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

[LockoutSeason]

I know bringing facts to an NBA discussion is a cardinal sin, but this is hilarious.

Read on Twitter

[Tim Lehrbach]

It's all LeBron's fault that facts don't care about my feelings!

[DOT]

This should be required watching for anyone complaining about today's game being too simple:

Watch on YouTube

[Ice Man]

Draymond's gonna make a killing as an NBA analyst. He's smart, glib, and usually wrong, because he talks out of his ass rather than does his homework. As Chuck and Shaq can tell you, that's the path to analyst stardom.

[SkyBill40]

What the statistics show don't really seem to pass the eye test. And, to some degree, as far as "boring" is concerned... I'm having difficulty disagreeing with Green. Your mileage may vary, but seeing the game in this current state isn't all that interesting to me. While it does have some exciting times here and there, the amount of chucking is absurd.

[UcanUwill]

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. I think that is most people's who complain problem. Some people just say it is easy, but some people understand it is not easy, but it is still the same. Most teams play the same way, try to find the same shots, and that's not gonna change because we are in an era where everything like that gets figured out mathematically. If they come up with more efficient shots, all teams will try to do that. The problem people have I think is just that, that everyone tries to play the same way now and that can be boring. The further we will go, the harder time we will have finding teams with unique identity.

Teams play more efficiently, but it doesn't mean it can't be boring. I would parallel it to something like exploration. Radars, satellites, the fact we can map every Earths location is good, its convenient, but we will never be in a time again where you could imagine that some yet to be found old temple is there, for Indiana Jones to be found. And thats boring, thats pretty depressing, all we wanted was to explore the world, but when we did, its boring now. Conan Doyle would never write Lost world again. Thats just downside of knowing everything.

[ITYSL]

Draymond's gonna make a killing as an NBA analyst. He's smart, glib, and usually wrong, because he talks out of his ass rather than does his homework. As Chuck and Shaq can tell you, that's the path to analyst stardom.

He's the perfect heir to Chuck and Shaq - just hate on the modern game at all times. Miserable ****, the whole lot of them.

[elchengue20]

It's funny it's quite the opposite, players nowadays are being requiered to do more than ever, nearly all players have to be able to contribuite offensively in different ways by cutting, screening, passing, dribbling, shooting.

There was much more defensive specialists in the past that didn't do nothing on the offensive end.

It's mind blowing people that made a living playing basketball and spent millions of hours on it don't have a clue on what they are watching.

[ITYSL]

Offensive rating this year has a neutral correlation with 3PA per game. There's essentially no connection between how many 3PAs a team has and what their offensive rating is.

Also - no, most teams do not play a similar game. The 5 teams with the most 3PA/game average 30% more 3PA/game than the bottom 5 (42.8 vs. 33.1). There's a lot of variance between teams in terms of how many 3PAs are shot per game.

Yes, leaguewide 3PAs are up. They've replaced long 2s for the most part because they're a higher efficiency shot. Teams still attack in offense in a lot of different ways. Just because it ends in a 3PA more often doesn't negate that.

[ItsDanger]

They definitely do a lot of ghost screens. I think the underlying data is garbage. What is defined as a certain play or shot isn't always 100% aligned. I reject many of these online opinions because I question their data.

[puny]

Is this really what boomers were impressed with?

Young man yells at cloud?

[JonFromVA]

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. I think that is most people's who complain problem. Some people just say it is easy, but some people understand it is not easy, but it is still the same. Most teams play the same way, try to find the same shots, and that's not gonna change because we are in an era where everything like that gets figured out mathematically. If they come up with more efficient shots, all teams will try to do that. The problem people have I think is just that, that everyone tries to play the same way now and that can be boring. The further we will go, the harder time we will have finding teams with unique identity.

Teams play more efficiently, but it doesn't mean it can't be boring. I would parallel it to something like exploration. Radars, satellites, the fact we can map every Earths location is good, its convenient, but we will never be in a time again where you could imagine that some yet to be found old temple is there, for Indiana Jones to be found. And thats boring, thats pretty depressing, all we wanted was to explore the world, but when we did, its boring now. Conan Doyle would never write Lost world again. Thats just downside of knowing everything.

Not that long ago the NBA was predictable ISO drive and kick, and then before that it was ISO post-up. Clear out, go to work.

The rules had to change for teams to embrace new ways to score.

Exploring new ways is possible, you just can't stumble on to stuff. Teams have to be actively searching for answers and new approaches.

The Cavs, Celtics, and Thunder are all pushing the league forward in new ways on both ends of the floor. Other teams are on the cusp of joining in.

Time to recognize.

[sikma42]

I know bringing facts to an NBA discussion is a cardinal sin, but this is hilarious.

Read on Twitter

It's also about interpting facts. When you are running off-ball action you will (on average) use way more screens than if you are running a high p&r.

The rebuttal rests on the premise that p&r centric offense would mean more pick and rolls...thats not true and demonstrates a misuse and misunderstanding of the data

[Showtime 80]

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?

Watch on YouTube

Is this highlight reel supposed to be impressive? These are like Aaron Gordon’s B-list dunks.

Is this really what boomers were impressed with?

LOL, Nique was doing this against packed paints with 3, 4 or 4 people routinely camping inside with a shot blocking 7 footer waiting to challenge any drive to the basket. He did all this while being the main offensive weapon for the Hawks in the persons the most devastating conference of all time in the 80’s/90’s East.

The glorified scrub Gordon has never been close to his team’s offensive focus and has had the benefit of 25+ years of soft rule changes by the NBE to clear the paint for all perimeter players to attack the basket without any physical resistance.

[Ruma85]

Watch on YouTube

Is this highlight reel supposed to be impressive? These are like Aaron Gordon’s B-list dunks.

Is this really what boomers were impressed with?

LOL, Nique was doing this against packed paints with 3, 4 or 4 people routinely camping inside with a shot blocking 7 footer waiting to challenge any drive to the basket. He did all this while being the main offensive weapon for the Hawks in the persons the most devastating conference of all time in the 80’s/90’s East.

The glorified scrub Gordon has never been close to his team’s offensive focus and has had the benefit of 25+ years of soft rule changes by the NBE to clear the paint for all perimeter players to attack the basket without any physical resistance.

Why i certainly understand where you are coming from, though Gordon is far from scrub weather he was ever a team's offensive focus or not, his a really good player, I can get along with all the points you make because they make a lot of sense, regarding Gordon or European style soft as tissue paper is an insult to a lot people's IQ towards the game, I can even understand why you seem upset/possibly pissed off, but you need to learn how take deep breathers, & think what you are writing instead of just going on a rants...

[TorontoBarneys]

"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.

[Black star]

This should be required watching for anyone complaining about today's game being too simple:

Watch on YouTube

This has big "the economy is fine and all you plebians just need to look at all our statistics about how good the economy is instead of complaining about costs" energy.

Yes the game is simpler when the majority of actions result in a three or a lay up attempt. You can't just point to more complex off ball actions and say "everybody has to start paying attention to that now and use that to decide if its interesting" because that's not the metric people watching use to determine whether the gameplay is simple or not.

[dhsilv2]

This should be required watching for anyone complaining about today's game being too simple:

Watch on YouTube

This has big "the economy is fine and all you plebians just need to look at all our statistics about how good the economy is instead of complaining about costs" energy.

Yes the game is simpler when the majority of actions result in a three or a lay up attempt. You can't just point to more complex off ball actions and say "everybody has to start paying attention to that now and use that to decide if its interesting" because that's not the metric people watching use to determine whether the gameplay is simple or not.

No...it has "watch the actual game kid" written all over it.

[druggas]

Is this really what boomers were impressed with?

Young man yells at cloud?

Best post all day!

[Black star]

This should be required watching for anyone complaining about today's game being too simple:

Watch on YouTube

This has big "the economy is fine and all you plebians just need to look at all our statistics about how good the economy is instead of complaining about costs" energy.

Yes the game is simpler when the majority of actions result in a three or a lay up attempt. You can't just point to more complex off ball actions and say "everybody has to start paying attention to that now and use that to decide if its interesting" because that's not the metric people watching use to determine whether the gameplay is simple or not.

No...it has "watch the actual game kid" written all over it.

In the video he literally says "if you describe a basketball game by the end of it's possessions a ton of long jumpers are probably less interesting". The point of this video is that all the other stuff going in is much more complex or interesting and that people should pay attention to everything going on in a possession to see it. It's not some incisive answer to the people who find a bunch of threes boring