TWO THREE OR NOT TWO THREE MICHAEL JORDAN

Two Three or Not Two Three?

Hey fam, step into the ConKrete Playground. We're here to talk hoop history, and specifically, to settle a score that gets folks heated up faster than a blacktop in July. We're talking about the GOAT, Michael Jordan, and that persistent whisper (or loud shout) from the naysayers that he couldn't shoot the three.

Let's just stop that noise right here. To say MJ wasn't a distance threat is to ignore the actual tapes and the cold, hard numbers. You want to talk efficiency? You want to talk clutch? Let's talk logic.

Look, some folks love to bring up his early years like it's a "gotcha" moment. And yeah, let's be real: MJ wasn't a sharpshooter from Day One. In his first few seasons, that three-point efficiency was… let's call it "developing." He wasn't relying on the long ball. But this is Michael Jordan we're talking about. The man who didn't just learn new skills; he mastered them and then made everyone else look like they were playing checkers while he was playing high stakes chess. MJ said, he didn't like to focus on threes, because you find yourself running to the three point line and waiting for someone to kick it out. That takes away from his game. He likes the mid range and to get down hill, attack the rim and put pressure on the defense.

Here’s where you have to do the math. Think about it: if a player finishes their career with a certain 3-point percentage, they must have had seasons where they shot above that average. So, to all the critics clinging to his "17%" story from the first few years, I need you to answer a question. Take it to your kids' advanced math class (if you can;t do it). Ask them: If MJ started that low, and yet he finished his career with a solid 32.7% (which jumped even higher to 35% during his championship prime)... what did he have to shoot in the second half of his career to pull that average up? He shot roughly 16.4% from three.

Let me help you with the math: To pull that 16% up to his career finish, Mike had to become an elite marksman. From 1994 to 1997, he shot a blistering 40.4% from beyond the arc. He didn't just "make" shots; he weaponized the three-pointer exactly when the league started to value it.

Let me help you with the research, since I don't debate without it. He didn't just "hit some shots." He flipped a switch. From roughly 1994 to 1997, Michael Jordan became a legitimate, efficient deep threat. The man literally decided to weaponize the three-point shot. We're not talking about some fluke streak; we're talking about consistent, clutch performance.

And speaking of clutch… this is the part the doubters conveniently leave out. MJ's Finals three-point percentage was higher than his overall career average! He stepped up when the stage was biggest. He shot nearly 50% in the '92 Finals! Are you kidding me? This wasn't a guy shying away from the spotlight; this was the definition of cold-blooded efficiency when the championship was on the line.

The point isn't to say he was better than Steph Curry from deep. The point is to dismantle the lazy, uninformed narrative that he "couldn't shoot threes." If MJ played in today’s game, with the spacing and the rules and the sheer focus on that shot, you are truly kidding yourself if you don't think his numbers would be significantly higher. Michael Jordan was an apex predator; he adapted and succeeded.

So, the next time someone tries to tell you that MJ was only a slasher, that he couldn't hit the big one from downtown… just tell them to check the film. Tell them to do the math. Tell them you heard it at ConKrete Playground. Because here, we don't just talk noise; we deal in facts.

The answer to the question "Two Three or Not Two Three?" is simple: Mike could, and he did. Class is dismissed.

PlayerCareer Finals 3P%

Kevin Durant 44.8%

Stephen Curry 39.5%

Michael Jordan 36.8%

LeBron James 35.2%

Kobe Bryant 31.4%

Dirk Nowitzki 30.2%