Ainge: Curry 'has to be the best shooter of all time'

http://www.csnne.com/boston-celtics/ainge-tweets-curry-has-be-best-shooter-all-time?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo



Ainge tweets Curry 'has to be the best shooter of all time'
June 1, 2015, 12:45 pm







Steph Curry can put the ball in the net. It doesn't matter the distance, the defender or the number of hands he's using. Curry is an expert shooter, which is largely why he was the 2014-15 NBA MVP. He hasn't relented in the postseason, shooting 46.1 percent from the field and 43.7 percent from the 3-point line.

Danny Ainge must have been watching some postseason tape of Curry on Sunday morning, because the Celtics President of Basketball Operations praised the Warriors guard. Ainge tweeted that Curry "has to be the best shooter of all time."

You hear that?

That's the sound of Larry Bird calling Ainge -- Bird probably has a thought or two about who the best shooter is.


Danny Ainge ✔@danielrainge
.@StephenCurry30 has to be the best shooter of all time. The percentages along with the variety and the degree of difficulty separate him.
5:25 AM - 31 May 2015



bob
MY NOTE:  I try to avoid superlatives but how many shooters have made it look SO easy and effortless?  Gervin?  Jordan?  All Curry needs is the smallest, tiniest sliver of daylight and it's a hard dribble to bring the ball up, a quick wrist flip and it's gone.  Jordan shot 32.7% career from 3, 51% from 2; Ray Allen shot 40% from 3 and 48.5% from 2; Reggie Miller shot 39.5% from 3 and 51.6% from 2; George "Iceman" Gervin shot 27.1% from 3 and 50.9% from 2.  

Steph Curry is averaging 44% from 3, career and 49% from 2.  44-freaking-percent, and he takes A LOT of 3pt fgas...


.

Not sure that I would say that this guy is the all time best shooter because his career numbers are not as good as his numbers this year, but it would be hard to say that he does not compare with the best shooters of all time based on what he has done this year.

A bunch more years like this one, and he could eventually become the best of all time. He will enhance his season by performing in a similar way in the finals.

I don't care about "best all-time" this or that because the fans who are alive in any given era will usually find someone of that era to annoint.  However, what IS interesting is to conjecture what combination of ingredients makes one an extraordinary shooter.  I mean, there are only so many hours in every day to practice, so work ethic is important but not necessarily discriminating.  Eyesight?  Physique or body mechanics?  Growing up in an outdoor, four-season basketball climate?  Competition (especially from siblings)?  I'd have to guess that the intangible of "feel" has a lot to do with it.  I'd define "feel" as 25% confidence and 75% instinct.  "Feel" can spell the difference between a great shooter and a great improvisor.

Sam

bob

Shot at a .528 clip on 2 point attempts. Wow, the shooting sure has come along way since the early years.
Below link is for 1956-57 , players with a minimum of 1100 minutes played and 6'3' or shooter

http://bkref.com/tiny/vSByk

swish

Whether he is the best of all time or not, I'm happy for my friends who are Warriors fans. They have been enjoying the kind of season that Celtics fans have experienced for decades, and I'm sure they are having the time of their sporting lives. I love Curry's game!

Go Warriors!

"...what IS interesting is to conjecture what combination of ingredients makes one an extraordinary shooter."

Having Dell Curry as your papa sure didn't hurt Steph's stroke.  

Dell was a pretty fair shooter in his day and was one of the earliest 3 point specialists.  I bet he supplied Steph with much in both the nature and nurture departments.

Good point, Sloop.  I should have included genes.  And i bet there was more than genetics involved.  Having a dad who was probably a constant mentor had to play a role.

Sam

NBA average shooting percentages:

1965-66 43.3% (well before the advent of the three-pointer and with tight rims)
2014-15 44.9% (well after the advent of the three-pointer and with looser rims)

When it comes to point production, as shooting percentages have increased and teams have benefited from availability of the three ball, scoring in the deliberate offense era still lags way behind higher paced volume ball with lower shooting percentages and no three ball.  (NBA, league-wide, regular season)

1965-66: 102.4 FGA/G + 43.3% shooting % + no three-pointers yielded 115.5 PPG
2014-15: 83.6 FGA/G + 44.9% shooting % + the three-pointer yielded 100.0 PPG.

Source of statistics: Basketball Reference

Sam

Curry is a great example of a guy who was good in college, struggled a bit at the beginning of his NBA career and now is most certainly a star in a league of very talented players. Good for him, but he only got there with tons and tons of hard work.

Curry is also a good example of a young star being 'developed' rather than signed as a free agent.

I hope that Marcus Smart can develop into the same type of star player (although he will likely never shoot as well as Curry) for the Celtics.

So here's a question for anyone.  Would you rather have Curry or two very good players (meaning just a notch below him).  I'm always concerned that having a star of the greatest magnitude could result in instance vulnerability if he gets injured.

On another, related, topic if BobH is reading this.  Was has excited the Bay Area more?  Last year's Giants run or this year's Warriors run?

Sam