Kobe and AI Never Shot Close to 50percent FG% Once In Their Career

[En Sabah Nur]

The same defense that allowed Steve Nash to win 2 MVPs and had multiple 50% FG seasons on.

Abysmal posting as usual. Seek job interviews and leave this place.

 

[HandyWithTheSteel]

DEFENSE WAS TOUGHER AND THE RULES WERENT DESIGNED TO GIVE THE OFFENSE NEARLY AS MUCH FREEDOM AS WE SEE NOWADAYS

NOTICE LEBRON AND KD NEVER SHOT 50% IN THE 2000S

THATS NOT BY ACCIDENT

NOT TO MENTION, GUARDS WHO OPERATE MOSTLY ON THE PERIMETER WILL NATURALLY SHOOT A LOWER PERCENTAGE…

NOBODY THINKS RUDY GOBERT IS A MORE EFFICIENT SCORER THAN STEPH CURRY, BUT HIS PERCENTAGE IS NATURALLY MUCH HIGHER

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50% AND 45% IS 10/20 VS 9/20.. LITERALLY 1 SHOT IN 20 ATTEMPTS

BTW GROUPING AI AND KOBE TOGETHER IS DISINGENUOUS .. PRIME IVERSON WAS GENERALLY AROUND 40%-42% WHILE PRIME KOBE WAS 45%-47%…..BIG DIFFERENCE

Steve Nash, Tony Parker and Chris Paul all shot 50% in the 2000s.

 

[Roger king]

The same defense that allowed Steve Nash to win 2 MVPs and had multiple 50% FG seasons on.

Notice how when they cant rebut with facts for why other plays could acheive it in a so called ''tougher defense'' era but no AI or Kobe they resort to ad hominems and insults

 

[broller]

DEFENSE WAS TOUGHER AND THE RULES WERENT DESIGNED TO GIVE THE OFFENSE NEARLY AS MUCH FREEDOM AS WE SEE NOWADAYS

NOTICE LEBRON AND KD NEVER SHOT 50% IN THE 2000S

THATS NOT BY ACCIDENT

NOT TO MENTION, GUARDS WHO OPERATE MOSTLY ON THE PERIMETER WILL NATURALLY SHOOT A LOWER PERCENTAGE…

NOBODY THINKS RUDY GOBERT IS A MORE EFFICIENT SCORER THAN STEPH CURRY, BUT HIS PERCENTAGE IS NATURALLY MUCH HIGHER

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50% AND 45% IS 10/20 VS 9/20.. LITERALLY 1 SHOT IN 20 ATTEMPTS

BTW GROUPING AI AND KOBE TOGETHER IS DISINGENUOUS .. PRIME IVERSON WAS GENERALLY AROUND 40%-42% WHILE PRIME KOBE WAS 45%-47%…..BIG DIFFERENCE

 

[No1]

Notice how when they cant rebut with facts for why other plays could acheive it in a so called ''tougher defense'' era but no AI or Kobe they resort to ad hominems and insults

You’re comparing high volume scorers to a pass first PG and you think everyone else in the problem? LMAO.

 

[#1 pick]

DEFENSE WAS TOUGHER AND THE RULES WERENT DESIGNED TO GIVE THE OFFENSE NEARLY AS MUCH FREEDOM AS WE SEE NOWADAYS

NOTICE LEBRON AND KD NEVER SHOT 50% IN THE 2000S

THATS NOT BY ACCIDENT

NOT TO MENTION, GUARDS WHO OPERATE MOSTLY ON THE PERIMETER WILL NATURALLY SHOOT A LOWER PERCENTAGE…

NOBODY THINKS RUDY GOBERT IS A MORE EFFICIENT SCORER THAN STEPH CURRY, BUT HIS PERCENTAGE IS NATURALLY MUCH HIGHER

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50% AND 45% IS 10/20 VS 9/20.. LITERALLY 1 SHOT IN 20 ATTEMPTS

BTW GROUPING AI AND KOBE TOGETHER IS DISINGENUOUS .. PRIME IVERSON WAS GENERALLY AROUND 40%-42% WHILE PRIME KOBE WAS 45%-47%…..BIG DIFFERENCE

nikka what? Everyone thinks Gobert is a more efficient scorer than Steph. All he do is dunk. Of course he's more efficient. What you are trying to say is no one thinks Gobert is anywhere near Steph as a scorer.

 

[#1 pick]

The 2000s had terrible spacing due to the zone defense. Once the skill went up and 4s was shooting 3s in the 2010s and they stopped playing non shooting wings, shooting went up again plus spacing. Now everyone is expected to shoot and spacing is optimal. It's a lot easier to score in today's NBA but scoring a lot doesn't equal wins. You gotta play team ball and you gotta play with pace. It's a different game. There are a lot more scoring opinions. This ain't the 2000s. Your teammates got a bag too in today's NBA

 

[Harry B]

New gen might be slightly better (long distance) shooters but I’d say that it’s defense.

So it was a different game, pull up jumpers when dudes on you like a cheetah hunting will generate low percentages

 

[Devil Plisken…CMS]

I disagree that it is a random number for years it has been thought of that 50percent from the field is efficient and shows effective shot selections. Everyone played against capable defenses the question is why were those guys who people proclaim as one of the greatest to ever play and for kobe top 10 so poor from the field shooting wise

You’re actually wrong. In those days if you were 45% or above you was scene as a good perimeter shooter…Which made Jordan even more of an anomaly

 

[En Sabah Nur]

Steve Nash, Tony Parker and Chris Paul all shot 50% in the 2000s.

You’re comparing high volume scorers to a pass first PG and you think everyone else in the problem? LMAO.

If you have to explain to dummies like these why players who distributed the ball more than they shot it had higher percentages than players who shot the ball at high rates against defenses primarily focused on them they're not worth engaging in conversation.

 

[Mars]

AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 50% AND 45% IS 10/20 VS 9/20.. LITERALLY 1 SHOT IN 20 ATTEMPTS

BTW GROUPING AI AND KOBE TOGETHER IS DISINGENUOUS .. PRIME IVERSON WAS GENERALLY AROUND 40%-42% WHILE PRIME KOBE WAS 45%-47%…..BIG DIFFERENCE

You just contradicted yourself in consecutive sentences....Saying 45% vs 50% (5% difference isn't much of a difference (only 1 made shot in 20 attempts)..... then say a 5% difference between Iverson/Kobe is a big difference.

 

[Pressure]

Ineffecient volume scoring shouldn't be celebrated.

 

[bigde09]

The NBA being trash now really fukked some of you up

 

[Raquinotj]

03-04 Tracy McGardy led the league in scoring, shot 41% from the field. NOBODY gave a fukk about FG%, The game got nerdy crazy after analytics, social media and hot take shows started poppin’ to the point where nikkaz rather not shoot end of the quarter half court shot buzzer beaters to avoid a dip in their fg %.

 

[Mars]

03-04 Tracy McGardy led the league in scoring, shot 41% from the field. The game got nerdy crazy after analytics, social media and hot take shows started poppin’.

Orlando went 21-61