Reply With Quote
Want the Spurs to be successful, so whatever wins in today's game. But as a fan of the sport in general, all these 3s are hurting the product. Makes the game a lot less interesting.
I doubt it. Generational talent is called that for a reason.
Want the Spurs to be successful, so whatever wins in today's game. But as a fan of the sport in general, all these 3s are hurting the product. Makes the game a lot less interesting.
There’s an interesting discussion in realgm general board about it. The shot has increased every season for the past decade and some believe it will normalize once it gets to 40-45% of shots taken and hit a plateau. Who knows? 38% of Spurs shots in the preseason have been 3s already so it’s not so outlandish.
Well wasn't the game the same way when every possession was a post up? Predictable and uninteresting? I think the game is more interesting now just cause of relatability for example. Anyone can shoot a three but not everyone can dunk. Not everyone is 7 foot and can play the post. What is the average height of the world... There's a reason Curry is so popular. Basketball porn as it is called is more prevalent now then it has been in a long time. Spurs imo changed the game after the 2014 le run. Everyone wants to emulate that. Yes there's more chucking but the ball movement on a league wide scale is definitely up. I would like to see a little more balance on post but analytics are telling teams not to double to not give up the three so the balance will come. Just an influx of numbers right now.\
for the record: i think hand checking should be legal
It's all about volume. Pau and Tony don't take many. Really happy with what Tony did in the playoffs from 3 point range, but to beat GS, they're going to need to take and make those shots in volume. Not just one or two here and there.
I love the beautiful game even the GSW version and I loved how the Spurs have played in preseason but the 3 pt shot is becoming op. There’s going to be a point where one questions why it should be valued higher. There are more and more shooters capable of taking the shot and it’s almost as easy for them as making a layup over contested hands for someone else. I am not heavily versed in analytics but it also feels unfair a foul at the 3 pt line is worth more than a foul on a 2, even a strong slapping if someone close to the basket. There’s just a lot that doesn’t feel right about it and when every team is going to be jacking up 35-40 3s per game (according to future projections) just to be able to compete offensively then one starts to feel like it’s just too much. I don’t think the NBA is there yet, but you can see where they are heading.
Well if it gets to that and does indeed cause ratings to dip, you can be sure the league will do something about it. Right now the 3 pt shot is still in the honeymoon phase... We'll see how it progresses.
Well said.
Good post. While I certainly think there will indeed be a lot of analytics put into the situation ( probably already a summer's worth) the fact that we have shooters is a big plus for us. When you you know Curry can shoot from half court you guard for that, but having multiple 3 point threats is harder to game plan for. We have some talent ourselves.
Concur sir!
I hate when someone(realgm) seemingly talks about other forms of scoring as inefficient and therefore unwatchable. The only reason it's inefficient is because of the points the shot is worth. The shot is going in at a far better percentage. Yet they just keep spewing inefficient.
It's a different form of inefficiency.
10 three point attempts at 40% = 12 points
10 two point attempts at 50% = 10 points
In the bigger picture teams like the Warriors or the Rockets hedge against the numbers and understand that more 3 point attempts puts more points on the board. Personally I don' t like the fact that it has reduced the game to 3 point chucking. Jordan for example had an elite mid-range game and to me that was "exciting basketball". So yeah, your overall point is well understood - but they're strictly talking about the numbers.
I'm aware that it is inefficient given the points awarded. They speak of it like the shot is naturally inefficient and therefore bad for the game/viewing experience. They blurring/regurgitating talking points that would in some conversations be relevant.
red auerbach was initially opposed to the addition of the three point shot being utilized by the NBA as it had been in the ABA because he was afraid it would turn the league into a circus and would dilute the integrity of the game. of course, he softened that stance when the three point shot became a key weapon for the celtics. still, it does appear as if he has been proven right because the game is being altered for the worse. there are almost no big men who can play with their back to the basket and the in-between game is hard to find (credit to Kawhi for having one). on the other hand, the league gets its high scoring games that satisfy the changing demographic now populated by millenials and there are some moments where spacing leads to the passing that can make the game so aesthetic from time to time.
Relatability seems valid to some degree, but I don't know that is significant to me.
It's still a bunch of guys mostly in their 20s earning millions for having good genes and playing a game.
Neither of those guys shoot enough 3's.
.
Last edited by ceds; 10-10-2017 at 08:17 PM.
It was called the Beautiful Game because the motion and unselfishness in passing to teammates was beautiful to a basketball purist. The plays that made it exciting and fun to watch were those extra passes that found someone with the best shot, especially under the basket and not as much on the 3s. It was that passing wizardry from Duncan, Diaw, Manu and Tony that made it go. I'd rather watch the Spurs play like that again than shoot 50% on a lot of 3s.
Seriously, I don't understand why so many people are focusing on three-pointers. The BG used those only insofar as being able to take advantage of bad perimeter D. Big-to-big passing and off-ball cuts were a much bigger hallmark.
Guys, how do you rate Joff as a passer so far?
Can he be our next Diaw?
He's skilled. I have been impressed. I want to see him in real games b4 a comparison to Diaw frankly. Danny said he reminds him more of Tiago.. who was also a skilled passer.
Solution to the three is to move the three back another 3 feet, and remove the corner three.
He's ambitious more than good. When he gets lucky, his passes look fantastic. But he turns it over a lot trying to fit in ill-advised tosses.
Would help. Would also help to have a three-seconds like call for guys who stay behind the arc too long.
I think people tend to confuse Spurs 2014 BG with today Warriors BG.
The Spurs didn't rely on 3's the way that Warriors do now but what people often forget that Spurs BG was a collective-team answer to Parker's injury.
For example, we didn't see many of BG in the 2014 regular season nor in the 1st round against Mavs.
Of course the Spurs should shoot more 3's for mathematical reasons like others said here. But can they return to the BG? I doubt. There are many key pieces that this team would miss to play that way.
Why are you bringing up Manu?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions