vcsgrizzfan wrote:I really think most of this argument is tired baloney now.
There was a period from 2006 (where it peaked with the strictest enforcement of hand check rules) that really benefitted slashers disproportionately. But at this point, it's no longer the case. Between zones, defenses just getting more sophisticated and significantly less strict enforcement of hand check rules, the advantages for slashers have been pretty diminished.
The use of more zones and allowing doubling on a guy without the ball has made post players less relevant and that slack has been taken up by a lot more 3 point shooting.
But thinking Curry wouldn't light up the 90s like a Christmas tree is nonsense.
Not when defenders were allowed to be physical and hand check he wouldn't. He would probably be held to maybe 18-20 a game. The league benefits perimeter players now than ever before.
Last edited by DorianRo on Sat Dec 05, 2015 2:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Except FT shooting has ALWAYS been part of the game....no correlation whatsoever.
You seriously trying to claim that if the 3 point line existed, let alone was as big a factor in MJ's "formative" years as it is now, that there is no chance he would have been a MUCH better 3 point shooter(along with MANY more from his era and before) than he was....lol....Cmon man...get real.
He added it to his arsenal and improved upon it as it was, just like his post game.
Yup... MJ broke NBA Finals records for 3-point shooting JUST because critics decided they wanted to question his shooting range. So on the biggest stage in the NBA Mike, as he always did, embarrassed the naysayers.
No question about it, if he spent as much time practicing the shot as do player today Jordan would have been an elite-of-elite 3-point shooter.
He was dared to shoot. Kind of like when Lebron gets hot from 3. Defense was sagging. Kobe owns the record for 14 threes made in a game. He still was no steph curry from 3.
No he wasn't, fool...
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
DorianRo wrote:Curry is good but the hype is getting a little ridiculous now. He aint that good. Dude can't even win a FMVP :stephen a:
Hes got a ways to go to be mentioned alongside the elites. People need to realize as well, there ain't main great teams in the league anymore. Its very watered down and the fundamentals of the game are essentially obsolete.
Absolutely correct... although I'd say Curry is playing better now than Kobe ever has. Then again, Kobe's not in the elite-of-elite class anyway (ie' Top 10 all-time) so the point is moot.
vcsgrizzfan wrote:I really think most of this argument is tired baloney now.
There was a period from 2006 (where it peaked with the strictest enforcement of hand check rules) that really benefitted slashers disproportionately. But at this point, it's no longer the case. Between zones, defenses just getting more sophisticated and significantly less strict enforcement of hand check rules, the advantages for slashers have been pretty diminished.
The use of more zones and allowing doubling on a guy without the ball has made post players less relevant and that slack has been taken up by a lot more 3 point shooting.
But thinking Curry wouldn't light up the 90s like a Christmas tree is nonsense.
Not when defenders were allowed to be physical and hand check he wouldn't. He would probably be held to maybe 18-20 a game. The league benefits perimeter players now than ever before.
I don't think anyone is saying that Curry would not light it up in the 90s it's just that he wouldn't be averaging so many three-point shot makes because the type of shots would have to take he wouldn't be able to take the type of shots off the dribble and good majority of his shots are off the dribble
Last edited by Alex_Murphy on Sat Dec 05, 2015 6:27 am, edited 2 times in total.
vcsgrizzfan wrote:I really think most of this argument is tired baloney now.
There was a period from 2006 (where it peaked with the strictest enforcement of hand check rules) that really benefitted slashers disproportionately. But at this point, it's no longer the case. Between zones, defenses just getting more sophisticated and significantly less strict enforcement of hand check rules, the advantages for slashers have been pretty diminished.
The use of more zones and allowing doubling on a guy without the ball has made post players less relevant and that slack has been taken up by a lot more 3 point shooting.
But thinking Curry wouldn't light up the 90s like a Christmas tree is nonsense.
Not when defenders were allowed to be physical and hand check he wouldn't. He would probably be held to maybe 18-20 a game. The league benefits perimeter players now than ever before.
I don't think anyone is saying that Kareem would not light it up in the 90s it's just that he wouldn't be averaging so many three-point shot makes because the type of shots would have to take he wouldn't be able to take the type of shots off the dribble any good majority of his shots are off the dribble
thedangerouskitchen wrote:
Yup... MJ broke NBA Finals records for 3-point shooting JUST because critics decided they wanted to question his shooting range. So on the biggest stage in the NBA Mike, as he always did, embarrassed the naysayers.
No question about it, if he spent as much time practicing the shot as do player today Jordan would have been an elite-of-elite 3-point shooter.
He was dared to shoot. Kind of like when Lebron gets hot from 3. Defense was sagging. Kobe owns the record for 14 threes made in a game. He still was no steph curry from 3.
No he wasn't, fool...
Actually, he kind of was. In a sense it was a "pick your poison". If you got in MJs grill too far out, he'd put the rock on the floor and blow by you. And he was and remains the best finisher at the rim the game has ever seen, so, if he would settle for it, you generally would live with it.
It's the opposite in Curry's case. You are willing to get in his grill and risk getting beat off the dribble and rely on help behind you because the bigger poison is his shot from deep, even though he can also do damage scoring and dishing in the paint. It's the lesser evil in his case.
Not when defenders were allowed to be physical and hand check he wouldn't. He would probably be held to maybe 18-20 a game. The league benefits perimeter players now than ever before.
I don't think anyone is saying that Kareem would not light it up in the 90s it's just that he wouldn't be averaging so many three-point shot makes because the type of shots would have to take he wouldn't be able to take the type of shots off the dribble any good majority of his shots are off the dribble
Sorry that should've said curry… I'm using voice to text on my iPhone I apologize
Madnessssss wrote:
He was dared to shoot. Kind of like when Lebron gets hot from 3. Defense was sagging. Kobe owns the record for 14 threes made in a game. He still was no steph curry from 3.
No he wasn't, fool...
Yes he was you idiot. Video don't lie. Was given space and wide open on some of them. That's not what curry shoots over 90% of the time. He actually had even less defensive pressure than Lebron from 3.
[youtube]SRe-JyhBtsg[/youtube]
Playing off of him a little out of fear that he blows by you and dunks on everyone in the building is completely different than "daring him to shoot" ala what Bronze/Cavs did with Rose in ECF. As far as what Curry "shoots over 90% of the time"....that applies to almost everyone...outside an elite handful of shooters in the history of the game dude.
Last edited by Repeat3peat on Sat Dec 05, 2015 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
You can find plenty of stills of even Curry himself getting shots that wide open due to great ball movement....they just had one on here the other night with him taking a pass from Bogut in the corner without a soul bothering to challenge the shot.
You can find plenty of stills of even Curry himself getting shots that wide open due to great ball movement....they just had one on here the other night with him taking a pass from Bogut in the corner without a soul bothering to challenge the shot.
That's true, but you have to admit Curry is guarded a lot farther out than MJ was, most of the time. It's only logical. Curry can hurt you 'most' with the long range bomb while MJ could hurt you most taking it to the rack.
Madnessssss wrote:
Yes he was you idiot. Video don't lie. Was given space and wide open on some of them. That's not what curry shoots over 90% of the time. He actually had even less defensive pressure than Lebron from 3.
[youtube]SRe-JyhBtsg[/youtube]
Playing off of him a little out of fear that he blows by you and dunks on everyone in the building is completely different than "daring him to shoot" ala what Bronze/Cavs did with Rose in ECF. As far as what Curry "shoots over 90% of the time"....that applies to almost everyone...outside an elite handful of shooters in the history of the game dude.
It was their game plan to dare him to shoot 3s. He successfully killed them with it. He was a good shooter. But not elite. That's all I'm saying. Everyone here except grizz argued with me when I said he was dared to shoot. He was. They sagged off to prevent the drive. Same shit some teams did to Lebron. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
The 2 are not "one in the same" like it or not buzz. I agree he wasn't ELITE and likely under any circumstances wouldn't have been ELITE from deep...especially compared to the likes of Curry/Bird/Kerr/Korver etc...That isn't the point though.
DorianRo wrote:Guess people never saw late 80s-early 90s MJ, 2000 Shaq or '62 Chamberlain around here
I don't think anyone on here saw 62 chamberlain.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I gotta say 62 Chamberlain was a joy to watch, he was like a giant among men in both size and game. Of course the lack of physical specimen bigs at that time gave him an edge but regardless he was a special player to watch and was a very skilled player.
You can find plenty of stills of even Curry himself getting shots that wide open due to great ball movement....they just had one on here the other night with him taking a pass from Bogut in the corner without a soul bothering to challenge the shot.
That's true, but you have to admit Curry is guarded a lot farther out than MJ was, most of the time. It's only logical. Curry can hurt you 'most' with the long range bomb while MJ could hurt you most taking it to the rack.
Absolutely no question about it. MJ was guarded like the elite slasher/driver he was, the drive was taken away 1st and foremost if possible....just saying that that is entirely different from "daring him to shoot" like they do with say Noah when he gets it at the top of the key....or they did with Rose as I stated above is all.
Madnessssss wrote:
It was their game plan to dare him to shoot 3s. He successfully killed them with it. He was a good shooter. But not elite. That's all I'm saying. Everyone here except grizz argued with me when I said he was dared to shoot. He was. They sagged off to prevent the drive. Same shit some teams did to Lebron. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
The 2 are not "one in the same" like it or not buzz. I agree he wasn't ELITE and likely under any circumstances wouldn't have been ELITE from deep...especially compared to the likes of Curry/Bird/Kerr/Korver etc...That isn't the point though.
Whatever, I'm done with the convo. Curry would have raped any era. If he continues at this pace, it'll be the best season ever. If he wins a couple more rings (3 total), he'll enter top ten all time status. Peace be with you.
Curry would struggle mightily in the 80's and 90's, with the increased physicality, ability to handcheck PLUS the less emphasis on the 3-ball and with stingy defenders like Joe D, Moncrief, MJ, DJ, etc.
I'd give him being a slightly better Steve Kerr, given his handles and escapability but it's hard to see him cracking STAR or certainly not SUPERSTAR status.
l3 o $$ wrote:
Your comparison is flawed. You make a point about price being legit scorer/shooter in a diff era and then go on to say that curry is bigger/better.
Bigger/better how? In a diff era? Or are you simply assuming that curry would be bigger/better than price in the 80/90s. You do not have any proof that curry would be better than price in the 80/90s all you have to compare is Curry playing in a diff era to Price playing in an older era... Yet you conclude that curry is bigger/better?
Is he better because of the rule changes? Lack of hand check? Diff defenses? You simply cannot make a statement that curry would be better or even more ludacris that he IS better.
"Bigger" is not an assumption, it's a fact. Price was listed at 6'0, 170lbs. Steph Curry is listed at 6'3, 185lbs. Curry is the bigger player...
...a fact that is pretty relevant when we're discussing how the "hand check" era would have affected Steph's numbers. If Price was as successful as he was with his size and physique, I find it hard to believe that Steph's "physical limitations" would have lead to significantly inferior numbers in Price's era.
As for being "better," I can't prove that Curry would have been just as good in the '90's any more than anyone in this thread can prove that Jordan would've been just as good in today's "3-point era." You simply have to look at the preponderance of evidence in both cases and draw your own conclusions.
I actually think in an odd sort of way that both would likely have had more success in the other's era.
MJ was made for the initial period when hand check started being enforced rigidly in the 2005-6 season. Defenses had not adjusted yet and refs called it much tighter than they do now. His slashing ability was tailor made for the 4-5 years from 2006 to 2010 or 2011 or so. Defensive adjustments and referees calling it less strictly now have neutralized that somewhat.
Curry's ability to so easily get his shot no matter the defensive attention without needing that many screens would have made him almost unguardable back in the 80s and 90s when defenses were more focused on defending the post than the perimeter.
In any case, great is great in any era. Curry is other worldly right now.
In a thread where a lot of hyperbole was flung around, this was the best and most accurate post.
Imagine what Jordan would have done with the type of whistles Wade got in '06?
Imagine what Curry would have done to less sophisticated defenses that overly prioritized protecting the paint (particularly in the years that the 3-point line was closer)?
