Why does everyone hate the Warriors? (split)

[KingsFanSince85]

Some of us don't "hate" our Kings opponent. I don't and you know what - I feel perfectly normal.

That's great for you. Which means you won't take offense or care about what I say about you. While fans like you are well within your right to root for whomever you want, however you want --- you aren't what I'd consider a hardcore fan. Maybe you don't even consider yourself a hardcore fan. I have no idea. In my book, you are a fair weather fan.

Hardcore fans are loyal to their team through thick and thin. Not only that, they loathe the enemies and rivals of said team.

I think you'll find that, while there is a percentage of fans that can root for all teams within a given region, a majority of fans aren't like that. Most Raiders fans hate the 49ers and vice versa. Most A's fans hate the Giants and vice versa. Go to Chicago sometime. Almost every Cubs fan hates the southsiders. That's the norm, not the exception.

but it's interesting to me that so many just don't like their style of play.

And it's interesting to me why that's still interesting to you after the reasons have been explained quite a few times by different people.

The cliff notes version is that we don't care to watch a 3pt shootout or game of HORSE during what is supposed to be a game of basketball. While there should be elements of the 3pt shot in the game, those in opposition don't feel it should encompass 40 - 50% of all shot attempts. And while off-balance shots 5 feet behind the line when you aren't squared to the basket might be fun to see on occasion, they aren't good shots on the whole and isn't something the we naysayers want to see practiced by our youth and/or becoming a staple of the game. Enough said.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

[Modding]

This conversation has been as civil as could reasonably be expected to this point. Let's not take this to a "No True Scotsman/Kings Fan" place.

 

[VF21]

...The only truth is that neither side can prove that it's right.

Unfortunately, if I'm right it means the end of the love I've had for the game of basketball for over 50 years.

 

[pshn80]

And that's all cool, but I'm not the one up in here declaring my preferred style of play to be the best, or the "most beautiful," or the "most fun," and implying that people who aren't on board with how teams are playing now need to come out of the stone age and get into formation, or whatever passive-aggressive coded language they're using instead of that, which ends up more or less meaning the same thing. I'm not the one over here on some, "WHY U NO LIKE BULLY BALL?"

Come on, Slim, where are you getting no that stuff. You and others dislike the Warriors because of their style of play. And this dislike does not seem casual but rather extreme. Your oss convince me of your sincerity bu my ndersand ng of why it s "extreme" is not as clear. But, as you say, you permit me to look at it differently.

In these finals I again root for a Warriors victory. I also have an unreasonable view - I don't like LeBron.

 

[pshn80]

That's great for you. Which means you won't take offense or care about what I say about you. While fans like you are well within your right to root for whomever you want, however you want --- you aren't what I'd consider a hardcore fan. Maybe you don't even consider yourself a hardcore fan. I have no idea. In my book, you are a fair weather fan.

Hardcore fans are loyal to their team through thick and thin. Not only that, they loathe the enemies and rivals of said team.

I think you'll find that, while there is a percentage of fans that can root for all teams within a given region, a majority of fans aren't like that. Most Raiders fans hate the 49ers and vice versa. Most A's fans hate the Giants and vice versa. Go to Chicago sometime. Almost every Cubs fan hates the southsiders. That's the norm, not the exception.




And it's interesting to me why that's still interesting to you after the reasons have been explained quite a few times by different people.

The cliff notes version is that we don't care to watch a 3pt shootout or game of HORSE during what is supposed to be a game of basketball. While there should be elements of the 3pt shot in the game, those in opposition don't feel it should encompass 40 - 50% of all shot attempts. And while off-balance shots 5 feet behind the line when you aren't squared to the basket might be fun to see on occasion, they aren't good shots on the whole and isn't something the we naysayers want to see practiced by our youth and/or becoming a staple of the game. Enough said.

Let me try and put on my "good natured" hat. I'll try. Not a hard-core fan? A far-weather fan? Sir, you are a bad "reader" or you haven't read at all. I, like a number on here, nave been with the Kimgs since the beginning, putting money where my mouth is (STH). A fair weather fan wouldn't have lasted two seasons. Hardcore? I eat and sleep it. In a word, you are dead wrong. Now do you want to start over he try again with further analysis?

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Come on, Slim, where are you getting no that stuff. You and others dislike the Warriors because of their style of play. And this dislike does not seem casual but rather extreme...

So what if it is, though? That doesn't mean that I should have to defend my taste in basketball. My hatred of the goddamned lakers is "rather extreme," too, and nobody asks me to defend that...

 

[pshn80]

So what if it is, though? That doesn't mean that I should have to defend my taste in basketball. My hatred of the goddamned lakers is "rather extreme," too, and nobody asks me to defend that...

Sorry, I guess I just don't get hatred of opposing teams. Or maybe I get it but but don't share it.

PS: was that you, Slim? Anyway, thanks, MOD.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

No pobo. Fortunately, you had the next post in the thread, so it was easy enough to split the two.

 

[Sac.Kings]

I think the possible answer as to "why no one cares" if you dislike Lebron/Cavs is that Lebron has been quite easy to dislike since he left for Miami, so he's old news. He's also a bit of a prima donna (understatement of the century right there). People that are familiar with the NBA and follow it regularly already know why you would dislike Lebron -- there are tons of reasons. There's no confusion there. People dislike the Clippers because of their flopping, which they have been doing since they got together a few years ago. They are whiners, complainers, and choke artists. Everyone knows why someone would dislike the Clippers. Etc. for the rest.

As annoying as it is for me to watch Golden State play, they haven't really done anything extreme to annoy the casual viewer. Sure, they can play dirty and as of late, throw very cheap shots (Draymond comes to mind), but the way they are viewed by the majority is of a three point shooting team that can also pass and defend. They have baby-faced MVP with a great image and probably have the best shooting backcourt in history, or at the very least right at the top. People want to watch that, and they just broke the Bull's record of all time wins. Also, the NBA I suspect is working hard to maintain that squeaky clean image, which is why I think they refused to suspend Green, which IMO was easily the correct solution. No way on earth that that was a basketball play, period.

Golden State is a money making machine for the NBA and for people that don't really "get" basketball or haven't watched it for a long time, they are fun to watch. I can easily see why it would be thrilling for a casual fan to watch Curry pull up for 28 feet and sink it. I cringe every single time, but someone out there loves it. That's why they don't understand the hate for the Warriors. In their mind, what have they done to make you hate them?

The question of whether or not their style of play suits one person or another is a personal choice. Everyone has preferences. I'll be honest, there are parts of the Warrior's offense that is beautiful to watch, but it's those jack em up threes that I cannot and will not ever support. That's a bad shot period, even if you hit it. I also am not a fan of small-ball, which essentially describes the Warriors to a T (but they do have the ability to match up if needed). I just don't understand the psychology behind the rest of the NBA teams. If they go small, I go big and I kill them inside. Last I checked, layups were still completed at a higher % than threes.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

In a word, you are dead wrong.

Actually, that's 4 words. But I digress.

I'm not dead wrong considering how I prefaced the statement. It's merely my opinion. And before you accuse somebody else of being a "bad reader" or "not reading at all", you should ensure you are doing it properly yourself. Because you aren't.

Circling back to what I said: "you aren't what I'd consider a hardcore fan". I then further explained why and cited examples. You obviously don't agree and thus answered my question as to whether you consider yourself a hardcore fan. We just have drastically different definitions of what a hardcore fan actually is.

Again, I still maintain that fans like you with such a lax attitude toward their teams rivals fall into the minority. That doesn't make you wrong, just different the norm.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

As annoying as it is for me to watch Golden State play, they haven't really done anything extreme to annoy the casual viewer. .

Other than the continued antics of Green, I actually agree with you on this point. I fully understand why the casual fan likes or enjoys watching the Warriors. The same was true of our Kings back in the day. But as hard as it is for some of us to imagine, our rivals didn't like that team all too much either.

As I stated before, my dislike of the Warriors goes back far before this team or even the exciting Baron Davis led teams 10 years ago. I don't like any of our fellow CA teams. They have always been division rivals, as well as regional rivals. I don't like to see my rivals having more success than my own team. Color me a hater. I'm more than fine with it. I'm betting most of you SF Giants fans couldn't be made to ever appreciate or root for the Dodgers if they were in the Warriors shoes as a "fun" team. Same goes for me in reverse.

Having conveyed that, I also just don't like many of their players for differing reasons. I've never liked Klay Thompson since he entered the league. He has one of those smug suck-hole faces you just want to punch. Draymond Green is flat out a punk whose attitude and act has become worse as the team success has gone to his head. I view him as I'm sure most Cousins haters view Boogie except that he's not on my team. Harrison Barnes bothers me because, as a UNC fan, he constantly underachieved and let my team down. Never lived up to the billing in Tarheel blue and irritates me when he does well now because of it.

Steph Curry is really the only player that I used to like. I was a huge fan of his coming out of college and really wanted the Kings to draft him. I'm not sure it's fair to say I hate him, I guess it's more about the fact that he's killing it for one of our rivals AND I kinda get a sense the past few seasons that success has really gone to his head too. His body language and demeanor is just different that it was his first 4-5 years in the league and it rubs me the wrong way now.

 

[Bricklayer]

But you'd be okay with just letting DMC go 1 on 1 in the post and grinding it out (I'm assuming here so please forgive me if my presumption was wrong)? How is Curry chucking 3s which he is immensely good at any different from having the great bigs of old pounding it inside? Both are unstoppable. The %s aren't that different. Or are guards not meant to score for the game to be considered basketball?

Make Curry's jumpers worth the same amount of points as Boogie's post moves or Westbrook's drives, and I have no complaint.

The problem is that Curry is basically benefitting from/exploiting a league rule favoring his preferred shot over everybody else's preferred shot. 55% of all Steph's shots this year were threes, because why not when they count more than any other shot you can take.

He's a marvelous shooter, but he also just throws up wildly bad shots, which is fine in 3pt world because you only need to make 1/3 of them to be as good as a 50% shooter. So chuck away.

His numbers this year:

30.1pts on .669 TS% are basically breaking the game. No guard could ever remotely achieve that without getting extra points on all his shots.

If there were no 3pt line:

25.0pts on .556 TS%


Still a strong offensive guard, but his legend, his GOATYness stems entirely from him really figuring out the exploit of getting 50% more points for every distance shot he puts up. His shots are not being governed by the same rules everybody else's shots are, and its helping drive an insane leaguewide 3pt explosions as everybody realizes the only way yo compete with 3pt chuking is to start chucking them up yourself. Its the +50% incentive driving all of it.

 

[kingsboi]

I think the possible answer as to "why no one cares" if you dislike Lebron/Cavs is that Lebron has been quite easy to dislike since he left for Miami, so he's old news. He's also a bit of a prima donna (understatement of the century right there). People that are familiar with the NBA and follow it regularly already know why you would dislike Lebron -- there are tons of reasons. There's no confusion there. People dislike the Clippers because of their flopping, which they have been doing since they got together a few years ago. They are whiners, complainers, and choke artists. Everyone knows why someone would dislike the Clippers. Etc. for the rest.

As annoying as it is for me to watch Golden State play, they haven't really done anything extreme to annoy the casual viewer. Sure, they can play dirty and as of late, throw very cheap shots (Draymond comes to mind), but the way they are viewed by the majority is of a three point shooting team that can also pass and defend. They have baby-faced MVP with a great image and probably have the best shooting backcourt in history, or at the very least right at the top. People want to watch that, and they just broke the Bull's record of all time wins. Also, the NBA I suspect is working hard to maintain that squeaky clean image, which is why I think they refused to suspend Green, which IMO was easily the correct solution. No way on earth that that was a basketball play, period.

Golden State is a money making machine for the NBA and for people that don't really "get" basketball or haven't watched it for a long time, they are fun to watch. I can easily see why it would be thrilling for a casual fan to watch Curry pull up for 28 feet and sink it. I cringe every single time, but someone out there loves it. That's why they don't understand the hate for the Warriors. In their mind, what have they done to make you hate them?

The question of whether or not their style of play suits one person or another is a personal choice. Everyone has preferences. I'll be honest, there are parts of the Warrior's offense that is beautiful to watch, but it's those jack em up threes that I cannot and will not ever support. That's a bad shot period, even if you hit it. I also am not a fan of small-ball, which essentially describes the Warriors to a T (but they do have the ability to match up if needed). I just don't understand the psychology behind the rest of the NBA teams. If they go small, I go big and I kill them inside. Last I checked, layups were still completed at a higher % than threes.

It's the alpha and the sheep effect

 

[KingsFanSince85]

Still a strong offensive guard, but his legend, his GOATYness stems entirely from him really figuring out the exploit of getting 50% more points for every distance shot he puts up.

Yeah, any GOAT talk is utterly ridiculous. He's an all-time great shooter, no doubt. But I'm not sure he's a better shooter than Larry Bird, Ray Allen, Reggie Miller, Peja Stojakovic, etc.. He's just taken advantage of the 3pt line so much better than those players ever did largely because teams/coaches have embraced the practice more than they ever have before. Lots of NFL QB's are putting up 5,000+ yard seasons and breaking TD pass records due to the added focus in the passing game, but that doesn't mean those QB's are better than the Montana, Elway, and Marino.

Furthermore, to be considered GOAT, you have to do more than shoot. Take shooting away from Steph and what else does he bring to the table? He's a fantastic ball-handler and a pretty good playmaker when he want's to be, but an all-time great at it? Nope. And he's an average defender, more of a "team" defender than anything else.

LeBron James and Magic Johnson could dominate games without scoring. Jordan was once a DPOY. Steph can't do either of those things. That's one of the reasons he isn't getting the respect from his peers.

 

[Bricklayer]

His ability to get the shot off his own dribble is what separates him from the likes of Peja, Reggie etc. He's legitimately the GOAT at that ability, making him the one impossible to stop.

But, if the league had not put in a place a rules saying 23 foot jumpers were worth 150% as much as 22 foot jumpers, post moves, hooks, fingerrolls etc., then Curry being the GOAT at his particular skill/shot would just make him another in a long line of very talented offensive players.

 

[peacelate]

Would you guys prefer to do away with the 3 and have teams congest the lanes?

 

[Telemachus]

Would you guys prefer to do away with the 3 and have teams congest the lanes?

I find this line of thinking odd. Before the 3 pt. Shot, most teams played a free flowing offense with no trouble of creating spacing. I always found it interesting that teams in the 70s & 80s almost all averaged 100 to 120 pts a game. As the 3 became a bigger part of the game, scoring seemed to drop in the late 80s & 90s. The league dropped the hand check rule (and made other changes) in order to bring scoring back up. Personally, I would love to see the 3 removed and see what happens.

 

[peacelate]

I find this line of thinking odd. Before the 3 pt. Shot, most teams played a free flowing offense with no trouble of creating spacing. I always found it interesting that teams in the 70s & 80s almost all averaged 100 to 120 pts a game. As the 3 became a bigger part of the game, scoring seemed to drop in the late 80s & 90s. The league dropped the hand check rule (and made other changes) in order to bring scoring back up. Personally, I would love to see the 3 removed and see what happens.

Say hello to zone defenses. Zone defenses while removing the 3 pt line will kill the game. Book it.

Teams back then scored more points because NBA forced you to play man-to-man. You couldn't play the zone defenses/illegal defenses and overload the strong side of the floor like you can today.

League saw a problem with man-to-man because Jordan came along and iso'd everyone out of the gym.

 

[KingMilz]

You saw more of this type of basketball during the regular season against over-matched teams. They were like a cat playing with a mouse. However, you're not seeing as much of it in the postseason against better teams. Down the stretch against OKC, their offense generally consisted of Steph or Klay creating their own shots off the dribble (often step back 3's) or via screen and curls.

Not much different than the other championship teams I mentioned. The only difference is the number of 3's.

Yeah off course that's the case that's why everyone on this forum basically refuses the idea to trade Cousins is because they believe in the playoffs he can takeover and win a game on his own like Curry/Klay did. That's basically when the defence get's really tight and good like OKC's was you need superstars to win you the game because team's like OKC can shut down your ball movement. That's the argument I hear on here about Cousins just about everyday but when Steph/Klay actually accomplish it it's off the dribble circus shots and not team basketball.

That actually is team basketball because they realise the other team is defending so well that they have to take over because the ball movement is not working to once again free up the ball movement with them being more aggressive and forcing traps/switches and such to create 4 on 5/ 3 on 4 situations in the half court which Draymond Green excels in better than anyone in the NBA.

If it was all about ball movement/passing and cuts like everyone all of a sudden is preaching than the Atlanta Hawks would have swept everyone last year.

 

[pshn80]

Actually, that's 4 words. But I digress.

I'm not dead wrong considering how I prefaced the statement. It's merely my opinion. And before you accuse somebody else of being a "bad reader" or "not reading at all", you should ensure you are doing it properly yourself. Because you aren't.

Circling back to what I said: "you aren't what I'd consider a hardcore fan". I then further explained why and cited examples. You obviously don't agree and thus answered my question as to whether you consider yourself a hardcore fan. We just have drastically different definitions of what a hardcore fan actually is.

Again, I still maintain that fans like you with such a lax attitude toward their teams rivals fall into the minority. That doesn't make you wrong, just different the norm.

I'm happy with that. Now you know there are hard core fans of the Kings that are different from you. And I'm sure both of us are happy.

 

[Telemachus]

Say hello to zone defenses. Zone defenses while removing the 3 pt line will kill the game. Book it.

Teams back then scored more points because NBA forced you to play man-to-man. You couldn't play the zone defenses/illegal defenses and overload the strong side of the floor like you can today.

League saw a problem with man-to-man because Jordan came along and iso'd everyone out of the gym.

I have always felt that zones were allowed in part because of the 3pt line. While MJ was the best, there have always been great iso players, and teams had to adjust how they defended them.

I also believe that the lack of fundamentals has greatly hurt the game. It amazes how many players don't know how to set a proper screen, or how many don't know how to use one either. There are so many simple things that help an offense run smoother that many NBA players don't seem to understand. For instance, I can remember many times when Cousins would get the ball in the post only to watch JT move to the other side of the key (hoping to either get the ball or maybe get into position for a rebound). The result was that it made it easier for JT's man to double Cousins while also clogging the paint. Now if he would have run through the paint, it would create many more options. Maybe Cousins passes him the ball when he cuts, or maybe he draws the attention of other defenders, creating more space for Cousins to work, or maybe JT's man stays with Cousins leaving JT open for a jumper after he goes through the paint. I see basic mistakes like this by many players across the league, and it leaves me scratching my head. My guess is that the main culprit is players spending less time in college. NBA coaches didn't used to have to worry about teaching players HOW to play the game. They only had to teach them how to run their schemes on both sides of the floor.

 

[pshn80]

I think the possible answer as to "why no one cares" if you dislike Lebron/Cavs is that Lebron has been quite easy to dislike since he left for Miami, so he's old news. He's also a bit of a prima donna (understatement of the century right there). People that are familiar with the NBA and follow it regularly already know why you would dislike Lebron -- there are tons of reasons. There's no confusion there. People dislike the Clippers because of their flopping, which they have been doing since they got together a few years ago. They are whiners, complainers, and choke artists. Everyone knows why someone would dislike the Clippers. Etc. for the rest.

As annoying as it is for me to watch Golden State play, they haven't really done anything extreme to annoy the casual viewer. Sure, they can play dirty and as of late, throw very cheap shots (Draymond comes to mind), but the way they are viewed by the majority is of a three point shooting team that can also pass and defend. They have baby-faced MVP with a great image and probably have the best shooting backcourt in history, or at the very least right at the top. People want to watch that, and they just broke the Bull's record of all time wins. Also, the NBA I suspect is working hard to maintain that squeaky clean image, which is why I think they refused to suspend Green, which IMO was easily the correct solution. No way on earth that that was a basketball play, period.

Golden State is a money making machine for the NBA and for people that don't really "get" basketball or haven't watched it for a long time, they are fun to watch. I can easily see why it would be thrilling for a casual fan to watch Curry pull up for 28 feet and sink it. I cringe every single time, but someone out there loves it. That's why they don't understand the hate for the Warriors. In their mind, what have they done to make you hate them?

The question of whether or not their style of play suits one person or another is a personal choice. Everyone has preferences. I'll be honest, there are parts of the Warrior's offense that is beautiful to watch, but it's those jack em up threes that I cannot and will not ever support. That's a bad shot period, even if you hit it. I also am not a fan of small-ball, which essentially describes the Warriors to a T (but they do have the ability to match up if needed). I just don't understand the psychology behind the rest of the NBA teams. If they go small, I go big and I kill them inside. Last I checked, layups were still completed at a higher % than threes.

Well said. If a person doesn't agree with you, as I don't, they are a "casual" fan? I don't think so, at least speaking for me.

 

[peacelate]

In a vacuum, yes 33% is required from 3 to be as efficient from 2 at 50% FG. However, we can't judge point value in a vacuum because that's not how it occurs in reality.

2 pt shot attempts draw more shooting fouls than 3 pt attempts so have a higher point value. So for every 2 pt shot taken, there are more free throws associated with it than 3 pt shot taken. His TS% isn't only based on his threes. You have to remember he is a 90% FT shooter.

So no, you can't just jack up threes and increase TS% alone.

 

[NowImLost]

 

[lawlman91]

You made a curious assumption that ignored what I said.

lmao well said

 

[lawlman91]

Say hello to zone defenses. Zone defenses while removing the 3 pt line will kill the game. Book it.

Teams back then scored more points because NBA forced you to play man-to-man. You couldn't play the zone defenses/illegal defenses and overload the strong side of the floor like you can today.

League saw a problem with man-to-man because Jordan came along and iso'd everyone out of the gym.

I don't understand how no 3pt line will kill the game

 

[peacelate]

Did Sh

His ability to get the shot off his own dribble is what separates him from the likes of Peja, Reggie etc. He's legitimately the GOAT at that ability, making him the one impossible to stop.

But, if the league had not put in a place a rules saying 23 foot jumpers were worth 150% as much as 22 foot jumpers, post moves, hooks, fingerrolls etc., then Curry being the GOAT at his particular skill/shot would just make him another in a long line of very talented offensive players.

Are you sure about that? In your calculation of TS%, you reduced his 3 pt shots to 2 pt shots. That's fine. However, you would have to make the same adjustment for every 3 Pt shot taken by any player because they are playing by the same rules. Then it would be more reasonable to compare TS%.

Reggie Miller posted a .650 TS% while taking only 3.9 3PA/game at a .348 clip. How did he attain such a high TS% shooting so few threes? Did he cheat the game?

 

[peacelate]

I don't understand how no 3pt line will kill the game

If there's no 3 Pt line, what incentive is it to guard anything beyond the 3Pt line? It's worth the same as a 2 PT shot at the basket. It's a lower percentage shot than a 2 Pt shot. No reason to guard a shot from that distance because most times they will miss it. Just pack the paint and guard the higher percentage shot.

Which would you guard: a 35% 2 pt shot or a 60% 2 pt shot? It won't be pretty watching 10 guys in the paint.

 

[Merdiesel]

Guilty by association...
Dirty Draymond Green gets away with ****ing murder out there.
This guy could literally slap Adam Silvers mom across the face and somehow the league would find a way to justify it as a basketball move.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

If there's no 3 Pt line, what incentive is it to guard anything beyond the 3Pt line? It's worth the same as a 2 PT shot at the basket. It's a lower percentage shot than a 2 Pt shot. No reason to guard a shot from that distance because most times they will miss it. Just pack the paint and guard the higher percentage shot.

Which would you guard: a 35% 2 pt shot or a 60% 2 pt shot? It won't be pretty watching 10 guys in the paint.

If the three-point shot is removed, there is no reason to allow zone defenses, either.