Get Curry back to his normal rotations

[Impuniti]

I don't know if it will fix some of his shooting woes, but it's worth a shot to see. It was an adorable little experiment from Kerr. If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.




Why is he still going on with this 25 games into the season?

I basically agree with you, whatever is best for Curry is best for the team as well imo also, but what record exactly do you consider the team would have with different rotations ?. Their record isn’t exactly bad even after the short handed loss to Denver.

It's difficult to talk about hypotheticals because we don't know. I can say Steph would have a better rhythm and would have shot better in x, y, z game but I don't know this for a fact. It would just be a guess. My point is simply to revert back to what helps one of the best players of all time hopefully be at his best and hope his numbers increase because right now they're garbage for his level.

There really isn't an argument since Kerr made this change that implies they should keep this new formation. Team plays worse, Curry plays worse, and we're losing far more games than we were beforehand.

[Scoots1994]

I don't know that Curry's shooting numbers are a direct result of the rotation. Seems more likely it's that he's double and triple teamed all the time.

Hopefully you're right. Because adding Klay to the lineup should make it harder for teams to double and triple team Steph as much. I'm very anxious to see what a lineup with Steph, Klay and Wiggins can do.

Curry, Klay, Wiggins, Porter, Bjelli. Double away!

[GunnerWRX]

If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.

You’ve lost me there buddy.

I don’t think Kerr’s rotation is golden, but what do you mean by “losing at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed”, when we are at 27-7 with the current rotations?

[michaelm]

If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.

You’ve lost me there buddy.

I don’t think Kerr’s rotation is golden, but what do you mean by “losing at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed”, when we are at 27-7 with the current rotations?

If GSW were 10:1 before a changed rotation and 17:6 since he has a point. This is not my recollection however, but I stand to be corrected.

[shazam_guy]

HiRez: It's not just the hand-wringing and tooth-gnashing, it's the ANGRY wringing and gnashing. "Every time they lose a game, I'm being cheated! And I could personally solve it so they'd never lose another game EVER!"

I take back my earlier complaints about that kind of heated, middle-school certainty. Some of you really make me laugh, and that's worth something these days.

[xdrta+]

If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.

You’ve lost me there buddy.

I don’t think Kerr’s rotation is golden, but what do you mean by “losing at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed”, when we are at 27-7 with the current rotations?

If GSW were 10:1 before a changed rotation and 17:6 since he has a point. This os not my recollection however.

Is it possible that there are other factors besides the rotation? Players missing, tougher schedule, there are all sorts of factors involved.

[Impuniti]

You’ve lost me there buddy.

I don’t think Kerr’s rotation is golden, but what do you mean by “losing at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed”, when we are at 27-7 with the current rotations?

If GSW were 10:1 before a changed rotation and 17:6 since he has a point. This os not my recollection however.

Is it possible that there are other factors besides the rotation? Players missing, tougher schedule, there are all sorts of factors involved.

Of course there are other factors. It also doesn't guarantee that changing Steph to his old rotations, he will magically start shooting at his old level. But there isn't an argument on why
1. This new rotations is improving the team
2. Reverting back hurts the team

[michaelm]

If GSW were 10:1 before a changed rotation and 17:6 since he has a point. This os not my recollection however.

Is it possible that there are other factors besides the rotation? Players missing, tougher schedule, there are all sorts of factors involved.

Of course there are other factors. It also doesn't guarantee that changing Steph to his old rotations, he will magically start shooting at his old level. But there isn't an argument on why
1. This new rotations is improving the team
2. Reverting back hurts the team

As I said if you are definite they were at 10:1 and then changed to a new rotation, and Steph himself has actually said he isn’t comfortable with the way he is being rotated which he has said, and isn’t shooting as well as he did early in the season, then while other factors may apply including teams having finally somewhat worked out how to defend him, a high index of suspicion applies to the rotation pattern imo as well as yours. I am just unsure about the rotation changing at the point when they were 10:1, but if you are sure then I will take your word for it.

Klay in vaguely good health is a game changer though, any defense which involves allowing Klay open shots, particularly open catch and shoot threes, is unlikely to be overly successful.

[Samurai]

Curry is launching more 3's than ever before; this season he is averaging 19 attempts per 100 possessions. Last year was his previous high (17.5) and before that his high was 16.5 (not counting his 5 games in 2020). Since we know that typically shooting percentages drop with more attempts, could it be the fact that Curry is shooting more 3's than he has in any other season (where he shot for higher percentages) is as much a factor in his (thus far) career low shooting percentage? And that defenses have evolved to swarm Curry much more than earlier in his career when his prowess was less established?

[cdubbz]

It was an adorable little experiment from Kerr. If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed.

The Warriors have the best record in the entire league.

Also what if this 'experiment' is because Kerr will have Klay/Wiseman to add to rotation and the staff thinks this Curry rotation is for the future with Klay.

Klay plays first quarter up until the last few minutes when Curry comes back in.

[michaelm]

Curry is launching more 3's than ever before; this season he is averaging 19 attempts per 100 possessions. Last year was his previous high (17.5) and before that his high was 16.5 (not counting his 5 games in 2020). Since we know that typically shooting percentages drop with more attempts, could it be the fact that Curry is shooting more 3's than he has in any other season (where he shot for higher percentages) is as much a factor in his (thus far) career low shooting percentage? And that defenses have evolved to swarm Curry much more than earlier in his career when his prowess was less established?

I guess swarming Curry to stop 3 point shots works If there are no other reliable 3 point shooters. In many games various other players have got hot from 3 point range and GSW have won. They don’t really have any other consistent high volume 3 point shooters, although Wiggins may perhaps be benefiting from Curry being swarmed. Poole while capable of high volume scoring is streaky at best from 3 point range and the way he plays may clash with how Curry plays. Swarming Curry won’t work if Thompson brings anything like his former prowess as a shooter back to the team though.

[WarriorGM]

Something that I noticed while looking at the box score for the first game against the Nuggets: Otto Porter took one three point attempt and missed. Bjelica took one three point attempt and missed. Kuminga took two three points shots and missed. Iguodala took two three pointers also and missed. Porter and Bjelica should have been taking more three point attempts than Kuminga and Iguodala. Perhaps the Nuggets defense was simply very smart in their coverage but the team should have put more emphasis on getting their best supporting shooters higher quality looks and attempts when the other team is denying Curry.

[Samurai]

Curry is launching more 3's than ever before; this season he is averaging 19 attempts per 100 possessions. Last year was his previous high (17.5) and before that his high was 16.5 (not counting his 5 games in 2020). Since we know that typically shooting percentages drop with more attempts, could it be the fact that Curry is shooting more 3's than he has in any other season (where he shot for higher percentages) is as much a factor in his (thus far) career low shooting percentage? And that defenses have evolved to swarm Curry much more than earlier in his career when his prowess was less established?

I guess swarming Curry to stop 3 point shots works If there are no other reliable 3 point shooters. In many games various other players have got hot from 3 point range and GSW have won. They don’t really have any other consistent high volume 3 point shooters, although Wiggins may perhaps be benefiting from Curry being swarmed. Poole while capable of high volume scoring is streaky at best from 3 point range and the way he plays may clash with how Curry plays. Swarming Curry won’t work if Thompson brings anything like his former prowess as a shooter back to the team though.

I'm certainly hopeful that having Klay back will make a big difference. But the strategy thus far has clearly been to run Curry off the line at all costs and, if that means leaving Draymond, Iggy, JTA, and even good shooters like Wiggins, Lee, etc. open, so be it. Even if they make a shot or two, they don't believe that will work as much in the long run as letting Curry shoot 3's. But that means Curry gets fewer good looks and more of his attempts are not good shots - even for Curry. But Klay is a different animal and if Klay is close to being the Klay we remember, hopefully that might open up some better shots for Steph.

[michaelm]

It will be a shame for us Curry fans if he continues to get only very poor looks from 3 point range, but the team winning with a barrage of threes from Klay might make it more bearable. There might be more avenues for Curry to score inside as well.

[michaelm]

[img]i[/img]:cry:

Something that I noticed while looking at the box score for the first game against the Nuggets: Otto Porter took one three point attempt and missed. Bjelica took one three point attempt and missed. Kuminga took two three points shots and missed. Iguodala took two three pointers also and missed. Porter and Bjelica should have been taking more three point attempts than Kuminga and Iguodala. Perhaps the Nuggets defense was simply very smart in their coverage but the team should have put more emphasis on getting their best supporting shooters higher quality looks and attempts when the other team is denying Curry.

Not having Draymond out there as an offensive co-ordinator/general possibly didn’t help. The other guys probably don’t want to take shots away from Curry which is usually a sound principle, but Draymond might perhaps have taken the decisions out of their hands.

These guys are only human, even if barely so in Curry’s case, and having come out highly motivated in the previous 2 games appeared not to get themselves up as much for this game. I trust they will come out firing the next game against the Nuggets, they don’t want to cede any psychological ascendancy to Jokic, a great player anyway but also a large in stature guy against whom they theoretically don’t match up well. I like FNQ am encouraged by their comeback and defense in the second half when they did appear to apply themselves more.
The other thing is whether swarming Curry is sustainable for a whole game even without Klay next to him.

[azwfan]

I don't know if it will fix some of his shooting woes, but it's worth a shot to see. It was an adorable little experiment from Kerr. If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.




Why is he still going on with this 25 games into the season?

This is factually inaccurate. The rotation got changed first in the 2nd OKC game... game 6.
https://www.thewarriorstalk.com/blog/2021/11/6/have-steve-kerrs-recent-rotations-been-affecting-steph-curry

At that point in the season we were 4-1. An .800 winning percentage.
On the season the Warriors are 27-7. A .794 winning percentage. Not a significant difference. Especially when you consider the Warriors are 1-1 without Steph Curry. Meaning they are 26-6 with him... a .812 winning percentage.
.812 > .800.

Onto Steph's individual stats...
Prior to the switch: 30.4 ppg, 41.9% fg, 38.46% 3pt, 6.6 ast, 4.4 tov
Season averages: 27.7 ppg, 43.3% fg, 39.7% 3pt, 5.9 ast, 3.4 tov

So he's shooting less, but at a better %. Also with a better ast / tov ratio after the switch.

So dislike the rotation all you want, there are things I dislike about it... but the fact of the matter is that he's not doing any worse than he did prior to the switch... and neither is the team.
So come up with an argument that isn't complete BS... or at least wait till we lose a few more games without Draymond.

Other stats to keep in mind:
Team fg%, and team ast/tov ratios are better than what Curry is averaging thus far.

[michaelm]

I don't know if it will fix some of his shooting woes, but it's worth a shot to see. It was an adorable little experiment from Kerr. If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.



Why is he still going on with this 25 games into the season?

This is factually inaccurate. The rotation got changed first in the 2nd OKC game... game 6.
https://www.thewarriorstalk.com/blog/2021/11/6/have-steve-kerrs-recent-rotations-been-affecting-steph-curry

At that point in the season we were 4-1. An .800 winning percentage.
On the season the Warriors are 27-7. A .794 winning percentage. Not a significant difference. Especially when you consider the Warriors are 1-1 without Steph Curry. Meaning they are 26-6 with him... a .812 winning percentage.
.812 > .800.

Onto Steph's individual stats...
Prior to the switch: 30.4 ppg, 41.9% fg, 38.46% 3pt, 6.6 ast, 4.4 tov
Season averages: 27.7 ppg, 43.3% fg, 39.7% 3pt, 5.9 ast, 3.4 tov

So he's shooting less, but at a better %. Also with a better ast / tov ratio after the switch.

So dislike the rotation all you want, there are things I dislike about it... but the fact of the matter is that he's not doing any worse than he did prior to the switch... and neither is the team.
So come up with an argument that isn't complete BS... or at least wait till we lose a few more games without Draymond.

Other stats to keep in mind:
Team fg%, and team ast/tov ratios are better than what Curry is averaging thus far.

23 - 6 ie games since the rotation change if it was at the time GSW had a 4 - 1 record is also a 0.793 win rate. 5 games is not much of a sample size anyway and they were being criticised/diminished for having an easy schedule early season.

[HiRez]

It will be a shame for us Curry fans if he continues to get only very poor looks from 3 point range, but the team winning with a barrage of threes from Klay might make it more bearable. There might be more avenues for Curry to score inside as well.

I can't wait to see when teams keep doubling Steph and Klay starts burying them. At that point they have to guard Klay tight and magically Steph's percentages start to rise again. But it's actually Steph's 2P% that is down the most so hopefully Klay will open up driving lanes and allow him some cleaner finishes.

[azwfan]

I don't know if it will fix some of his shooting woes, but it's worth a shot to see. It was an adorable little experiment from Kerr. If the intention was to lose at a significantly higher rate than before the rotations were changed. If that was the goal, he nailed it.



Why is he still going on with this 25 games into the season?

This is factually inaccurate. The rotation got changed first in the 2nd OKC game... game 6.
https://www.thewarriorstalk.com/blog/2021/11/6/have-steve-kerrs-recent-rotations-been-affecting-steph-curry

At that point in the season we were 4-1. An .800 winning percentage.
On the season the Warriors are 27-7. A .794 winning percentage. Not a significant difference. Especially when you consider the Warriors are 1-1 without Steph Curry. Meaning they are 26-6 with him... a .812 winning percentage.
.812 > .800.

Onto Steph's individual stats...
Prior to the switch: 30.4 ppg, 41.9% fg, 38.46% 3pt, 6.6 ast, 4.4 tov
Season averages: 27.7 ppg, 43.3% fg, 39.7% 3pt, 5.9 ast, 3.4 tov

So he's shooting less, but at a better %. Also with a better ast / tov ratio after the switch.

So dislike the rotation all you want, there are things I dislike about it... but the fact of the matter is that he's not doing any worse than he did prior to the switch... and neither is the team.
So come up with an argument that isn't complete BS... or at least wait till we lose a few more games without Draymond.

Other stats to keep in mind:
Team fg%, and team ast/tov ratios are better than what Curry is averaging thus far.

23 - 6 ie games since the rotation change if it was at the time GSW had a 4 - 1 record is also a 0.793 win rate. 5 games is not much of a sample size anyway and they were being criticised/diminished for having an easy schedule early season.

22-5 with Curry (since its his rotation we are talking about and he was out 2 of those games. .814 win rate. The entire argument is BS.

[Thugleavy34]

Thanks for the correction, it was my recollection as well that the 10 game statement seemed off. I remember it being the 2nd week of the season, and the warriors had just lost or almost lost a game where the other team came back in the 6 minutes Curry was out to start the 4th quarter.

It brought back bad memories of us struggling for long stretches when Curry is out. It's easy for opposing teams to gameplan when they knew he'd be sitting out the first half of the 2nd and 4th quarters. This new rotation has better lineups staggered throughout the entire game, and a nightmare for opposing teams to gameplan against.