Michael Murden:
A lot has been made lately about LeBron James chasing the all-time scoring record. People talk about the "Shot Clock Era" and imply the pre and post shot clock eras were so different that records and numbers from the two eras can't meaningfully be compared.
I think the same about the 3-Point Era.
I think it so changed the game that NBA records need to be divided into the pre and post Three Point Eras, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar should remain the scoring champion of his era.
How would you compare the advent of the 3-pointer to the advent of the shot clock in terms of how it changed the game and how it changed perceptions of the relative values of players?
Sam Smith:
It's a valid point, though less with the advent of the NBA three-point line in 1979 (the old ABL in the early 1960s and ABA until the merger in 1976 used it) than the rules changes in the early 2000s that limited the physical play and the growing player empowerment at a younger age through the AAU system and players drifting through college for a year or less that saw tall players prefer to remain on the perimeter and shoot. And good luck telling them otherwise or they were going somewhere else.
To your point, though, also is a good response to the debate about Steph Curry or perhaps some others as the greatest shooters ever. Maybe he is. But I'd agree only post-three point era because if you weren't getting three points for that shot why shoot it? Thus you can't measure the depth of shooters like Curry and Damian Lillard and others against, say, Lou Hudson or Pete Maravich or Bill Sharman, the latter who was shooting more than 90 percent on free throws in the 1950s when we're not even sure the rims were the same size or not bent in the games in Rochester, Syracuse or Ft. Wayne.
Sharman also was a professional baseball player and the first ever in the NBA who devised exercise and workout programs. So there's little doubt he could have worked up to a longer shot. Curry's best free throw season was 93.4 percent; Sharman's was 93.2 percent. Oscar Robertson was easily the strongest guard in the NBA, more powerful than many interior players. Of course, he could have moved out beyond 23 feet. But why would he for the same point total?
In the early 1960s, Robertson was the only non center shooting at least 50 percent. And Jerry West did so later in the 1960s. But to your point, as it were, fortunately we don't have an asterisk anymore for Roger Maris' 61 home runs in 162 games. The NBA was playing 72 games after the shot clock was introduced and not 80 games until about a decade later.
There are always variations in sports, like the NFL season going from 12 to 14 games in the early 1960s and 16 games in the late 1960s. I accept the total records whatever they are because they are accumulations.
LeBron will deserve his record when he gets it. And he really didn't shoot that many threes until recently. I assume eventually someone like Curry or maybe Anthony Edwards in this shooting era plays 25 years and passes everyone shooting 35 threes a game. I wouldn't mind seeing the additional explanations that cover eras inserted into the Halls of Fame and maybe the record books just to note that guys got an extra point for something others guys didn't.
But I don't see many looking at LeBron as the greatest scorer.
He just hung around longer. Karl Malone is third all-time scorer, but who really believes he's a better scorer than Wilt Chamberlain or Michael Jordan?
I don't believe many think Barry Bonds is the Major League home run leader. Not that LeBron did anything wrong, and it's a great feat in this era to endure like he has. But the greatest scorers will retain their places in fans' view, I believe.
"point" - Google News
April 16, 2022 at 12:21AM
https://ift.tt/Dpwni6q
Ask Sam Mailbag: Patrick Williams' playoff role, 'The 3-Point Era' and more - NBA.com
"point" - Google News
https://ift.tt/OIKtNCY
https://ift.tt/J8qTrcK
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Ask Sam Mailbag: Patrick Williams' playoff role, 'The 3-Point Era' and more - NBA.com"
Post a Comment