Top 3 realgm consensus mistakes

[penbeast0]

There were others; another thing to look for is teams that focus on turnover differential defensively often play a fast pace. Efg differential isn't the only way to play good defense.

[Doctor MJ]

I mean, in 2014 the highest 3 point shooting team in the league was 26.6, In 2015 it was 32.5 and in 2017 it was 40.

Neither of those 3 teams played in san francisco, but in houston

Hell, even in 2016 when curry 3 point volume took the league by storm the warriors only shot half a 3 more per game. And next season houston was again way above them in volume

The team that pushed the pace more with 3 point shooting and whose approach has more widely been used across the league is the -rockets- not the warriors. Further to my point that dinasty teams dont determine the league destiny. That feels like more a narrative thingh that sounds good but doesnt seem to happen often

The league as a whole took more after the ringless rockets than after the dinastic warriors. Because for most teams in the league it made more sense to follow that approach that imitating warriors system without the right players for it

As I said to Chuck, to me the important point is not about who the other teams were looking to emulate, but that they clearly looked to emulate somebody.

Further, since D'Antoni ends up as coach in Houston and D'Antoni is the single most important coach in this paradigm shift, I'm certainly not looking to take credit away from him.

However, I do think it's important to understand that the team that does X the most is not necessarily the one that's driving adoption of more X by other teams.

In '14-15, Houston had the 12th best ORtg and the 14th best 3P% while getting gentleman-swept by Golden State.
Meanwhile Golden State the 2nd best ORtg and the 1st best 3P% while winning the championship.

The idea that any team was looking at these two teams and thinking "We've got to play more like Houston" just seems weird to me.

The point about it not necessarily being wise to emulate a team whose personnel you don't have makes sense, but that's a reason why emulation may not happen. Here we seem to be in agreement that emulation did happen, and it's just a question about whether it's the team that won the championship while changing minds about jump shooting teams winning championships, or a team that got defeated easily in the playoffs after posting a mediocre offense with mediocre 3-point percentages.

Further:

While emulating a team's strategy isn't the same thing as emulating their coach, I don't think we should forget that a) McHale wasn't considered a top COY contender that year, b) was quickly kicked to the curb the next season, and c) was never given another head coaching job.

Pretty bizarre to me to argue that the coach attached to the team everyone was looking to emulate would be treated as such a non-entity.

I am not trying to argue people lookes at the 2015 rockets as the team to emulate but pointing out the league trended closer to playing like the 2015 rockets than the 2015 warriors

If dinasties shape the league by winning rings why did that happen?

Ah, I see. Yes, that focus makes sense given what you've already said. Apologies, I've already had conversations in the past where people tried to argue that it was the Rockets that were the primary influence.

To answer your "why did that happen?" question:

First, let's not forget the acceleration of 3-point shots that occurred after the Warrior championship. While your question brings up a reasonable point of discussion, keep in mind that an answer of "So the Warrior championship wasn't that big of a deal" doesn't answer the question of why the acceleration took place, and I would emphasize that if you're not looking to explain such accelerations, then you're not really looking for cause & effect which I think is really important given that that's precisely what's being debated on this point.

Second, I'm a broken record here, but having been paying a lot of attention in the aftermath of the early '00s rule shifts, I've seen so many people simply assume that those shift were responsible for the dominant changes that followed. People asking whether those changes made the difference is entirely reasonable, but jumping to the answer of "Yes" is a problem.

Okay, now a key point: The person/team/group that jumps the most into a given trend is not always the person/team/group that gets others to jump on that trend. Let's consider genre evolution in music - which parallels genre evolution more broadly:

We have a recurring theme of genres producing more and more complex works over time. It's true in classical music, jazz, rock, and now we're starting to see these trends in hip hop.

I would tend to see Kendrick Lamar as the face of this movement in the 2010s. He made more complex works than those who influenced him, and now surely there are those producing more complex works influenced by him.

But if you go back in time and travel down another road, you'll see someone like Saul Williams coming out of the slam poetry scene producing work considerably more complex than Lamar (in my assessment). Does that mean Williams is truly the main reason for the trend in question? No, despite the fact that I loved his work, it never went mainstream.

If you'd like examples in basketball, the most glaring examples belong to college basketball where there's a long history of non-powerhouses just deciding to take a ton of 3's. Should these teams be considered extremely important in the NBA trends that came in the 2010s? In general, no, because their approach never went mainstream.

The situation with Golden State & Houston is more easily confused because they are contemporaries. If the Rockets went big on 3's first, and shot more 3's in the time when the NBA went all in on the trend, it's easy to conclude that the Rockets must have been the main force...but that's not my conclusion.

I should say: The move to 3's under GM Morey is part of what tends to get called "Moreyball", and Morey's influence on analytics is significant because he was the first analytics-first GM and he had excellent success - I'd say he deserves an argument for Executive of the Decade in the 2010s.

However, unlike Moneyball in baseball where the team associated with it (Oakland) was the one seen as really kickstarting the new era, in the NBA that franchise is most definitely Phoenix with Jerry Colangelo being THE visionary of the 21st century NBA, along with coach Mike D'Antoni who would have kickstarted this era much earlier had he been given the authority to do so . Morey came along later and with his analytics focus embraced pace & space, but it came out of Phoenix (and before that, Europe).

But none of this means that the Rockets couldn't have been an extremely, extremely important inflection point simply because they came later, only that when we evaluate the Rockets' influence here, we have to focus on what specifically we think they influenced.

If we focus on analytics, there's a great case that they are the most important, with Morey being the face of the movement.

But when it comes to getting teams to shoot more 3's, I think what we have to do here is ask:

When were the big inflection points? and Who was the rest of the NBA focused on when these inflection points happened?

1980's relevance goes without saying.

1994's relevance is important and should be discussed. When the NBA shortened the 3-point line, this changed the perspective of NBA teams on how to use the 3, and even though numbers went down after the moved the line back, it never went back where it was before, and from that point it increased year by year ever since. (Of course, it was already increasing before 1994, so one might argue that 1994 didn't have the long-term influence than it first appeared to, but I don't think this was a given.)

But while 3PA's increased to end the '90s and in the era afterward, it was never a massive shift until the '10s, despite the fact that the Suns produced HUGE ORtgs with the approach and got a ton of attention as a result.

I think we really have to ask ourselves, if offensive success like the Suns produced couldn't create extreme acceleration, why would think that the Rockets would do so with their fair less outlier success?

For myself, my conclusions are drawn from the Suns era, which you might say broke my heart. The idea that you see the type of success the Suns' offense had and that the main influence that happened as a result was that the Suns ended up giving up on the approach after only 2 healthy season where they lost to the champion both times, was as insane to me back then as it should seem to everyone now.

Such was the power of what NBA people thought they knew about basketball. They really thought pace & space was a gimmick that couldn't win in the NBA, and pushed the Suns' new owner (Sarver) to make changes to build a serious contender...and so that's what he and his employees did.

And of course, if you're looking for the face of this cynicism toward the Suns' approach, it was Charles Barkley. Nowadays of course Barkley still talks about how problematic jump-shooting teams are even after he's watched these teams win championships over and over again, but back then, he was harsher and more influential. He wasn't the only one who thought like this, but he was the guy on TV saying it over and over again...

and Houston had literally NO impact on guys like this, because their whole argument was about championships.

And so it was these teams winning championships that made the difference, and that brings us back to the Warriors.

Now before I exit here: So much of the stuff I'm saying is non-quantitative. Perhaps you and others feel like "it's not proof", and that's okay. But I would emphasize that if you're not talking about specific causal influence, you're not in a stronger position for explanation than I am.

The acceleration needs causal explanation, and simply looking at the leaderboard and assuming that the team who shot the most 3's is the team that made everyone else feel compelled to take more 3's ain't that.

[Doctor MJ]

Offensively, the only real influence the Warriors have had on the league is upping the pace. The idea of being an elite defensive team while playing at a breakneck pace was pretty foreign before they broke out in 2015.

Honestly, their switch heavy defense has shaped this era more than anything they've done offensively. Match up hunting became so much more common as a result of all the switching that happens now.

How would one even go about trying to emulate Golden States offense? If you dont have at least one god-level movement shooter it completely falls apart because you need someone off the ball who can pull multiple defenders 25ft away from the basket.

Since '14-15, pace has increased by 4.5% while 3PA's have gone up 57.1%. An order of magnitude difference.

If you want to put forward another reason why all the 3's are happening, do so.

If you're under the impression that the pace increase is anything at all like the 3-point increase, you need to forget what you think you know.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

As I said to Chuck, to me the important point is not about who the other teams were looking to emulate, but that they clearly looked to emulate somebody.

Further, since D'Antoni ends up as coach in Houston and D'Antoni is the single most important coach in this paradigm shift, I'm certainly not looking to take credit away from him.

However, I do think it's important to understand that the team that does X the most is not necessarily the one that's driving adoption of more X by other teams.

In '14-15, Houston had the 12th best ORtg and the 14th best 3P% while getting gentleman-swept by Golden State.
Meanwhile Golden State the 2nd best ORtg and the 1st best 3P% while winning the championship.

The idea that any team was looking at these two teams and thinking "We've got to play more like Houston" just seems weird to me.

The point about it not necessarily being wise to emulate a team whose personnel you don't have makes sense, but that's a reason why emulation may not happen. Here we seem to be in agreement that emulation did happen, and it's just a question about whether it's the team that won the championship while changing minds about jump shooting teams winning championships, or a team that got defeated easily in the playoffs after posting a mediocre offense with mediocre 3-point percentages.

Further:

While emulating a team's strategy isn't the same thing as emulating their coach, I don't think we should forget that a) McHale wasn't considered a top COY contender that year, b) was quickly kicked to the curb the next season, and c) was never given another head coaching job.

Pretty bizarre to me to argue that the coach attached to the team everyone was looking to emulate would be treated as such a non-entity.

I am not trying to argue people lookes at the 2015 rockets as the team to emulate but pointing out the league trended closer to playing like the 2015 rockets than the 2015 warriors

If dinasties shape the league by winning rings why did that happen?

Ah, I see. Yes, that focus makes sense given what you've already said. Apologies, I've already had conversations in the past where people tried to argue that it was the Rockets that were the primary influence.

To answer your "why did that happen?" question:

First, let's not forget the acceleration of 3-point shots that occurred after the Warrior championship. While your question brings up a reasonable point of discussion, keep in mind that an answer of "So the Warrior championship wasn't that big of a deal" doesn't answer the question of why the acceleration took place, and I would emphasize that if you're not looking to explain such accelerations, then you're not really looking for cause & effect which I think is really important given that that's precisely what's being debated on this point.

Second, I'm a broken record here, but having been paying a lot of attention in the aftermath of the early '00s rule shifts, I've seen so many people simply assume that those shift were responsible for the dominant changes that followed. People asking whether those changes made the difference is entirely reasonable, but jumping to the answer of "Yes" is a problem.

Okay, now a key point: The person/team/group that jumps the most into a given trend is not always the person/team/group that gets others to jump on that trend. Let's consider genre evolution in music - which parallels genre evolution more broadly:

We have a recurring theme of genres producing more and more complex works over time. It's true in classical music, jazz, rock, and now we're starting to see these trends in hip hop.

I would tend to see Kendrick Lamar as the face of this movement in the 2010s. He made more complex works than those who influenced him, and now surely there are those producing more complex works influenced by him.

But if you go back in time and travel down another road, you'll see someone like Saul Williams coming out of the slam poetry scene producing work considerably more complex than Lamar (in my assessment). Does that mean Williams is truly the main reason for the trend in question? No, despite the fact that I loved his work, it never went mainstream.

If you'd like examples in basketball, the most glaring examples belong to college basketball where there's a long history of non-powerhouses just deciding to take a ton of 3's. Should these teams be considered extremely important in the NBA trends that came in the 2010s? In general, no, because their approach never went mainstream.

The situation with Golden State & Houston is more easily confused because they are contemporaries. If the Rockets went big on 3's first, and shot more 3's in the time when the NBA went all in on the trend, it's easy to conclude that the Rockets must have been the main force...but that's not my conclusion.

I should say: The move to 3's under GM Morey is part of what tends to get called "Moreyball", and Morey's influence on analytics is significant because he was the first analytics-first GM and he had excellent success - I'd say he deserves an argument for Executive of the Decade in the 2010s.

However, unlike Moneyball in baseball where the team associated with it (Oakland) was the one seen as really kickstarting the new era, in the NBA that franchise is most definitely Phoenix with Jerry Colangelo being THE visionary of the 21st century NBA, along with coach Mike D'Antoni who would have kickstarted this era much earlier had he been given the authority to do so . Morey came along later and with his analytics focus embraced pace & space, but it came out of Phoenix (and before that, Europe).

But none of this means that the Rockets couldn't have been an extremely, extremely important inflection point simply because they came later, only that when we evaluate the Rockets' influence here, we have to focus on what specifically we think they influenced.

If we focus on analytics, there's a great case that they are the most important, with Morey being the face of the movement.

But when it comes to getting teams to shoot more 3's, I think what we have to do here is ask:

When were the big inflection points? and Who was the rest of the NBA focused on when these inflection points happened?

1980's relevance goes without saying.

1994's relevance is important and should be discussed. When the NBA shortened the 3-point line, this changed the perspective of NBA teams on how to use the 3, and even though numbers went down after the moved the line back, it never went back where it was before, and from that point it increased year by year ever since. (Of course, it was already increasing before 1994, so one might argue that 1994 didn't have the long-term influence than it first appeared to, but I don't think this was a given.)

But while 3PA's increased to end the '90s and in the era afterward, it was never a massive shift until the '10s, despite the fact that the Suns produced HUGE ORtgs with the approach and got a ton of attention as a result.

I think we really have to ask ourselves, if offensive success like the Suns produced couldn't create extreme acceleration, why would think that the Rockets would do so with their fair less outlier success?

For myself, my conclusions are drawn from the Suns era, which you might say broke my heart. The idea that you see the type of success the Suns' offense had and that the main influence that happened as a result was that the Suns ended up giving up on the approach after only 2 healthy season where they lost to the champion both times, was as insane to me back then as it should seem to everyone now.

Such was the power of what NBA people thought they knew about basketball. They really thought pace & space was a gimmick that couldn't win in the NBA, and pushed the Suns' new owner (Sarver) to make changes to build a serious contender...and so that's what he and his employees did.

And of course, if you're looking for the face of this cynicism toward the Suns' approach, it was Charles Barkley. Nowadays of course Barkley still talks about how problematic jump-shooting teams are even after he's watched these teams win championships over and over again, but back then, he was harsher and more influential. He wasn't the only one who thought like this, but he was the guy on TV saying it over and over again...

and Houston had literally NO impact on guys like this, because their whole argument was about championships.

And so it was these teams winning championships that made the difference, and that brings us back to the Warriors.

Now before I exit here: So much of the stuff I'm saying is non-quantitative. Perhaps you and others feel like "it's not proof", and that's okay. But I would emphasize that if you're not talking about specific causal influence, you're not in a stronger position for explanation than I am.

The acceleration needs causal explanation, and simply looking at the leaderboard and assuming that the team who shot the most 3's is the team that made everyone else feel compelled to take more 3's ain't that.

Rockets lead 2 jumps in 3 point shooting. First Rudy T using 3s to create space for Hakeem which had been done before by Rick Pitino using 3s to create space for Ewing.

The Morey ball which reminds me of Oakland A’s Money ball. The computer says only shoot 3s and layups. It makes sense. Every other shot is garbage unless that shot is being completely undefended. Do not shoot defended mid range unless you are a superstar mid range shooter. Normal basketball players should not be shooting defended mid range shots. Even the stars should not shoot deep 2s.

The Morey ball Rockets were successful if you call being a top 4 team and reaching the conference finals success. But the Warriors actually won championships. Warriors were different than Morey-ball because while Morey ball found players to execute a system the Warriors created a system to maximize the value of Curry and Klay. Morey starts with a system. Warriors start with their players.

But Rockets and Warriors together make teams want to follow their paths.

Could Moreyball work without a star like Harden? What gets the 3 point shooters open? Can 5 five Kyle Korvers spaced around the 3 point line create shots? Doe the 5 Kyle Korvers need somebody in the middle to draw help defenders?

And what about the fast break. The fast break is good. Why didn’t Morey ball have a good fast break?

My computer mindset team has 2 players that are best of Bill Russell and Michel Cooper and Kyle Korver. They will be spaced out left and right at the top of the 3 point line. I will have them ready to get back on defense and resist the urge to send Bill Russell to the offensive boards. In one Corner I have Curry/Norm Nixon. In the other Corner I have Jamal Wilkes/Thompson. In the middle I have Magic Johnson/ Steve Nash/Draymond/Michel Jordan.

Why Nash? Nash can hit a 3. When you drive the lane and nothing is there Nash heads off in another direction away from the hoop and makes a great play. Magic and Draymond and Jordan are not as good at taking what their given when they are not given anything but garbage. Nash finds something good in the garbage.

So I have Jordan to draw in help defenders and Magic Nash Draymond to hit the open man. I have the best pieces of the 1982 Lakers fast break. Play Morey ball but with the 1982 Lakers fast break and a pair of Bill Russell/Michael Coopers to snuff out the other team’s offense.

Ps… And give the Bill Russells Andrew Bugut’s passing, screen setting and understanding of how to play with Curry and Klay. Bill Russell also has his whatever good luck charm he had in the 1960s that made the Celtics win every game 7. Of course with a team like that there will not be any ame 7s.

[euroleague]

2 - Longevity getting priority over prime:
It's understandable that you have to draw the line somewhere but to me longevity mainly comes into play with players of a similar level. If you're MVP/All-NBA 1st team level for a couple seasons, I think that's more valuable than having 15 seasons of fringe All-NBA play. A good example would be that I have Kawhi significantly higher than guys like Pau Gasol and Paul Pierce but not everyone seems to agree with that.

I mean, without even getting over why that's pretty much objectively irrational, it still sounds pretty weird. You don't have Penny Hardaway over John Stockton on your GOAT list, or do you?

Kawhi has much more than a couple seasons at All-NBA 1st level play, and Gasol/Pierce don't even come close to 15 seasons of fringe All-NBA play.

Prime getting priority doesn't mean longevity is completely unconsidered.

[Doctor MJ]

Rockets lead 2 jumps in 3 point shooting. First Rudy T using 3s to create space for Hakeem which had been done before by Rick Pitino using 3s to create space for Ewing.

The Morey ball which reminds me of Oakland A’s Money ball. The computer says only shoot 3s and layups. It makes sense. Every other shot is garbage unless that shot is being completely undefended. Do not shoot defended mid range unless you are a superstar mid range shooter. Normal basketball players should not be shooting defended mid range shots. Even the stars should not shoot deep 2s.

The Morey ball Rockets were successful if you call being a top 4 team and reaching the conference finals success. But the Warriors actually won championships. Warriors were different than Morey-ball because while Morey ball found players to execute a system the Warriors created a system to maximize the value of Curry and Klay. Morey starts with a system. Warriors start with their players.

But Rockets and Warriors together make teams want to follow their paths.

Your team building was fun! To your points:

First, I loved that you mentioned Pitino. Pitino is absolutely one of the might-have-beens in the story, and I'd say the first NBA coach to really push in the modern direction. (Nelson experimented, but didn't really push.)

Pitino deserves credit for being ahead of his time, though I will note that while D'Antoni's run in the 2000s is to me the key run out of all of this, D'Antoni wasn't a follower of Pitino on this. D'Antoni was in Italy in the '70s calling his brother back home telling him that the 3 was the future.

Re: Houston at the forefront of 2 jumps. Well that's true, and I'm so glad you brought up Rudy T-ball! Because of the NBA moving the 3-point line, it's hard to know how much credit to give the Rockets specifically for the boost that came in the '90s, but certainly they were part of it, just as Moreyball was in the '10s.

[penbeast0]

Do we also give credit to the 81 Rockets finalists who surrounded Moses with 4 jumpshooters (PF was Rudy Tomjanovich )? Not shooting 3's but 4 out spacing with midrange shooters.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Do we also give credit to the 81 Rockets finalists who surrounded Moses with 4 jumpshooters (PF was Rudy Tomjanovich )? Not shooting 3's but 4 out spacing with midrange shooters.

I don't think so.
Calvin Murphy has been doing his thing under many coahes. Then they have Mike Dunkeavy who was not yet a 3 point shooter and was never a volume shooter.
They did not play Rudy T much in the plaoffs or the Finals. In the finals 10th man Major Jones actually played a minute more than Rudy T the 11th man. Rudy was getting older and I think perhaps he had lost the ability to defend either of Bird or Maxwell or ML Carr who would be to fast for Rudy. Maybe Rudy could defend rookie McHale.
Rockets only hit 21 3s the entire year, half of them by Rudy T who only played 24 minutes per game in 52 games.

Explain this to me basketball reference, If Moses Malone shot Zero 3s and hit zero 3s how is his 3 point percentage 33%.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/HOU/1981.html
Rockets 1.4 3s attempted per game ranks 17th.

Robert Reid could hit mid range but he preferred driving. I don't consider him an outside shooter.
By center standards Billy Paultz was an outside shooter but he did not take enough outside shots to move the needle much.
I don't think of Tom Henderson or Allan Leavel as outside shooters. I think Henderson could hit an outside shot and I know Allen Leavel could hit a outside shot but I think both of them prefer driving.

I don't remember Calvin Garrett. He played 10 minutes a game for 4 games in the finals and as a Celtic fan I remember every other Rocket.

Bill Willoughby and Major Jones were memorable to me. They may not even shoot mid range or barely shoot mid range.

Nope Not an outside shooting team except for Calvin Murphy who can kill a team from the outside against good defense with a hand in his face if he gets hot. Streaky shooter. Calvin Murphy getting hot at key times was key to the 40 and 42 R0ckets reaching the finals. Calvin Murphy was particularly responsible for the Rockets beating the Spurs. Calvin Murphy scored 42 points against the Spurs in game 7. I also love Robert Reid. Mose Malone had help.

[Blame Rasho]

Explain this to me basketball reference, If Moses Malone shot Zero 3s and hit zero 3s how is his 3 point percentage 33%.

It isn’t string theory… he shot 3 threes and made one three over the season. You might want to look at totals instead of a 82 game avg.

But yeah given your absurd takes and posts, I am not surprised you can’t grasp such items easily.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Watch on YouTube

;ebc=ANyPxKrx125SoKf116BJwohJhpPs0NNL_b5eJmoK8JPYFa2UN0_jWOpVuvD4C9RGYfFJ_IdH6eq_nTb5V5miafmTKSMhEO0PfA&feature=emb_imp_woyt

Calvin Murphy one of the less well known Hall of famers and at 5' 9" the shortest Hall of Famer
In this video Calvin Murphy scores 42 points in game 7 vs the Spurs.

Calvin Murphy the shorter faster Steph Curry who does not shoot 3s.

I love Mugsy, Spud Webb and Mark Price. Was Price under 6 feet. I think Nate Archibald was under 6 feet. I don't believe that either of Price and Archibald were truly 6 feet. Price and Archibald are both listed at over 6' feet" and with them out I think Murphy is the best under 6 foot NBA player ever.

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

Rockets lead 2 jumps in 3 point shooting. First Rudy T using 3s to create space for Hakeem which had been done before by Rick Pitino using 3s to create space for Ewing.

The Morey ball which reminds me of Oakland A’s Money ball. The computer says only shoot 3s and layups. It makes sense. Every other shot is garbage unless that shot is being completely undefended. Do not shoot defended mid range unless you are a superstar mid range shooter. Normal basketball players should not be shooting defended mid range shots. Even the stars should not shoot deep 2s.

The Morey ball Rockets were successful if you call being a top 4 team and reaching the conference finals success. But the Warriors actually won championships. Warriors were different than Morey-ball because while Morey ball found players to execute a system the Warriors created a system to maximize the value of Curry and Klay. Morey starts with a system. Warriors start with their players.

But Rockets and Warriors together make teams want to follow their paths.

Your team building was fun! To your points:

First, I loved that you mentioned Pitino. Pitino is absolutely one of the might-have-beens in the story, and I'd say the first NBA coach to really push in the modern direction. (Nelson experimented, but didn't really push.)

Pitino deserves credit for being ahead of his time, though I will note that while D'Antoni's run in the 2000s is to me the key run out of all of this, D'Antoni wasn't a follower of Pitino on this. D'Antoni was in Italy in the '70s calling his brother back home telling him that the 3 was the future.

Re: Houston at the forefront of 2 jumps. Well that's true, and I'm so glad you brought up Rudy T-ball! Because of the NBA moving the 3-point line, it's hard to know how much credit to give the Rockets specifically for the boost that came in the '90s, but certainly they were part of it, just as Moreyball was in the '10s.

Rudy told Vernon Maxwell to keep shooting those 3s. The media guys were confused. Vernon Maxwell's 3 point percentage was not all that great but it was good enough. The media named Vernon mad Max. They thought flinging 3s like that was madness. The media guys would have heart attacks if they saw the current NBA filled with Vernon Maxwells. Rudy knew what he was doing.