Whose the better shooter Steve Kerr or Kyle Korver?

[Crystallas]

This is hard to say, for one reason, and just one reason. Kerr had great setups to hit hot spots, Korver makes his own shots sometimes. I have to switch them, put Korver on Kerr's teams, and put Kerr on Korver's teams. Now it can be close.

I still say Kerr. But I can see the argument.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

I am actually going to say it is a close-call. But if you look at the percentages, Korver shot better with the three-point line at its normal/standard distance of 23' 9''.

Kerr's best percentages came when the line was only at 22' at it's max.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

there was a top 75 shooters of all time thing on bleacherreport(i know i know but they used a really neat formula)

anywho, they came up with korver being #5 on the list and kerr #4
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/763849-nba-75-greatest-shooters-of-the-three-point-era

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

That formula can't account for everything. Including that the line was moved up for a three-year period.

I actually voted for Korver. But I do think that Kerr was the better player because he had a natural position. Korver doesn't.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

PS- (in regard to the title of the thread)

It is "who's" - not "whose." Whose is possessive. That is the second time I saw that mix-up today and it annoys me -_-

 

[Crystallas]

Wait, whose you talking to?

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Wait, whose you talking to?

-_- anybody who's listening

(note: I did not use "whose")

 

[scottiepippen1994]

-_- anybody who's listening

(note: I did not use "whose")

How can anyone listen to you on here? We can only read what you type but not hear..if you make a utube video of yourself and post it, then we will be able to hear you and see you...

 

[scottiepippen1994]

Easy.

Dan was also a great shooter...and versatile...

 

[BMR31]

LOL Kerr and it isnt close

 

[BMR31]

Dan was also a great shooter...and versatile...

Waddup, Pip?

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

LOL Kerr and it isnt close

Saying it isn't close pretty much proves that you must be biased towards Kerr.

Kerr's three highest three-point shooting percentage seasons came in 1994-95, 1995-96, and 1996-97.

It was during these seasons that the three-point line was at only 22 feet. This was the only period of time since the inception of the three-pointer that the line was that close to the basket.

Kyle Korver never played during that stretch of time. But that didn't stop him from having an amazing season where he averaged 53% from three-point range. Steve Kerr never did that when the line was at the standard 23-feet 9-inch mark.

Korver averages 41% (4+ attempts per-game) and Kerr averages 45% (only <2.0 attempts per-game) for three for their careers.

Kyle Korver actually looks like he might be the better three-point shooter, and shooter in general, than Steve Kerr.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

What makes Kyle Korver's season of shooting 53% even more impressive is that he shot 6.1 three-pointers per-36 minutes. That is over double the rate of three-point attempts that Steve Kerr took during the course of his 52% season (from nearly 2 feet closer in than Korver). So defenses had to be even more aware of Korver's presence on the three-point line than they had to be with Kerr's.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

Here is the most telling stat of all:

Kyle Korver's career 3pt .pct from the standard 23'9'':

0.411 (1016-for-2472)

Steve Kerr's career 3pt .pct from the standard 23' 9'':

0.379 (405-for-1068)

 

[Glide2keva]

So you're penalizing Kerr for the NBA changing the rules? That's unfair.

As I said in a another post, the 3-point shot wasn't as heavily shot then as it is now. Look at the Bulls first Finals box scores, they shot a total of 22 3-pointers, for the ENTIRE SERIES in 91. When they moved the line in to 22' all around, more people shot more threes. Even still, it wasn't as prominent a weapon as it is used today.

Korver shoots more threes simply because offenses call for more of those shots.

So, skewing the numbers makes it look like Korver is the better shooter, and I guess you can make an argument, but you can't deny Kerr's numbers.

 

[scottiepippen1994]

Waddup, Pip?

Oh no, its the living legend of trollism himself from the infamous espn bulls messageboard...I thinks its time we all pray, it may get ugly here....LMAO!!!

 

[BMR31]

Oh no, its the living legend of trollism himself from the infamous espn bulls messageboard...I thinks its time we all pray, it may get ugly here....LMAO!!!

LOL im sure these people know better. The top troll of all time is you.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

It is a pretty simple concept. Kerr shot from less farther away and was less heavily guarded than Korver was.

Numbers don't lie. If you take away the three years that the three-point line was moved closer in, Korver is the undisputed winner.

Kerr is the better player. Korver is just as good of a shooter - if not better. Especially from 2-pt range and off of screens.

These numbers don't lie.

 

[ChiIllini22]

LOL im sure these people know better. The top troll of all time is you.

Uh oh time to throw down! :jackson:

 

[clonetrooper264]

I'd take Kerr, but I can definitely see the argument for Korver. They're both just really really really good shooters...