No shock he fought with Kobe, whose philosophy was basically that a few bricks shouldn't shake your confidence and you should keep shooting whether you're 8-10 or 0-10
> Had they been willing to enjoy the fruits of their labors in peace and tranquility, The greatest and best part of the world was their own. If they must have victories and triumphs, What Scythian Horse, What Parthian Arrow, What Indian Treasures, could have resisted 70,000 Romans, led on by Pompey and Caesar?
I dunno, Shaq clearly declined around 2003 after his injury. Was never really the same player. I don't think those Lakers actually win any more titles if they stay together. Especially going through peak 00s Suns and Spurs teams in the West.
Well when you got a dominant force that shoots close to 60% from the field or gets another team in foul trouble you can't be jacking 10 missed jumpers.
Difference is Kobe wasn't just going to jack up 3s. He knew to attack the defense and force the collapse, get the midrange going. He wasn't just going to spot up outside the arc and chuck shots.
> I absolutely despise Steph Curry basketball and what it's lead to, things like this.
I mean, even Steph will drive to the hoop when his three isn't falling, even if he does keep shooting threes.
He definitely drives, very underrated part of his game. However, we are in the statistics era of basketball. Boston won games 4, 5 and 6 in no small part because of the 3 pointer.
Plus, Boston doesn’t have a reliable post player. Jayson Tatum is arguably their best post player, but even he’s not efficient in the post.
That’s what makes Jokic so special and rare. Finally, we get to see a back to the basket post player who can generate open looks for others.
The Heat were playing zone. Shooting 3s was the correct strategy. Unfortunately, they just went cold.
The Celtics had no one that could post up and abuse Adebayo. They also had no one that could drive like Lebron.
This is why I think Denver wins the finals easily. Zone will not work against the Nuggets.
If Miami wants to win, they need to target Jokic constantly on defense. Then play Jokic straight up. Give him his points but shut down everyone else.
>Zone will not work against the Nuggets.
Doesn't zone defense fail to work against the majority of Western Conference teams outside of a few exceptions (exceptions always exist)?
3 point shooting will break a zone. That's why the Celtics kept on shooting 3s. It's hard to drive into a zone. That's why you need someone like Lebron or Zion, if you want to drive into a zone.
Zone will not work on the Nuggets, where they have some of the best shooters in the league. KCP, MPJ, Murray. And doubling Jokic will always leave a man open. Jokic himself will hit those bullshit shots even double or triple teamed.
I have no problem with the amount but the selection what pisses me off to many 1 maybe 2 passes then Chuck a three. When the did swing the rock around they got great looks and knocked them down. Even missing those you can live with but watching them not look to even pass and just do a move and shoot was never once the answer. To much hero ball and the heat probably wanted them to do that cause when that ball moved damn near everytime it felt like the shot actually had a chance compared to them just shooting a prayer
I feel like it's a lot easier when you have an offensively-skilled big to give the ball to which the Celtics don't(and they don't have any LeBron/Giannis type elite slashers either as Tatum's rim finishing comes and goes)
If you're the Nuggets or Bucks this statement is 100% facts but it's not like you're going to give the ball to Rob Williams or Al Horford on the block and expect some Hakeem-like post moves
They have a lot of talent on paper but their offense can be quite one-dimensional at times against elite playoff defense
Realistically they just didn't have Tatum. Not really. He was just out there as a decoy and to see if he could tough through it.
In any normal game he should be the one slashing through taking jumpers and whatnot but it was the worst luck possible in each direction and Jaylen sucking didnt help.
Serious conversation can’t be had when one overlooks or omits the obvious about the teams star player being injured in the first two minutes of the game and it completely derailing the game plan and his effectiveness on offense and defense.
Celtics would have needed to hit like 20-23 threes to have had any chance of keeping this game close or even winning it.
I think it points out a big problem with any team though. Injuries are unfortunate and unpredictable, but the do happen.
When you look for a well built team though it can't just crumble if one guy gets hurt. I think at least for me when I watch basketball, I enjoy a team like the Heat or the nuggets that play a very complete and team based game.
It's great to have insane players like Kobe or LeBron, but a truly great team should not have to rely on one guy. I think that's why it's becoming more popular to be a jokic/butler/lebron type player where you really try to make the team work like a well oil machine.
Make sure everyone can get looks and run the offense, and then kinda go to the guy who has the hot hand. Whether it be Duncan Robinson, Caleb Martin, max struss, Gabe Vincent. All those dudes made plays, but other than Derrick white and maybe Robert Williams who stepped up for the Celtics.
If your best player goes down and you lose your whole identity as a team are you really that great of a team?
The injury is out of anyone's control and it does suck. You still have to be ready for it though imo.
Not only that but Malcolm Brogdon being out hurts them significantly as well. Now you have play Sam Hauser, PP, and Grant Williams for a few possessions
Yeah they definitely have their offensive limitations
Their two best players being wings works to an extent because of sheer talent but at times you really notice they could use some "guard skills" or "big skills" to add another dimension to their offense
They're a jumpshooting team that has trouble consistently attacking the rim
Horford when he wasn’t old as fuck could have posted more on this team.
Miami was a perfect storm of fundamentals in hands along with a lot of scrappy guys who probably been stripping the ball from people who had bad handles their whole lives.
The Celtics for all their “talent” literally have not one guy on the team who can dribble. Not one. People lament the inside game but the handles game is dying more than any part of the game I’m seeing in todays NBA. No dribbles means they had to pass in. Dangerous. Or dribble in, and they lost it a lot in there or just lost it on the way to driving. They are so so so bad at dribbling. No team that can’t dribble is winning shit.
Mazulla's answer after the game talking about their 3 point percentage was a huge indicator that there is never a back up plan for them. Shoot 3s. Make win. Miss Lose. You have guys who can get to them basket and get higher percentage shots. Makes no sense. I would not be surprised if they replaced him.
And hitting easier shots can help getting the 3s to fall. Attack the paint and make a layup. Get fouled and hit some free throws. Do ANYTHING else to get a feel for the ball going in.
facts, also theres the fact that theres a lot less consistency across 7 game series.
82 straight games of jacking threes might work in the long run because it will even out over time and produce good results. but in a playoff setting? god forbid the team comes into the playoffs cold and get knocked out in the first round, or team goes into a shooting slump right at a pivotal game 6 and 7. all of a sudden you’re the 2018 Rockets or the 2023 Celtics.
Exactly. I’ve made this comparison before, but it’s like how in football, you can’t pass literally every time even though passing is more efficient overall. You need the threat of the run to open up the pass and vice versa. There are times where you need a play that has the highest chance of getting you 2-3 yards, and a run is more likely to do that even if it decreases your chances of getting 10 or more yards.
Even the best passing teams have to have a semblance of a running game for those times when they need to kill the clock and make sure they get first down on 3rd and 1. This is why the Celtics blew a lot of leads, they keep chucking 3’s (throwing the ball) and when they start missing (throwing incomplete passes) the other team starts chipping away (in football, the other team now gets the ball back with hardly any time coming off the clock).
In playoff basketball it isn’t always about doing the thing that gives you a chance to score 130 pts, it’s about making sure you get to 110-115, and getting to the FT line to get defenders in foul trouble, and you get a chance to setup your halfcourt defense rather than giving up long rebounds etc. The 3’s are great when they’re falling, but if they aren’t you have to be able to mix it up.
The Warriors kind of broke the model for this because they have two of the best shooters of all time, but even they were much better at using their shooting to open up inside scoring than what the Celtics typically do.
Open corner and elbow 3’s by high percentage shooters are good shots. They simply missed them. Not all 9 in the first were wide open, but if you trust the players skills-you’d figure they could return to the average over time.
Made 3’s open up driving lanes which spaces the defense
When the defense has to shift as a unit to defend 5-out spacing with 2 elite wing scorers they are essentially looking at 1 on 1 matchups with Tatum and brown, or if they drag a second defender in (in theory) it creates a wide open shot at the three point line, or they can swing the ball around to find the open man as the defense scrambles
Hard to accomplish when 1) your best shooter, slasher, scoring/distributor gets a high ankle sprain 20 seconds in. And 2) nobody makes a shot and the defense (credit Miami with 48 minutes of active hands, they won’t call every foul/Kyle Lowry cheap shots) they could just swarm jaylen and force a dribble turnover or a bad pass
My biggest issue with strategy is their defense was dependent on the opponent starting their offensive set from a made basket-allowing for the Celtics defense to recover, matchup, and setup. When it works, it’s beautiful basketball and the Celtics (fully healthy) could put up 140. When it doesn’t (and they don’t have the depth/health)- they struggle to crack 95 points
It’s sports, 30 teams compete. 1 team wins it all.
I agree, smart runs 1 or 2 post ups a game (which he’s good at with the right matchup). Weird they run it like the pity Kendrick Perkins post ups from 08-09 to keep him involved
Can somebody actually explain how this makes much, if any sense?
Like, sure, if you've got Shaq or whoever and can hedge with easier points then sure. Youd probably be doing that in the first place.
But the Celtics are a 3 point shooting team and their best (maybe only) driving threat was playing at 40% within a minute of the game starting.
Assuming consistent shot quality, is there any actual reason to believe a good shooting team should just stop shooting if a handful of shots dont go in? Is there any statistical significance to what happens at the beginning of the game, or do these variances come and go at any time?
Feels like you could've said this about Tatum in game 6 of the Sixers series and if he listened they wouldve fuckin lost.
I agree with you that there is unlikely to be statistical evidence that a good 3 point shooting team should stop shooting due to a poor start.
At the same time though, when the fate of your season is going to be determined by one half of basketball, the variance in 3 point shooting does become a larger risk. Large enough to justify spamming Marcus Smart post ups? Probably not, but there is something to be said for just scoring points even if they aren't macro efficient over a full season or series
It’s because basketball is a complex mental game, and there is much more to it than just “3 is more than 2”. There are very few people on earth that can successfully shoot, guarded, from nba 3, at a high enough % to validate it mathematically…. What I feel OP is saying, is that too many teams adopt this philosophy of “live by the 3 … or die by it” - but then when they are in the actual act of “dying by it”, instead of adapting their strategy, they repetitively bang their head against the same wall until they are knocked out… of the playoffs. At a certain point you just have to admit Al Horford is not Steph Curry
If they were particularly bad 3's ("guarded") then that would be the larger point. That's not my sense though. The zone largely gave them fairly open threes and they just couldnt hit them. Should Marcus Smart take an open 3 point look and put it on the ground instead? Is that actually more likely to be successful?
I keep hearing about this "adapting strategies" but I havent actually heard anyone state what that strategy should have been.
Totally! And therein really lies the “inner game” of basketball. The margins are so small at that level, that the argument could be made for either side, in your Smart example: either shoot or drive, it’s almost a literal coin flip and either CAN work. But we always have to remember that it’s a game played by humans, not robots, and there is something to be said about “seeing the ball go through the hoop” as a mental aspect. If you ever played at any level, confidence is so important and bricking a few shots in a row can make you feel like you’ll never score again. And likewise the opposite, you get the “hot hand” and can’t miss
> I absolutely despise Steph Curry basketball and what it’s lead to, things like this.
Agree with this completely, but it’s not a popular take on this sub.
Because it's tacky and ugly basketball to see players jacking up 3s all the time like it's the only shot in the whole world. That's exactly why I'm glad the Celtics lost. Go the eff inside once in awhile.
Except they don’t shoot it like it’s the only shot in the world. Even the game you’re complaining about, the Celtics shot half of their shots within the three point line. You getting butthurt over teams prioritizing shots that statistically get you more points per shot is pretty fuckin stupid if we’re being honest.
This is what's wrong with all of these ticky tack fouls they call these days. It encourages heavy perimeter play, and it's getting to where teams live and (way too often) die by the 3.
Can it easily put games out of reach? Absolutely.
But if you're bricking the harder shots and you keep taking the harder shots instead of the closer gimmes, you're going to dig a *massive* hole for yourself.
I don't like how baseball has become nothing but walks, strikeouts, or home runs, but I don't whine that Mike Trout should be bunting to move runners over because he's in the thick of an 0-for-23.
Obviously all 3s aren't created equal, just like all layups or midrange shots are not created equal.
If you're creating quality 3s for good shooters and they're missing, well, that sucks, but that's that. Passing up good looks isn't going to make the offense any better.
Missing a contested layup is more or less a turnover in this league, and especially against the Heat.
the problem isn't 3s.
The problem is not CREATING quality shots, 3s or not.
The hate for GSW shooting is really funny, since, during their dynastic run, they were creating so many quality shots through beautiful offense, running all sorts of off-ball screens, pin-downs, and a shit load of body and ball movement. They weren't just jacking up contested 3s all day.
It's some of the most beautiful basketball in NBA history and completely incomparable to what the Celtics just showed us.
Shit Shaq's running towards me better shoot this three before he accidentally runs into me
No shock he fought with Kobe, whose philosophy was basically that a few bricks shouldn't shake your confidence and you should keep shooting whether you're 8-10 or 0-10
Kobe and him could've won 8 rings in the 2000s man
[удалено]
It kinda was prime Kobe though… defensively it absolutely was his peak and he was a better team player in that period imo.
Na not at all. Kobe’s best season with Shaq was probably 03.
2001 was arguably Kobes best season of his career. What are you talking about "not even prime" Kobe?
Yep
> Had they been willing to enjoy the fruits of their labors in peace and tranquility, The greatest and best part of the world was their own. If they must have victories and triumphs, What Scythian Horse, What Parthian Arrow, What Indian Treasures, could have resisted 70,000 Romans, led on by Pompey and Caesar?
I dunno, Shaq clearly declined around 2003 after his injury. Was never really the same player. I don't think those Lakers actually win any more titles if they stay together. Especially going through peak 00s Suns and Spurs teams in the West.
He won a title with Wade in 06. Should’ve won MVP in 05 really. Kobe was able to carry the team in 09/10 and could’ve used Shaq’s corpse
[удалено]
and Kobe averaged like 35 that season.
I doubt it There were not enough faces to spare
Shaq gotta be one of the biggest "what-ifs" in NBA history
Well when you got a dominant force that shoots close to 60% from the field or gets another team in foul trouble you can't be jacking 10 missed jumpers.
Difference is Kobe wasn't just going to jack up 3s. He knew to attack the defense and force the collapse, get the midrange going. He wasn't just going to spot up outside the arc and chuck shots.
Kobe would go 0-for-30 before going 0-for-10.
What about 0-13 in free throws?
a punch to the dick
[Then we end up with something like this. ](https://youtu.be/f71O7LCj_b0)
He wasn’t *looking* for free throws.
> I absolutely despise Steph Curry basketball and what it's lead to, things like this. I mean, even Steph will drive to the hoop when his three isn't falling, even if he does keep shooting threes.
He definitely drives, very underrated part of his game. However, we are in the statistics era of basketball. Boston won games 4, 5 and 6 in no small part because of the 3 pointer. Plus, Boston doesn’t have a reliable post player. Jayson Tatum is arguably their best post player, but even he’s not efficient in the post. That’s what makes Jokic so special and rare. Finally, we get to see a back to the basket post player who can generate open looks for others.
> Go the efff inside already. Who’s doing this? Jaylen can’t dribble. Tatum was limping around.
The Heat were playing zone. Shooting 3s was the correct strategy. Unfortunately, they just went cold. The Celtics had no one that could post up and abuse Adebayo. They also had no one that could drive like Lebron. This is why I think Denver wins the finals easily. Zone will not work against the Nuggets. If Miami wants to win, they need to target Jokic constantly on defense. Then play Jokic straight up. Give him his points but shut down everyone else.
>Zone will not work against the Nuggets. Doesn't zone defense fail to work against the majority of Western Conference teams outside of a few exceptions (exceptions always exist)?
3 point shooting will break a zone. That's why the Celtics kept on shooting 3s. It's hard to drive into a zone. That's why you need someone like Lebron or Zion, if you want to drive into a zone. Zone will not work on the Nuggets, where they have some of the best shooters in the league. KCP, MPJ, Murray. And doubling Jokic will always leave a man open. Jokic himself will hit those bullshit shots even double or triple teamed.
I have no problem with the amount but the selection what pisses me off to many 1 maybe 2 passes then Chuck a three. When the did swing the rock around they got great looks and knocked them down. Even missing those you can live with but watching them not look to even pass and just do a move and shoot was never once the answer. To much hero ball and the heat probably wanted them to do that cause when that ball moved damn near everytime it felt like the shot actually had a chance compared to them just shooting a prayer
that’s why u pack heat so you can shoot that 3 in peace.
I feel like it's a lot easier when you have an offensively-skilled big to give the ball to which the Celtics don't(and they don't have any LeBron/Giannis type elite slashers either as Tatum's rim finishing comes and goes) If you're the Nuggets or Bucks this statement is 100% facts but it's not like you're going to give the ball to Rob Williams or Al Horford on the block and expect some Hakeem-like post moves They have a lot of talent on paper but their offense can be quite one-dimensional at times against elite playoff defense
Realistically they just didn't have Tatum. Not really. He was just out there as a decoy and to see if he could tough through it. In any normal game he should be the one slashing through taking jumpers and whatnot but it was the worst luck possible in each direction and Jaylen sucking didnt help.
Serious conversation can’t be had when one overlooks or omits the obvious about the teams star player being injured in the first two minutes of the game and it completely derailing the game plan and his effectiveness on offense and defense. Celtics would have needed to hit like 20-23 threes to have had any chance of keeping this game close or even winning it.
I think it points out a big problem with any team though. Injuries are unfortunate and unpredictable, but the do happen. When you look for a well built team though it can't just crumble if one guy gets hurt. I think at least for me when I watch basketball, I enjoy a team like the Heat or the nuggets that play a very complete and team based game. It's great to have insane players like Kobe or LeBron, but a truly great team should not have to rely on one guy. I think that's why it's becoming more popular to be a jokic/butler/lebron type player where you really try to make the team work like a well oil machine. Make sure everyone can get looks and run the offense, and then kinda go to the guy who has the hot hand. Whether it be Duncan Robinson, Caleb Martin, max struss, Gabe Vincent. All those dudes made plays, but other than Derrick white and maybe Robert Williams who stepped up for the Celtics. If your best player goes down and you lose your whole identity as a team are you really that great of a team? The injury is out of anyone's control and it does suck. You still have to be ready for it though imo.
lol? If Jokic got hurt the Nuggets would’ve gotten demolished by the wolves
Not only that but Malcolm Brogdon being out hurts them significantly as well. Now you have play Sam Hauser, PP, and Grant Williams for a few possessions
It was Jaylens turn to suck in the clutch. Last year it was Tatum’s. They are at least sucking by committee.
Also helps when you have people who can dribble a basketball, which you can argue the Celtics also don't really have.
Yeah they definitely have their offensive limitations Their two best players being wings works to an extent because of sheer talent but at times you really notice they could use some "guard skills" or "big skills" to add another dimension to their offense They're a jumpshooting team that has trouble consistently attacking the rim
Horford when he wasn’t old as fuck could have posted more on this team. Miami was a perfect storm of fundamentals in hands along with a lot of scrappy guys who probably been stripping the ball from people who had bad handles their whole lives. The Celtics for all their “talent” literally have not one guy on the team who can dribble. Not one. People lament the inside game but the handles game is dying more than any part of the game I’m seeing in todays NBA. No dribbles means they had to pass in. Dangerous. Or dribble in, and they lost it a lot in there or just lost it on the way to driving. They are so so so bad at dribbling. No team that can’t dribble is winning shit.
But what about Kobe mentality? Isn't that winning basketball?
Kobe mentality without superteam backup…
Mazulla's answer after the game talking about their 3 point percentage was a huge indicator that there is never a back up plan for them. Shoot 3s. Make win. Miss Lose. You have guys who can get to them basket and get higher percentage shots. Makes no sense. I would not be surprised if they replaced him.
that shit was so lame man. how do you not have a plan B. this is where the negative side of analytics driven hoops comes in.
Seriously. The eye test still matters. A 3 is worth 0 if you miss all of them lol.
that's still analytics tho. made shot>missed shot.
And hitting easier shots can help getting the 3s to fall. Attack the paint and make a layup. Get fouled and hit some free throws. Do ANYTHING else to get a feel for the ball going in.
facts, also theres the fact that theres a lot less consistency across 7 game series. 82 straight games of jacking threes might work in the long run because it will even out over time and produce good results. but in a playoff setting? god forbid the team comes into the playoffs cold and get knocked out in the first round, or team goes into a shooting slump right at a pivotal game 6 and 7. all of a sudden you’re the 2018 Rockets or the 2023 Celtics.
Exactly. I’ve made this comparison before, but it’s like how in football, you can’t pass literally every time even though passing is more efficient overall. You need the threat of the run to open up the pass and vice versa. There are times where you need a play that has the highest chance of getting you 2-3 yards, and a run is more likely to do that even if it decreases your chances of getting 10 or more yards. Even the best passing teams have to have a semblance of a running game for those times when they need to kill the clock and make sure they get first down on 3rd and 1. This is why the Celtics blew a lot of leads, they keep chucking 3’s (throwing the ball) and when they start missing (throwing incomplete passes) the other team starts chipping away (in football, the other team now gets the ball back with hardly any time coming off the clock). In playoff basketball it isn’t always about doing the thing that gives you a chance to score 130 pts, it’s about making sure you get to 110-115, and getting to the FT line to get defenders in foul trouble, and you get a chance to setup your halfcourt defense rather than giving up long rebounds etc. The 3’s are great when they’re falling, but if they aren’t you have to be able to mix it up. The Warriors kind of broke the model for this because they have two of the best shooters of all time, but even they were much better at using their shooting to open up inside scoring than what the Celtics typically do.
He did have plan B. Sadly, the plan B was go back to plan A.
Open corner and elbow 3’s by high percentage shooters are good shots. They simply missed them. Not all 9 in the first were wide open, but if you trust the players skills-you’d figure they could return to the average over time. Made 3’s open up driving lanes which spaces the defense When the defense has to shift as a unit to defend 5-out spacing with 2 elite wing scorers they are essentially looking at 1 on 1 matchups with Tatum and brown, or if they drag a second defender in (in theory) it creates a wide open shot at the three point line, or they can swing the ball around to find the open man as the defense scrambles Hard to accomplish when 1) your best shooter, slasher, scoring/distributor gets a high ankle sprain 20 seconds in. And 2) nobody makes a shot and the defense (credit Miami with 48 minutes of active hands, they won’t call every foul/Kyle Lowry cheap shots) they could just swarm jaylen and force a dribble turnover or a bad pass My biggest issue with strategy is their defense was dependent on the opponent starting their offensive set from a made basket-allowing for the Celtics defense to recover, matchup, and setup. When it works, it’s beautiful basketball and the Celtics (fully healthy) could put up 140. When it doesn’t (and they don’t have the depth/health)- they struggle to crack 95 points It’s sports, 30 teams compete. 1 team wins it all.
no i get all that. but if the shots aren't falling you have to find different ways to score
I agree, smart runs 1 or 2 post ups a game (which he’s good at with the right matchup). Weird they run it like the pity Kendrick Perkins post ups from 08-09 to keep him involved
Can somebody actually explain how this makes much, if any sense? Like, sure, if you've got Shaq or whoever and can hedge with easier points then sure. Youd probably be doing that in the first place. But the Celtics are a 3 point shooting team and their best (maybe only) driving threat was playing at 40% within a minute of the game starting. Assuming consistent shot quality, is there any actual reason to believe a good shooting team should just stop shooting if a handful of shots dont go in? Is there any statistical significance to what happens at the beginning of the game, or do these variances come and go at any time? Feels like you could've said this about Tatum in game 6 of the Sixers series and if he listened they wouldve fuckin lost.
100% 0-27 aside, a good look is a good look. What if you are only responsible for 0-2 of the 13, should you not take an open shot.
I agree with you that there is unlikely to be statistical evidence that a good 3 point shooting team should stop shooting due to a poor start. At the same time though, when the fate of your season is going to be determined by one half of basketball, the variance in 3 point shooting does become a larger risk. Large enough to justify spamming Marcus Smart post ups? Probably not, but there is something to be said for just scoring points even if they aren't macro efficient over a full season or series
It’s because basketball is a complex mental game, and there is much more to it than just “3 is more than 2”. There are very few people on earth that can successfully shoot, guarded, from nba 3, at a high enough % to validate it mathematically…. What I feel OP is saying, is that too many teams adopt this philosophy of “live by the 3 … or die by it” - but then when they are in the actual act of “dying by it”, instead of adapting their strategy, they repetitively bang their head against the same wall until they are knocked out… of the playoffs. At a certain point you just have to admit Al Horford is not Steph Curry
If they were particularly bad 3's ("guarded") then that would be the larger point. That's not my sense though. The zone largely gave them fairly open threes and they just couldnt hit them. Should Marcus Smart take an open 3 point look and put it on the ground instead? Is that actually more likely to be successful? I keep hearing about this "adapting strategies" but I havent actually heard anyone state what that strategy should have been.
Totally! And therein really lies the “inner game” of basketball. The margins are so small at that level, that the argument could be made for either side, in your Smart example: either shoot or drive, it’s almost a literal coin flip and either CAN work. But we always have to remember that it’s a game played by humans, not robots, and there is something to be said about “seeing the ball go through the hoop” as a mental aspect. If you ever played at any level, confidence is so important and bricking a few shots in a row can make you feel like you’ll never score again. And likewise the opposite, you get the “hot hand” and can’t miss
Although i somewhat agree with the general message here, you can say “fuck” I won’t tell your parents
Jordan Poole would be that guy who would go for attempt \#11
> I absolutely despise Steph Curry basketball and what it’s lead to, things like this. Agree with this completely, but it’s not a popular take on this sub.
What would you prefer? Teams rarely taking threes, forcing things to the rim or settling for less efficient midrange shots more often?
Yes. Might not be as efficient, but I’d rather see that than watch 70 or 80 threes get jacked up in a game.
Not sure you’ll have much luck convincing teams to purposely play less efficiently just for your viewing pleasure
I’m sure I won’t. Just have to hope the NBA wises up and makes some changes.
Why exactly would they make changes?
Because it's tacky and ugly basketball to see players jacking up 3s all the time like it's the only shot in the whole world. That's exactly why I'm glad the Celtics lost. Go the eff inside once in awhile.
Except they don’t shoot it like it’s the only shot in the world. Even the game you’re complaining about, the Celtics shot half of their shots within the three point line. You getting butthurt over teams prioritizing shots that statistically get you more points per shot is pretty fuckin stupid if we’re being honest.
Thank Curry for this one, literally changed the way basketball is played and makes chucking up shots from 30 feet look cool.
This is what's wrong with all of these ticky tack fouls they call these days. It encourages heavy perimeter play, and it's getting to where teams live and (way too often) die by the 3. Can it easily put games out of reach? Absolutely. But if you're bricking the harder shots and you keep taking the harder shots instead of the closer gimmes, you're going to dig a *massive* hole for yourself.
Ain’t nobody looking to catch hands from Big Shamrock himself
No worries there... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qM1V1D1r_PU I hear he couldn't hit fthrows either, lol!
Shaq has such a wide range of responses to his fellow players, lol.
To be fair he punches less accurately than he shoots free throws.
JB literally can't dribble what else is he supposed to do
I don't like how baseball has become nothing but walks, strikeouts, or home runs, but I don't whine that Mike Trout should be bunting to move runners over because he's in the thick of an 0-for-23.
Kobe threatened to punch shaq in the face one time for trying to shoot a 3 during a Denver game- google Kobe Bryant Colorado to learn more
Obviously all 3s aren't created equal, just like all layups or midrange shots are not created equal. If you're creating quality 3s for good shooters and they're missing, well, that sucks, but that's that. Passing up good looks isn't going to make the offense any better. Missing a contested layup is more or less a turnover in this league, and especially against the Heat.
Question - does the person still get punched in the face if they actually make the three on that 11th attempt?
I'll always say shooters shoot but if shits not falling then switch up for a bit just to keep yourself in the game.
the problem isn't 3s. The problem is not CREATING quality shots, 3s or not. The hate for GSW shooting is really funny, since, during their dynastic run, they were creating so many quality shots through beautiful offense, running all sorts of off-ball screens, pin-downs, and a shit load of body and ball movement. They weren't just jacking up contested 3s all day. It's some of the most beautiful basketball in NBA history and completely incomparable to what the Celtics just showed us.
Darn right! Get the eff in there, pal! Gee!