Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Tristan Thompson? He plays aggressive defense but usually loses his focus when playing off the ball. I don't trust that he would make the correct decision when playing against Indiana's renowned single-double baseline setup. And if he did successfully switch, who picks up Indiana's powerful big man rolling?



Indiana had good players in that setup. That is why it is so tough to replicate. Curry, as the primary ball-handler has more chances to pull up his transport dribble than Miller did. Reggie had easy 30 foot range though.

But he wouldn't be guarding 90's Indiana, he would be guarding Reggie Miller on a team today. That's the whole premise of the argument.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elprez98]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Reggie didn't have Steph range?

You don't really believe that.

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

But he wouldn't be guarding 90's Indiana, he would be guarding Reggie Miller on a team today. That's the whole premise of the argument.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The single-double series can still be run today. Good sturdy screeners are necessary of course. But Miller flying off those screens puts so much pressure on the defenders to react correctly. Most big men don't though.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Reggie didn't have Steph range?

You don't really believe that.

Yeah, Reggie could just pull up from 32 feet and hit at 42% just like Steph can.

Reggie's career average is a lower percentage than Steph shot from 30+ feet. Keep in mind that the majority of Reggie's 3 pointers are of the catch and shoot variety, Steph shoots a blistering 48% on those.

Reggie's best 3 season stretch was from 94-97 the years that the league shortened the 3 point line. Those 3 years average out to 41.8%, which is worse than Curry shoots from 30-40+ feet over the past 3 seasons.

So yes, I really believe that.

In a literal sense Reggie Miller does have Curry range, most players in the league do. In a literal sense I have Curry range. But he's not even remotely close to being able to hit them at the rate Steph can. And has never done anything over the course of his career to show otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Yeah, Reggie could just pull up from 32 feet and hit at 42% just like Steph can.

Reggie's career average is a lower percentage than Steph shot from 30+ feet. Keep in mind that the majority of Reggie's 3 pointers are of the catch and shoot variety, Steph shoots a blistering 48% on those.

Reggie's best 3 season stretch was from 94-97 the years that the league shortened the 3 point line. Those 3 years average out to 41.8%, which is worse than Curry shoots from 30-40+ feet over the past 3 seasons.

So yes, I really believe that.

In a literal sense Reggie Miller does have Curry range, most players in the league do. In a literal sense I have Curry range. But he's not even remotely close to being able to hit them at the rate Steph can. And has never done anything over the course of his career to show otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Miller probably hit at about 35% from 30 plus feet. Miller's role and function was different though. How often did Miller carry the ball across the timeline? Not much compared to Curry.

Curry's three point playoff shooting: 40.8
Miller's three point playoff shooting: 39.0

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

And Reggie played in a system that was designed specifically to get him wide open looks. Which even you yourself said they were great at doing. That's is in fact what the majority of his shots were.

Steph shot 49% on "open" looks and 46% on "wide open" looks.

From 1996-2005 Reggie only took 20 shots from the 30-39 foot range. He made 4 of them for 20%.

Just last season alone Curry shot 31 of them and made 17. About 55%. This year he's already 3/7 for 43%.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Different functions for those guys. Miller could bomb from deep with anybody though, even Curry.

[KG]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

To me, a better comparison of games would be Reggie to Klay.

Reggie would do just as well in today's game BUT comparing him to a ball-handling shot creator like Steph is a disservice to Reggie and Steph.

[elprez98]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

And Reggie played in a system that was designed specifically to get him wide open looks. Which even you yourself said they were great at doing. That's is in fact what the majority of his shots were.

Steph shot 49% on "open" looks and 46% on "wide open" looks.

From 1996-2005 Reggie only took 20 shots from the 30-39 foot range. He made 4 of them for 20%.

Just last season alone Curry shot 31 of them and made 17. About 55%. This year he's already 3/7 for 43%.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What seems to get lost in the conversation is that cats didn't shoot from out there back in the day not because they couldn't, but because it counts the same as shooting from 23.5 but just with a lower success rate.
As a matter of fact, taking an ill advised 36 footer in the playoffs is what helped the Cavs withstand the comeback the Dubs had cooking.

As a guy who just hit 40, I watched Miller torch my Bulls on more than one occasion. He and Glen Rice are two guys I have no doubt could shoot from that range had it been an accepted practice in their day.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

What seems to get lost in the conversation is that cats didn't shoot from out there back in the day not because they couldn't, but because it counts the same as shooting from 23.5 but just with a lower success rate.
As a matter of fact, taking an ill advised 36 footer in the playoffs is what helped the Cavs withstand the comeback the Dubs had cooking.

As a guy who just hit 40, I watched Miller torch my Bulls on more than one occasion. He and Glen Rice are two guys I have no doubt could shoot from that range had it been an accepted practice in their day.

They both could, nobody is arguing they couldn't. Just not at Steph's level.

Why would we expect Reggie to shoot from 30+ feet as well as Steph when he doesn't shoot from 23 feet as well as Steph?

Are we just automatically under the assumption that Reggie would be a better shooter the farther away he gets? Next prediction is he would shoot 48% from halfcourf then?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elprez98]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

They both could, nobody is arguing they couldn't. Just not at Steph's level.

Why would we expect Reggie to shoot from 30+ feet as well as Steph when he doesn't shoot from 23 feet as well as Steph?

Are we just automatically under the assumption that Reggie would be a better shooter the farther away he gets? Next prediction is he would shoot 48% from halfcourf then?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's no more outrageous than extrapolating that he couldn't shoot well from there based on a 20 shot sample size, over a 10 year period.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

It's no more outrageous than extrapolating that he couldn't shoot well from there based on a 20 shot sample size, over a 10 year period.

I'm not basing my assumption on that though.

I'm just disagreeing with those saying he absolutely could when we have nothing at all to base it on. The fact that he only took 20 of those shots over that period proves that nobody has enough factual evidence to show otherwise.

How can one claim he without a doubt could if he indeed never has? Thats no different than me saying that if JJ wanted to start taking the shots Steph takes that he would have the same results. I think it's pretty clear that's not the case. If all great outside shooters could do what Steph does he wouldn't literally be the only player doing at the level he's been doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlexBrady]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

I'm not basing my assumption on that though.

I'm just disagreeing with those saying he absolutely could when we have nothing at all to base it on. The fact that he only took 20 of those shots over that period proves that nobody has enough factual evidence to show otherwise.

How can one claim he without a doubt could if he indeed never has? Thats no different than me saying that if JJ wanted to start taking the shots Steph takes that he would have the same results. I think it's pretty clear that's not the case. If all great outside shooters could do what Steph does he wouldn't literally be the only player doing at the level he's been doing it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your shot chart numbers on Miller only go back to 96. Does that include playoffs too? I have charts on Miller that go back further and he was up around 35% from 30 feet.
Curry is indisputably the better player here but challenging Miller on his accuracy from long-range isn't wise.

[elprez98]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Curry is indisputably the better player here but challenging Miller on his accuracy from long-range isn't wise.

This is all I'm saying. I'm not comparing them as players as Curry is clearly the better player. And of course, I don't have the metrics to support my position about how well Reggie shot from 30 feet and beyond.

But the eye test is pretty damn good when you watch over time. I saw Reggie live at full speed during an era where you could hold, bump, and do pretty much anything to stop your opponent and the dude could still shoot lights out from deep.

In the end, I understand that Curry shoots better from deep. I personally think a lot of that is just because of the different eras in which the guys played. But I also think the gap ain't nearly as large as you make it out to be.

[fluent2332]

Re: Does Michael Jordan's name have the same impact as before?

Nicely said fellas.