Your Unpopular Basketball Opinions? [PC Board Edition]

[sp6r=underrated]

The hot hand is real

What do you mean when you say "the hot hand is real?"

[SactoKingsFan]

I have another potentially unpopular (or at least "insufficiently considered") opinion: the value of a good screen-setter is widely unappreciated, not only by casual fans but also by many posters here.

Many on the Kings board would agree. It was hard to not notice years of Cousins setting half-assed screens. Mostly comes down to effort and timing. Papagiannis is still a teenager and he's already a very good screen setter.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Dr Spaceman]

Speaking of Cousins, I may as well drop this one: I'm not sure he was one of the best 20 players in the league this season and I think giving him a 30% max will set your franchise back a long way.

[trex_8063]

I have another potentially unpopular (or at least "insufficiently considered") opinion: the value of a good screen-setter is widely unappreciated, not only by casual fans but also by many posters here.

I agree with this soooooooo much.

It is why I have argued Gobert is more important to the Jazz offense than Hayward. Gobert sets 2-4 screens on an average play. I see a good screen as no different than a good pass/assist. Creating movement and space is so important and a good screen is the one of the best ways to do that(arguably the most important). If that player can then roll to the basket as a threat he is going to make a HUGE difference.

OK, after all these positive responses and 4 "and1's", maybe I'm mistaken that this is an unappreciated skill here.

wrt to Gobert: I don't know if he's setting 2-4 screens per possession, but yeah it's a lot, and I wouldn't argue with someone who contends he's that important to their offense.
I did once hear the Jazz telecasters state that the Jazz average 73 "high screens for the ball-handler" (i.e. pnr/pnp) plays per game----if you watch the Jazz, 73 seems kinda skimpy as an estimate, and I don't know exactly how they're counting this.......perhaps if Gobert sets a screen on one side of the defender but it doesn't really "take", so they sort of immediately reset and he repeats the screen on the other side of the defender, maybe they're counting that as only ONE screen......or perhaps they meant that Jazz set at least one screen on 73 possessions per game----at any rate, if 73 screens are set in a game, it's likely that Rudy set ~50 of them.

And I don't think it's hard to conceptualise how a "good" screen (relative to an "average" screen) might add [conservatively] 0.02-0.04 points/play of value.....by creating that tiny bit of extra space for the ball-handler----whether it allows for a cleaner look at a jumper, or allows a penetration to the rim, or allows a penetration which sets the defense to rotating and thus creates a penetrate-and-kick opportunity----it improves the efficacy of the play itself (even if the screener has nothing else to do with the play), such that a screener like Gobert might be adding 1-2 pts/game to the Jazz's offensive output thru no other means (that is: WITHOUT any consideration of his threat as a roll man or on the offensive glass, and how the defense adjusts to those threats) than simply setting a decent screen.

[Bruh Man]

Lebron's 2016 supporting cast is worse than Dirk's in 2011, possibly anyone's since Rick Barry

The hot hand is real

Can't see how this is unpopular. I think most people here see the 2011 Mavs as being perfectly built around Dirk. They lacked star power in comparison with other championship teams, but that was a very good supporting cast around Dirk.

probably the bolded part, and it is definitely an unpopular opinion that Lebrons cast last year was bad compared to other contenders. I agree with the hot hand being real though.

[Narigo]

This may be not be a unpopular opinion but...
I think the 2017 Warriors are better than the 2016 Warriors despite having a worse record

[Dr Positivity]

Lebron's 2016 supporting cast is worse than Dirk's in 2011, possibly anyone's since Rick Barry

The hot hand is real

Can't see how this is unpopular. I think most people here see the 2011 Mavs as being perfectly built around Dirk. They lacked star power in comparison with other championship teams, but that was a very good supporting cast around Dirk.

It's pretty common to see people rate supporting casts by how many all-stars they have on their team. So Dirk 2011, Duncan 2003, Hakeem 1994 are rated as the most impressive because of lack of star partners, compared to Lebron having Kyrie and Love

[Bruh Man]

This may be not be a unpopular opinion but...
I think the 2017 Warriors are better than the 2016 Warriors despite having a worse record

I too think KD is better than Harrison Barnes .

[Dr Positivity]

The hot hand is real

What do you mean when you say "the hot hand is real?"

I think players can be in a rhythm or focus or feeling good physically/mentally, that allows them to play at a higher level for a period of time, whether it's a few minutes, a game, or a few weeks. As opposed to the anti-hot hand viewpoint that used to be popular in places like TrueHoop, that suggested hitting a few shots in a row was just math like flipping a coin a few times in a row and landing on the same side. I feel like the reason there's a big difference between a good day for a player and a bad day, or that teams have more game at home and road, is a sign that they're just not mechanical producers who are outputting odds of the ball going in or not on a nightly basis.

[ThaRegul8r]

The hot hand is real

What do you mean when you say "the hot hand is real?"

I think players can be in a rhythm or focus or feeling good physically/mentally, that allows them to play at a higher level for a period of time, whether it's a few minutes, a game, or a few weeks.

Being "in the zone" is a thing. It's been written about. I've personally experienced it, and I'm sure there are others who've played some kind of sport (doesn't have to be professionally) who've experienced it at some point in their life.

[Goudelock]

What do you mean when you say "the hot hand is real?"

I think players can be in a rhythm or focus or feeling good physically/mentally, that allows them to play at a higher level for a period of time, whether it's a few minutes, a game, or a few weeks.

Being "in the zone" is a thing. It's been written about. I've personally experienced it, and I'm sure there are others who've played some kind of sport (doesn't have to be professionally) who've experienced it at some point in their life.

Heck, I'd even say that it's a thing in the "real world" as well. I've had a day at work where I was a machine and doing everything perfectly. It was a surreal experience. And yeah, I've been in the zone exactly once while playing basketball. I felt like I couldn't miss anything, and was pulling off kyrie irving-esque dribble moves that I was never able to do again.

Here's another unpopular opinion:

Kobe was the most talented passer of any SG and had the talent to average 10 APG. He just wasn't the most willing passer, and was somewhat stifled by the Triangle for most of his career when it came to assist opportunities.

[Blackmill]

Here's another unpopular opinion:

Kobe was the most talented passer of any SG and had the talent to average 10 APG. He just wasn't the most willing passer, and was somewhat stifled by the Triangle for most of his career when it came to assist opportunities.

That is an unusual opinion. Though I'm interested to hear more about why you think this. I've argued for Kobe's passing ability in the past, but I haven't seen as much of Kobe's career as I would like, so I must concede a degree of uncertainty. Any seasons or series where Kobe's passing was on full display? Summer's approaching and I'll actually have time to start watching games again.


My unpopular opinion: There's over 10 legitimate GOAT candidates.

[Johnlac1]

The hot hand is real

What do you mean when you say "the hot hand is real?"

I think players can be in a rhythm or focus or feeling good physically/mentally, that allows them to play at a higher level for a period of time, whether it's a few minutes, a game, or a few weeks. As opposed to the anti-hot hand viewpoint that used to be popular in places like TrueHoop, that suggested hitting a few shots in a row was just math like flipping a coin a few times in a row and landing on the same side. I feel like the reason there's a big difference between a good day for a player and a bad day, or that teams have more game at home and road, is a sign that they're just not mechanical producers who are outputting odds of the ball going in or not on a nightly basis.

I think the "hot hand" theory is not much different from the "if it's working, keep doing it" theory.
In football if you're getting five, six, seven yards every time you run the ball, you don't start throwing long passes. If the def. can't stop your running game, why pass?
In bb if you're running certain sets that allow your players to get wide open shots, why would you run something else? I know for many people the "hot hand" theory is just throwing the ball to a certain player and letting him shoot until he starts missing a lot. Usually that occurs because he's getting open. While many times it looks like a player is really hot, it's because the off. is running stuff that is getting him good shots. There aren't too many players in the league who can fire up weird shots from all angles and distances and shoot a good pct. A player who seems hot is usually just one who is getting open. And if a good shooter is getting great looks, even if he's missing now, he should keep shooting is my theory.

[sp6r=underrated]

This may be not be a unpopular opinion but...
I think the 2017 Warriors are better than the 2016 Warriors despite having a worse record

completely agree, they are regarded as being worse entirerly because last year they did abnormally well in close game and this year they have returned to normal.

[ThaRegul8r]

This may be not be a unpopular opinion but...
I think the 2017 Warriors are better than the 2016 Warriors despite having a worse record

completely agree, they are regarded as being worse entirerly because last year they did abnormally well in close game and this year they have returned to normal.

There were games last year where they snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, and stuff like Harrison Barnes hitting a three-pointer with 0.2 left to beat a 7-40 team. Everything that they needed to go right went right in order for them to break the record. Posters here have recently talked about what would have happened if seasons were replayed, and it's unlikely the Warriors win 73 if the season was replayed, but that's what actually happened (and with everything that went right, they still left themselves zero room for error at the end, needing to win out the rest of the way to do more than tie). But everyone knew beforehand that the Warriors were going to have a worse record than they did last year even with Durant. And it was understood that the Warriors could be a better team even if they had a worse record.

[Ballerhogger]

Speaking of Cousins, I may as well drop this one: I'm not sure he was one of the best 20 players in the league this season and I think giving him a 30% max will set your franchise back a long way.

Ok my question to you is, which big men would you pick over him right now, and which players from the 11-20 are better than him?

[70sFan]

Another one - Elgin Baylor in terms of peak is very underrated - around top 20-25 peak ever.

[Dr Spaceman]

Speaking of Cousins, I may as well drop this one: I'm not sure he was one of the best 20 players in the league this season and I think giving him a 30% max will set your franchise back a long way.

Ok my question to you is, which big men would you pick over him right now, and which players from the 11-20 are better than him?

As far as big men, my list of guys I'd take over Cousins right now:

Draymond Green
Marc Gasol
Rudy Gobert
Anthony Davis
Nikola Jokic

I think Blake Griffin at his best is better, although I'd have them around the same range as you can't expect Griffin to stay healthy.

As far as players ahead, is take Mike Conley over Cousins so with that you know about where I stand.

[Ballerhogger]

Speaking of Cousins, I may as well drop this one: I'm not sure he was one of the best 20 players in the league this season and I think giving him a 30% max will set your franchise back a long way.

Ok my question to you is, which big men would you pick over him right now, and which players from the 11-20 are better than him?

As far as big men, my list of guys I'd take over Cousins right now:

Draymond Green
Marc Gasol
Rudy Gobert
Anthony Davis
Nikola Jokic

I think Blake Griffin at his best is better, although I'd have them around the same range as you can't expect Griffin to stay healthy.

As far as players ahead, is take Mike Conley over Cousins so with that you know about where I stand.

Cousins has edge over Marc for me. Marc gasol is on the decline , he didnt improve his genral box score agaisnt the Spurs in the 1st round. Other than i agree with your big man list.

[TM_]

1) Brid over Lebron
2) Carmelo was never a superstar level player
3) Kawhi is easily a top 2 player
4) Harden is very overrated