QUESTION: Does high FG Percentage Equate Skill in the NBA?

[DoubleClutch]

Had a discussion recently with a Lebron fan who argued since Lebron shoots a higher FG percentage than MJ that he’s “more skilled” and even can be considered a better scorer than Jordan.

That’s gotta one of the dumbest arguments I’ve heard

I don’t even consider Lebron on the same level as MJ as a scorer. I don’t need stats to tell me this but still this is one of many statistic based arguments putting Lebron > MJ in many fans eyes.


So is it true that just because Lebron is big and dunks a lot and bull dozes his way in the lane for easy layups, it doesn’t make him any less skilled than someone like Jordan who is clearly a more versatile and talented scorer.

If that’s the case then you could argue Shaq is a more skilled post player than Hakeem or something based on FG..... and we all know that’s not true just by watching Hakeem play.

So what do you think?

Does higher FG automatically make a player better or more skilled than one with lower FG?

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

No. Not at all.... a whole lot more player movement now, which promotes greater offensive efficiency, that's not a direct result of individual skillset

 

[Jesus]

Brees and Stafford have yards galore, but those nikkas aren't in GOAT convos for QB.

Sounds like an agenda thread to bash "Lebron stans"...

Go look up DeAndre Jordan's FG%

 

[Noah]

Not necessarily. Volume + efficiency + variety defines how effective/good someone is at scoring, not just one or even just two of those components.

 

[chowism]

Another Lebron thread

 

[CarltonJunior]

If you're a roleplayer just means you know how to pick your spots.

If you're a high volume guy that isn't a center then it means you know how to get to the line and typically you aren't a jumpshooter.

 

[KnickstapeCity]

Waits for @Illeye buckmatic to run in here with the in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....









:philjacksonlol:

 

[DoubleClutch]

Not necessarily. Volume + efficiency + variety defines how effective/good someone is at scoring, not just one or even just two of those components.

The problem is most of sports media (guys who never played against MJ or Lebron) opt for the statistics like it’s the law cause it’s googleable

Their arguments are the most basic and surface level when the game is more complex. Ive never heard anyone mention about volume, variety or the ways both Lebron and MJ score or things like shot selection or level of difficulty.

That’s why I’ve seen many teams/players shut Lebron down or take away/expose aspects of his offensive game and he couldn’t adapt. Meanwhile I’ve never seen that happen with Jordan or Kobe Iverson, Tmac or even other players unless they’re just having an off shooting night

 

[010101]

& brons %'s probably would be even higher if he swapped eras with mj*

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

Waits for @Illeye buckmatic to run in here with the in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....









:philjacksonlol:

Gave your ass a pity dap
@yaposttrashb

 

[VegasCAC]

It means you’re a more efficient scorer, not necessarily a better scorer overall (volume has to be taken into account).

FG% isn’t correlated to “skill” necessarily, obviously.

But if you watch Lebron and don’t think he’s skilled you probably don’t understand the game.

Lebron is more skilled at finishing in traffic, 3pt shooting, and passing than Jordan. Jordan is more skilled at midrange jumpers and ballhandling

 

[Reece]

It doesn't. Stats are supposed to support your argument. Stat geeks make it THE argument without any room for in game observation.

You know you dealing with dummies when they argue someone is inefficient scoring 9/20 shots compared to a guy scoring 10/20 shots when the former shoots difficult jumpers all game and the other guy shoots easy layups all game. The first thing you do in any study is control for anything that distorts the results. Otherwise the comparison is bullshyt. Bron Stans know this and still argue it anyway. They're purposely disingenuous. Growing up nikkas NEVER used to count their shots and see if they were taking high percentage shots. Not in the NBA. Not in high school basketball. Not nikkas outside at the park. NEVER. nikkas just busted your ass and that was it. This is some new shyt fueled by pro-Lebron narratives.

 

[The Fire]

They have like the same fg%

 

[10bandz]

It doesn't. Stats are supposed to support your argument. Stat geeks make it THE argument without any room for in game observation.

You know you dealing with dummies when they argue someone is inefficient scoring 9/20 shots compared to a guy scoring 10/20 shots when the former shoots difficult jumpers all game and the other guy shoots easy layups all game. The first thing you do in any study is control for anything that distorts the results. Otherwise the comparison is bullshyt. Bron Stans know this and still argue it anyway. They're purposely disingenuous. Growing up nikkas NEVER used to count their shots and see if they were taking high percentage shots. Not in the NBA. Not in high school basketball. Not nikkas outside at the park. NEVER. nikkas just busted your ass and that was it. This is some new shyt fueled by pro-Lebron narratives.

Exactly.....its literally a 1 shot difference

 

[Reece]

Exactly.....its literally a 1 shot difference

LeBron averaged a .504% FG his career.

Steph Curry averaged a .477% FG.

Steph is an inefficient chucker