What if Curry played in the 1990s?

The gap between top players in different eras may not be as big as everyone thinks. The biggest difference between the 90s and this generation is actually the width and narrowness of the space under the basket, and the impact is more of a breakthrough. The unparalleled peripheral shooting technique, as well as the ability to throw free attacks anytime, anywhere, are popular in any era.

This issue was discussed last year, so let's sort out my thoughts and add a few more words.

I think:

Superstars will be superstars in any era, and so will Curry.

The difference is nothing more than what can be achieved under different coaches - if you can meet the elder Nelson or Riley, then maybe the times will change in advance.

Stephen Curry is an All-Star guard averaging 24 points and 9 assists under Mark Jackson; Kerr took over, matched the team, Curry immediately took off to become a historical attacker, even MVP, historical data, championship all won.

For example, Nash is under the elder Nelson of Dallas, All-Star, and the league three teams; To the Sun Dantony, with a good team, two-time regular season MVP, assist king, historical attacker.

When Curry was just popular, many people found him old templates: similar luck and magic baskets: Mark Price, Abdul Rauf and the like.

Price is a short, white version of Curry.

In the 1992-93 NBA, three-point shooting was not popular, and the NBA three-point shooting ratio was only 10%.

Does not prevent Price from leading the Cavaliers to third in the East, averaging 18 points and 8 assists per game, shooting 48% + 42% + 95%, and Jordan tied for the league first-class guard. The following year he also went to the Dream Second Team.

Anyone who has watched Price play knows that it's a weakened version of Curry — in fact, he's probably more like a shorter Nash than Curry — but he can also be in the league for a while.

Off topic, that Cavaliers are friendly to shooters, and their No. 4 is Steve Cole.

Cole later went to the Bulls and wore number 25 — the Cavaliers' number 25, which was Price.

Curry's ball-holding style can refer to the Cavaliers' version of Price; The ballless configuration, which can refer to the Pacers version of Reggie Miller.

Miller's regular-season stats aren't obvious, but three of his six career Eastern Conference Finals defeats were 3-4 or he would have made it to the Finals — the Knicks who lost to Ewing, the Magic of the Sharks and the Bulls of Jordan's final year.

Larry Brown and Larry Bird, building the right team around Miller, will allow Miller to take the configuration of Smits, Mark Jackson Sr., and two Davis to the NBA Finals.

Curry can hold the ball higher than Price, and the off-ball move higher than Miller, and he is both strong.

Just match him with a Pacers/Cavaliers front court, a smart man like Doherty/Smitz, and a tough forward like Nance/Davis.

The best fit for Curry is the 1996-97 Charlotte Hornets:

At that time, the Hornets, defense + organizational forward 201 centimeters tall Mason (averaging 16 points, 11 rebounds and 6 assists per game), Bearded center Devac (averaging 13 points, 9 rebounds, 4 assists and 2 blocks per game), the league's top shooter All-Star Game MVP Glenn Rice (27 points per game), plus Curry's own daddy Del Curry, easily won 54.

Mason was the dream chaser of the 1990s.

Divac can be regarded as the Bogut of the 1990s.

Curry comes in instead of Rice — his no-ball, ball and long-range shots are above Les — or instead of his own dad, won't this lineup be playable?

The topic should have been over, but I still want to talk more:

In fact, the gap between top players in different eras may not be as big as everyone thinks.

The Curry era and the Jordan era are not without people running through.

Ray Allen entered the industry in 1996.

Jordan's final year with the Bulls, Ray Allen started in his second grade, averaging 20+5+4, 43%+36%+88%, PER16.

At the age of 35, Ray Allen averaged 17 points, 3 rebounds and 3 assists in 36 minutes, 49%+44%+88%, PER16.

Ray Allen is known for being a stable player. Between 1998 and 2010, the Jordan era to the Curry era, the gap does not seem to be large?

Duncan shot 19+11+3+2 per 36 minutes in the 1997-98 season, shooting 55 percent from the field.

By the 2009-10 season, Duncan was 21+11+4 per 36 minutes, shooting 51 percent.

Duncan is notoriously immobile. From the last year of the Jordan era to the Curry era, it seems that the gap is not so far apart?

In the 2009-10 season, Curry was a sophomore, averaging 19+4+6 per game, and shooting 48%+44%+93% from three.

It seems that there are no signs that he can't fight in the 1990s...

Of course, I know a lot of people will say, "Curry's three-point shot can't be used in the 1990s", and it is true that three-point shooting was not popular in the 1990s, and he just started shooting a lot, and he is expected to be scolded by the coach.

But put it another way: older coaches aren't all blind, especially in the early 1990s, when the three-point boom was in place. If you really shoot correctly, the coach will give you the green light.

Go back to the Jordan era and say a typical case.

Dana Barros, a small defender, started 27 games in the first four years of his career.

In 1993-94, he had 13 points and 5 assists per game, and a three-point rate of 38 percent: because he had a strong three-point hand.

The following year, in 1994–95, the Philadelphia 76ers gave Dana Barros unlimited fire, and Barros averaged 2.4 three-pointers on 5.2 shots per game for a 46 percent shooting percentage. Entered the All-Star - this All-Star is estimated to be unknown now, why? Just because he has a hand in the ball to pull a three-pointer.

The following year he went to Boston to play as a substitute, still firing unlimitedly, shooting 1.9 of 4.6 per game.

In fact, in the 1996-97 season, Tim Haddavi shot 8 three-pointers per game from 34% range.

Shooting three-pointers was really unpopular in those days, but if you shoot really accurately and dribble, the whole team gives you the green light.

- If you shoot accurately, Jordan will pass you the ball at key moments...

So, with the accuracy and range of Barros and Tim Hardaway's level, the team can give them unlimited firepower.

Stephen Curry in the 1990s, with his unparalleled no-ball threat + dribbling three-point ability, the coach still can't let him shoot enough?

The biggest difference between the 1990s and this generation is actually the width of the space under the basket, and the impact is more of a breakthrough.

The unparalleled peripheral shooting technique, as well as the ability to throw free attacks anytime, anywhere, are popular in any era.

Finally, a legacy.

Tim Haddavi entered the NBA in 1989 and averaged 1.1 three-pointers in his first season.

Two years later, he made 5 three-pointers per game, averaging 23 points and 10 assists per game; Who allowed him to vote? Mad scientist old Nelson coach.

By the 1997–97 season, he was averaging 7.3 three-pointers per game in Miami. Who allowed him to vote? Pat Riley.

The pioneering sense of the elder Nelson and Riley was so obvious.

Nash averaged less than one three-pointer per game in his rookie year and four three-pointers per game in 2001-02. Who allowed him to vote? Old Nelson.

Later Nash went to the Suns and became MVP.

In 2009, Kerr was in the Suns and wanted to pick Curry, wanting Curry to accept the mantle, but the Warriors came first.

Warriors general manager Larry Riley. What did he do before?

A: Old Nelson's teaching assistant.

Nelson Sr. and his assistant coach, as well as the Warriors, Tim Hardaway, Dallas, Phoenix, Nash, a lot of bold experimentation, a lot of permission, a lot of crazy ideas — finally merged into Curry.

Feedback of the times to innovative idealists.