Make 3s = Win Games?

[Audi]

Even if you fall into the camp of "not believing" that shooting more 3's equals winning...

You, at some level, have to believe that floor spacing is a real necessity in todays nba. A successfully run offense almost always requires it.

I agree on importance in general, but I don't quite understand what today's NBA has to do with it...isn't it just as much a necessity as it has always been?

The game has evolved into benefiting offense as opposed to the 80’s and 90’s defense. There is no longer hand checking and many rules benefiting shooters.

Right - and I was thinking about how interior defenses would've been bolstered by those defensive-benefiting rules making it even harder in the paint and mid....wondering why more 3's weren't taken to space the floor due that fact. Then I remembered...zone defenses weren't even legal in the league before 2001...I imagine making them legal played a pretty significant role in giving defenses the ability to sag off significantly.

[pepe1991]

I agree on importance in general, but I don't quite understand what today's NBA has to do with it...isn't it just as much a necessity as it has always been?

The game has evolved into benefiting offense as opposed to the 80’s and 90’s defense. There is no longer hand checking and many rules benefiting shooters.

Right - and I was thinking about how interior defenses would've been bolstered by those defensive-benefiting rules making it even harder in the paint and mid....wondering why more 3's weren't taken to space the floor due that fact. Then I remembered...zone defenses weren't even legal in the league before 2001...I imagine making them legal played a pretty significant role in giving defenses the ability to sag off significantly.

Zone defense being illegal was just pure crap rule and didn't really impact a game. Most nba teams didn't shoot 3s in general around 2000 where zone defense would have any impact on outcomes. Teams shot more 3s in 1997 than in 2007 for example.

Biggest impact on making defense poop was interducing defensive 3 seconds that prevented centers from being rim protectors by camping below rim. Now on regular bases center has to leave paint allowing guards to drive much easier.
Later they made centers even less useful by changing verticality rule.

There is good reason why team USA isn't as dominant any more if they don't bring their A++ team ( 3 losses to Australia, France and Serbia in 2019,2020 and 2021). FIBA rules allow center to camp, therfore all driving lines are clogged more often than not, and refs actually call cheating moves- as violations ( ball carry, penta steps hidden by BS "eurostep" , walking...). It helps that floor is also shorter to distance defense needs to cover is narrow.

But in nba it's more of a show than a game, officiating is horrendus and always in favor of offense. If Giannis isn't two way player who execlly would be golden boy of nba defense? Green? He is one of most hated nba players. Who else? Gobert? He isn't that popular ( look at votes for allstar) and than who is third? Brook Lopez ?


But look, enter ANY higlight of ANY game, and watch how many times traveling happends.

The moment one foot is lifted, the other foot becomes the pivot foot.
To start a dribble, the pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released from the hand(s).
To pass or shoot for a field goal, the player may jump off a pivot foot, but neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball is released from the hand

Literally Wizards- Magic iN FIRST POSSESSION OF A GAME Fultz commits travel by catching ball with both hands and making two steps before realising ball

My point is: nba teams have to be offensive oriented, because it's impossible to win games on "defense" since defense isn't really allowed to play, and due bad officiating isn't sustainable as tactic.
Today having "good" defense means not allowing 125 points but 112.

[drsd]

is steve kerr a joke of a coach to you?

This is like asking if I think Erik Spoelstra is a good coach. My default answer for both Spoelstra and Kerer is "NO".
Both are horrible X-O coaches.

But actually that's not their job. Their job is to take divas and meld them to a team. It is really, really hard to get 2 or 3 all-stars to work together and not play hero-ball every play.

So: Spoelstra and Kerr are actually great coaches for these sorts of talent-rich teams.


..

[JoshuaPotter]

is steve kerr a joke of a coach to you?

This is like asking if I think Erik Spoelstra is a good coach. My default answer for both Spoelstra and Kerer is "NO".
Both are horrible X-O coaches.

But actually that's not their job. Their job is to take divas and meld them to a team. It is really, really hard to get 2 or 3 all-stars to work together and not play hero-ball every play.

So: Spoelstra and Kerr are actually great coaches for these sorts of talent-rich teams.


..

My point was two fold.

I do not think Steve Kerr allowed for that type of defense without a plan and it wasn't as easy to bypass as a few lines of text on a forum.

To say that they are horrible X-O coaches is not necessarily true either. But I digress.