Eddie Johnson tries to agree with Draymond and gets brutally fact-checked

[SkyBill40]

you mean shots from three or any shot? Because it seema to me you're just saying they shoot too much from three, but I am not clear what "too much" ia supposed to mean in this context.
To the point they are hurting the team? Or based on your personal taste?

I was referencing three point attempts specifically, although two point shot attempts also being bad is an equally annoying thing. And they are, in many instances, hurtful to the team as it leads to a blown possession and also personally frustrating to watch.

they are not if you make them efficiently, that's the whole point of the discussion!

[DOT]

And that's great... except I was focusing strictly on 3pFGA and not attempts in general.

Right, because if we point out that you're seeing the same ratio of makes to misses in general, that kinda destroys your entire argument.

Argument wasn't ever about makes. It was about the increased volume of said shots having been taken. Stop trying to broaden the discussion beyond the specific scope and focus on what is at hand here, shall we?

You said increased volume and low completion

You're trying to narrow the scope. Your entire argument hinges on it being commonly accepted that a 3pt miss is inherently worse than a 2pt miss when it's just not. I fail to see the difference between somebody shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from 3 vs someone shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from mid. It's more or less exactly the same amount of enjoyability to watch, it's all jump shots just some are longer ranged.

[dhsilv2]

I agree with you it's not all that matters. In the same way that all the off ball movement and screens that happen before the shot goes up isn't all that matters.

So just pointing at the increase in complexity of one part of the game doesn't invalidate the fact that another part of the game is getting simpler. Two things can be happening from different perspectives

No...this is just stupid. The game is 48 minutes. The determination of complexity it the entirety of the 48 minutes. The point Ben made was that people are only looking at one point and not what leads to it. He wasn't saying we should ignore EITHER. But the game has always mostly been long jumpers and shots in the paint. That's just the nature of the game.

Multiple factors go into that complexity. In the video he is putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions factor. You are also putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions. Which misses the point that other parts of the game also contribute significantly to the game's complexity such as a shot variety factor. And if you can't understand that point then we are talking in circles

They are additive.

He covers very clearly the topic of shot variety which as I JUST covered as well. Has never been that diverse.

[SkyBill40]

Right, because if we point out that you're seeing the same ratio of makes to misses in general, that kinda destroys your entire argument.

Argument wasn't ever about makes. It was about the increased volume of said shots having been taken. Stop trying to broaden the discussion beyond the specific scope and focus on what is at hand here, shall we?

You said increased volume and low completion

You're trying to narrow the scope. Your entire argument hinges on it being commonly accepted that a 3pt miss is inherently worse than a 2pt miss when it's just not. I fail to see the difference between somebody shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from 3 vs someone shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from mid. It's more or less exactly the same amount of enjoyability to watch, it's all jump shots just some are longer ranged.

Nah. Not that at all. That's all you making an inference on what I am thinking and, well, your assumption is incorrect. A miss is a miss, my dude. They're all bad; however, poor shot selection only exacerbates the miss when a better shot, be it a three or a two, could have been more successful. It's particular bad, as I personally see itwhen unnecessary three point attempts are taken. My Suns are culprits of that on the regular.

And your enjoyability is your own. Subjectivity being that, of course.

[DOT]

Argument wasn't ever about makes. It was about the increased volume of said shots having been taken. Stop trying to broaden the discussion beyond the specific scope and focus on what is at hand here, shall we?

You said increased volume and low completion

You're trying to narrow the scope. Your entire argument hinges on it being commonly accepted that a 3pt miss is inherently worse than a 2pt miss when it's just not. I fail to see the difference between somebody shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from 3 vs someone shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from mid. It's more or less exactly the same amount of enjoyability to watch, it's all jump shots just some are longer ranged.

Nah. Not that at all. That's all you making an inference on what I am thinking and, well, your assumption is incorrect. A miss is a miss, my dude. They're all bad; however, poor shot selection only exacerbates the miss when a better shot, be it a three or a two, could have been more successful. It's particular bad, as I personally see itwhen unnecessary three point attempts are taken. My Suns are culprits of that on the regular.

And your enjoyability is your own. Subjectivity being that, of course.

A miss is a miss, and guys aren't missing any more than they used to

You're just mad the shots they're missing are a few feet further out for some reason.

[nikster]

"Fact-checking" is such low testosterone behavior. It's like you're that stereotype of the person who calls out someone's spelling mistake.

The overall statistics could say that PnR's are down across the board, but that particular person's experience might have been different to the point where he felt he needed to share it openly. People who feel the need to "dunk" on others in open forums probably haven't been **** by their wives in years.

Someday, you will be embarrassed that you were like this.

We can only hope. I honestly thought it was satirical at first, can't believe someone would seriously equate fact checking with low testoerone behavior.

[SkyBill40]

You said increased volume and low completion

You're trying to narrow the scope. Your entire argument hinges on it being commonly accepted that a 3pt miss is inherently worse than a 2pt miss when it's just not. I fail to see the difference between somebody shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from 3 vs someone shooting 50% from the field overall with 3/10 shooting from mid. It's more or less exactly the same amount of enjoyability to watch, it's all jump shots just some are longer ranged.

Nah. Not that at all. That's all you making an inference on what I am thinking and, well, your assumption is incorrect. A miss is a miss, my dude. They're all bad; however, poor shot selection only exacerbates the miss when a better shot, be it a three or a two, could have been more successful. It's particular bad, as I personally see itwhen unnecessary three point attempts are taken. My Suns are culprits of that on the regular.

And your enjoyability is your own. Subjectivity being that, of course.

A miss is a miss, and guys aren't missing any more than they used to

You're just mad the shots they're missing are a few feet further out for some reason.

Assume all you wish. That's still free.

[Exp0sed]

Thinking Basketball already killed this narrative. The amount of 3s is due to the fact that spot up shots used to be long 2s are now 3-point shots. The amount of shots taken in the paint has remained the same.

You are essentially arguing that long 2s are fun and unpredictable, while shooting a slightly longer 3s is boring and predictable.

(BTW, Today’s players also make their 3s at a higher% than ‘90s and ‘00s players made long 2s)

The “too many 3s” argument has been debunked. “Too many PnRs” has been debunked. Do you have any actual real criticisms?

2s are a lot more unpredictable than 3s, that is for certain, i just watched all of Chicago's NBA Finals games and they are more entertaining than anything i've ever seen!

Plus the 2s make defenders work a lot harder, whereas 3s often just make defenders put a hand up, and when Curry has a cold night you don't even need to put a hand up... and last season i remember hearing that Indiana were just waiting to get the ball and not even caring about defense

Spot on!

Go watch the offensive repertoire of players like McHale, Worthy, King, Dantley or Aguirre to name a few from that era and they absolutely are more entertaining with the variety of moves and counter moves they had from 18 feet in than ANYTHING you see from the supposed top 10 players of today trying to bomb away 10+ 3’s a game. That’s what happens when AAU becomes the main “developer” of basketball

The rebounding battles that also resulted from those mid range/post up attacks had a lot to do with the way rivalries materialized organically instead of 10 players waiting 25 feet away from the basket for long rebounds that rarely get contested because the offensive players have already one foot at half court before the 3 point brick goes up, pathetic

You have counters for shooters tho

stepback, sidestep, attack the closeout + float game etc. you can argue watching shooters sidestep their defenders to create space for the shot is less enetertainig than watching the guys you listed use their array of moves in the hi or low post, that's true enough

My point is "moves" still exist they're just different. think about something like the Eurostep, back then no1 used it and now without a viable Eurostep you basically can't play in the league.


Different eras, needs, goals and thus - different moves...

Sent from my SM-A055F using RealGM mobile app

[Black star]

No...this is just stupid. The game is 48 minutes. The determination of complexity it the entirety of the 48 minutes. The point Ben made was that people are only looking at one point and not what leads to it. He wasn't saying we should ignore EITHER. But the game has always mostly been long jumpers and shots in the paint. That's just the nature of the game.

Multiple factors go into that complexity. In the video he is putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions factor. You are also putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions. Which misses the point that other parts of the game also contribute significantly to the game's complexity such as a shot variety factor. And if you can't understand that point then we are talking in circles

They are additive.

He covers very clearly the topic of shot variety which as I JUST covered as well. Has never been that diverse.

I'll stop here because we've come full circle. You're right he does cover it and he shows that it's gotten worse. The bankshot, the turnaround fadeaway jumper, the free throw line curl jumper, all are a variety of unique shots that get bundled together into a "long two" category and replaced with threes. The chart which he posts in the video at 7:00 shows that when you divide the court into three shootings zones, historically we saw shots from all three zones in good measure and in the modern game we are seeing shots primarily from only two of those zones. That is literally less shot variety. So you might want to check that again

[dhsilv2]

Multiple factors go into that complexity. In the video he is putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions factor. You are also putting the emphasis on all the off ball movements and actions. Which misses the point that other parts of the game also contribute significantly to the game's complexity such as a shot variety factor. And if you can't understand that point then we are talking in circles

They are additive.

He covers very clearly the topic of shot variety which as I JUST covered as well. Has never been that diverse.

I'll stop here because we've come full circle. You're right he does cover it and he shows that it's gotten worse. The bankshot, the turnaround fadeaway jumper, the free throw line curl jumper, all are a variety of unique shots that get bundled together into a "long two" category and replaced with threes. The chart which he posts in the video at 7:00 shows that when you divide the court into three shootings zones, historically we saw shots from all three zones in good measure and in the modern game we are seeing shots primarily from only two of those zones. That is literally less shot variety. So you might want to check that again

I didn't say no change. I said it was never THAT diverse.

And what you're talking about however are mostly shots we'd see in isolation settings. We still have mid range isolation shots. What we have less of, if not almost none of, are catch and shoot mid range shots. That's the primary mover.

[dhsilv2]

And that's great... except I was focusing strictly on 3pFGA and not attempts in general.

Right, because if we point out that you're seeing the same ratio of makes to misses in general, that kinda destroys your entire argument.

Argument wasn't ever about makes. It was about the increased volume of said shots having been taken. Stop trying to broaden the discussion beyond the specific scope and focus on what is at hand here, shall we?

Three point percentage has hovered around 35% since the early 90's to now. Not what I'd call horribly efficient, but I guess some will see it that way.

1998

Shots 3-10 feet 37.6%
Shots 10-16 35.4%

That's league wide and those two shot types made up 34% of all field goal attempts. Maybe just me but I don't really see a meaningful difference here.

Today those shots are down but teams are shooting

3-10 feet 45.6%
10-16 feet 44.0%

We today let star players shoot those shots and everyone else takes 3's. I'll leave you to your feelings on what is an isn't efficient. But teams were taking a hell of a lot of shots around 35% in 1998. Roughly half the shots once you add in the 15% of shots taken from 3.

Today 42% of shots are 3's shot at about 36%. Basically 8% of shots are taken more efficiently today in total. Take this all with what you will. I just wanted to point out taking 35% shots was happening all the time in the past. They just weren't 3's.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

I was referencing three point attempts specifically, although two point shot attempts also being bad is an equally annoying thing. And they are, in many instances, hurtful to the team as it leads to a blown possession and also personally frustrating to watch.

they are not if you make them efficiently, that's the whole point of the discussion!

well, that's not what you are saying.
offenses have never been as good as today, this is working. whatever you might say

[DAWill1128]

The NBA will have to consider whats the end product when the scoring gets so high. Adam Silver has been adamant about wanting to increase scoring and being happy with the reffing and rule changes that have allowed it. But when does the scoring and the rules and reffing stop? Look at professional football in the NFL, if they let scoring run rampant they just become the Arena Football League. The San Jose Sabercats of the AFL used to play games with outcomes of 76 to 69 results. Nobody wanted to watch that brand of football. Do people want to watch professional basketball, the NBA have games of 140 to 130? Just visually you run the risk of fans wondering if the defense ever gets a stop.

[djsunyc]

top 10 teams in ortg vs. 3 point attempts

cavs 121.9 - 41.2 (4th)
knicks 119.9 - 34.0 (27th)
nuggets 119.5 - 31.2 (30th)
boston 118.8 - 48.3 (1st)
memphis 117.8 - 37.5 (14th)
okc - 117.3 - 38.7 (11th)
dallas - 115.4 - 35.2 (24th)
kings - 115.3 - 35.9 (20th)
lakers - 114.6 - 34.2 (25th)
pacers - 114.4 - 34.2 (26th)

only 2 of the top 10 offenses in the league are in the top 10 in 3 point attempts. in fact, most are in the bottom half.

the bottom 7 in 3FA and their records

dallas: 30-26
lakers: 32-20
pacers: 30-23
knicks: 36-18
clippers: 31-23
raptors: 17-38
nuggets: 36-19

[tamaraw08]

top 10 teams in ortg vs. 3 point attempts

cavs 121.9 - 41.2 (4th)
knicks 119.9 - 34.0 (27th)
nuggets 119.5 - 31.2 (30th)
boston 118.8 - 48.3 (1st)
memphis 117.8 - 37.5 (14th)
okc - 117.3 - 38.7 (11th)
dallas - 115.4 - 35.2 (24th)
kings - 115.3 - 35.9 (20th)
lakers - 114.6 - 34.2 (25th)
pacers - 114.4 - 34.2 (26th)

only 2 of the top 10 offenses in the league are in the top 10 in 3 point attempts. in fact, most are in the bottom half.

the bottom 7 in 3FA and their records

dallas: 30-26
lakers: 32-20
pacers: 30-23
knicks: 36-18
clippers: 31-23
raptors: 17-38
nuggets: 36-19

Are you able to compare the top ORTG teams in the 80's and 90's along with their 3pt attempts?
Which teams are more efficient?

[djsunyc]

top 10 teams in ortg vs. 3 point attempts

cavs 121.9 - 41.2 (4th)
knicks 119.9 - 34.0 (27th)
nuggets 119.5 - 31.2 (30th)
boston 118.8 - 48.3 (1st)
memphis 117.8 - 37.5 (14th)
okc - 117.3 - 38.7 (11th)
dallas - 115.4 - 35.2 (24th)
kings - 115.3 - 35.9 (20th)
lakers - 114.6 - 34.2 (25th)
pacers - 114.4 - 34.2 (26th)

only 2 of the top 10 offenses in the league are in the top 10 in 3 point attempts. in fact, most are in the bottom half.

the bottom 7 in 3FA and their records

dallas: 30-26
lakers: 32-20
pacers: 30-23
knicks: 36-18
clippers: 31-23
raptors: 17-38
nuggets: 36-19

Are you able to compare the top ORTG teams in the 80's and 90's along with their 3pt attempts?
Which teams are more efficient?

furthest back is 96/97

bulls: 112.4 - 17.1 (11th)
jazz: 112.4 - 11.0 (30th)
seattle : 109.6 - 19.3 (7th)
hornets: 109.1 - 16.9 (13th)
pistons: 108.5 - 18.3 (9th)
suns: 108.0 - 17.4 (10th)
rockets: 107.5 - 22.4 (2nd)
hawks: 106.4 - 22.4 (3rd)
lakers: 106.4 - 18.3 (8th)
blazers: 106.3 - 17.1 (12th)

interestingly enough, 5 of the top 10 ortg teams are in the top 10 in 3FA. and 9 of them are top 13.
only 1 team is in the bottom half of the league and they are last.

[Zetsword]

Draymond preparing early to be a cranky talking head. What's the point in saying this besides that, like for real? Because he's typically very positive on the state of the game...

[tsherkin]

Game has been figured out by numbers, and most teams play very similarly, because facts tell us it is the most efficient way to play.

Most teams have always played similarly, whether or not that was a smart idea, unless they had talent to dictate that they could do something else. That's not new. People just bitch about it more because we have broader access. We were having near-identical whining conversations on Usenet in the 90s.

the difference is that those complaining on rsbp in the 90s or early 00s were right

xD

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Most teams have always played similarly, whether or not that was a smart idea, unless they had talent to dictate that they could do something else. That's not new. People just bitch about it more because we have broader access. We were having near-identical whining conversations on Usenet in the 90s.

the difference is that those complaining on rsbp in the 90s or early 00s were right

xD

To be honest, there were two different whining groups:
1) the game should go back to golden age of the 80s
2) the game should look at Europe

[LockoutSeason]

And that's great... except I was focusing strictly on 3pFGA and not attempts in general.

Right, because if we point out that you're seeing the same ratio of makes to misses in general, that kinda destroys your entire argument.

Argument wasn't ever about makes. It was about the increased volume of said shots having been taken. Stop trying to broaden the discussion beyond the specific scope and focus on what is at hand here, shall we?

Three point percentage has hovered around 35% since the early 90's to now. Not what I'd call horribly efficient, but I guess some will see it that way.

What does this mean? Increased volume of what shots, 3-pointers?

So this just confirms what I said that your definition of “chucking” is just shooting more 3s. If one player goes 10/10 from 3 and another goes 0/10 from 3, they are both chuckers according to you since they both took 10 3s.