Random NBA Observations 2013 - 2014

[The War Report]

Even better than Reggie, Reggie never shot over 42% from 3, Steph never shot under 43%.

He did in 97-98 and Curry has only played in the league for 4 years.

 

[drewbreez]

He's the best shooter I have ever seen


Might as well start calling him earthday, dudes shot chart is all green.

Durants @drewbreez

Curry is a better shooter however you slice it, Durant is taller and finishes around the rim better.

There are two ways I can slice it that make Durant better and that make more sense in terms of the ENTIRE game. First, Durant shoots more shots. He takes more shots total and shoots a higher percentage, not just at the rim but in that ENTIRE area around the key. Steph becomes much less accurate inside 20 feet, and that dribble skill does him no good if he can't get better/easier/higher-efficiency shots.

Second, duration of time. More seasons and more games played = larger sample size with which to compare him to say, a Reggie Miller, who played 18 years or a Ray Allen who is playing in his 19th next year. 4 years? Of jump-shooting accurately in one region of the court does not a Greatest Shooter make. Nuh uh.

 

[Malta]

I'm looking at context actually, which is the context of the history of the game. So my point is that 4 seasons is not a large enough sample size to call someone the greatest at something, when others have done that skill (shooting) for 7 or 10 or 11 years at a time. It's different to call someone the Greatest JumpShooter Off The Dribble, whatever that means or even to say he's the best you've seen. I'm glad he's impressed you but that doesn't make him an all-time great at the skill.

He has a high percentage accuracy on jump shots. That's a more valid assessment than "he's the greatest shooter of all time" and it makes sense to draw a distinction instead of giving out historical accolades in the pre-season of his 5th year.

He is the best shooter ever, period. 4 seasons is a large enough sample size when the man in question is shooting 45% from 3 all while being pressured. He's not running off a ton of screens every night like Reggie, has hall of famers all over the place to help take pressure off him like Bird, hell he doesn't even have a teammate as good as Westbrook, yet when he releases that shot from outside the lane it still has a better chance of going in than someone you said has a better stake in claim (Durant). If you can't understand why shooting off the dribble makes a shot harder than you clearly don't know basketball.

If today he suffered a freak accident and couldn't play anymore, he'd still be the best shooter ever, doing something for a length of time means little in regards to a skill. You said Durant had a better claim for being the best shooter ever, when every stat that measures jumpshooting says Curry is better.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

He did in 97-98 and Curry has only played in the league for 4 years.

You're right, Reggie's best season he shot 42.9%, Steph's worse was 43.7%, yeah it's only been 4 years but you've never seen anyone this good shooting in their first 4 years. Compare his first 4 years with Reggie's if you really want to see the difference.

 

[Malta]

There are two ways I can slice it that make Durant better and that make more sense in terms of the ENTIRE game. First, Durant shoots more shots. He takes more shots total and shoots a higher percentage, not just at the rim but in that ENTIRE area around the key. Steph becomes much less accurate inside 20 feet, and that dribble skill does him no good if he can't get better/easier/higher-efficiency shots.

Curry took more shots per game than Durant, he played 11 less games than him on the season. You can try all you want to spin that chart, Durant is better 12ft and in because he's nearly a foot taller You can't make sense of them, Curry is better from mid-range and from 3 point, you know where jump shooting is usually measured

Second, duration of time. More seasons and more games played = larger sample size with which to compare him to say, a Reggie Miller, who played 18 years or a Ray Allen who is playing in his 19th next year. 4 years? Of jump-shooting accurately in one region of the court does not a Greatest Shooter make. Nuh uh.

He's a better shooter than both of them, I couldn't give a fukk about longevity, neither shot the ball like he did last year.

 

[drewbreez]

@Blackthoughts actually YOU start the thread. You made the claim that Steph Curry is the Greatest Shooter Of All Time. So you go ahead and see how that holds up.
Even if you said, he's the most ACCURATE shooter in from 19-30 feet you've seen, that would maaaaaaaybe hold water. But Greatest Shooter has to be judged over a span of time longer than he's been in the league because that's how statistics and measuring work: how long someone is able to do something consistently over time. That's not a random measure. It's accepted practice.

 

[The War Report]

Durant would go down as one of the best shooting big men of all time.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

@Blackthoughts actually YOU start the thread. You made the claim that Steph Curry is the Greatest Shooter Of All Time. So you go ahead and see how that holds up.
Even if you said, he's the most ACCURATE shooter in from 19-30 feet you've seen, that would maaaaaaaybe hold water. But Greatest Shooter has to be judged over a span of time longer than he's been in the league because that's how statistics and measuring work: how long someone is able to do something consistently over time. That's not a random measure. It's accepted practice.

If I make the thread nikkas will go after me because it's another GSW related thread. I'm asking you to make it to keep it unbiased. And as far longevity it's like you saying Biggie can't be in the GOAT convo because he only had 2 albums.

 

[drewbreez]

From accepted practice:

Insensitivity to sample size

Insensitivity to sample size is a cognitive bias that occurs when people judge the probability of obtaining a sample statistic without respect to the sample size. For example, in one study subjects assigned the same probability to the likelihood of obtaining a mean height of above six feet [183 cm] in samples of 10, 100, and 1,000 men. In other words, variation is more likely in smaller samples, but people may not expect this.[1]

In another example, Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman asked subjects

A certain town is served by two hospitals. In the larger hospital about 45 babies are born each day, and in the smaller hospital about 15 babies are born each day. As you know, about 50% of all babies are boys. However, the exact percentage varies from day to day. Sometimes it may be higher than 50%, sometimes lower.
For a period of 1 year, each hospital recorded the days on which more than 60% of the babies born were boys. Which hospital do you think recorded more such days?

The larger hospital
The smaller hospital
About the same (that is, within 5% of each other) [1]

56% of subjects chose option 3, and 22% of subjects respectively chose options 1 or 2. However, according to sampling theory the larger hospital is much more likely to report a sex ratio close to 50% on a given day than the smaller hospital (see the law of large numbers).

Relative neglect of sample size were obtained in a different study of statistically sophisticated psychologists.[2]

Tversky and Kahneman explained these results as being caused by the representativeness heuristic, according to which people intuitively judge samples as having similar properties to their population without taking other considerations into effect. A related bias is the clustering illusion, in which people under-expect streaks or runs in small samples. Insensitivity to sample size is a subtype of extension neglect.[3]

And yea I watch, play and love basketball. I think Steph Curry is one of the league's elite shooter. I think he will go on to shoot accurately from 3PT for at least a few more years. I think you've made great points about his outstanding season (for a single season) last year, but longevity matters "any way you slice it" when saying someone is the clear BEST.

 

[drewbreez]

If I make the thread nikkas will go after me because it's another GSW related thread. I'm asking you to make it to keep it unbiased. And as far longevity it's like you saying Biggie can't be in the GOAT convo because he only had 2 albums.

Bet.

I upped that thread.

Let the people decide.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

Laker fans heading into the season hoping for an 8th seed...life is great.

 

[GzUp]

Season starts in less then two months.

 

[G.O.A.T Squad Spokesman]

Season starts in less then two months.

Pre-season in 2.5 weeks

 

[GzUp]

Pre-season in 2.5 weeks

The fukkery this season .

 

[mbewane]

Season starts in less then two months.

Summer is too damn long breh