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

[ojandpizza]

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

My eye test says Reggie just simply wasn't the all around outside threat y'all are making him out to be. To imply that he could just step into the league and be Curry good from outside is silly to me. The way Curry and Reggie play are so far different. Reggie was a catch and shoot player, and in today's league that it is simply not as easy to get open on those type of plays. Everyone switches, everyone zones.

He would still be a good player, he was never great to begin with, but to think he would be tons better just because more players can shoot as well, actually better, than him in today's game is silly.

No AB I don't have charts from farther back, those were taken from nba.com shot tracking and that's as far back as it goes. I don't have my own charts. Playoff charts for those same season have him 1/8 for 30+ feet though.

Keep in mind your charts also showed Kemp was an elite mid range shooter who should have won MVP. Yet shot tracking has him shooting in the 30's from mid range. So while I don't at all question your knowledge as a fan I do question the accuracy of whatever self-made charts you have.

To assume he would step into today's game and be the level of the two time MVP, a player who this past season literally broke the mold of what we thought a good scorer should be, was more efficient doing it "his way" than even some of Jordan's best seasons, simply because Reggie was a great shooter is just laughable. Only 3 of 18 years was he even considered a top 15 player, yet today he would be mentioned amongst the top 5? Just because he has a good catch and shoot game? No way, no ****ing way.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fluent2332]

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

I think Reg would be bombing so many 3s per game if he were playing today it would rival Curry's output.

[ojandpizza]

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

The problem with what you're saying is that you're assuming that since they are both great outside shooters that their game is essentially the same. Implying that Reggie can replicate things that a player with a completely different play style does.

Why would the ball be in his hands to generate that type of output is my point. The reason Curry gets up that amount of 3's is because he has the ability to create his own looks. Curry per 36 minutes is shooting 21+ attempts, Reggie was around 13-15ish, and Curry, given that the ball is in his hands a lot, has a high usage, much higher than Reggies.

An off ball player isn't going to get the looks of a player who can get his own shot. The league has been that way for years, even when Jordan was leading the league in usage every season.

Klay Thompson plays more off ball. And his 3 point attempts are nearly double Reggie's on about the same percentages. He still isn't doing what Steph is doing. And I would even argue that Klay might be better at getting his own look than even Reggie, idk they are close. Reggie wasn't pulling up from 27 of the dribble like Klay does when Steph sits, but like it's been said he might if he were playing today...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AlexBrady]

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

Just switching or zoning a single-double series isn't the answer. The defenders need to have the awareness to deal with a man flying off the screen and still stay in touch with the roller. It isn't easy and many bigs make the wrong decisions here. Saying Tristan Thompson could switch out and negate this play is just wrong.

Miller was better than that from 30 plus feet. I am willing to call those NBA.com numbers wrong. Miller was a good player, but he was a truly great shooter.

I remember posting that Shawn Kemp deserved to be a first team all NBA player over David Robinson around 96 or so. Kemp's pull-up jumpers were in fact automatic.

Miller could frequently create his own shot through his quick release and 6-7 height. He was better here than Klay Thompson is.

[wwharton]

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

AB and others, the discussion started with the notion that Reggie Miller would be on Steph Curry's level if playing today. So, imo, any analysis of his numbers not matching up bc he doesn't bring the ball up or can't create on his own just supports OJ's assessment that the comparison is (way) off.

You all also talk about how no one shot from that deep back then because of the low percentage of accuracy. We rolled our eyes at Curry when he started taking shots from that deep for the same reason... only his accuracy is still higher than most shooting from 22 feet. Even in today's NBA nobody else is shooting from distance like Curry. The league has evolved but he is still the only player to evolve his range to this level, so yes, it is silly to say anyone from the past would be able to shoot, in game, from distance like Curry is doing right now. It's an even worse comparison when you consider how much attention he gets and doing it so much off the dribble.

And I think the most important thing that has been kind of glossed over is that Reggie Miller wasn't that great of a player even in his day. If the NBA HOF was more similar to the NFL he wouldn't even be sniffing it. He was a very good player, but I think the Klay comparison is probably the best. There's no question he'd be a starter in today's game. But he'd be no closer to a center piece for a championship team than he was when he was playing.

I think Reg would be bombing so many 3s per game if he were playing today it would rival Curry's output.

It really seems like you're just trolling now (REALLY seems like it)

[Ragnar53]

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

I do think Reggie Miller would average 20PPG in today's league, simply because he was much better at drawing fouls on his shots than anything (Rip Thru move anyone?), plus with the rules being that the player now has to have a clean landing on jumpers.......

I really think he'd be averaging 8 to 10 freethrows a game.

But to say he'd be doing it at Steph's level? Off the dribble? From 25+ feet? Wait what?

[wwharton]

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

I do think Reggie Miller would average 20PPG in today's league, simply because he was much better at drawing fouls on his shots than anything (Rip Thru move anyone?), plus with the rules being that the player now has to have a clean landing on jumpers.......

I really think he'd be averaging 8 to 10 freethrows a game.

But to say he'd be doing it at Steph's level? Off the dribble? From 25+ feet? Wait what?

20ppg, I could see that. He'd definitely be a starter/borderline all star today.

[fluent2332]

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

I think Reg would be getting buckets if he were playing today, and yes I think he would be up there with Steph in total 3 point output and shooting. With the modern offenses + green light he would have today, factor in that he'd be working on creating his 3 point shot more off the dribble (which he was fully capable of with his high basketball IQ and incredible work ethic), add in at least a couple situations per game where he'd have the ball and defense would go under a P&R, etc. etc., and shoot...fuggedaboudit!

I also have researched and discovered that analytics say there is a 100% chance that none of us know and it is impossible to ever determine. But I know that Reggie and many of the old greats were fierce competitors and could find a way to make it work in a big way in today's NBA.

[ojandpizza]

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

On that note I'll just agree to disagree on this shooting topic.

I will say though, not even speaking on the shooting argument, I think you're giving a fringe all-star level player entirely too much credit. The biggest difference between the two guys, other than one being a top 5 player and the other a top 15-20 player, is that tons of players have been able to do what Reggie does, he just so happened to do it when it was still rare. Steph is the only guy who's proven to be able to do what Steph does.

But I know that Reggie and many of the old greats were fierce competitors and could find a way to make it work in a big way in today's NBA.

If you were simply saying he could "make it work" we wouldn't even be having this discussion though. That's not what's been said, you've taken a guy who spent the majority of his career as a slightly above-average player, rarely and All-Star, and saying he would be an MVP-level guy.. that's not making it work. That would be like me saying that Andrew Wiggins could jump on to a team in the 90's and be the equivalent of Michael Jordan.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fresh Tendrils]

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

Damn. Ya'll went from MJ vs LeBron to Miller vs. Curry?

I thought the off-season was bad.

Spoiler

Kidding. This has been (somewhat) entertaining.

Spoiler

Only slightly kidding.

[fluent2332]

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

Reggie doing it when it was still rare is a thing, though. That just shows how far ahead he was at the time. Y'all are going to look back at Curry when every point guard in the league is bombing 30 foot 3's or when the 3 point line is moved back 3 feet and say the same thing about him. (joking, half-way. Curry is special, no doubt, but the trend is moving to that direction so future players will likely do what Curry is doing now and it won't be as rare)

The fact that Reg was shooting that way in the era he did tells me enough that with his mindset, skills, work ethic, etc., he would be ahead of the game today, too. He may not still be completely on par with Curry today but that dude would be bombing the NBA with 3s.

And like I said, there is nothing to base any of this on. I don't care if you use analytics until the cows come home, there is no time machine that can take a prime Reggie and put him in today's game, or vice versa. And all the speculation in the world doesn't mean anything because the limitless factors that are or could potentially be in play can be analyzed in a bajillion different ways until the end of time.

That said, Reg would be killin' 'em. That's my last word on this topic.

[ojandpizza]

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

The thing with Reggie is it wasn't like he was shooting better than every other great shooter of his era, or great shooters after him.

He's considered the best shooter ever more so because he played for 18 seasons, stayed healthy, and amassed a large volume in made 3's. Ray Allen was the same way. Hell Ray Allen was a great shooter throughout his career (arguably better than Miller), but it wasn't until he was older and his total started approaching Reggie's that people even brought him in the "best shooter ever" discussions.

Ellis, Kerr, Houston, Price, Hornacek, Dell, Person, these guys all hit the three ball at rates just as efficiently as Reggie. Reggie just played forever, stayed healthy, his game transitioned well as an older player too.

Peja Stojakovic for example was probably a better 3ball shooter at his best than Reggie or Ray at theirs, but he didn't make nearly as many over his career, he wasn't a relevant player for nearly as long. He didn't hit big playoff shots against Ewing, he didn't push off and drain one on MJ, he's not regarded in the same "legendary" status that Reggie is often associated with.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ojandpizza]

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

I do think Reggie Miller would average 20PPG in today's league, simply because he was much better at drawing fouls on his shots than anything (Rip Thru move anyone?), plus with the rules being that the player now has to have a clean landing on jumpers.......

I really think he'd be averaging 8 to 10 freethrows a game.

But to say he'd be doing it at Steph's level? Off the dribble? From 25+ feet? Wait what?

I agree, think he could definitely get in that 18-22 a night range.

I think the 8-10 free throws is a bit of a stretch. They stopped calling the rip through move a few years back because more and more players (namely KD) were using it. KD dropped from 9-10 free throws a game to about 6 once they fixed that. You rarely see it called now. They also call offensive fouls for the leg kick, which was Reggie's thing more so than the rip through.

While he was great at drawing contact on those shots he only got to the line for about 5 attempts per game. So it's not like he was able to use it enough to frequently get himself to the line. And that was during that era, when players often fouled whenever they felt like it because they weren't threatened with flagrants.

Also against common belief, there are actually less fouls called in today's NBA than the 90's. About 200 less per team on average per year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wwharton]

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

Reggie doing it when it was still rare is a thing, though. That just shows how far ahead he was at the time. Y'all are going to look back at Curry when every point guard in the league is bombing 30 foot 3's or when the 3 point line is moved back 3 feet and say the same thing about him. (joking, half-way. Curry is special, no doubt, but the trend is moving to that direction so future players will likely do what Curry is doing now and it won't be as rare)

The fact that Reg was shooting that way in the era he did tells me enough that with his mindset, skills, work ethic, etc., he would be ahead of the game today, too. He may not still be completely on par with Curry today but that dude would be bombing the NBA with 3s.

And like I said, there is nothing to base any of this on. I don't care if you use analytics until the cows come home, there is no time machine that can take a prime Reggie and put him in today's game, or vice versa. And all the speculation in the world doesn't mean anything because the limitless factors that are or could potentially be in play can be analyzed in a bajillion different ways until the end of time.

That said, Reg would be killin' 'em. That's my last word on this topic.

It wasn't rare back then either. Reggie was a personality... as has been said over and over, he was basically the equivalent of Klay Thompson as a player. I can't remember if you've mentioned how old you are, but I find it kind of hard to believe you actually watched a lot of Reggie in his "prime" because you are seriously overvaluing how good he was even back then.

I also don't accept the cop out of "there's no way for us to know" in this particular case. In a time when many are trying to claim stars of the past wouldn't even be relevant in today's game, we all agree that Reggie's skills would translate. But to suggest he'd be on par with a 2 time MVP who is was the center piece on a championship team (going far and above anything Reggie Miller did in his actual playing career) is just completely out of left field. I could suggest that if Bill Russell played today he'd lead the league in 3pt shooting. Can't prove me wrong but it's still a ridiculous hypothesis.

EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, the MVPs, ring and many other things Reggie never dreamed of are why Curry will not be looked at the same way in the future either. It's just a bad comparison.

[KG]

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

The thing with Reggie is it wasn't like he was shooting better than every other great shooter of his era, or great shooters after him.

He's considered the best shooter ever more so because he played for 18 seasons, stayed healthy, and amassed a large volume in made 3's. Ray Allen was the same way. Hell Ray Allen was a great shooter throughout his career (arguably better than Miller), but it wasn't until he was older and his total started approaching Reggie's that people even brought him in the "best shooter ever" discussions.

Ellis, Kerr, Houston, Price, Hornacek, Dell, Person, these guys all hit the three ball at rates just as efficiently as Reggie. Reggie just played forever, stayed healthy, his game transitioned well as an older player too.

Peja Stojakovic for example was probably a better 3ball shooter at his best than Reggie or Ray at theirs, but he didn't make nearly as many over his career, he wasn't a relevant player for nearly as long. He didn't hit big playoff shots against Ewing, he didn't push off and drain one on MJ, he's not regarded in the same "legendary" status that Reggie is often associated with.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All of those points I highlighted kind of speak to someone being better than "slightly above-average".

Reggie, if anything, was crazy consistent and one of the better competitors of that era. As someone who grew up during that era, he was easily Top 3 SG of the 90s which isn't bad considering he played in an era & conference with MJ. The same era where you could get more physical on defense, something we've seen be effective on Steph (although I personally think he wasn't near 100% for the Finals).

I don't think he's on Steph's level when it comes to shooting AND overall offensive game but at least put some respect in his name. The guy did it night in and night out (missed very few games) in the very definition of small-market.

Even Klay, who I think very highly of would have to produce at his current level for another 10 years to match Reggie's longevity.