Was Michael Jordan a Better 3-Point Shooter than LeBron James?

Was Jordan a Better 3-Point Shooter than LeBron? The Truth Behind the Stats

The 3-Point Debate: Michael Jordan vs. LeBron James

Well, this is a question that comes up all the time, especially when you're talking basketball with your friends or on sports forums: "Was Michael Jordan a better 3-point shooter than LeBron James?" Now, let me tell you, this is not as simple as it sounds. I’ve had a few heated debates about this with buddies, and honestly, my opinion has shifted a few times.

On one hand, you've got Jordan, who dominated the 90s with his scoring ability, but wasn’t exactly known for his 3-point shooting. Then there’s LeBron, who’s evolved over the years into a much more consistent 3-point threat, especially in today’s game. So, let’s break it down and dive into the numbers, the context, and what truly makes them stand out from behind the arc.

Michael Jordan's 3-Point Shooting: A Surprise in History

When you think of Michael Jordan, you probably picture incredible dunks, mid-range jumpers, and explosive drives to the basket. But 3-point shooting? Eh, not the first thing that comes to mind, right? Actually, I was in the same boat until I did a little more research.

Jordan's Stats: Decent, But Not Elite

Honestly, when I looked up Jordan’s career 3-point shooting percentage, I was a little surprised. Across his 15-year NBA career, Jordan shot 32.7% from three. Not terrible, but not what you would call elite. For context, that's lower than today's standards for a "decent" 3-point shooter, but still respectable given the era he played in.

I remember talking with my friend Tom, a die-hard Jordan fan, about this. He pointed out that Jordan’s game wasn’t built around the 3-point line—he had other ways to score. The 3-point shot wasn't as emphasized in the 90s as it is now, and Jordan's main weapon was his ability to drive, finish, and hit mid-range shots. But still, for someone who played most of his career without the 3-point shot being a priority, Jordan’s 3-point numbers aren’t too shabby.

Context of the Era

Here’s the thing I often forget to consider: The NBA in Jordan’s time wasn’t the 3-point shooting league we see today. The 3-point line was introduced in the 1980s, but it didn’t really become a major part of the game until later. Jordan’s Bulls teams were more focused on defense, post-play, and mid-range shooting, so his 3-point attempts were always limited. It’s also worth noting that the volume of 3-pointers was much lower in the '90s, compared to the three-point-heavy offenses we see today.

LeBron James: A More Consistent 3-Point Threat

Now, let's talk about LeBron. Honestly, when LeBron came into the league, his 3-point shot was nowhere near as polished as it is today. But over the years, he’s worked on it, and man, it’s been impressive. If you ask me, LeBron’s 3-point shooting is often underrated, especially given how versatile and complete his game is.

LeBron's Stats: Growth Over Time

LeBron’s career 3-point shooting percentage is 34.6%. At first glance, it doesn’t seem like a huge difference from Jordan’s, right? But here’s where the difference comes into play: LeBron has been a more consistent threat from three, especially as the game has evolved. His percentage has actually gone up as his career has progressed, particularly in the last few seasons. He’s adapted his game to the modern era, where the 3-point shot is crucial, and has become a much more reliable shooter from deep.

LeBron's Clutch 3-Pointers

I remember watching LeBron hit a clutch 3-pointer against the Warriors in the 2016 Finals—it was a defining moment in his career. Honestly, when I saw that shot, I realized just how much LeBron has grown as a 3-point shooter. His ability to hit big shots in crucial moments really sets him apart. Jordan had his clutch moments too, but LeBron has shown the ability to rise up and knock down big 3-pointers consistently, especially in high-pressure situations.

Comparing the Two: Who Had the Better 3-Point Shot?

So, now that we’ve looked at both Jordan and LeBron, who really had the edge in terms of 3-point shooting? Let’s be real, this comparison isn’t exactly apples to apples.

The Case for Jordan: Quality Over Quantity

Here’s where I kind of change my mind. Jordan was never asked to shoot a ton of 3-pointers, but when he did, he was pretty effective. In the grand scheme of things, Jordan didn’t need the 3-point shot to dominate the game. His scoring ability, footwork, and basketball IQ allowed him to score from virtually anywhere on the court.

What stands out to me about Jordan is how he didn’t have to rely on the 3-pointer to be great. He had a deadly mid-range game and could get to the rim at will. So, in terms of effectiveness, he still had a way of scoring that wasn’t heavily dependent on the three, which is something LeBron couldn’t always do in the early years of his career.

The Case for LeBron: A New Age 3-Point Shooter

Now, LeBron’s case is a little different. He came into the NBA at a time when the game was transitioning to a 3-point-heavy league. So, he adapted. LeBron’s 3-point shooting is more versatile—he can shoot from beyond the arc in transition, catch-and-shoot situations, and in clutch moments. His evolution as a 3-point shooter, especially in the later years of his career, shows how he has fully embraced the modern game.

Conclusion: It Depends on How You Look at It

Honestly, I’m still not sure who I would give the edge to when it comes to 3-point shooting. If you look purely at the stats, LeBron has a slight edge in terms of percentage. However, if you consider their eras and the way they played the game, Jordan’s ability to dominate without relying on the 3-pointer is pretty impressive.

So, was Jordan a better 3-point shooter than LeBron? It depends on how you define "better." If we’re talking about consistency and volume, LeBron takes it. But if we’re talking about overall impact and effectiveness, you could make a strong case for Jordan’s mastery of the mid-range game and his ability to dominate without the three-point shot.

At the end of the day, both are legends in their own right, and comparing them will always spark some debates.

Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old?

The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too. It's a very normal height for a girl.

Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old?

How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 137 cm to 162 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/3 feet). A 12 year old boy should be between 137 cm to 160 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/4 feet).

How tall is a average 15 year old?

Average Height to Weight for Teenage Boys - 13 to 20 Years

How to get taller at 18?

Staying physically active is even more essential from childhood to grow and improve overall health. But taking it up even in adulthood can help you add a few inches to your height. Strength-building exercises, yoga, jumping rope, and biking all can help to increase your flexibility and grow a few inches taller.

Is 5.7 a good height for a 15 year old boy?

Generally speaking, the average height for 15 year olds girls is 62.9 inches (or 159.7 cm). On the other hand, teen boys at the age of 15 have a much higher average height, which is 67.0 inches (or 170.1 cm).

Can you grow between 16 and 18?

Most girls stop growing taller by age 14 or 15. However, after their early teenage growth spurt, boys continue gaining height at a gradual pace until around 18. Note that some kids will stop growing earlier and others may keep growing a year or two more.

Can you grow 1 cm after 17?

Even with a healthy diet, most people's height won't increase after age 18 to 20. The graph below shows the rate of growth from birth to age 20. As you can see, the growth lines fall to zero between ages 18 and 20 ( 7 , 8 ). The reason why your height stops increasing is your bones, specifically your growth plates.