The fallacy of the new NBA Center

[Local_NG_Idiot]

Yes, Horford averaged 32mpg last season. He also only played in 68 games last season. Did Boston play with only 4 guys on the court for 14 games for 32mpg? He played 2193 minutes for the season and there's 3936 available Center minutes in a regular season. I even went "best case" for your argument that all 2193 minutes were played where he was the C (note: Horford/Zeller played minutes togehter and Horford/Olynyk played minutes together as well as Horford/Amir who was playing C and who was playing PF is debatable in certain instances, but I'm willing to assume Horford ALWAYS played C).

So, my math is at least right, next time I would suggest double checking your own math prior to criticizing someone else's.

Well, this is worse than I thought. I obviously saw you were including injury time. Now, are you standing by the argument that starting centers do not play the lion share of the minutes because of injury? If you are, that is a horrible argument that I can't even begin to discuss.

How do you know they are lost to injury? Teams rest their players now for multiple games per season all the time. Those rest games are part of the overall plan of how that team is going to play their center position for the season.

I mean, you are conceding that starting centers play the lion share of minutes when they *do* play? In that case, I win.
For what is worth, I think you are reasonable and I started last post apologizing, so, please rethink this argument and let's move on.

While I disagree with how you choose to parameterize the data, I'll play along for argument sake. So, a page back I posted your list of starting Cs with their corresponding MPG. If I follow your parameters of how you wish to calculate the % of time they play C, that list plays 53% of the total C minutes per game league wide, which means you are STILL excluding 47% of the available data.

As far as Howard being "elite", we are talking about career numbers right? Your original premise was on full career correct? So for a career where the player has 3 DPOYs, 4 1st All-Defense teams, 1 2nd All-Defense teams, 1st among all active players in blocks, 1st among all active players in rebounds, 1st among all active players in DRB%, 1st among all active players in Defensive win share. If he hasn't been an elite defensive center for his career, I would love to see what you consider to be an elite defensive Center.

Well, the masses jumped on me for using career numbers so I switched to last years. If we're going with career numbers my points are heightened and center do suck at 3s *in addition* to playing the lion share of minutes, which... I mean, that is the whole argument.[/quote]

I'm not jumping on you for using career numbers, so if we are using career numbers, is Howard elite or not? Even if we aren't using career numbers and solely last season, ATL had the 4th best ranked defense in the league last year, with Howard leading the team in blk%, drb%, DWS, WS/48, and 2nd in Defensive Box Plus/Minus, all while playing 62% (based on how you would like it calculated) of the team's C minutes.

Now, regarding the whole defensive focus to which you and some posters are using, I'm sorry, it does not meet my criteria. Defensive centers *always* had a place in the game so there is nothing new about that. Again, the argument is: "It is a fallacy that the *new* center is a 3pt shooter" and it is.

There is nothing in the new narrative about defensive centers, they were always coveted and they have been dominating the position since day one. They still are and that is my whole point, the C position is much closer to what it has always been and the evidence seems very much in favor of such premises

Go back to my post with the minutes played and take a look at the distribution curve of what type's of Cs are above the mean playing time and which are below. You'll find all the ones above the mean (ie: getting above average playing time) have at least one of two skillsets:

1 - effectively defend modern offenses and rim protect
2 - shoot the ball with 3pt range.

I agree the 1st skillset has always been of value to an NBA franchise, the 2nd is the one that has come into existence over the past few years and as you can see, is closing the gap quickly in on-court value. The Cs that are quality rebounders and who take up / create space in the paint who aren't necessarily good defensively and who cannot shoot 3s are the ones on that list who continue to see their PT dwindle, and they are losing that PT to the 47% of players on the floor you refuse to recognize as "New NBA Centers".

[Buff]

Sorry to jump in on page 10 but, even if by your assertion that centers "suck" at shooting 3's, the evidence says that they are shooting more 3's. These are the numbers:

In 2016-17, centers (as per stats.nba.com's definition) took and made 1494 of 4338 3's for a rate of 34.4% in the regular season.

Compared to 2014-15, 2 seasons ago, centers took and made 581 of 1807 3's for a rate of 32.2%.

In 2 seasons, the rate at which centers are taking 3's has gone up 240% and they are making 257% more 3's.

What this means is that, yes, the majority of NBA centers still aren't good 3 pt shooters but, that is changing and it's changing rapidly.

I've never looked at these numbers before and, they're blowing my mind right now.

If you go back ITT we have gone back 5 yrs and its just as stark a contrast. Its shocking but given the influence of 3s (both volume/efficiency) on ORTG it makes sense to diverge from the old way of playing. Some pretty good posts in here worth reading from DarkKnight/RapCity/LNG/etc.. FWIW this wont change his argument (he wants to "win"), and it will continue to be an exercise in futility, instead of an actual discussion.

I just respond to comments and only want the Raptors to "win". But yeah, this is not going anywhere since it has come down to insults (even the veiled ones are insults) when I have not attacked anyone but their posts. To you, in particular, I have posted several questions you just have ignored. Maybe to not "lose" or whatever but keep this in mind as I log out: the first person to insult is the loser of the argument.

Good day.

[vini_vidi_vici]

Sorry to jump in on page 10 but, even if by your assertion that centers "suck" at shooting 3's, the evidence says that they are shooting more 3's. These are the numbers:

In 2016-17, centers (as per stats.nba.com's definition) took and made 1494 of 4338 3's for a rate of 34.4% in the regular season.

Compared to 2014-15, 2 seasons ago, centers took and made 581 of 1807 3's for a rate of 32.2%.

In 2 seasons, the rate at which centers are taking 3's has gone up 240% and they are making 257% more 3's.

What this means is that, yes, the majority of NBA centers still aren't good 3 pt shooters but, that is changing and it's changing rapidly.

I've never looked at these numbers before and, they're blowing my mind right now.

If you go back ITT we have gone back 5 yrs and its just as stark a contrast. Its shocking but given the influence of 3s (both volume/efficiency) on ORTG it makes sense to diverge from the old way of playing. Some pretty good posts in here worth reading from DarkKnight/RapCity/LNG/etc.. FWIW this wont change his argument (he wants to "win"), and it will continue to be an exercise in futility, instead of an actual discussion.

I just respond to comments and only want the Raptors to "win". But yeah, this is not going anywhere since it has come down to insults (even the veiled ones are insults) when I have not attacked anyone but their posts. To you, in particular, I have posted several questions you just have ignored. Maybe to not "lose" or whatever but keep this in mind as I log out: the first person to insult is the loser of the argument.

Good day.

In that case, I win.

Ok, bye.

[Buff]

Sorry to jump in on page 10 but, even if by your assertion that centers "suck" at shooting 3's, the evidence says that they are shooting more 3's. These are the numbers:

In 2016-17, centers (as per stats.nba.com's definition) took and made 1494 of 4338 3's for a rate of 34.4% in the regular season.

Compared to 2014-15, 2 seasons ago, centers took and made 581 of 1807 3's for a rate of 32.2%.

In 2 seasons, the rate at which centers are taking 3's has gone up 240% and they are making 257% more 3's.

What this means is that, yes, the majority of NBA centers still aren't good 3 pt shooters but, that is changing and it's changing rapidly.

I've never looked at these numbers before and, they're blowing my mind right now.

Ah, damn it... I've been here since 2004 and never post because of this. I can't really help myself. So, let's see your numbers with context:

- 30 teams, 82 games per: 2624
- 1494/2624 = 0.56, 4338/2624 = 1.65

So, in conclusion... centers (counting the PFs playing centers and all small ball and all the jazz) are taking less than 2 3s a game and making slightly more than half a shot a game.

The NBA will never be the same again.
My mind is blown.

[Local_NG_Idiot]

Sorry to jump in on page 10 but, even if by your assertion that centers "suck" at shooting 3's, the evidence says that they are shooting more 3's. These are the numbers:

In 2016-17, centers (as per stats.nba.com's definition) took and made 1494 of 4338 3's for a rate of 34.4% in the regular season.

Compared to 2014-15, 2 seasons ago, centers took and made 581 of 1807 3's for a rate of 32.2%.

In 2 seasons, the rate at which centers are taking 3's has gone up 240% and they are making 257% more 3's.

What this means is that, yes, the majority of NBA centers still aren't good 3 pt shooters but, that is changing and it's changing rapidly.

I've never looked at these numbers before and, they're blowing my mind right now.

If you go back ITT we have gone back 5 yrs and its just as stark a contrast. Its shocking but given the influence of 3s (both volume/efficiency) on ORTG it makes sense to diverge from the old way of playing. Some pretty good posts in here worth reading from DarkKnight/RapCity/LNG/etc.. FWIW this wont change his argument (he wants to "win"), and it will continue to be an exercise in futility, instead of an actual discussion.

While I agree with you here, I'm bored and so..........

Here are a couple problems: first, you do not analyze the replacement players.

Why would I analyze replacement players? Your argument is based upon the premise of the starters, not the bench, I am sticking to YOUR parameterized argument here.

Are they good shooters? If so, how much better?

Replacement players are irrelevant to the argument as you have made clear previously.

And second, and here is the crux of my argument, you argue they are better players... why don't they start?

Where have I argued the bench players are better? I've merely broken down the mpg (while a crude measure) for the list you provided and assigned to each individual player what their primary skillset is.

Couple things: why use the mean and not the average? I'd guess it is because it helps your cause. And yes indeed... in fact, of the top minute players I listed (yes, last season) 26 of them play the average or more minutes than the average.

Is "why use mean and not average" a serious question? I provided both which should show you I wasn't attempting to hide data or skew it in any manner. BTW, I should clarify that when I use the word mean, I am actually calculating median averaging the two middle values. Not exactly the correct term, but for some reason I got in the habit of defining mean in that manner when really it is the median.

I didn't do it for argument sake, I used the mean because it represents the middle ranking of MPG of an NBA C. If you are above the middle ranking, you are playing more minutes than the majority of yours peers and vice versa for below. The average of the league is 2/3rds of the starting C and it's because there is a heavier distribution of lower minutes in the bottom 3rd which drags the average away from the middle value.

This is high school level mathematics here, I'm not sure why you've chosen to attempt to pick this apart as some attempt to skew results.

So, most of them don't shoot... do I read that correctly?

Of the starting Cs who rank in the bottom 15 in PT in the league as compared to the # of Cs who rank in the top 15 and who can shoot? Yes, you read that correctly.

And here is your trick, move defense into the equation. Which is equivalent of saying: "well, before the new NBA nobody cared about defensive centers" which is a clear lie. So, if you take the defense out (which is not an attribute of the new NBA center that this thread refers to) you agree with me: the new centers are very close to the old centers. At least the ones who play the lion share of minutes at the position.

Fine, move it back out. Of the top 15 MPG Cs in the league, 8 shoot 3s (more than half) and 6 do it at above average %s. Of the bottom 15 MPG Cs in the league, 2 shoot 3s (way less than half) and 1 does it at above average %s.

Now, find me the players that do play your share of minutes and let's do the analysis. How many of them actually play against large traditional centers? Do they win that matchup when they do? How many actual threes do they actual shoot and at which percentage?

Why, wasn't in your original premise of argument to look at anyone but starters.

What I've shown is that NBA teams value 2 things in Cs, one is defense and if you can't do that, you better to be able to shoot, and if you can't do that either, well, good luck seeing more than 25mpg for your career. That value of "shooting C" correlated to minutes played wasn't there 5 years ago, that is the point, that is the change that you refuse to acknowledge even when we stick to your parameters surrounding your argument.

[ruckus]

Sorry to jump in on page 10 but, even if by your assertion that centers "suck" at shooting 3's, the evidence says that they are shooting more 3's. These are the numbers:

In 2016-17, centers (as per stats.nba.com's definition) took and made 1494 of 4338 3's for a rate of 34.4% in the regular season.

Compared to 2014-15, 2 seasons ago, centers took and made 581 of 1807 3's for a rate of 32.2%.

In 2 seasons, the rate at which centers are taking 3's has gone up 240% and they are making 257% more 3's.

What this means is that, yes, the majority of NBA centers still aren't good 3 pt shooters but, that is changing and it's changing rapidly.

I've never looked at these numbers before and, they're blowing my mind right now.

Ah, damn it... I've been here since 2004 and never post because of this. I can't really help myself. So, let's see your numbers with context:

- 30 teams, 82 games per: 2624
- 1494/2624 = 0.56, 4338/2624 = 1.65

So, in conclusion... centers (counting the PFs playing centers and all small ball and all the jazz) are taking less than 2 3s a game and making slightly more than half a shot a game.

The NBA will never be the same again.
My mind is blown.

In context, it's an exponential increase from 2 seasons prior despite your efforts to try and minimize it. And, less than 2 attempts per game right now will probably be 2 attempts by the end of next season and 4 attempts per game in 5 seasons. And, I'm probably being conservative here. I'm not sure I understand why you're trying to reject the notion that the center position is changing because all evidence is to the contrary.

I mean, going by your mindset, the 3 shouldn't be part of the game at all because 20 years ago, everyone was terrible at it. I'm not a fan of the 3-happy era but, that's the way the league is trending whether you like it or not.

[vini_vidi_vici]

I'm not a fan of the 3-happy era but, that's the way the league is trending whether you like it or not.

This thread, reminds me of another thread (and the same as Chokers signature I believe), it starts with a narrow focus, and as the thread prolongs theres some interesting things. Much like Ruckus, the more I read (Thank you Buff, despite your insistence on starting Cs/etc.., and this narrow focus) abotu bigs shooting 3s more is crazy.

This article is from Feb 16th (the season wasnt over), I want you to keep this in mind.

This season, NBA players 6-10 and taller have taken 7,072 three-pointers and have made 2,482 (35%). At this point last season, they had taken 4,387 and made 1,522 (34.6%). Ten years ago? NBA players 6-10 and taller attempted 2,995 three-pointers over the course of the entire season and made 1,021 (34%).

I couldnt believe that much had changed. I mean if we were including all bigs (as I think C/PFs are just bigs now, like Brad Stevens), its becoming crazy.

The one thing I find upsetting is the fans who dont like this evolution (not just Ruckus, im using him because I respect him as a poster and he just posted it, but alot of posters here ive seen write this). I like the emphasis on any skill, and the way teams design things right now seem so innovative/interesting. I loved Run TMC growing up, I loved Hakeem dream shakes, Jordans midrange, etc.. but the transition offense, the way the offense moves the defense in half court, the interesting and innovate ways to get 3s/rim points is so much fun to watch (yes even the Raps "boring" offense). Watching the different defensive philosophies to combat it, ICE, heavy switching, the funneling, etc.. has been fun too.

I also think its the easiest way to defeat the "superstar" calls and/or create upsets. You hit shots you arent as reliant on a favorable whistle that inside/driving type teams need because youre taking alot of contested shots, a much higher percentage than outside ones.

Thats coincided which the information era, from great writers, to podcasts, more statistics than ever, and the Raps rise. I have never had a better time following the Raps/basketball.

In the end, someone will develop a counter to it (im just not sure its going to be throwing the ball inside for contested PostUps which are very inefficient) and we will watch how teams adjust. Im just saying its been a pleasure to actually be witness not just to an individual player changing the game (a MJ/LBJ/etc..), but an entire change of the game itself if even incrementally in terms of total offense/volume.

[Buff]

In that case, I win.

Ok, bye.

Wow, you read 2 whole words of what I wrote, good job!
Much better than reading only your posts, as you usually do.

[Buff]

I'm not a fan of the 3-happy era but, that's the way the league is trending whether you like it or not.

This thread, reminds me of another thread (and the same as Chokers signature I believe), it starts with a narrow focus, and as the thread prolongs theres some interesting things. Much like Ruckus, the more I read (Thank you Buff, despite your insistence on starting Cs/etc.., and this narrow focus) abotu bigs shooting 3s more is crazy.

And still, it looks like only the guys in the picture do. Using ruckus numbers we got that today centers take 1.65 shots per game on average. How many centers shot more than average at more than average efficiency (35.5):

http://stats.nba.com/players/traditional/#!?sort=FG3_PCT&dir=-1&Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&PlayerPosition=C

- Marc Gasol
- Speights
- Embiid
- KAT
- Cousins
- Horford

I mean, yeah, it has increased 600% from 1 to 6. Most of them starters (which seems irrelevant here) but in all, still only 1 in 5 teams have one and they are basically average, not even good shooters.

You are welcome.

[Johnny Bball]

I'm not sure I understand why you're trying to reject the notion that the center position is changing because all evidence is to the contrary.

Was this a rhetorical "question"?

[Buff]

I'm not sure I understand why you're trying to reject the notion that the center position is changing because all evidence is to the contrary.

Was this a rhetorical "question"?

I couldn't find that comment by ruckus, but the answer is very simple. I do not accept arguments because my elders say so. So I try to challenge them, in this case with fairly good evidence. I'm often wrong, but it beats repeating what everyone says ad-nauseum. Critical thinking: it is a good thing, even if you are wrong.

PS: I think you were trying to use the quotations on "rhetorical", it was clearly a question.

[Johnny Bball]

I'm not sure I understand why you're trying to reject the notion that the center position is changing because all evidence is to the contrary.

Was this a rhetorical "question"?

Hey! it is Johnny Me Too!

I couldn't find that comment by ruckus, but it is very simple. I do not accept arguments because my elders say so. So I try to challenge them, in this case with fairly good evidence. I'm often wrong, but it beats repeating what everyone says ad-nauseum. Critical thinking: it is a good thing, even if you are wrong.

PS: I think you were trying to use the quotations on "rhetorical", it was clearly a question.

Well.. no I used it on the right part since that is a statement and not a question. But since you have argued everything else, lol, why stop now! And I think its clear why being right on this subject is of interest to you, which is why I thought it was rhetorical.



On another note completely, I checked to see what percentage of shots were 3 point shots now from bigs. Maybe bigs were just taking more shots right?

I took only the NBA.com stats for centres listed as centres, used this year and 4 years ago (because it wouldn't allow me to quote 5 years ago by general distance) and used centres with more than 1 FGA a game.

This year 11.2% of shots taken by centres (82 players) were 3 point attempts. 4 years ago, 6.6% of shots taken by centres (90 players) were 3 point shots. 4 years ago the largest volume player listed as a centre was Kevin Love for MIN. If you took him out of the equation, its 5.5%.

Nope, its clear out of all players that are listed as centres, the percentage of the shots they take from 3 has drastically increased over a short span, not just the attempts. Fwiw shots overall from the position were 5% lower this year.

Hey! it is Johnny Me Too!

Here is some advice for you, don't start being dickish to people if you don't want it onto yourself.

[Buff]

I took only the NBA.com stats for centres listed as centres, used this year and 4 years ago (because it wouldn't allow me to quote 5 years ago by general distance) and used centres with more than 1 FGA a game.

This year 11.2% of shots taken by centres (82 players) were 3 point attempts. 4 years ago, 6.6% of shots taken by centres (90 players) were 3 point shots. 4 years ago the largest volume player listed as a centre was Kevin Love for MIN. If you took him out of the equation, its 5.5%.

Nope, its clear out of all players that are listed as centres, the percentage of the shots they take from 3 has drastically increased over a short span, not just the attempts.

First of all, I apologize about the name calling, it was uncalled for. Now, about the argument, thanks for the numbers. It actually help my cause. So the numbers of threes have doubled in 4 years (I actually thought it was worse) Still, a *new* center only takes one of ten shots as a 3. So:

Yes! Centers are taking more threes! Everyone knows that. Is it statistically significant to winning? No, by a long shot it is not (about 1.5 shots per game). Therefore, it can not be "game changing" or anything like that. It could very well be a fad that will probably go away and come back depending on the random big guys in the league. i.e. if we get a couple big-bads shaq-like players.

if you check what NBA.com calls "Forward", which I assume its 3/4 you see 86 players shooting 37%+, for Centers is what, 1, 2? So it is wrong to say that the league is going away from big, non-3-shooting people. Because at the end of the day the game is played on a court and it is a physical game. You cannot go fulltime Draymond (and that is the best case) because his game is energy, he tires fighting 50 pounds. And then he has to shoot the 3, so you know what?

Please let the centers of the other team take ALL the 3s. Less for Curry. Do the numbers and you probably come ahead barely shooting 50% from the field (have not done the math). In lieu of this, you cannot call it "evolution", "exponential" and all other adjectives that are spit out around here without questioning. It is simply not significant enough.

Now, for the last time, yes the game is about taking more threes, everyone knows. And if you run all the numbers you have done for PF instead of C you will see a increase much larger than from centers. I'd say, I really cannot afford the time I'm putting into this argument But this is the last point I'll make: None of these teams are starting no PF at C fulltime, since (again, conjecture) I'd bet the loss rebounding much significant than a measly shot a game (or two, whatevs).

Having said that, I'm obviously not changing any minds, tho nobody has made a good argument to make me change mine. Please lock it.

[ruckus]

I'm not a fan of the 3-happy era but, that's the way the league is trending whether you like it or not.

The one thing I find upsetting is the fans who dont like this evolution (not just Ruckus, im using him because I respect him as a poster and he just posted it, but alot of posters here ive seen write this). I like the emphasis on any skill, and the way teams design things right now seem so innovative/interesting. I loved Run TMC growing up, I loved Hakeem dream shakes, Jordans midrange, etc.. but the transition offense, the way the offense moves the defense in half court, the interesting and innovate ways to get 3s/rim points is so much fun to watch (yes even the Raps "boring" offense). Watching the different defensive philosophies to combat it, ICE, heavy switching, the funneling, etc.. has been fun too.

I also think its the easiest way to defeat the "superstar" calls and/or create upsets. You hit shots you arent as reliant on a favorable whistle that inside/driving type teams need because youre taking alot of contested shots, a much higher percentage than outside ones.

Thats coincided which the information era, from great writers, to podcasts, more statistics than ever, and the Raps rise. I have never had a better time following the Raps/basketball.

In the end, someone will develop a counter to it (im just not sure its going to be throwing the ball inside for contested PostUps which are very inefficient) and we will watch how teams adjust. Im just saying its been a pleasure to actually be witness not just to an individual player changing the game (a MJ/LBJ/etc..), but an entire change of the game itself if even incrementally in terms of total offense/volume.

I appreciate your take on it. I have to agree that watching the strategy part of it is fun. As is the analysis that comes along with it. And I agree that we are watching history unfold as it pertains to basketball. I also agree that having more multi-skilled players regardless of their height is very welcome.

My dislike for this current era of ball, and dislike may be too strong a word, is due to aesthetics. The same way people don't like watching Raptors ball, I have a difficult time watching 3-ball fests. Part of my current love for the Raptors comes from the fact that every 3 they take is close to life or death.

Also, I'm not heavily involved in lower level ball but, I see the negative effects that this current era has in regards to everyone wanting to jack up a 3. The entry pass into the post is rarely used or practiced. Post moves are rarely used or practiced. Big man down low offense and initiating that offense is a dying art. From that, I understand why Buff is being so dense on the issue.

That being said, when I play rec ball, I've embraced the 3 otherwise I'd never touch the ball posting up. It's all putbacks or 3s for a big nowadays.

[Johnny Bball]

First of all, I apologize about the name calling, it was uncalled for. Now, about the argument, thanks for the numbers. It actually help my cause. So the numbers of threes have doubled in 4 years (I actually thought it was worse) Still, a *new* center only takes one of ten shots as a 3. So:

Yes! Centers are taking more threes! Everyone knows that. Is it statistically significant to winning? No, by a long shot it is not (about 1.5 shots per game). Therefore, it can not be "game changing" or anything like that. It could very well be a fad that will probably go away and come back depending on the random big guys in the league. i.e. if we get a couple big-bads shaq-like players.

if you check what NBA.com calls "Forward", which I assume its 3/4 you see 86 players shooting 37%+, for Centers is what, 1, 2? So it is wrong to say that the league is going away from big, non-3-shooting people. Because at the end of the day the game is played on a court and it is a physical game. You cannot go fulltime Draymond (and that is the best case) because his game is energy, he tires fighting 50 pounds. And then he has to shoot the 3, so you know what?

Please let the centers of the other team take ALL the 3s. Less for Curry. Do the numbers and you probably come ahead barely shooting 50% from the field (have not done the math). In lieu of this, you cannot call it "evolution", "exponential" and all other adjectives that are spit out around here without questioning. It is simply not significant enough.

Now, for the last time, yes the game is about taking more threes, everyone knows. And if you run all the numbers you have done for PF instead of C you will see a increase much larger than from centers. I'd say, I really cannot afford the time I'm putting into this argument But this is the last point I'll make: None of these teams are starting no PF at C fulltime, since (again, conjecture) I'd bet the loss rebounding much significant than a measly shot a game (or two, whatevs).

Having said that, I'm obviously not changing any minds, tho nobody has made a good argument to make me change mine. Please lock it.

Actually I looked at it and most players now listed as centres are in fact centres where as there were a few very good players 4 years ago like Love, Bosh and Ibaka listed as centres back then. It actually makes it worse.

I don''t think its much of an argument that centres aren't shooting a ton of threes, but the transition is happening and its just starting and its only getting worse. Players can't change overnight. But the better ones have and they will play more because of it.

You can't go fulltime Draymond but its clear you can't go fulltime lots of players because of foul trouble, not energy. They would play draymond there all game if there's not risk he gets in foul trouble. So teams wait until the 4th and unload the clip. Its clear that on lots of teams including the best teams, that the finishing centre is not always the starter and the starter is not always the better centre.

This isn't a fad. Its rule changes like hand checking and illegal defense that have changed the game. Its attention to analytic data.
But the pendulum isn't swinging back the other way until rules change again imo.