Average NBA Team Now Attempting More 3's Than 04-05 Suns

[LukasBMW]

Average NBA Team Now Attempting More 3's Than 04-05 Suns

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/239495/Average-NBA-Team-Now-Attempting-More-3s-Than-04-05-Suns

It really sucks that we changed the way the NBA is played yet got absolutely nothing out of it.

Hell, even San Antonio is picking up the pace. Thanks for stealing our title and stealing our method.

Of course one could argue that we let DAntoni, Nash, Gentry, and Kerr all leave and they were the ones truly responsible for the SSOL era.

[saintEscaton]

Yup revolutionized the way the game would be played but yet failed to reap the fruits of our labor and look where we are now.... The Dubs can thank SSOL for handing over the blueprints and Sarver's incompetence for letting them bring Kerr and Gentry aboard. Nash chose the right team most true to his brand to consult.

[Stix]

It's really easy to blame the Spurs, I have been guilty of it on numerous occasions. But looking back, those teams were not deep, and DA only played a 7 man rotation. No true back up PG, and a plethora of injuries, and the Shaq trade ultimately did us in. Not to mention a bunch of mistakes made by the FO, Kurt Thomas, Marcus Banks... ect. Also, the complete lack of defense and pretty much outscoring teams as a strategy did not work well in the long run.

Gentry doesn't get enough credit IMO, he is the common denominator of all of those teams and I think he had more to do with the W's championship run last year than most people think. Just look at our season in 2010, he took that team to the WCF which they arguably could have won if not for the Ron Artest putback. He implemented a zone defense that gave the lakers fits, he understood the need. We also had the Celtics number that year and it was probably the closest we got to a 'chip in SSOL despite having better teams in the past.

Interested to see what he does with the Pelicans. I think that team is just a couple of trades away from being a legit contender.

[sunskerr]

I think its human nature to ignore the fact that we honestly just had very bad luck. In 2007 we dealt with suspensions , crooked refs and not to mention Nash breaks his nose in a close game 1. If you think about the series that way, pretty much every thing had to go the Spurs way in that 07 series and we still almost won that game 5. Remember Nash's press conference after the series? If I recall correctly he stated that, "we just couldn't catch a break".

In '10, Jason Richardson (and he was a fantastic player for us) just forgot to box out and Artest hit a difficult shot.

It's not so realistic to chalk everything up to our own faults and blame it on ourselves. That undersells just how good those teams were from 05-10. Sometimes things just don't work out because of extreme circumstances. It takes some luck to win a championship: our bad luck is the Lakers' and Spurs' good luck. And sometimes the die of fate rolls a one a few times in a row.

Now on the subject of the thread topic:

History is written by the victors and we were not a victor. Although we were light years ahead of the NBA (on offense, at least), it is true that San Antonio and Miami are given more credit than us when it comes to the current state of the NBA. Well, we do certainly get credit but it seems like those two teams are given more (when all they did was rename our offensive sets). And that's completely wrong and people will conveniently ignore our contributions because it doesn't fit a good narrative.

We have a nice moral victory as being the most influential team of the modern era though, so that's nice. In a way, our contributions were actually more important than any championship winning team's. So I guess we can rationalize it that way even thought it's still extremely bittersweet.

[jcsunsfan]

Its just a matter of math. You can shoot alot lower percentage of threes than twos and be really effective. Its also harder to guard the three point shot.

I remember Dan Majerle saying after the playoffs one year that he was going to work on his three point shot. At the time I thought "why would you do that? Your bread and butter is your slashing game." It seems silly to think that now.

[King4Day]

Imagine Amar'e stayed healthy in 05/06? In his first game back from microfracture he went beastmode. Then he faltered a bit and then his season ended. I don't think we have any trouble beating Dallas or Miami with a fully healthy team. We would have run Shaq off the floor with our speed.

I still remember Marion crying after we were eliminated by Dallas during the postgame.

[Damkac]

I hope our players will improve their 3 pt shooting. We lack good shooters.

[bwgood77]

It's really easy to blame the Spurs, I have been guilty of it on numerous occasions. But looking back, those teams were not deep, and DA only played a 7 man rotation. No true back up PG, and a plethora of injuries, and the Shaq trade ultimately did us in. Not to mention a bunch of mistakes made by the FO, Kurt Thomas, Marcus Banks... ect. Also, the complete lack of defense and pretty much outscoring teams as a strategy did not work well in the long run.

Gentry doesn't get enough credit IMO, he is the common denominator of all of those teams and I think he had more to do with the W's championship run last year than most people think. Just look at our season in 2010, he took that team to the WCF which they arguably could have won if not for the Ron Artest putback. He implemented a zone defense that gave the lakers fits, he understood the need. We also had the Celtics number that year and it was probably the closest we got to a 'chip in SSOL despite having better teams in the past.

Interested to see what he does with the Pelicans. I think that team is just a couple of trades away from being a legit contender.

Yes, and I actually clicked reply as you mentioned Gentry's huge role in our teams and with the Ws last year and now he is running a team with arguably the most valuable player in the league and one of the premier stretch 4s. And even if Jrue isn't healthy, they have Tyreke who can pass, and if they both are there, that is two guys to pass and if Gordon is healthy, another premier shooter.

Our team looks decent on paper, but a healthy Pelicans team (big if though) is more equipped. I still think Hornacek is a damn good coach with the right pieces though so even if he just gets us into the playoffs I consider this season a success. We still need that home run signing and/or player we drafted who develops into a star. I think some old vet coach stuck in old ways wouldn't be as successful with our team where the league is going.

[bwgood77]

I think its human nature to ignore the fact that we honestly just had very bad luck. In 2007 we dealt with suspensions , crooked refs and not to mention Nash breaks his nose in a close game 1. If you think about the series that way, pretty much every thing had to go the Spurs way in that 07 series and we still almost won that game 5. Remember Nash's press conference after the series? If I recall correctly he stated that, "we just couldn't catch a break".

In '10, Jason Richardson (and he was a fantastic player for us) just forgot to box out and Artest hit a difficult shot.

It's not so realistic to chalk everything up to our own faults and blame it on ourselves. That undersells just how good those teams were from 05-10. Sometimes things just don't work out because of extreme circumstances. It takes some luck to win a championship: our bad luck is the Lakers' and Spurs' good luck. And sometimes the die of fate rolls a one a few times in a row.

Now on the subject of the thread topic:

History is written by the victors and we were not a victor. Although we were light years ahead of the NBA (on offense, at least), it is true that San Antonio and Miami are given more credit than us when it comes to the current state of the NBA. Well, we do certainly get credit but it seems like those two teams are given more (when all they did was rename our offensive sets). And that's completely wrong and people will conveniently ignore our contributions because it doesn't fit a good narrative.

We have a nice moral victory as being the most influential team of the modern era though, so that's nice. In a way, our contributions were actually more important than any championship winning team's. So I guess we can rationalize it that way even thought it's still extremely bittersweet.

I 100% agree with all of this. Often times a game comes down to one play, or one bad call, or unfortune. It still amazes me that the world can all watch the same game, and if one play that could have gone either way, goes one way, the entire rhetoric on talk shows, message boards, etc, will be "what is their problem?" or "good job on the game!"

For example, for those who follow football, the Chargers lost on the very last play on Monday night, in a game they definitely should have won. They pretty much dominated, but the Steelers had one pick six which was a huge factor. But despite that pick 6, if the guy doesn't squeeze into the end zone on the last play (and I'm not even sure he did), the Chargers win. The entire rhetoric of the game and how the team is playing is flipped based not on the effort, but on the result of a play of inches. Even my dad will say after such a loss "what do you think the issue is?" and if they win that question doesn't arise. In basketball, it often depends on the lucky bounce off a long 3 as we witnessed last year....if we win that game, no one says anything...if we lose, plenty start complaining about the team, and the only difference creating alternate conversations was a lucky bounce.