Warriors arrogance continues

[coachmac87]

I also find it interesting how things would've been if the media and outside world gave a about the Spurs when they went through their first dynasty run..

We were not liked by NBA fans and media due to boring play etc. Spurs did all this despite everything else..pretty much us against the world mentality..

[NameLess Scrub]

The cognitive bias that ultrawealthy venture capitalists like Lacob frequently commit is called the fundamental attribution error.

People who commit this error tend to overemphasize the internal characteristics that led to their success, while remaining blind to the external cir stances (e.g. luck) that led to their favorable position.

This is very similar to what I think every time I hear a millionaire entrepreneur taking all credit for being financially successful, specially when their capital came from a source like playing basketball.

[Sean Cagney]

This was already posted in the nba forum. I do agree they are a bag organization. Who do you think was more arrogance the Shaq-Kobe Lakers or this Warriors team?

Warriors team to be honest.

[Keepin' it real]

http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/nba-w...int-guard-nba/

Career backup players are among the most anonymous individuals in the NBA. And especially with headliners like Tim Duncan, Kawhi Leonard, LaMarcus Aldridge, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker garnering virtually all of the media attention on the San Antonio Spurs, Patty Mills’s contributions are too often overlooked.
Even so, it says here that Mills is not only a significant factor in the Spurs’ recent successes, but he’s also the very best backup point guard in the league.
Here’s an appraisal of Mills’ game as demonstrated in the Spurs 100-92 victory over the Pelicans.
Mills is both fast (up-and-down the court) and quick (within limited spaces). Plus he’s nothing less than an incredible passer, especially when he’s on the move and off-balance. Still, his slickest pass came on an underneath inbounds play with 1.6 seconds left in the first quarter. That’s when Mills tossed a perfect lob to Boris Diaw who canned a fadeaway jumper. The ball had to be perfectly placed to avoid the backboard plus the efforts of two defenders.
This was Mills’ only assist, only because several teammates missed makeable shots that his passes created. Moreover, Mills’ primary duty was to keep the ball moving, thereby allowing the inevitable unfolding of the offense to uncover open shots. It’s no surprise that, no matter who had the ball, there was always somebody available to pass the ball to — and somebody else, and somebody else, for 24 seconds.
That’s one of the beauties of the Spurs’ offense.
Indeed, at both ends of the court, Mills’ game plan was virtually perfect. In 20 minutes he only made two legitimate miscues, none of which were costly.

• Whereas Tony Parker can still drive into the lane, then spin and/or twist his way into layups, Mills mostly scores from the perimeter. (He was 2-5 from downtown, which accounted for the six points he scored). One of Mills’ two turnovers occurred when he forced his way among the trees into the paint with nowhere to go — and his dribble was snatched away.
• Mills was discredited with another turnover when his perfect pass bounced off Diaw’s hands and was recovered by the Pelicans.
• And Mills also missed a rushed three-pointer.

Otherwise, Mills was in perfectly timed perpetual motion on offense — moving the ball with snappy passes, unafraid to set sturdy picks on bigs, passing away and cutting through the middle, protecting the ball with his body on crossovers and spins and, like every member of the Spurs, always making the extra pass.
The only occasions where Mills wasn’t moving when the Spurs had possession was when he briefly stood in one corner or the other while Manu Ginobili, LaMarcus Aldridge or Kevin Martin went one-on-one.
Mills did play a perfect game on defense. He dealt with screens in various ways — overplaying and beating his man to the contact, tailgating and recovering, squeezing his way through or switching. Whichever maneuver Mills executed, he received timely help from his teammates.
Even when he was forced to switch onto the massive Kendrick Perkins, Mills aggressively fronted him when taken into the low post, denying any entry pass.
Mills was rarely challenged in one-on-one situations. When Tim Frazier tried to take him, Mills sealed the baseline. Otherwise, Mills forced his erstwhile iso-minded opponents to help spots.
Mills’ ability to read the Pelicans’ offense also enabled him to record a pair of steals — both coming along the baseline from the weak side.
Pop showed his trust in Mills by leaving him in the game late in the third and early in the fourth quarter when New Orleans had mini-rallies. Indeed, with the Spurs up by only six and just over a minute left in the game, Pop had five subs on the floor.
Mills is the almost perfect cog in the Spurs’ almost perfect basketball machine. He’s one of the most significant reasons why San Antonio’s subs can compete on almost equal terms with opponents’ starters, as well as routinely outplay opponents’ second-stringers.
And, it also says here, that Patty Mills will be an important factor when the Spurs overcome the Warriors in the Western Conference finals.

[Seventyniner]

It's not so much the Warriors as it is the movement of the league from seven-footers to 6-8 guys and from post players to inefficient jump-shooters who are still the better play due to TS%. There's no way a guy like Covington should be more valuable than Okafor, but with the way the league is now, that's very much the case. Right now, you have a team like the Spurs who can choose to play inside and out still. But in 10 years or so, there aren't going to be the players in school for a team to do that. Once the talent pool changes like that, it'll take a long time to change back.

Removing the corner three would restore the bigs to their proper place. You wouldn't have guys like Griffin and Davis shooting threes when they aren't good at it. It would also change PnR defense, since the weakside corner wouldn't be dangerous anymore. I would find it fascinating if someone like the d-league tried it out.

I agree that the D-League is the perfect place to try something like that.

Removing the corner three also makes late-game situations a bit less exciting. If the three-point line has 30-40% of its length chopped off, it is much easier to defend. That's exactly your point, but it makes last-second threes and improbable fast comebacks more difficult. Would this hurt ratings? Hard to say but I'd lean slightly towards yes.

Where I disagree is your definition of bigs' "proper place." The game is constantly evolving. KG came into the league wanting to be a 7-foot shooting guard, and this was 20 years ago. He couldn't have gotten that desire from watching early 90's NBA.

If you want radical, make threes worth 2.5 instead (or almost equivalently have every other made shot behind the line only worth 2). Or allow the home team for each game the option to have the three-point line "active" or not for that game. Make HCA a true advantage.

[Chinook]

I agree that the D-League is the perfect place to try something like that.

Removing the corner three also makes late-game situations a bit less exciting. If the three-point line has 30-40% of its length chopped off, it is much easier to defend. That's exactly your point, but it makes last-second threes and improbable fast comebacks more difficult. Would this hurt ratings? Hard to say but I'd lean slightly towards yes.

I understand your point. But I think there are ways around it. Maybe they could remove the corner three while also changing the shape of the line to make longer. I would say they could also try moving the basket up (which would make deep-corner shots much harder). But that would require goal-post modifications to avoid having the stanchion on the court. It would also be fascinating to see how that affected an offense.

Where I disagree is your definition of bigs' "proper place." The game is constantly evolving. KG came into the league wanting to be a 7-foot shooting guard, and this was 20 years ago. He couldn't have gotten that desire from watching early 90's NBA.

I agree the game is evolving, but it's evolving in a way that is minimizing the effect of height, and that's one of the fundamental characteristics of NBA players. They need to rebalance the game to where being a skilled post player who's seven feet tall means something. Stretch-bigs were great when they were a counter. It's going too far with them as the main front-court players. When you eliminate the corner three, marginal stretch-bigs are going to become harder to play while elite stretch-bigs will be still be relevant. And midrange bigs who can shoot from the baseline like West will become important again.

f you want radical, make threes worth 2.5 instead (or almost equivalently have every other made shot behind the line only worth 2). Or allow the home team for each game the option to have the three-point line "active" or not for that game. Make HCA a true advantage.

I've thought a lot about the point issue. I can't see decimals becoming a thing, but I was kicking around the idea of having paint buckets be worth two, midrange three and beyond the arc four. That would prevent mid-range shots from being inefficient, but it would also negate players like Jordan and Drummond.

What about a curved backboard? If you design it as a parabola, it would be even better as far as layups go. And shots from between the wings would also work. But corner threes would become much harder, as would midrange jumpers from the short corner.

[apalisoc_9]

Im all for making the game more accecisble and advantageous to shorter players. It allows for a bigger pool of playera going forward

[SAGirl]

we shall beat them!

you heard it from the wizard.

thanks for sharing cutewizard!

[lilbthebasedgod]

Its because they are

[Chinook]

Im all for making the game more accecisble and advantageous to shorter players. It allows for a bigger pool of playera going forward

I don't want to watch a three-point shooting contest every game. I think basketball works best when there is an inside-outside balance that opens up an even wider talent pool. Until they make 3-10 foot shots as efficient as corner-threes, they'll keep trending away from a system that allows for multiple offensive structures.

[jon123spurs]

Diamond Leung (@diamond83) tweeted at 4:04 PM on Fri, Apr 01, 2016:
Draymond Green to KNBR: "When I look at our 7 losses, I look at 'em & say. 'ah, 3 teams really beat us.' I'd say Port, Detroit, the Lakers."

Lol Raymond career coat tailer.

[cd98]

GSW are on the verge of breaking the single season record for wins. I would say they are no more arrogant and probably less arrogant than the Bulls team that set the record. People here are too sensitive. Warriors will be incredibly difficult to beat in the playoffs.

[TD 21]

It's not so much the Warriors as it is the movement of the league from seven-footers to 6-8 guys and from post players to inefficient jump-shooters who are still the better play due to TS%. There's no way a guy like Covington should be more valuable than Okafor, but with the way the league is now, that's very much the case. Right now, you have a team like the Spurs who can choose to play inside and out still. But in 10 years or so, there aren't going to be the players in school for a team to do that. Once the talent pool changes like that, it'll take a long time to change back.

I agree the game is evolving, but it's evolving in a way that is minimizing the effect of height, and that's one of the fundamental characteristics of NBA players. They need to rebalance the game to where being a skilled post player who's seven feet tall means something. Stretch-bigs were great when they were a counter. It's going too far with them as the main front-court players. When you eliminate the corner three, marginal stretch-bigs are going to become harder to play while elite stretch-bigs will be still be relevant. And midrange bigs who can shoot from the baseline like West will become important again.

Unfortunately, the league loves the fact that the effect of height is being minimized, for the exact reason apalisoc_9 mentioned.

Hardcore fans will appreciate Duncan (the majority of his career), Diaw, Scola, Jefferson, Okafor, etc. school physically superior players in the post, but that doesn't appeal to casual fans, who in any sports league account for the majority. They inherently have a more rudimentary understanding of the game and are far more likely to be drawn to smaller players, who are supposedly more relate-able.

I like the fact that NBA players, on the whole, are damn near a different species, but the league wants them to be as close as possible to the every man, which is why the Warriors are their wet dream. As such, they won't do anything to stifle their impact, unless their run becomes so ridiculous that there's a widespread sense of inevitably going into every season and interest wanes.

[apalisoc_9]

I don't want to watch a three-point shooting contest every game. I think basketball works best when there is an inside-outside balance that opens up an even wider talent pool. Until they make 3-10 foot shots as efficient as corner-threes, they'll keep trending away from a system that allows for multiple offensive structures.

I dont disagree. I think that with the current system, there is enough to warranty having 4 bigs in a team. The trend of the NBA of moving towards 4 smalls is directly a result of a few teams having general sucesss in that structure. It isnt a 100% sure more successfull structure than having 2 bigs to start as evidence with spurs.

Short answer, the current rules allows for teams to play big and succseed. The court is perfect.

Dont fix what isnt broke.

4 smalls is a fad that might go away of the spurs win this year

[Chinook]

I dont disagree. I think that with the current system, there is enough to warranty having 4 bigs in a team. The trend of the NBA of moving towards 4 smalls is directly a result of a few teams having general sucesss in that structure. It isnt a 100% sure more successfull structure than having 2 bigs to start as evidence with spurs.

Short answer, the current rules allows for teams to play big and succseed. The court is perfect.

Dont fix what isnt broke.

4 smalls is a fad that might go away of the spurs win this year

It's more than a fad. It's shifting the talent pool. You're losing post players in exchange for jump-shooter or dunkers. That's something that even Mark Jackson has noticed. High-players are learning to shoot threes on the break instead of running to the rim. The tall players that can make it to high-level colleges are almost undraftable if they can't hit at least a college three. The trend doesn't have to grow faster. It just has to hang around for a few more years. With teams like GS and OKC favoring small-ball along with up-and-coming teams like Toronto and Boston, it's not going to change any time soon.

[Thomas82]

He spoke too soon tbh..

Should've just waited until they "win" the le this year..back 2 back..regular season etc..

But this just sets them up to have egg on their faces if they fall short..but I guess you make these comments when you're not used to success or if you're craving for attention.

Let the actions speak for themselves..it's better when an outside sources gives you the credit..not when you do it yourself

+1

[daslicer]

GSW are on the verge of breaking the single season record for wins. I would say they are no more arrogant and probably less arrogant than the Bulls team that set the record. People here are too sensitive. Warriors will be incredibly difficult to beat in the playoffs.

The Bulls outside of Rodman weren't as arrogant as these Warriors. I remember Mike being a big time trash talker on the court but off the court he didn't talk like these current Warriors do. I can't recall Pippen and MJ badmouthing teams after losses and being salty like the Warriors are. I even remember Mike during the 72 win season refusing to say the Bulls were the team to beat but instead saying the Rockets were team to beat until proven otherwise. The Bulls were pretty humble during that 72 win run unlike these Warriors. I remember it vividly since I was teenager during that time period.

[hsxvvd]

It's the fact that Holt would never say something stupid like this that proves him wrong.

[ace3g]

Warren Shaw @ShawSportsNBA
Ref ignored Smart's timeout lol

[Spurs 4 The Win]

Green is the worlds biggest got

[ace3g]

way too easy...

[SpursFan86]

Come the on Boston...

[DMC]

A team does well and guess what, it has a prima donna got on it not named Curry and the fans of the 17 consecutive 50 win, never missed playoffs, 5 rings got team melt right the down. Oh no, compe ion is bad. They must be evil. I'd bet they don't go to be until almost half past eleven.

"No one knows what it's like, to be a dust bin, in Shaftesbury, with hooligans.." -Hicks

[ace3g]

Boston!!!! Batfleck!!! Boston!!! Spurs now have an NBA record all to themselves!!!

[PopTheGOAT]

Warrior take the L at home!!!!