reached that level as a shooter, taking into account that he never made the 3 a featured part of his game. I'm not, or never have, made an argument that he'd shoot 3's at a Durant level of volume/efficiency.

But at this point, we're debating over minor percentages as far as the 3 goes. The big picture is, what would his scoring average wind up in this era? Well, let's give him Wade/Westbrook's level of 3 point shooting ( even though at his peak he proved himself capable of greater). We know that those guys were/are capable of 28-30 points while being poor 3point shooters by today's standards. We know that MJ has superior midrange ability to both, so we can assume 50% shooting is a given if a worse shooting Wade can do that and average 30ppg. We know that his slashing and fishing ability around the rim would still be top-tier today. We know that he'd draw a ton of fouls. And we know he's a superior free throw shooter( much better than Wade, slightly better than Westbrook) to both. What conclusion would you draw from that?

And ultimately, the topic at hand is Curry's offense compared to MJ's. Is he doing some historic level shit? Absolutely. Durant did some historic shit 2 years ago. Kobe did some historic shit, in terms of streak shooting, 10 years ago. Ultimately, Curry needs to do what he's doing now during the playoffs, over a period of years, before we can have an honest discussion on the topic.

I hear you, I just prefer to deal with what was actual accomplished. I honestly think Mj is in between 30-35 a game, depends upon teammates, system, and scrutiny. He'd fare just fine in this era, some things given (extra ft), some taken away (freedom of navigating the defense) against current schemes. Just be be clear when I say schmes we'retalking the upper echelon.

Curry is doing great things on offense right now, it's definitely dominant but different. People will always tend to favor new things they haven't seen before. Curry is just the latest one, the talk will settle down once everyone gets a long enough sample of what he's doing.

[tmacattack33]

Correction: Let's wait until the playoffs before we start saying that Curry's offense > MJ's

[Dragonyeuw]

I hear you, I just prefer to deal with what was actual accomplished. I honestly think Mj is in between 30-35 a game, depends upon teammates, system, and scrutiny. He'd fare just fine in this era, some things given (extra ft), some taken away (freedom of navigating the defense) against current schemes. Just be be clear when I say schmes we'retalking the upper echelon.

Teammates and system are two variables that we can't account for. So the best thing to do is just to look at his game, in terms of what he was capable of. Again, you don't need to be a 'great' 3 point shooter to put up 30 today. Lesser talents have proven this. He's going to navigate the defense just fine, he didn't have Wade's craftiness with the dribble but he had elite quickness, first step, and change of pace. Let's bear in mind that MJ, during the second 3peat, was primarily a jump shooter and post-up player, and still put up 28-30. This was with decreased ability to get to, and finish at, the rim( compared to his peak levels). And even shooting 42 percent in 96, he still only shot 3.2 threes a game. His attempts didn't dramatically jack up because of the shortened line. And he still broke the 30ppg barrier. So I would argue that 32-33ppg for 'peak' MJ in today's game, assuming that variables like system and teammates are in place that may necessitate very high volume of scoring, would be the low-end of his scoring potential.

[RepMe]

We can still compare seasons to seasons though, even if playoffs are more important.