NBA 3pt Shootout Contest Detailed Analysis
Let's get back to the idea that the players today are simply better at the shot. There aren't many reliable ways to test this. Obviously, there is video that shows that the players back then were just as capable of making the shots, we just don't see the volume like today. That means we don't have enough information to really tell. To extrapolate and interpolate is not possible either. It's not possible to say if Curry played in the 80s how would it be, or if Bird played in 2019 how it would be. There is, however, one thing that can be compared across eras: the All-Star game 3pt Shootout. Why is this good?
- The number of shots is the same
- Time time limit is the same
So, everyone over the years is essentially shooting the same shot, in the same conditions. Great! This can now be compared safely. But, it should also be strongly noted that a few years ago, the Money Ball rules were modified, where modern players now have 4 additional Money Balls compared to earlier players. In other words, there are 4 more points available. We will include these in our analysis.
Here is the list of things to compare regarding the 3pt Shootout:
- Hodges has the record for making 19 shots in a row. His total was 24 points. He hit 21 shots total.
- Curry set the record with 27 points. He hit 20 total shots. This is 20 years later.
Other players who have made a total of 17-20 shots in a round:
- Larry Bird (18)
- Mark Price (20)
- Kapono (20,19)
- Klay (17)
- Belinelli (18)
- Kyrie (20)
- Tim Legler (18,18)
- Gilbert Arenas (18)
- James Jones (18)
- Hubert Davis (19)
Research done by this reddit poster.
This diagram states the time limit as 30s and 40s. It should be 60s and 70s.
One can see that all these players are not significantly better or worse than others. 1-2 shots at most in a contest. And with decades in between, and such different 3pt environments and stats, this should cut through all that. We should be able to infer that the skills between the elite shooters has not changed too much. And we should be able to infer that the changes in percentages and totals should be almost completely attributed to the different 3pt shooting environment in the NBA today.
- Kapono can be considered as good a 3pt shooter as Curry.
- Arenas can be considered nearly as good a 3pt shooter as Curry.
- Kyrie can be considered as good a 3pt shooter as Curry.
- etc.
Let's consider Gilbert Arenas. This is a player whose reputation did not end well with the NBA. Putting that aside, let's just focus on his shooting skill. Here he is shooting as good as Curry, but was never considered as an all-time shooter like Curry. He also has on video, him hitting something like 97/100 3-pointers. No other player has such a video. It is safe to say that nobody can shoot significantly better than that. Someone else might be able to get 98 or 99 after several attempts, and that is fine. But this is the kind of shooting that you can say is just about as good as it gets for the human species.
Now, back to the quote that got this all started. I'll agree that the environment is important. But I will be much more clear about making the point that the environment is almost the only thing that is influencing the impressive numbers today. As we can see, the elite shooters have existed from the beginning, and their performances appear to be identical. It's just the environment that has changed.
These kind of numerical improvements can be seen across all sports. It is important that we don't attribute these numerical improvements to the individual, but to the external modifications that allow individuals to take advantage of them and produce better numbers. An excellent, concise explanation of this phenomena is the following:
Are athletes really getting faster, better, stronger? | David Epstein