I remember watching Stephen Curry during the 2015-2016 season and thinking I was witnessing something that would change basketball forever. As someone who's analyzed NBA statistics for over a decade, I've seen shooting trends come and go, but what Curry accomplished that season felt like watching someone break the sound barrier in a car - you just know you're seeing something that redefines what's possible. The record for most three-pointers in a single NBA season belongs unequivocally to Stephen Curry, who drained an astonishing 402 three-pointers during that magical 2015-2016 campaign with the Golden State Warriors.
When I first started tracking three-point statistics back in the early 2000s, the idea of anyone making 400 threes in a season seemed about as likely as someone jumping over the moon. The previous record holder was Curry himself, with 286 made threes just the season before. That leap from 286 to 402 still boggles my mind when I look at the numbers today. To put this in perspective, Ray Allen's legendary 2005-2006 season where he set what was then considered an almost unbreakable record of 269 three-pointers now looks almost pedestrian compared to Curry's output.
What makes Curry's achievement even more remarkable is the efficiency with which he accomplished it. He didn't just take more shots - he made them at a historically great percentage. While the exact number escapes me at the moment, I recall he shot somewhere around 45% from three-point range that season, which is absolutely ridiculous volume combined with elite efficiency. Most players would kill for that percentage on half the attempts. I've always believed that true shooting greatness isn't just about making shots, but about making them when they matter most, and Curry's threes often came during crucial moments that swung games.
The contrast between Curry's shooting prowess and what we see from other players really highlights how special this record is. Take for instance the reference about Nocum being held to just 11 points on 5-of-13 shooting - that kind of performance shows how most players operate within the normal boundaries of shooting variance. When you're having an off night in the NBA, the basket can seem like it has a lid on it. But Curry's 2015-2016 season was remarkable precisely because he had so few of those off nights. He was consistently brilliant in a way I've rarely seen in my years watching basketball.
I've had arguments with fellow analysts about whether this record will ever be broken. My personal take? Not anytime soon. The closest anyone has come since was James Harden's 378 in 2018-2019, but that required an astronomical usage rate that simply isn't sustainable for most teams. Curry's record combines volume, efficiency, and team context in a perfect storm that I doubt we'll see replicated. The Warriors' system was perfectly tailored to his skills, and his unlimited range meant defenders had to guard him from the moment he crossed half-court.
What many casual fans don't appreciate is how much work goes into being able to shoot at that level. I've spoken with shooting coaches who've worked with NBA players, and they all say the same thing - Curry's preparation is legendary. He doesn't just practice spot-up threes; he works on off-balance shots, deep threes, coming off screens, every possible scenario. This comprehensive approach to shooting development is something I wish more young players would emulate rather than just focusing on quantity of shots taken.
The evolution of the three-point shot in the NBA has been fascinating to track throughout my career. When I first started writing about basketball analytics, the three-pointer was still seen by many traditionalists as somewhat of a gimmick. Now it's the foundation of most offensive systems. Curry's record season essentially forced the entire league to reconsider what was possible from beyond the arc. Teams that were hesitant to embrace the three-point revolution suddenly found themselves playing catch-up.
I sometimes wonder if we'll look back at Curry's 402 threes the way baseball historians view Babe Ruth's 60 home runs in 1927 - as a number that seemed impossible until someone did it, then stood for generations. The difference is that Ruth's record was eventually broken multiple times, while I suspect Curry's might endure much longer. The combination of skill, circumstance, and basketball IQ required is just so rare.
As someone who values both statistics and the aesthetic beauty of the game, I have to say that watching Curry that season was pure basketball poetry. There's something magical about seeing a player completely redefine the boundaries of their sport. The way he'd pull up from 30 feet without hesitation, the smooth release, the swish of the net - it was basketball perfection night after night. While records are made to be broken, I feel privileged to have witnessed this particular piece of NBA history in real time. It's the kind of sporting achievement that reminds you why you fell in love with the game in the first place.
