Acknowledging the enemy
- Thread starter Darth Divac
- Start date
Last nights warrior/thunder game has me questioning why I continue to waste my time with the Kings.
Sports is suppose to be an escape from reality. A break from the salt mines. The Kings haven't been that for over a decade. Last nights game was the 2nd complete warriors game I've watched (when they're not playing the Kings) and it was extremely enjoyable.
Sports is suppose to be an escape from reality. A break from the salt mines. The Kings haven't been that for over a decade. Last nights game was the 2nd complete warriors game I've watched (when they're not playing the Kings) and it was extremely enjoyable.
I'm pretty sure Curry made a deal with the devil. He's shooting 52% from the floor, 47% from 3, and 91% from the FT line and he's played in 466 out of 472 games in his career, plus 40 for 40 in postseason. Oh, and only 7 technicals in his career. 
It's pretty remarkable.
It's pretty remarkable.
Watching him play is amazing. He tied the record for most made 3s in history. The game winning shot was in some category that is not normal. He now surprises people with 3s from new distances from the basket. I do not like his showboating, but that is just the way the game is played now.
The Thunder played a really great game but still lost. They must be pretty sad today. Their offense at crunch time is really a two man show which is a problem for them. The defensive intensity last night was sensational on both sides. I agree that watching a Warriors game is a whole different experience than watching the Kings. There is a lot to learn from those guys.
The Thunder played a really great game but still lost. They must be pretty sad today. Their offense at crunch time is really a two man show which is a problem for them. The defensive intensity last night was sensational on both sides. I agree that watching a Warriors game is a whole different experience than watching the Kings. There is a lot to learn from those guys.
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure Curry made a deal with the devil. He's shooting 52% from the floor, 47% from 3, and 91% from the FT line and he's played in 466 out of 472 games in his career, plus 40 for 40 in postseason. Oh, and only 7 technicals in his career. It's pretty remarkable.
It's pretty remarkable.
stephen curry is certainly awe-inspiring in his ability to hit so many three's in the way that he does, but i have to agree with gregg popovich about the state of the professional version of this sport; the three-point shot has turned the nba into a game of horse, a glorified series of circus shots that make it rather easy for a team to run up the score without ever having to actually commit to executing the tenets of the sport with the kind of proficiency typically required of professionals...
kings fans and warriors fans alike were wow'ed by the otherworldly dueling three-point contest that steph curry and omri casspi initiated at the end of the first half in an earlier game between the two teams. it was exciting, but it wasn't basketball. personally, i'm not interested in watching nba teams morph into the harlem globetrotters. "the dunk" is already old hat by now. it's no longer an aesthetic revolution, and the three will similarly lose its aesthetic punch through the passage of time. unfortunately, so many three-pointers are taken in pull-up situations and/or early in the shot clock and/or out of the pick and roll (the most artless and elementary play in the entire sport) that it renders the notion of "basketball" a bit irrelevant, especially when there's almost zero strategic incentive to diversify an offense. the game is becoming increasingly homogenized, predictable, and--in my opinion, which is surely in the minority--boring...
hell, there's hardly space in the game anymore for a low-post bruiser like demarcus cousins, and players of that ilk must become adept at shooting the ball from distance in order to survive. i hate that one must conform in order to win in the current nba landscape, that alternative play styles are evaporating, and that the game can be reduced to a simple statistical formula for success...
mark cuban recently advocated for pushing the three-point line back in an effort to return some diversity to the nba, and i think the game will eventually require such a move to maintain its variety, artfulness, and elegance. personally, i think it would be brilliant to eliminate the three from the corners altogether and push the "arc" back anywhere from six inches to a foot, so it would become a true arc instead of a semi-circle (or semi-oval, if you like), where a greater (and disproportionate) share of points are currently rewarded for a shot that's no longer difficult for most professional basketball players...
kings fans and warriors fans alike were wow'ed by the otherworldly dueling three-point contest that steph curry and omri casspi initiated at the end of the first half in an earlier game between the two teams. it was exciting, but it wasn't basketball. personally, i'm not interested in watching nba teams morph into the harlem globetrotters. "the dunk" is already old hat by now. it's no longer an aesthetic revolution, and the three will similarly lose its aesthetic punch through the passage of time. unfortunately, so many three-pointers are taken in pull-up situations and/or early in the shot clock and/or out of the pick and roll (the most artless and elementary play in the entire sport) that it renders the notion of "basketball" a bit irrelevant, especially when there's almost zero strategic incentive to diversify an offense. the game is becoming increasingly homogenized, predictable, and--in my opinion, which is surely in the minority--boring...
hell, there's hardly space in the game anymore for a low-post bruiser like demarcus cousins, and players of that ilk must become adept at shooting the ball from distance in order to survive. i hate that one must conform in order to win in the current nba landscape, that alternative play styles are evaporating, and that the game can be reduced to a simple statistical formula for success...
mark cuban recently advocated for pushing the three-point line back in an effort to return some diversity to the nba, and i think the game will eventually require such a move to maintain its variety, artfulness, and elegance. personally, i think it would be brilliant to eliminate the three from the corners altogether and push the "arc" back anywhere from six inches to a foot, so it would become a true arc instead of a semi-circle (or semi-oval, if you like), where a greater (and disproportionate) share of points are currently rewarded for a shot that's no longer difficult for most professional basketball players...
This is the most bizarre thread I have seen on here in a long time.
Why is Curry the enemy?
Why would the NBA make a rule to combat some who shoot really good? What would a rule like that even look like?
Why is the pull up 3 an elementary play, yet most players in the NBA can't do it?
All pushing the 3pt line back would do is make someone like Steph even MORE valuable. He hit a 38 foot game winner last night like it was layup in warmups.
Why is Curry the enemy?
Why would the NBA make a rule to combat some who shoot really good? What would a rule like that even look like?
Why is the pull up 3 an elementary play, yet most players in the NBA can't do it?
All pushing the 3pt line back would do is make someone like Steph even MORE valuable. He hit a 38 foot game winner last night like it was layup in warmups.
What a depressing post. You act like these "circus shots" are something that every NBA player can do like it's a game of NBA Jam or something. Curry is a phenomenal shooter and playmaker. One of the, if not the, best shooter to have ever played (at least at this point in his career). How can you not at least acknowledge what he is doing is amazing and really fun to watch?
stephen curry's three-point shot is certainly the most impressive that the nba has ever witnessed, but i generally consider the mad dash across the league to shoot as many three's as possible to be a circus-like enterprise. again, i tend to agree with gregg popovich's assessment. it's admittedly "old school," but i just don't find as much enjoyment of the game nor find it particularly compelling when play occurs so regularly in the space between the three-point lines:
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/1...egg-popovich-says-3-pointer-circus-sort-thing
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/1...egg-popovich-says-3-pointer-circus-sort-thing
I can understand why some don't love an offense that centers arounds the 3 but the Warriors are so much more than that. They share the ball, every player knows and appreciates their role AND they play defense. I find their style wildly entertaining. In fact, the game last night was the most fun I'd had watching a game since the Bulls/Heat playoff series several years back. What a game!
Steph could go down as one of the most unguardable players ever. He has guys a ft taller than him trying to defend his shot and they still can't. If he pump fakes he can easily get into the lane for another pull up, pass or layup. The sky hook of threes.
Steph could go down as one of the most unguardable players ever. He has guys a ft taller than him trying to defend his shot and they still can't. If he pump fakes he can easily get into the lane for another pull up, pass or layup. The sky hook of threes.
the enemy? he's the enemy of the NBA. He will be back to back MVP and more than likely back to back champion. I said it last year when the Warriors won the ship, that was the worst thing that could happen to the league. Teams will now look to try to build their team with shooters shooters and more shooters and keep trying to find the next Draymond Green or Klay Thompson, etc. Like the Spurs, they are a unique team in their own way. No point of replicating what they are doing, no one has a Steph Curry on their team. For me personally, I can't hate on the Warriors or their play but man I can't even watch their games anymore, it's just not my cup of tea, I like defense and inside post scoring rather than a track meet chucking up three's left and right.
I'm pretty sure Curry made a deal with the devil. He's shooting 52% from the floor, 47% from 3, and 91% from the FT line and he's played in 466 out of 472 games in his career, plus 40 for 40 in postseason. Oh, and only 7 technicals in his career. It's pretty remarkable.
It's pretty remarkable.
Can you define old school for me? Are you interested in a return to the iso ball that dominated when I started watching in the late 90's or are you picturing something different when you lament the current era?
I don't miss that period, and with perspective I'm thankful they began allowing zone and got rid of the handchecking, which helped end the one on one play that was strangling the league. There was a lot of ugly playoff basketball in the late 90's all the way through the 00's. Remember those 76'er teams? That's basketball hell for me. Not a fan of watching Larry Brown micro manage ever possession as they'd walk it up to get AI another clear out iso play. Extreme example perhaps, but the ball moved less and offenses were to put it nicely less dynamic. Skill isn't what I think of when I picture the Pacer and Pistons going at it and does anyone really want to make the argument that the Spurs of that period were more skilled or better to watch when compared to how they're currently constructed? Those early Spurs teams were painful to watch on the offensive side compared to the beautiful ball movement you see from them today, which is made possible by the three point shot and the subsequent spacing it creates. This is all a matter of perspective and maybe were thinking of different eras, but I take exception with the idea that the post Jordan pre D'antoni period was a more skilled time full of great midrange players.
I think It's also fair to say this stuff is cyclical. The three point shot isn't going away, but teams are going to get better at counter programming and organizations are going to learn you can't replicate what the Warriors do unless you have a Nash or a Curry. Remember when the Lakers won with two seven footers? Everyone went out and tried to emulate that strategy found out how hard it is to find two skilled bigs that work well together. Teams over payed, didn't find the same success, and it fell out of vogue. I don't enjoy watching all the knock off low rent Warrior pretenders out there, but I doubt it's permanent.
I don't miss that period, and with perspective I'm thankful they began allowing zone and got rid of the handchecking, which helped end the one on one play that was strangling the league. There was a lot of ugly playoff basketball in the late 90's all the way through the 00's. Remember those 76'er teams? That's basketball hell for me. Not a fan of watching Larry Brown micro manage ever possession as they'd walk it up to get AI another clear out iso play. Extreme example perhaps, but the ball moved less and offenses were to put it nicely less dynamic. Skill isn't what I think of when I picture the Pacer and Pistons going at it and does anyone really want to make the argument that the Spurs of that period were more skilled or better to watch when compared to how they're currently constructed? Those early Spurs teams were painful to watch on the offensive side compared to the beautiful ball movement you see from them today, which is made possible by the three point shot and the subsequent spacing it creates. This is all a matter of perspective and maybe were thinking of different eras, but I take exception with the idea that the post Jordan pre D'antoni period was a more skilled time full of great midrange players.
I think It's also fair to say this stuff is cyclical. The three point shot isn't going away, but teams are going to get better at counter programming and organizations are going to learn you can't replicate what the Warriors do unless you have a Nash or a Curry. Remember when the Lakers won with two seven footers? Everyone went out and tried to emulate that strategy found out how hard it is to find two skilled bigs that work well together. Teams over payed, didn't find the same success, and it fell out of vogue. I don't enjoy watching all the knock off low rent Warrior pretenders out there, but I doubt it's permanent.
I don't like his effect on the game, don't particularly like him. It still feels like an enormous gimmick to me. But it is the damndest thing I think I've ever seen. That's a huge part of the problem for me -- its not really basketball. Its not about playing the game, running plays, teammates or anything else, just an essentially unstoppable array of bad shots -- or we would have called them bad by anyone else ever. You can't guard a guy out to halfcourt. If he can pull up off his dribble drifting left or right, and bury a 35 footer consistently, what is that? What can you do?
So like I say, I really don't like it. Especially not because of the likely effect on kids all over America right now trying to emulate it. People worried, somewhat correctly, about the effect A.I.'s iso ball was having on youth development. Wait until the surge of super chuckers hits the league in 5-8 years, groomed on the bad 3pt bomb as hero shot.
I should say I tip my hat to him. Its kind of true. I wince at people trying too hard to explain it away etc. etc. But mostly I try to pretend he doesn't exist and focus on the guys actually playing basketball as we've known it. Curry is an entity onto himself, an elemental force of 3-ballness. Even changing the rules to push the 3pt shot back, which IMO is a good idea to slow down the mutation of the game, likely has little effect on Curry. 25ft is the same as 22 for him. It is the damndest thing, but as a fan of the NBA I don't think the damndest thing is necessarily a good thing for the sport, and I'll certainly be rooting, likely futiley,. for the Spurs to reground the sport in hoary principles rather than wild gimmickry.
So like I say, I really don't like it. Especially not because of the likely effect on kids all over America right now trying to emulate it. People worried, somewhat correctly, about the effect A.I.'s iso ball was having on youth development. Wait until the surge of super chuckers hits the league in 5-8 years, groomed on the bad 3pt bomb as hero shot.
I should say I tip my hat to him. Its kind of true. I wince at people trying too hard to explain it away etc. etc. But mostly I try to pretend he doesn't exist and focus on the guys actually playing basketball as we've known it. Curry is an entity onto himself, an elemental force of 3-ballness. Even changing the rules to push the 3pt shot back, which IMO is a good idea to slow down the mutation of the game, likely has little effect on Curry. 25ft is the same as 22 for him. It is the damndest thing, but as a fan of the NBA I don't think the damndest thing is necessarily a good thing for the sport, and I'll certainly be rooting, likely futiley,. for the Spurs to reground the sport in hoary principles rather than wild gimmickry.
ummmm... how can the 3-pt shot be moved back any further in the corners?
There's a sideline there that barely fits guys' feet as it is......
If it can be moved back though, it most definitely should be - the dominance of the 3 is simply too much now for a remotely-balanced sport.
They should also change the zone rules, which make big men fairly useless compared to a wing player on offense.
But changing the 3-pt distance won't be affecting Curry whatsoever. He's WAY too good for an extra foot to matter.
The only way to stop the Warriors' dynasty is:
* Start calling their absurdly-handsy defense. Most of their starters should be in foul trouble by the end of every single first quarter, if it was called right.
* Start calling their illegal screens.
* Hope for significant injury(ies).
There's a sideline there that barely fits guys' feet as it is......
If it can be moved back though, it most definitely should be - the dominance of the 3 is simply too much now for a remotely-balanced sport.
They should also change the zone rules, which make big men fairly useless compared to a wing player on offense.
But changing the 3-pt distance won't be affecting Curry whatsoever. He's WAY too good for an extra foot to matter.
The only way to stop the Warriors' dynasty is:
* Start calling their absurdly-handsy defense. Most of their starters should be in foul trouble by the end of every single first quarter, if it was called right.
* Start calling their illegal screens.
* Hope for significant injury(ies).
You can't That's the point. Its not a competitive sport at that point. Its more like golf. All you can do is find somebody on your side who can do the same thing, run up and down the court, never run plays, and just chuck up whatever you feel like.
BTW, Curry IS the best shooter of all time. At least at those sorts of shots. That's not the question.
A very long time ago -- so long it predates my own basketball watching, so that's not the point -- the 3pt shot was invented as a gimmick. It wasn't a core thing in any way. A fun gimmick shot that hey, maybe it went in. Sometime in the mid 90s to mid 00s it reached a point of balance. Where you could have great players who specialized in it, 3pt shooting roleplayers were valuable. It was a spacer. A valuable alternative strategy.
The problem is that that decision made back in the 70s to award a shot from one spot on the floor a full 50% more value than shots anywhere else on the floor was only a reasonable one if shots from out there were at least 50% harder (and much more at the time) to make. But now when you get a guy like Curry running around able to hit them effortlessly from anywhere, because you are rewarding that shot 50% over anything else, its basically the GOAT alternative. You can't compete with that. You can't defend it.
I've been watching the Warriors on/off numbers this year, and I'm even beginning to question just how great they are as a team sans Curry. You can do that for any team obviously -- we are nothing without Cuz too. But with the Warriors you're talking about a championship team, a 70 win team, and when Stephen Curry is on the floor they have an absurd 119.6 ORTG and .591 eFG%, then he leaves and they have a 104.1 ORTG and .499 eFG%. Which is to say when he is in the game they have an ORTG nearly 7 points higher than any other team in the NBA (OKC), and I would imagine quite possibly the highest of all time, and when he is out they have an ORTG and eFG% roughly equal to the 22nd ranked Indiana Pacers (104.1 and .495). When Curry is out of the game they actually LOSE their minutes, badly I might add. A -6.3 differential, which means that the Golden State Warriors, current and likely future NBA champions, are basically as bad as the Phoenix Suns, 27th in the NBA, without one player. That's absurd.
And all of the above can be converted into a celebration of Curry. It certainly is amazing. But its unbalanced in the extreme, and the way its being done is the problem. Its practically an exploit. If Steph was dominating in the post, or slashing like mad, or whatever, then the other team has a chance to respond, to strategize, to double, or whatever needs to be done. But what Steph does makes the opposing team an afterthought. He's not beating guys, or finding holes in defenses. He just shoots before he even gets into the defensive zone. He's almost in a 3pt shooting contest with no viable defense to stop him. Not important if you are a good defensive team, a bad one, a well coached team, a poorly coached team. You can't defend what he does. You can't even make it tough, since its all basically impossible. I happen to like the 3pt shot, its always been there since I began watching basketball. But if more guys like Curry began streaming into the league I would be beating down the door for the league to get rid of the stripe entirely. When a shot worth 50% more is that easy for you, then there is no need for it to be worth more. If it is, then soon there will be no point at all of taking or practicing any other kind of shot. A layup would even become a giveup shot when you had no other choice.
For those clinging to the idea that's a good thing, let's take the next step. Let's say Steph now has a kid, let's name him Chuck. So Chuck Curry makes the NBA in 20 years and Chuck comes in and he is even better than dad. He doesn't even have to cross halfcourt, can hit a halfcourt shot like most guys hit FTs. And so that's what he does. Every game he comes out, teams desperately try to deny the inbounds, he gets it, takes two steps, heaves, and swish! Is that basketball? There's nothing to do.
In a classic law of unintended consequences case, the NBA created the Curry phenomenon. They, unique in all of the major sports, made scoring from a certain point on the court worth much more than scoring from anyplace on the court. Then they got rid of illegal defense rules, allowing teams to gang up on players inside, and they did that at the same time they got rid of handchecking, collectively making the perimeter game much more attractive than being swarmed and hacked inside. Eventually a shooter of Curry's caliber was going to come along, and when he did they have over the years created a situation where its just simply the best strategy. Where there is no counter, no defense, no other way to achieve that efficiency. There's nothing to do. The rules have dictated one strategy is the best strategy. One player has come along who is better at the best strategy than anybody else. You can't even thug people anymore without being thrown out. Just nothing to do. Guess he wins. Now everybody run off over the summer and spend your time exclusively working on your own chucking, because that's the only hope.
BTW, Curry IS the best shooter of all time. At least at those sorts of shots. That's not the question.
A very long time ago -- so long it predates my own basketball watching, so that's not the point -- the 3pt shot was invented as a gimmick. It wasn't a core thing in any way. A fun gimmick shot that hey, maybe it went in. Sometime in the mid 90s to mid 00s it reached a point of balance. Where you could have great players who specialized in it, 3pt shooting roleplayers were valuable. It was a spacer. A valuable alternative strategy.
The problem is that that decision made back in the 70s to award a shot from one spot on the floor a full 50% more value than shots anywhere else on the floor was only a reasonable one if shots from out there were at least 50% harder (and much more at the time) to make. But now when you get a guy like Curry running around able to hit them effortlessly from anywhere, because you are rewarding that shot 50% over anything else, its basically the GOAT alternative. You can't compete with that. You can't defend it.
I've been watching the Warriors on/off numbers this year, and I'm even beginning to question just how great they are as a team sans Curry. You can do that for any team obviously -- we are nothing without Cuz too. But with the Warriors you're talking about a championship team, a 70 win team, and when Stephen Curry is on the floor they have an absurd 119.6 ORTG and .591 eFG%, then he leaves and they have a 104.1 ORTG and .499 eFG%. Which is to say when he is in the game they have an ORTG nearly 7 points higher than any other team in the NBA (OKC), and I would imagine quite possibly the highest of all time, and when he is out they have an ORTG and eFG% roughly equal to the 22nd ranked Indiana Pacers (104.1 and .495). When Curry is out of the game they actually LOSE their minutes, badly I might add. A -6.3 differential, which means that the Golden State Warriors, current and likely future NBA champions, are basically as bad as the Phoenix Suns, 27th in the NBA, without one player. That's absurd.
And all of the above can be converted into a celebration of Curry. It certainly is amazing. But its unbalanced in the extreme, and the way its being done is the problem. Its practically an exploit. If Steph was dominating in the post, or slashing like mad, or whatever, then the other team has a chance to respond, to strategize, to double, or whatever needs to be done. But what Steph does makes the opposing team an afterthought. He's not beating guys, or finding holes in defenses. He just shoots before he even gets into the defensive zone. He's almost in a 3pt shooting contest with no viable defense to stop him. Not important if you are a good defensive team, a bad one, a well coached team, a poorly coached team. You can't defend what he does. You can't even make it tough, since its all basically impossible. I happen to like the 3pt shot, its always been there since I began watching basketball. But if more guys like Curry began streaming into the league I would be beating down the door for the league to get rid of the stripe entirely. When a shot worth 50% more is that easy for you, then there is no need for it to be worth more. If it is, then soon there will be no point at all of taking or practicing any other kind of shot. A layup would even become a giveup shot when you had no other choice.
For those clinging to the idea that's a good thing, let's take the next step. Let's say Steph now has a kid, let's name him Chuck. So Chuck Curry makes the NBA in 20 years and Chuck comes in and he is even better than dad. He doesn't even have to cross halfcourt, can hit a halfcourt shot like most guys hit FTs. And so that's what he does. Every game he comes out, teams desperately try to deny the inbounds, he gets it, takes two steps, heaves, and swish! Is that basketball? There's nothing to do.
In a classic law of unintended consequences case, the NBA created the Curry phenomenon. They, unique in all of the major sports, made scoring from a certain point on the court worth much more than scoring from anyplace on the court. Then they got rid of illegal defense rules, allowing teams to gang up on players inside, and they did that at the same time they got rid of handchecking, collectively making the perimeter game much more attractive than being swarmed and hacked inside. Eventually a shooter of Curry's caliber was going to come along, and when he did they have over the years created a situation where its just simply the best strategy. Where there is no counter, no defense, no other way to achieve that efficiency. There's nothing to do. The rules have dictated one strategy is the best strategy. One player has come along who is better at the best strategy than anybody else. You can't even thug people anymore without being thrown out. Just nothing to do. Guess he wins. Now everybody run off over the summer and spend your time exclusively working on your own chucking, because that's the only hope.
Last edited:
I suppose all the NBA teams that aren't championship contenders need to go and become sheep and follow the leader since they have no moxie to create their own brand. That's what Curry and the Warriors have done here, they've created their own brand and teams now want to copyright that brand of basketball for false hope and expect minimal consequences in return.
Defenses have to adjust. Plain and simple. If they have to pressure Curry from their own end of their court, so be it.
Warrios play an exciting brand of basketball. I love watching them play. Their passing is unbelievable. Much more watchable than the iso-ball of the 90's-early 00's.
Youngsters will of course try to emulate Curry, but unless they shoot with such a high efficiency, their coaches will never let them play like Curry.
Warrios play an exciting brand of basketball. I love watching them play. Their passing is unbelievable. Much more watchable than the iso-ball of the 90's-early 00's.
Youngsters will of course try to emulate Curry, but unless they shoot with such a high efficiency, their coaches will never let them play like Curry.
We can't have another Sweet River Baines, now can we?
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83479601/
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/83479601/