Banchero shows pure scoring touch required to shoot over packed paints in 90's

[3ba11]

https://i.makeagif.com/media/11-10-2022/-Vi7WB.gif


In previous eras, the unspaced courts forced players to LIVE OFF these kinds of shots.

Unfortunately, most of today's players are bad at these kinds of shots and therefore wouldn't be as good in the 90's where these shots were the standard.. Essentially, previous eras had the same advantage on 2-pointers that today's players have at 3-pointers..

Today's players are experts at gather-step layups and threes, but infact suck at the in-between where all the real basketball and unpredictability happens

[Carbine]

If they get Victor, what a time to be a Magic fan.

[90sgoat]

OP, do you agree with me that Banchero has some rookie SF Kevin Garnett in his game?

Obviously built different, but the moves and the spots and the open court game?

[ShawkFactory]

He was being guarded by 34 SG who was always bad defensively. Lot's of guys in the league could do that.

John Collins could do it.

He's very good at a lot of things but there is nothing special about what you just showed.

[Kblaze8855]

Mid range pull up players and post scores who can convert free throws have always been the most reliable for a single basket but if the other team takes 65 threes and your team can’t keep up you don’t usually end up in a position for your tough shot making to matter because you’re down 24 points by the second quarter. This is why coaches don’t ask that of players anymore. When you need to throw it in down 1 and have somebody take two dribbles and a pull-up to win its great to have a guy like that but that requires you not being blown out first.

Add to that the fact that every modern offense wants the floor spaced and not to have somebody gumming up driving lines?

You either have to be Giannis with shooters everywhere or be a shooter from outside yourself.

Coaches don’t want the stop and pop as a rule even if they accept the goat tier guys like KD still doing it.

And they get away with it because every team plays the same way. Long as everybody sticks to the same method it doesn’t matter how smart or stupid it is somebody is going to win. You don’t have to beat 1993 like 1993 didn’t play to beat 2023. In a matchup 2023 would likely have the edge though. It’s just asking too much to out two pointer a team that can make 25 threes. By todays rules at least.

Make them play hybrid rules it will be a complete shock so who knows.

[3ba11]

In a matchup 2023 would likely have the edge though. It’s just asking too much to out two pointer a team that can make 25 threes. By todays rules at least.

Make them play hybrid rules it will be a complete shock so who knows.





This thread doesn't ask who would win a hypothetical matchup between 2023 and 1993

The point of this thread is that if today's players went back to the 90's, they would suck because the OP gif were the only shots available.. Banchero wouldn't have teammates spacing the floor with 30 threes per game - there would be almost no spacing so the OP gif is the only type of shot available on most possessions.

Today's players are bad at contested 2-pointers, while previous eras were experts at it.. Ultimately, previous eras had the same advantage on 2-pointers that today's game has on threes

[Phoenix]

This thread doesn't ask who would win a hypothetical matchup between 2023 and 1993

The point of this thread is that if today's players went back to the 90's, they would suck because the OP gif were the only shots available.. Banchero wouldn't have teammates spacing the floor with 30 threes per game - there would be almost no spacing so the OP gif is the only type of shot available on most possessions.



If you put today's players back in 1990 they'd have developed skills useful for how basketball was played in 1990. And the reverse would happen with 90s players being teleported forward to 2022. Merely taking players who developed skills under different conditions( and with different players before them to build on) and saying 'player X wouldn't adapt as well to player Y era' will never not be a really dumb way to discuss these things.

[3ba11]

John Collins could do it.





Tons of today's players can do that shot but are they good enough at those shots to RELY on them every possession ?????....

Because that's what previous eras had to do because no one had a cast that spread the floor with 30 threes a game - the court was completely UNSPACED, so shots like the OP were required on nearly every possession

Again, guys like Bernard King, Kiki Vandeweghe and Alex English dropped 30 ppg on good efficiency by taking shots like the OP gif all game.. Today's players can't do that just like previous eras couldn't shoot 45 threes a game.

Ultimately, previous eras have the same advantage on 2's that today's game has on threes

[Kblaze8855]

Guys practice off the dribble 30 footers for hours at a time today. They don’t need to drive into packed paints. Not that the paints would stay packed anyway. Today’s guys arent going to start taking 16 foot pull ups when you stand in the paint. They’re just gonna shoot over you till you unpack the paint by coming out to stop the resulting downpour.

[ShawkFactory]

Tons of today's players can do that shot but are they good enough at those shots to RELY on them every possession ?????....


Who cares?

They don't have to..

[3ba11]

Guys practice off the dribble 30 footers for hours at a time today. They don’t need to drive into packed paints. Not that the paints would stay packed anyway. Today’s guys arent going to start taking 16 foot pull ups when you stand in the paint. They’re just gonna shoot over you till you unpack the paint by coming out to stop the resulting downpour.


You aren't addressing the point and are clearly AVOIDING the point

If today's player went back to the 90's, they wouldn't have teammates spacing the floor with 30 threes a game, so shots like the OP gif were required on nearly every play... Today's player can't take shots like that all game just like previous eras couldn't take threes all game at respectable efficiency..

Essentially, previous eras have the same advantage on 2's that today's game has on threes.

Guys like Bernard King, Kiki Vandeweghe and Alex English dropped 30 ppg on good efficiency by taking shots like the OP gif all game.. Today's players can't do that just like previous eras couldn't shoot 45 threes a game.

[3ba11]

Who cares?

They don't have to..


It matters because if today's players can't live off the kind of shot shown in the OP, then they wouldn't be any good in the 90's because those were the only shots available back then on the unspaced courts.

Similarly, John Paxson wouldn't be good today of his range didn't extend to 3-point range

Again, previous eras had the same advantage on 2's that today's era has on threes.. I'd prefer to have the advantage on 2's (aka basketball)

[ShawkFactory]

So essentially what you're saying is that the game now is played under a different set of rules and with focus on a completely different set of skills than the game in the 90s. And that both games have an equal advantage given the times that they were in.

Umm...yea. That's what everyone has been saying always.

[Phoenix]

It matters because if today's players can't live off the kind of shot shown in the OP, then they wouldn't be any good in the 90's because those were the only shots available back then on the unspaced courts.

Similarly, John Paxson wouldn't be good today of his range didn't extend to 3-point range

Again, previous eras had the same advantage on 2's that today's era has on threes.. I'd prefer to have the advantage on 2's (aka basketball)

So players skillsets translate best in the league their skillsets were built to play in. Are you of the impression you discovered something new?

[Phoenix]

So essentially what you're saying is that the game now is played under a different set of rules and with focus on a completely different set of skills than the game in the 90s. And that both games have an equal advantage given the times that they were in.

Umm...yea. That's what everyone has been saying always.

Lol exactly.

[Kblaze8855]

. If today's player went back to the 90's, they wouldn't have teammates spacing the floor with 30 threes a game, so shots like the OP gif were required on nearly every play... Today's player can't take shots like that all game just like previous eras couldn't take threes all game at respectable efficiency..




These guys make step back 30 footers. They are not going to even attempt to play like Bernard king. They’ll just take threes over the top. These guys will go out and take 17 threes versus a team designed to not let them do it. You don’t think they could go take 17 threes versus a team that thinks it’s a stupid shot and doesn’t like to go out there?

A guy like Dame isn’t just going to drive into Laimbeer and get crushed. He’s gonna look you right in your face from 28 feet and pull up just like he does now. They don’t need kick outs off a post up. They will stand there dribbling right in your face and take shots we grew up considering terrible and make them at a good enough rate you will have to start respecting it and space in the floor want to or not.


Make it 1975 so you will happily allow 25 foot two pointers all day it’s another story.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It matters because if today's players can't live off the kind of shot shown in the OP, then they wouldn't be any good in the 90's because those were the only shots available back then on the unspaced courts.

Similarly, John Paxson wouldn't be good today of his range didn't extend to 3-point range

Again, previous eras had the same advantage on 2's that today's era has on threes.. I'd prefer to have the advantage on 2's (aka basketball)
I know you don't watch basketball but surely you should know that there was a three point line in the 90s. In fact they even briefly moved out up a little. Luke everything else in life the game evolved. A team from the 90s would have no idea how to stop Kevin Durant. They would hit him and get rough but there would be no one that could challenge his shot. Except maybe Scott Pippen.

[Phoenix]

I know you don't watch basketball but surely you should know that there was a three point line in the 90s. In fact they even briefly moved out up a little. Luke everything else in life the game evolved. A team from the 90s would have no idea how to stop Kevin Durant. They would hit him and get rough but there would be no one that could challenge his shot. Except maybe Scott Pippen.

I'm not even sure Scottie would have, at least anymore than someone like Paul George nowadays.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I'm not even sure Scottie would have, at least anymore than someone like Paul George nowadays.

Certainly not saying he would shut him down or anything but Pippen was a great athlete with a 7'3 wingspan. Durant is taller with even longer wingspan but Pippen may be a challenge with his superior athleticism.

[3ba11]

So essentially what you're saying is that the game now is played under a different set of rules and with focus on a completely different set of skills than the game in the 90s. And that both games have an equal advantage given the times that they were in.

Umm...yea. That's what everyone has been saying always.


No that' isn't what this thread says

This thread says that today's player cannot live off of the kind of shot shown in the OP, which means that most of today's players wouldn't be any good back then where the unspaced court required those shots

[ShawkFactory]

No that' isn't what this thread says

This thread says that today's player cannot live off of the kind of shot shown in the OP, which means that most of today's players wouldn't be any good back then where the unspaced court required those shots

Ok but why? The other side of the coin has already been shown. You can't just continue to ignore it.

I mean...you can. But it's silly.

[3ba11]

I know you don't watch basketball but surely you should know that there was a three point line in the 90s. In fact they even briefly moved out up a little. Luke everything else in life the game evolved. A team from the 90s would have no idea how to stop Kevin Durant. They would hit him and get rough but there would be no one that could challenge his shot. Except maybe Scott Pippen.


The three point line wasn't used in the 90's, so there was no spacing - aka Durant wouldn't be able to get in the lane and would be forced to shoot the kind of shot shown in the OP on most posaeasions.. He could actually do it along with the few other mid-range assassins like Kawhi or Booker.... but that's about it - most of today's stars like Giannis, Lebron, Luka, Westbrook and more have no touch and wouldn't be that good back then

And the lack of spacing would bottle up Durant far more than Boston did because help defenders would be even closer (that's the definition of no spacing)

[Phoenix]

No that' isn't what this thread says

This thread says that today's player cannot live off of the kind of shot shown in the OP, which means that most of today's players wouldn't be any good back then where the unspaced court required those shots

Unless todays players came up in that era, in which case they would adapt their skillsets to be better at those kinds of shots. Again, you're aren't breaking news here.

[3ba11]

Ok but why? The other side of the coin has already been shown. You can't just continue to ignore it.

I mean...you can. But it's silly.


I already said that today's era has the same advantage on threes that previous eras had on 2's... So I consider both sides....

Essentially, most people know that previous eras can't shoot threes compared to today's game but they don't realize that today's game can't shoot 2's like previous eras

And I think it's much easier to learn three-point shooting, whereas pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is

[Phoenix]

Basically, most people know that previous eras can't shoot threes compared to today's game but they don't realize that today's game can't shoot 2's like previous eras



Your point?

[3ba11]

Your point?


So today's players wouldn't be any good back then unless they're already expert mid-range guys like Kawhi, KD, or Booker

And it's much easier to learn three-point shooting (Ibaka and basically anyone can do it), whereas pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is, but guys like Jerome Kersey could become a 3-point shooter

[ShawkFactory]

I already said that today's era has the same advantage on threes that previous eras had on 2's... So I consider both sides....

Essentially, most people know that previous eras can't shoot threes compared to today's game but they don't realize that today's game can't shoot 2's like previous eras

And I think it's much easier to learn three-point shooting, whereas pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is

....


the game now is played under a different set of rules and with focus on a completely different set of skills than the game in the 90s. And that both games have an equal advantage given the times that they were in.

So you agree with this point I already made then. Cool..

[Phoenix]

So today's players wouldn't be any good back then unless they're already expert mid-range guys like Kawhi, KD, or Booker

And it's much easier to learn three-point shooting (Ibaka and basically anyone can do it), whereas pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is

So players who came along in a 3point-centric era shoot 3's better, and players who came along in a 2point-centric era shoot 2's better

Groundbreaking stuff.

[3ba11]

....



So you agree with this point I already made then. Cool..


Not at all

Anyone can learn to shoot threes like Ibaka or basically everyone learns to do it and can shoot 33%... Tons of guys have high volume at that crappy efficiency

Otoh, pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is, but guys like Jerome Kersey could become a 3-point shooter

[3ba11]

So players who came along in a 3point-centric era shoot 3's better, and players who came along in a 2point-centric era shoot 2's better

Groundbreaking stuff.


Nope

The point is that today's gather-steppers and 3-point shooters wouldn't be any good if they were plopped into an era that required shots like the OP as a standard

Pure scoring touch and instinct must be hard-wired in at a young age, whereas any bum can learn to shoot threes like Ibaka or basically anyone.

[Phoenix]

Nope

The point is that today's gather-steppers and 3-point shooters wouldn't be any good if they were plopped into an era that required shots like the OP as a standard

Pure scoring touch and instinct must be hard-wired in at a young age, whereas any bum can learn to shoot threes like Ibaka or basically anyone.

Today's gather-steppers and 3 point shooters would develop that shot selection if you plopped them into 1990 and actually had them come up organically in that era, instead of your back to the future though process. That's not how this works.

[3ba11]

But what's your overall point in telling us this?


I'm just taking another dump on today's NBA... :confusedshrug:... It's fun and the capacity and facts are there to do so - aka mock the watered down format (beginner fornat) and also mock the media's mis-coverage or lack of insight

It's an NBA forum.. o thought this was par for the course and standard

[Phoenix]

I'm just taking another dump on today's NBA... :confusedshrug:... It's fun and the capacity and facts are there to do so - mock the watered down format (beginner fornat) and also mock the media's mis-coverage or lack of insight

But you don't watch today's NBA.

[3ba11]

But you don't watch today's NBA.


YouTube keeps me up-to-date so I can see all the real ones coming... like Banchero

Is he better than Lebron at the same stage? I think Lebron's all-time talent could be superior but maybe not - Banchero is taller and bigger - he can actually play more like a big man if he wants, while also being an excellent ball-dominator. The kid is NINETEEN

[Real Men Wear Green]

The three point line wasn't used in the 90's,
Steve Kerr from three was one of the biggest shots of Jordan's career you lying idiot. Teams used the three. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.

[Phoenix]

YouTube keeps me up-to-date so I can see all the real ones coming... like Banchero

Is he better than Lebron at the same stage? I think Lebron's all-time talent could be superior but maybe not - Banchero is taller and bigger - he can actually play more like a big man if he wants, while also being an excellent ball-dominator. The kid is NINETEEN

I agree. So what's your plan for the rest of the day?

[ShawkFactory]

Not at all

Anyone can learn to shoot threes like Ibaka or basically everyone learns to do it and can shoot 33%... Tons of guys have high volume at that crappy efficiency

Otoh, pure scoring instinct and touch must be HARD-WIRED IN - aka lebron wouldn't magically develop touch or instinct if he was plopped into the 90's as is, but guys like Jerome Kersey could become a 3-point shooter

Ibaka has always been a viable shooter with touch. He grew playing in Spain. Bad example

3pt shooting takes as much touch and practice as anything else. HARD-WIRING is just that...practice. It’s not some mythical entity that players in the 90s possessed.

[ShawkFactory]

Steve Kerr from three was one of the biggest shots of Jordan's career you lying idiot. Teams used the three. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.

:lol

Not bad.

[AirBonner]

Sam Hauser might shoot 52% from 3 on atleast 4 attempts a game. MJ could never

[Phoenix]

Steve Kerr from three was one of the biggest shots of Jordan's career you lying idiot. Teams used the three. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.

https://c.tenor.com/FJCto5J08aYAAAAM/kevin-garnett-shocked.gif

[SouBeachTalents]

Steve Kerr from three was one of the biggest shots of Jordan's career you lying idiot. Teams used the three. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.
:oldlol:

We'll be seeing LeBron & Pippen threads into the 2030's.

[theman93]

Speaking of Banchero..

https://i.ibb.co/yhs0qb0/Capture6.png

[3ba11]

. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.


It's common knowledge that coaches and teams didn't know how valuable the three-pointer was in previous eras and that's why it wasn't used..

Now that the NBA has learned this statistical reality and pursues a 3-point strategy, nearly everyone is forced to shoot threes whether they can shoot or not like Ibaka, Westbrook or Lebron..

Heck, even Zion took 2 threes per game at 25% because today's strategy requires the threat of threes and spacing whether you can shoot or not.

The stats tell the story - league-wide efficiency has remained at 35% since 1994, so only the attempts have changed as nearly everyone is forced to shoot some threes as part of modern strategy (3-point contest)

Once teams realized that higher team ORtg could be achieved with threes, guys like Ibaka were forced to shoot threes... But he wasn't better at threes than say, Horace Grant - he was just being asked to shoot them because of the strategic shift.

So anyone from the 90's could quickly adapt and start shooting threes like Westbrook, Zion, Ibaka or Lebron .. Otoh, pure scoring touch and instinct must be HARD-WIRED IN like free throws




. They just didn't use it as much, a difference rooted in the fact that there weren't nearly as many good long range shooters back then. It's called evolution. It applies to everything but your posting.


If everyone sucks at 2-pointers compared to prior eras - then that's a DEvolvment of the game..

The game has devolved into a beginner format with wide open spacing and hands off, no impeding (no defense allowed

[Phoenix]

It's common knowledge that coaches and teams didn't know how valuable the three-pointer was in previous eras and that's why it wasn't used..

Now that the NBA has learned this statistical reality and pursues a 3-point strategy, nearly everyone is forced to shoot threes whether they can shoot or not like Ibaka, Westbrook or Lebron..



So you're saying that nobody in the NBA knew that 3>2 before 2010? Well thank Christ that Stephen Curry was born!

Also, we can now add 'HARD-WIRED' to the 3ball-isms list.

[3ba11]

Ibaka has always been a viable shooter with touch. He grew playing in Spain. Bad example

3pt shooting takes as much touch and practice as anything else. HARD-WIRING is just that...practice. It’s not some mythical entity that players in the 90s possessed.


Hard-wiring means you learn the movements and touch as you're still growing... as a youth

For example, you rarely see guys improve their FT's because that requires hard-wiring at a young age... It's the same with mid-range touch and moves... Everyone was forced to develop their own individually-unique way of scoring ON DEFENDERS in the no-spacing eras - that's why nobody played like Kareem, Magic, Bird, McAdoo, Jamal Wilkes, Gervin . Otoh, today's wide open spacing allows layups and threes, so most players play the same style and moves.

threes don't really require moves - most threes are spot-ups and OPEN - this is statistical fact as the NBA's tracking data shows..

So again, guys like Horace Grant or Ibaka can learn to shoot spot-ups, while Lebron and Westbrick could never attain the pure scoring touch and moves required in the no-spacing eras (see the OP gif for simpe example)

[Phoenix]

The game has devolved into a beginner format with wide open spacing and hands off, no impeding (no defense allowed

So why do you have Steph Curry in your top 10? By your logic he's a devolved player compared to previous eras.

[SouBeachTalents]

So why do you have Steph Curry in your top 10? By your logic he's a devolved player compared to previous eras.
And why does he have Giannis who is a legitimately bad shooter :lol

[Phoenix]

And why does he have Giannis who is a legitimately bad shooter :lol

I was waiting for his reply to Steph but I had Giannis in mind too. He doesn't have anything remotely close to the 'elite jumpshooting ability' 3nutball uses as a barometer of being in his top 10. But overall, since this is a devolved era of basketball nobody from the last decade should be in his top 10.Yet he has Steph, Giannis and Kawhi all on his list :hammerhead::hammerhead:

[3ba11]

So why do you have Steph Curry in your top 10? By your logic he's a devolved player compared to previous eras.


player comparisons don't consider era and only consider how much a player dominated his era including team dominance

Dominating the most involves accomplishing the hardest thing in basketball - defeating maximum defensive attention (winning while carrying the scoring load), which allows the player to win with less (no super-team needed)

So that's my mount rushmore criteria - being capable of doing the hardest thing in basketball, aka defeating maximum defensive attention so you can win with less help

But this isn't random - it requires certain skills to defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load).. We know that ball-dominators lack sufficient brand at high volume to successfully carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters like Curry, MJ, Bird or Kobe can maintain brand of ball at high scoring volume and therefore carry the scoring load against top teams (win with less help). .. the ability to carry the scoring load and win with less help makes expert jumpshooters like Curry, MJ, Bird and Kobe > Magic, Lebron, Oscar (ball-dominators)

[3ba11]

When I did some top 10 rankings previously, I stated many times that the only one that I wasn't sure about was Giannis - he had a massive asterisk.

But now I'm pretty settled on my top 10 because I included centers this time.

and it doesn't include Giannis.... MJ, Kobe, Bird, Russell, Curry, Wilt, Kareem, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, Lebron, Hakeem

I think that's like 12 or 13 and I included the centers this time .. expert jumpshooters > great centers > great ball-dominators.. Even of you prefer ball-dominators over centers, either Lebron or Magic still aren't top 5 because they lack elite jumpshooting skill to win with less (defeat maximum defensive attention, aka carry scoring load in Finals)

[Phoenix]

player comparisons don't consider era and only consider how much a player dominated his era including team dominance

Dominating the most involves accomplishing the hardest thing in basketball - defeating maximum defensive attention (winning while carrying the scoring load), which allows the player to win with less (no super-team needed)

So that's my top 10 criteria - being capable of doing the hardest thing in basketball, aka defeating maximum defensive attention so you can win with less help

But this isn't random - it requires certain skills to defeat maximum defensive attention (carry scoring load).. We know that ball-dominators lack sufficient brand of ball at high volume to successfully carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters like Curry, MJ, Bird or Kobe can maintain brand of ball at high scoring volume and therefore carry the scoring load against top teams (win with less help). .. the ability to carry the scoring load and win with less help makes expert jumpshooters like Curry, MJ, Bird and Kobe > Magic, Lebron, Oscar (ball-dominators)

I only read the first sentence and already knew the rest of your post was a giant wall of bullshit. So I'll refer to my earlier point ...

Nobody from a 'devolved' era of basketball( your words) should be in your top 10, because you're ranking him against players who competed in, by your own logic, superior eras. Need that broken down more? If you consider player X to have played in a superior era than player Y, then there's no way you could ever rank player Y higher.

Also, as far as winning titles, neither Giannis or Kawhi have 'dominated' this era so once again your logic doesn't hold under the most rudimentary scrutiny. There have been two 'dominant' players of the past decade for winning titles. One is Steph Curry. The other one you spend 10,000 posts ragging on about.

[Phoenix]

When I did some top 10 rankings previously, I stated many times that the only one that I wasn't sure about was Giannis - he had a massive asterisk.

But now I'm pretty settled on my top 10 because I included centers this time.

and it doesn't include Giannis.... MJ, Kobe, Bird, Russell, Curry, Wilt, Kareem, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, Lebron, Hakeem

I think that's like 12 or 13 and I included the centers this time .. expert jumpshooters > great centers > great ball-dominators.. Even of you prefer ball-dominators over centers, Lebron and Magic still aren't top 5

That list will change by tonight, once you've taken your evening meds.

[Phoenix]

So umm, is that list in order? If that's the case, why is Hakeem after Lebron when you state that you place great centers over great ball dominators? Why isn't Curry above Russell when you have expert jumpshooters over great centers? Why do you never go two posts without contradicting yourself?

[3ba11]

So umm, is that list in order? If that's the case, why is Hakeem after Lebron when you state that you place great centers over great ball dominators? Why isn't Curry above Russell when you have expert jumpshooters over great centers? Why do you never go two posts without contradicting yourself?


It's general basketball 101 - but obviously, there's exceptions to the general rule that expert jumpshooters > great ball-dominators ... Obviously, both guys must be top 10 candidates, so Reggie Miller wouldn't be better than Lebron for example, but Curry is

Also, Russell's ring count and leadership in the 60's gets an exception... It felt weird putting guys like Curry above him

And Hakeem's rings are kind of tainted like Lebron's, so I put Lebron's ring count over Hakeem

[Phoenix]

It's general basketball 101 - but obviously, there's exceptions to the general rule that expert jumpshooters > great ball-dominators ... Obviously, both guys must be top 10 candidates, so Reggie Miller wouldn't be better than Lebron for example, but Curry is

Also, Russell's ring count and leadership in the 60's gets an exception... It felt weird putting guys like Curry above him

And Hakeem's rings are kind of tainted like Lebron's, so I put Lebron's ring count over Hakeem

No, it's not general basketball 101. It's your own list based on your own arbitrary factors that you try to pass off as fact, so nobody's argument could ever 'win' against yours. Pretty transparent bullshit. Someone could argue great centers > all for their own equally arbitrary reasons and be no less valid. You're deluded enough to think your view on things sets the rules of engagement.

[3ba11]

No, it's not general basketball 101. It's your own list based on your own arbitrary factors that you try to pass off as fact, so nobody's argument could ever 'win' against yours. Pretty transparent bullshit. Someone could argue great centers > all for their own equally arbitrary reasons and be no less valid. You're deluded enough to think your view on things sets the rules of engagement.


it isn't arbitrary - expert jumpshooters need less help - this is the historical record

Centers need to be bird-fed by studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe, while ball-dominators need super-teams

Only expert jumpshooters can win with sidekicks like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen because they can carry the scoring load (unlike ball-dominators) and they don't need to be bird-fed like centers

[ShawkFactory]

No, it's not general basketball 101. It's your own list based on your own arbitrary factors that you try to pass off as fact, so nobody's argument could ever 'win' against yours. Pretty transparent bullshit. Someone could argue great centers > all for their own equally arbitrary reasons and be no less valid. You're deluded enough to think your view on things sets the rules of engagement.

Bro...this is where you stop :lol

The reasonable counter argument was made a couple pages ago. Just because he refuses to acknowledge it doesn’t mean you need to get worked up and continue.

[3ba11]

Bro...this is where you stop :lol

The reasonable counter argument was made a couple pages ago. Just because he refuses to acknowledge it doesn’t mean you need to get worked up and continue.


Any counter-argument was re-countered by me but ignored by you

And my argument is irrefutable because it's based on the historical record - expert jumpshooters win with less, so they're superior to centers and ball-dominators

Expert jumpshooters have sufficient brand of ball to carry the scoring load, so they don't need super-team help like ball-dominators, while centers need to be bird-fed by all-time studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe

So only expert jumpshooters can win with secondary producers at sidekick like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen, while centers and ball-dominators need super-teams or studs to bird-feed them

[Phoenix]

it isn't arbitrary - expert jumpshooters need less help - this is the historical record

Centers need to be bird-fed by studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe, while ball-dominators need super-teams

Only expert jumpshooters can win with sidekicks like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen because they can carry the scoring load (unlike ball-dominators) and they don't need to be bird-fed like centers

That wasn't what I was arguing as arbitrary though.

[Phoenix]

Any counter-argument was re-countered by me but ignored by you

And my argument is irrefutable because it's based on the historical record - expert jumpshooters win with less, so they're superior to centers and ball-dominators

Expert jumpshooters have sufficient brand of ball to carry the scoring load, so they don't need super-team help like ball-dominators, while centers need to be bird-fed by all-time studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe

THERE IT IS. YOUR arbitrary standard for how you rank. Anyone arguing to the contrary can't 'win' because they don't adhere to the criteria YOU set. It's like you making an argument 'the greatest pizza ever must have pepperoni and pineapple'. So by YOUR criteria, any pizza without those ingredients doesn't qualify based on YOUR criteria.

[Phoenix]

Bro...this is where you stop :lol

The reasonable counter argument was made a couple pages ago. Just because he refuses to acknowledge it doesn’t mean you need to get worked up and continue.

Oh don't worry, I'm having a nice glass of whiskey as I watch this fool trip over himself post after post.

[3ba11]

That wasn't what I was arguing as arbitrary though.


You said that anyone could say centers > jumpshooters - aka it's based on arbitrary reasons

except it isn't - expert jumpshooters are superior because they need less help - they don't need studs like Magic or Kobe to bird-feed them like centers do and they can carry the scoring load so they don't need super-team like ball-dominators

[3ba11]

THERE IT IS. YOUR arbitrary standard for how you rank. Anyone arguing to the contrary can't 'win' because they don't adhere to the criteria YOU set. It's like you making an argument 'the greatest pizza ever must have pepperoni and pineapple'. So by YOUR criteria, any pizza without those ingredients doesn't qualify based on YOUR criteria.


In order to beat me in an argument, you must beat me at my own game - show me historical record that proves me wrong

Unfortunately, Shaq and Kareem did infact need all-time studs to bird-feed them, while ball-dominators like Lebron and Magic needed super-teams because they couldn't successfully carry the scoring load themselves (too ball-dominant at carry-job volume).

Now if you could show me where Magic and Lebron won with secondary producers at sidekick like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen, then you would have me.. Unfortunately, only expert jumpshooters can win with less help like that

[SouBeachTalents]

In order to beat me in an argument, you must beat me at my own game - show me historical record that proves me wrong

Unfortunately, Shaq and Kareem did infact need all-time studs to bird-feed them, while ball-dominators like Lebron and Magic needed super-teams because they couldn't successfully carry the scoring load themselves (too ball-dominant at carry-job volume).

Now if you could show me where Magic and Lebron won with secondary producers at sidekick like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen, then you would have me.. Unfortunately, only expert jumpshooters can win with less help like that
2013

[Phoenix]

You said that anyone could say centers > jumpshooters - aka it's based on arbitrary reasons - except it isn't - expert jumpshooters are superior because they need less help - they don't need studs like Magic or Kobe to bird-feed them and they can carry the scoring load so they don't need super-team like ball-dominators

Yeah it is arbitrary because someone else could come along and list of a bunch of things like defending the paint combined with dominant volume interior scoring as their most important barometers for being a GOAT, which then eliminates your 'expert jumpshooters' from the equation. You may disagree with that but that doesn't invalidate their opinion, and that's what continued to fly over your head.

There was a conventional basketball logic that you played inside-out for half of the NBAs history. If jumpshooters throughout basketall history were considered 'superior' then the game would have been played outside in. Instead you look at the lineage of players who at one point were considered 'GOATs'- Mikan, Russell and Wilt, Kareem. Players like Oscar, West, and Baylor played with those aforementioned but never carried the title of GOAT or most dominant. Nobody looked at Oscar as being superior to Alcindor feeding him in the post in 71 enroute to a title. Nobody looked at Magic as being superior to Kareem until Cap was 40. It literally took 50 years of NBA basketball for a player under 6'8 to be considered GOAT. It's why Sam Bowie was taken over MJ, as stupid as that looks now in retrospect. It's why most of the most hyped first picks in history except Lebron and Zion were all bigs.

[3ba11]

2013


2013 Finals PPG

Lebron............ 25
Wade.............. 20


So Lebron never defeated maximum defensive attention (never carried scoring load in Finals successfully)

Ball-dominators lack sufficient brand of ball at carry-job volume to carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD or Kyrie...

Otoh, expert jumpshooters maintain brand of ball at high scoring volume, so they can beat top teams while carrying the scoring load and therefore win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen.

[Phoenix]

In order to beat me in an argument, you must beat me at my own game - show me historical record that proves me wrong

Unfortunately, Shaq and Kareem did infact need all-time studs to bird-feed them, while ball-dominators like Lebron and Magic needed super-teams because they couldn't successfully carry the scoring load themselves (too ball-dominant at carry-job volume).

Now if you could show me where Magic and Lebron won with secondary producers at sidekick like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen, then you would have me.. Unfortunately, only expert jumpshooters can win with less help like that

Hence your delusion in your persistent thinking that only your view is the one that matters or determines the arguing criteria for everyone else. It isn't. You're penalizing 'bird fed' players for playing the game the way it was designed to be played before we somehow decided that every 7 footer needed to play more like Steph than Shaq or Hakeem. Getting into the post and actually playing like bigmen were once supposed to play doesn't make them inferior players.

[SouBeachTalents]

2013 Finals PPG

Lebron............ 25
Wade.............. 20


So Lebron never defeated maximum defensive attention (never carried scoring load in Finals successfully)

Ball-dominators lack sufficient brand of ball at carry-job volume to carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD or Kyrie...

Otoh, expert jumpshooters maintain brand of ball at high scoring volume, so they can beat top teams while carrying the scoring load and therefore win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen.
Neither did Russell, Wilt or Magic.

[StrongLurk]

When I did some top 10 rankings previously, I stated many times that the only one that I wasn't sure about was Giannis - he had a massive asterisk.

But now I'm pretty settled on my top 10 because I included centers this time.

and it doesn't include Giannis.... MJ, Kobe, Bird, Russell, Curry, Wilt, Kareem, Duncan, Shaq, Magic, Lebron, Hakeem

I think that's like 12 or 13 and I included the centers this time .. expert jumpshooters > great centers > great ball-dominators.. Even of you prefer ball-dominators over centers, either Lebron or Magic still aren't top 5 because they lack elite jumpshooting skill to win with less (defeat maximum defensive attention, aka carry scoring load in Finals)

:roll:

He changed it AGAIN (for the millionth time). OP is fuking insane and has zero shame. What a lunatic.

[3ba11]

Yeah it is arbitrary because someone else could come along and list of a bunch of things like defending the paint combined with dominant volume interior scoring as their most important barometers for being a GOAT, which then eliminates your 'expert jumpshooters' from the equation. You may disagree with that but that doesn't invalidate their opinion, and that's what continued to fly over your head.






Less help needed - that's the factor that confirms everything I said

The historical record shows that expert jumpshooters like Curry, MJ or Kobe won multiple titles with less supporting talent than Kareem ever did.... Or Shaq.... Or ball-dominators like Magic and Lebron

It's a nice sample where top 10 candidates like MJ/Curry/Kobe won with less than the ball-dominators or centers that are top 10 candidates

Centers need to be bird-fed, while ball-dominators lack sufficient brand at carry-job volume to carry the scoring load... Expert jumpshooters don't have these issues so they can win with less






There was a conventional basketball logic that you played inside-out for half of the NBAs history. If jumpshooters throughout basketall history were considered 'superior' then the game would have been played outside in. Instead you look at the lineage of players who at one point were considered 'GOATs'- Mikan, Russell and Wilt, Kareem. Players like Oscar, West, and Baylor played with those aforementionedut never carried the title of GOAT or most dominant. It literally took 50 years of NBA basketball for a player under 6'8 to be considered GOAT. It's why Sam Bowie was taken over MJ, as stupid as that looks now in retrospect. It's why most of the most hyped first picks in history except Lebron and Zion were all bigs.


Humans remain dumb on things for long periods of time like flat earth for example

Accordingly, since the basket is fixed at 10 feet, it was intuitive that big men could score the easiest and therefore base offenses around them... And without the 3-point line, this was actually true in a vacuum - it's better to feed a big man for a 2-footer than a long jumpshooter for a 24-foot two-pointer... However, even today's basketball world doesn't understand that the jumpshooting facilitates better teammate development and chemistry, which ultimately yields a superior team

Essentially, much of the basketball universe STILL doesn't know that expert jumpshooting is the best skillset - it yields the best teammate development, chemistry and brand that allows organic winning... So a lot of stuff that we discuss on here is NEW.. Very few media people talk about the game in these high level terms and ways

[ShawkFactory]

In order to beat me in an argument, you must beat me at my own game - show me historical record that proves me wrong

Unfortunately, Shaq and Kareem did infact need all-time studs to bird-feed them, while ball-dominators like Lebron and Magic needed super-teams because they couldn't successfully carry the scoring load themselves (too ball-dominant at carry-job volume).

Now if you could show me where Magic and Lebron won with secondary producers at sidekick like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen, then you would have me.. Unfortunately, only expert jumpshooters can win with less help like that

Lol just like my 7 year old nephew who continuously changes the rules of monopoly so that he can win.

[ShawkFactory]

Oh don't worry, I'm having a nice glass of whiskey as I watch this fool trip over himself post after post.

Nice. What kind?

[Phoenix]

Essentially, much of the basketball universe STILL doesn't know that expert jumpshooting is the best skillset - it yields the best teammate development, chemistry and brand that allows organic winning... So a lot of stuff that we discuss on here is NEW.. Very few media people talk about the game in these high level terms and ways

So the long list of championship teams led by dominant 'bird fed' bigs were all won inorganically? 100 years of basketball and some nut on a shitty message board decides how basketball shoud be viewed for the rest of us.

[3ba11]

Neither did Russell, Wilt or Magic.


Yes you make my point - aside from rare one-offs, only expert jumpshooters can win while carrying the scoring load ... Centers generally need a stud like Magic or Kobe to bird-feed them, while ball-dominators lack sufficient brand at carry-job volume to carry scoring load.. Expert jumpshooters don't have these issues of bird-feeding or ball-domination, so they can carry the scoring load and win with less help

[3ba11]

Lol just like my 7 year old nephew who continuously changes the rules of monopoly so that he can win.


I'm basically just stating things in the historical record (aka expert jumpshooters win with less)

So I'm not really arguing; I'm informing

The only way to refute it would be to inform me back - show me that I'm wrong about the historical record... Unfortunately, I haven't been wrong about the historical record, so good luck

[Phoenix]

Nice. What kind?

Good ole JD on the rocks...

[StrongLurk]

OP why don't you have Durant ahead of Curry? Durant outplayed Curry in the playoffs/finals when they were together three years in a row and was able to go toe-to-toe with Lebron in back-to-back finals. Durant would've had a 3-peat with 3 FMVPS if he did not got injured. Durant is also an expert jumpshooter/scorer (also won an MVP)...yet you don't have him in the top 12? What makes Curry or Bird better players than Durant?

And I know that Durant didn't defeat "maximum attention" but you always claim Durant HAD to go to GS because of Lebron's "collision" and that Lebron STOLE Durant's 2012 "organic" ring. So you basically say Durant could've beaten max attention but Lebron's collusion ruined it. Durant outshined Curry at the highest levels when they played together.

Idk, just seems like you should rank him in the top 10 based on what you say, definitely higher than the centers/ball dominator.

[Phoenix]

Lol just like my 7 year old nephew who continuously changes the rules of monopoly so that he can win.

Lol yep. My 4 year old nephew creates his own rules in Candyland then changes them the moment I pass him on the board, but you expect that from a 4 year old....

[Phoenix]

OP why don't you have Durant ahead of Curry? Durant outplayed Curry in the playoffs/finals when they were together three years in a row and was able to go toe-to-toe with Lebron in back-to-back finals. Durant would've had a 3-peat with 3MVPS if he did not got injured. Durant is also an expert jumpshooter/scorer (also won an MVP)...yet you don't have him in the top 12? What makes Curry or Bird better players than Durant?

And I know that Durant didn't defeat "maximum attention" but you always claim Durant HAD to go to GS because of Lebron's "collision" and that Lebron STOLE Durant's 2012 "organic" ring.. Durant outshined Curry at the highest levels when they played together.

Idk, just seems like you should rank him in the top 10 based on what you say, definitely higher than the centers/ball dominator.

Durant was in his top 10 at one point, probably yesterday. Check back next week....

[3ba11]

So the long list of championship teams led by dominant 'bird fed' bigs were all won inorganically? 100 years of basketball and some nut on a shitty message board decides how basketball shoud be viewed for the rest of us.


I only said that ball-dominators can't win organically (aka they impose spot-up roles that prevents teammate development and chemistry to win organically)

Otoh, I never said that centers can't win organically - that's the only way that teams played for a long time so there will be organic winners... but again - the issue is help - they need more help because they're bird-fed.. So they need elite-producing studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe feeding them and therefore can't win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen..

[Phoenix]

I only said that ball-dominators can't win organically (aka they impose spot-up roles that prevents teammate development and chemistry to win organically)

Otoh, I never said that centers can't win organically - that's the only way that teams played for a long time so there will be organic winners... but again - the issue is help - they need more help because they're bird-fed.. So they need elite-producing studs like Magic, Oscar or Kobe feeding them and therefore can't win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen..

I thought Magic was a ball-dominator.

In general, your premise of bird fed is silly. Centers didn't dribble the ball up the court and assist themselves. Nowadays you can have Giannis at 6'11 dribble the ball up the floor and call his own number. If basketball was played like that in 1980 and Kareem had that as an option we wouldn't be using dumb ass terms like 'bird fed' 40 years later to describe how players were taught to play when basketball was conceived.

[3ba11]

OP why don't you have Durant ahead of Curry? Durant outplayed Curry in the playoffs/finals when they were together three years in a row and was able to go toe-to-toe with Lebron in back-to-back finals. Durant would've had a 3-peat with 3MVPS if he did not got injured. Durant is also an expert jumpshooter/scorer (also won an MVP)...yet you don't have him in the top 12? What makes Curry or Bird better players than Durant?

And I know that Durant didn't defeat "maximum attention" but you always claim Durant HAD to go to GS because of Lebron's "collision" and that Lebron STOLE Durant's 2012 "organic" ring. So you basically say Durant could've beaten max attention but Lebron's collusion ruined it. Durant outshined Curry at the highest levels when they played together.

Idk, just seems like you should rank him in the top 10 based on what you say, definitely higher than the centers/ball dominator.


You make a great point and maybe he's the easy choice to round out my top 10

Heck, doesn't Durant fit the criteria of being an expert jumpshooter that allows the teammate development and fits to win organically?

The answer is yes - Durant was about to achieve a GOAT organic ring by fitting with the unfittable - aka he nearly won organically with Westbrick in 2012 but Lebron's collusion ruined it... Lebron's "decision" essentially ruined Durant's career ..

So I would love to put Durant in the top 10 on the ASSUMPTION that he would've won organically with Westbrook in 2012 and other years (that title probably leads to others)... but it never actually happened... Curry was the guy that actually built an organic dynasty, so he has the know-how, not Durant

since Curry did infact win organically (no assumption needed), I put him ahead of Durant - what Curry has built in the Bay Area is goat-caliber.. otoh, lebron's decision made Durant coattail what Curry built... We have to make assumptions about Durant because Lebron's decision hurt his career.. Durant's primary mistake was waiting 6 years to respond to Lebron's decision.

[SouBeachTalents]

Also, where are all the titles for these elite jump shooters?

West
KG
Dirk
CP3
Harden
Nash
Allen
Reggie
Mullin
English

Hell, even KD, a GOAT level shooter, hasn't won anything outside of his stint with the Warriors.

Maybe, just maybe, there's more to basketball than your simplistic analysis.

[ShawkFactory]

Ahhhh 3ball: where the historical record and the assumptions meet.

[BigShotBob]

Also, where are all the titles for these elite jump shooters?

West
KG
Dirk
CP3
Harden
Nash
Allen
Reggie
Mullin
English

Hell, even KD, a GOAT level shooter, hasn't won anything outside of his stint with the Warriors.

Maybe, just maybe, there's more to basketball than your simplistic analysis.

Elite jump shooters aren't necessarily elite scorers imo

And I was going to reply to 3Ball about my main issue with KD's style of play is that he absolutely refuses to take his man off the dribble and drive into the lane at 6'11. He essentially makes the game harder for himself at times. MJ attacked the basket and was an efficient volume shooter.

KG fell into the same trap that KD did if you look at his shooting percentages they weren't very good for a big man

[Phoenix]

You make a great point and maybe he's the easy choice to round out my top 10

Heck, doesn't Durant fit the criteria of being an expert jumpshooter that allows the teammate development and fits to win organically?

The answer is yes - Durant was about to achieve a GOAT organic ring by fitting with the unfittable - aka he nearly won organically with Westbrick in 2012 but Lebron's collusion ruined it... Lebron's "decision" essentially ruined Durant's career ..

So I would love to put Durant in the top 10 on the ASSUMPTION that he would've won organically with Westbrook in 2012 and other years (that title probably leads to others)... but it never actually happened...

So you're right - I'm considering putting him in the top 10 based on this assumption of him winning organically and him outplaying Lebron twice heads-up in the Finals.. But regardless, since Curry did infact win organically (no assumption needed), I put him ahead of Durant - what Curry has built in the Bay Area is goat-caliber - the fact that he actually did it confirms that he knows the best brand of ball, whereas Durant had to coattail what Curry built... We have to make assumptions about Durant because Lebron's decision hurt his career.. Durant's primary mistake was waiting 6 years to respond to Lebron's decision.

How does Steph build the best brand of ball in an era that you consider to be a devolution of the game?

Durant now being a consideration for your mythical top 10 list is just lol.

[3ba11]

Ahhhh 3ball: where the historical record and the assumptions meet.


That's why I leave Durant out of the rankings - it's because we have to make assumptions about him and can't use the historical record like we can for ACTUAL organic winners

Lebron's collusion certainly stopped Durant from building something organic in 2012 - it's unfair, but it's still the reality that Durant never built anything like Curry did - Curry's actual experience building an organic juggernaut makes him superior, while Durant can only imagine and never actually figured out how

[StrongLurk]

You make a great point and maybe he's the easy choice to round out my top 10

Heck, doesn't Durant fit the criteria of being an expert jumpshooter that allows the teammate development and fits to win organically?

The answer is yes - Durant was about to achieve a GOAT organic ring by fitting with the unfittable - aka he nearly won organically with Westbrick in 2012 but Lebron's collusion ruined it... Lebron's "decision" essentially ruined Durant's career ..

So I would love to put Durant in the top 10 on the ASSUMPTION that he would've won organically with Westbrook in 2012 and other years (that title probably leads to others)... but it never actually happened... Curry was the guy that actually built an organic dynasty, so he has the know-how, not Durant

since Curry did infact win organically (no assumption needed), I put him ahead of Durant - what Curry has built in the Bay Area is goat-caliber.. otoh, lebron's decision made Durant coattail what Curry built... We have to make assumptions about Durant because Lebron's decision hurt his career.. Durant's primary mistake was waiting 6 years to respond to Lebron's decision.

Except the Warriors dynasty became legit BECAUSE of Durant.

Curry/Warriors only won in 2015 due to injuries which you have acknowledged. And we saw Curry choke a ridiculous 3-1 lead in 2016. So Curry didn't quite build a dynasty like you say.

Curry's ring last year was fantastic of course, but it took him, what 6 or 7 finals to finally be the best player in a finals?

[3ba11]

Also, where are all the titles for these elite jump shooters?

West
KG
Dirk
CP3
Harden
Nash
Allen
Reggie
Mullin
English

Hell, even KD, a GOAT level shooter, hasn't won anything outside of his stint with the Warriors.

Maybe, just maybe, there's more to basketball than your simplistic analysis.


Your argument is that every elite jumpshooter should have a bevy of titles - that's impossible - there's always going to be jumpshooters that never won - the point is that the ones that DID needed less help than the centers or ball-dominators that won

[3ba11]

Except the Warriors dynasty became legit BECAUSE of Durant.

Curry/Warriors only won in 2015 due to injuries which you have acknowledged. And we saw Curry choke a ridiculous 3-1 lead in 2016. So Curry didn't quite build a dynasty like you say.

Curry's ring last year was fantastic of course, but it took him, what 6 or 7 finals to finally be the best player in a finals?


Lebron's frontcourt ball-dominance and horrific fits drove Kyrie out of town, so the Warriors win in 2018 regardless of Durant's presence

And Curry averaged 10 more than all teammates for the 15' and 22' playoffs and Finals, so he defeated maximum defensive attention twice.. That's goat-level

People don't realize that ball-dominators can't defeat maximum defensive attention (can't carry scoring load against top teams), so they need more help than expert jumpshooters

For example, imagine if Klay had destroyed Lebron in the Finals - would anyone credit Curry with a goat accomplishment for winning those Finals,? This is how we should look at Lebron's 16' ring because Kyrie destroyed his MVP matchup and played about as good as Lebron

[StrongLurk]

Lebron's frontcourt ball-dominance and horrific fits drove Kyrie out of town, so the Warriors win in 2018 regardless of Durant's presence

And Curry averaged 10 more than all teammates for the 15' and 22' playoffs and Finals, so he defeated maximum defensive attention twice.. That's goat-level

People don't realize that ball-dominators can't defeat maximum defensive attention (can't carry scoring load against top teams), so they need more help than expert jumpshooters

For example, imagine if Klay had destroyed Lebron in the Finals - would anyone credit Curry with a goat accomplishment for winning those Finals,? This is how we should look at Lebron's 16' ring because Kyrie destroyed his MVP matchup and played about as good as Lebron

Curry’s 2015 ring doesn’t even matter. No Love or Kyrie and voters didn’t even want to give him FMVP. That 2015 ring if far from goat level. Last year was excellent though like I said. Curry’s “dynasty” lost the second Durant went down with his injury in 2019.

Durant would’ve won in 2012 like Curry if Wade and Bosh missed the 2012 finals due to injury.

[3ba11]

Btw, someone asked what I was doing the rest of the day - the election is over so this is my day off although we still have conference calls later today.. looks like our gal lost :(

[RRR3]

This is an absolute brutal beatdown of snivelly. Go easy on the guy he’s deranged.

[Axe]

Lol 7 pages in a useless thread by op.

[3ba11]

Curry’s 2015 ring doesn’t even matter. No Love or Kyrie and voters didn’t even want to give him FMVP. That 2015 ring if far from goat level. Last year was excellent though like I said. Curry’s “dynasty” lost the second Durant went down with his injury in 2019.

Durant would’ve won in 2012 like Curry if Wade and Bosh missed the 2012 finals due to injury.


Lebron's 2016 ring doesn't count because of the suspension - everyone agrees that the Warriors would've won in 5 of Draymond wasn't suspended.. Injuries to Bogut and Iggy further hurt the Warriors

So it all evens out...

Heck, if the Warriors lose in 2015, they probably re-tool and win in 2016 while the champion Cavs stand pat.

Bottom line - Curry defeated maximum defensive attention twice so he can win with less help like Wiggins, while Lebron can't defeat maximum defensive attention (can't carry scoring load in Finals) so he needs more help like AD, Wade and Kyrie

[Sportal]

You aren't addressing the point and are clearly AVOIDING the point

If today's player went back to the 90's, they wouldn't have teammates spacing the floor with 30 threes a game, so shots like the OP gif were required on nearly every play... Today's player can't take shots like that all game just like previous eras couldn't take threes all game at respectable efficiency..

Essentially, previous eras have the same advantage on 2's that today's game has on threes.

Guys like Bernard King, Kiki Vandeweghe and Alex English dropped 30 ppg on good efficiency by taking shots like the OP gif all game.. Today's players can't do that just like previous eras couldn't shoot 45 threes a game.

****ing Christ, you had players in the 90s that were barely ambidextrous with both hands, just at dribbling, let alone much else...

[sdot_thadon]

I like Paolo so far, but Am I the only one bothered by the fact he picked a brick that went in as an example?

[ShawkFactory]

Also, we can now add 'HARD-WIRED' to the 3ball-isms list.

The "hard-wire" is one I still can't get past. So stupid :lol

[3ba11]

The "hard-wire" is one I still can't get past. So stupid :lol


In previous eras, a guy like Alex English might make the shot shown in the OP like 6 or 7 times in a single game

The unspaced eras required everyone to develop their own individually-unique way of converting ON DEFENDERS... That's why previous eras had more individually-unique styles like English or Kareem..

Otoh, today's spacing only requires an athletic gather-step and threes, so everyone looks the same out there.. Similar to the "unskilled" positions in football, today's gather-steppers are commoditized and the guys that make the league are the ones that hit the gap the fastest with their gather-step.. That's literally what today's game has become - who can hit that gap the fastest because it's open...

Otoh, there was no gap in previous eras so players developed their own style and touch to score in heavy traffic.. The moves and touch to score in traffic cannot be quickly learned by modern players if they were plopped into the 90's... Kareem's skyhook and English's shots like the OP need to be hard-wired in over time, usually at a younger age...

If you guys played sports, you'd understand... hard-wiring movements in is quite prevalent in boxing, where a late-bloomer like Wilder looks robotic, while a natural from a young age looks smooth and fluid like Fury

[AirBonner]

Thread Cliffs: MJ didn’t take many 3 pointers because he wasn’t good at them

[3ba11]

Thread Cliffs: MJ didn’t take many 3 pointers because he wasn’t good at them


Here's an example of low IQ basketball - Lebron takes the 2nd most threes in the league but shoots among the worst efficiency

That's low IQ basketball

Otoh, Jordan never shot poorly anytime he had a modicum of volume (more than 1.5 attempts)... this includes the 90" regular season (38% on 3 attempts), the 93' Playoffs (4 attempts at 39%) or the 92' Finals (5 attempts on 43%).

Whenever Jordan had any meaningful volume whatsoever, he shot at today's standard... Otherwise, we have never given a shit when someone shoots poorly on like 0.8 attempts.. that's meaningless.. Essentially, Jordan only took bailout threes when he was forced to shoot at the end of shot clock... Anytime he was above bailout volume, he shot at today's standard

[ShawkFactory]

In previous eras, a guy like Alex English might make the shot shown in the OP like 6 or 7 times in a single game

The unspaced eras required everyone to develop their own individually-unique way of converting ON DEFENDERS... That's why previous eras had more individually-unique styles like English or Kareem..

Otoh, today's spacing only requires an athletic gather-step and threes, so everyone looks the same out there.. Similar to the "unskilled" positions in football, today's gather-steppers are commoditized and the guys that make the league are the ones that hit the gap the fastest with their gather-step.. That's literally what today's game has become - who can hit that gap the fastest because it's open...

Otoh, there was no gap in previous eras so players developed their own style and touch to score in heavy traffic.. The moves and touch to score in traffic cannot be quickly learned by modern players if they were plopped into the 90's... Kareem's skyhook and English's shots like the OP need to be hard-wired in over time, usually at a younger age...

If you guys played sports, you'd understand... hard-wiring movements in is quite prevalent in boxing, where a late-bloomer like Wilder looks robotic, while a natural from a young age looks smooth and fluid like Fury

Dude I understand what the term means as you initially described it. You didn’t have to spend 5 paragraphs expounding further.

The definition of it isn’t the funny part.

[StrongLurk]

Lebron's 2016 ring doesn't count because of the suspension - everyone agrees that the Warriors would've won in 5 of Draymond wasn't suspended.. Injuries to Bogut and Iggy further hurt the Warriors

So it all evens out...

Heck, if the Warriors lose in 2015, they probably re-tool and win in 2016 while the champion Cavs stand pat.

Bottom line - Curry defeated maximum defensive attention twice so he can win with less help like Wiggins, while Lebron can't defeat maximum defensive attention (can't carry scoring load in Finals) so he needs more help like AD, Wade and Kyrie

Curry has defeated maximum defensive attention against a championship level roster once which was last year. It was embarrassing that the 2015 Cavs took that series to six. Everyone knows that which is why Curry didn't win FMVP. I am excited to see what Curry can do this year.

[3ba11]

Curry has defeated maximum defensive attention against a championship level roster once which was last year. It was embarrassing that the 2015 Cavs took that series to six. Everyone knows that which is why Curry didn't win FMVP. I am excited to see what Curry can do this year.


6 game series is common and not embarrassing

Lebron and AD went 6 with an injured Heat team in 2020... So that ring doesn't count and it was a bullshit bubble ring anyway where the Lakers were the only team that gave a shit and saw an opportunity

So again, Curry defeated maximum defensive attention twice (carry scoring load in playoffs and Finals, aka 10 ppg more than all teammates)

Being able to defeat maximum defensive attention means that you can win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen and don't need all-time 1st options at sidekick like Kareem, Wade or Kobe

[StrongLurk]

6 game series is common and not embarrassing

Lebron and AD went 6 with an injured Heat team in 2020... So that ring doesn't count and it was a bullshit bubble ring anyway where the Lakers were the only team that gave a shit and saw an opportunity

So again, Curry defeated maximum defensive attention twice (carry scoring load in playoffs and Finals, aka 10 ppg more than all teammates)

Being able to defeat maximum defensive attention means that you can win with secondary producers like Wiggins or Pippen and don't need all-time 1st options at sidekick like Kareem, Wade or Kobe

You are trolling by equating a single game Draymond suspension - who should have been suspended in the Thunder series actually - and an injury to Goran Dragic as the same level as Kyrie playing one finals game and Love playing none.

Again you are in the minority with Curry's first ring. Everyone knows Curry underperformed which is why the voters only gave FMVP recognition to Lebron and Iggy. Matthew Delevadova was giving Curry trouble in the beginning of that series lol. No one considers Curry's first finals against a crappy Cavs team "GOAT level" so you are wrong again like you are most of the team.

You really should focus on Curry's ring last year...oh wait you don't because Lebron wasn't involved in that finals and let's be honest, you only care about Lebron, not Curry.

[3ba11]

https://i.makeagif.com/media/10-17-2015/NtLU8z.gif



You are trolling by equating a single game Draymond suspension - who should have been suspended in the Thunder series actually - and an injury to Goran Dragic as the same level as Kyrie playing one finals game and Love playing none.

Again you are in the minority with Curry's first ring. Everyone knows Curry underperformed which is why the voters only gave FMVP recognition to Lebron and Iggy. Matthew Delevadova was giving Curry trouble in the beginning of that series lol. No one considers Curry's first finals against a crappy Cavs team "GOAT level" so you are wrong again like you are most of the team.

You really should focus on Curry's ring last year...oh wait you don't because Lebron wasn't involved in that finals and let's be honest, you only care about Lebron, not Curry.


You mean like when Diaw held Lebron to 16 on 39% through 3 games of the 13' Finals while the Heat supporting cast staved off an 0-3 defict and ultimately needed Ray to force Game 7?

By your own bolded criteria above, Curry was far superior in the 15' Finals than Lebron was in the 13' Finals - Lebron completely choked until Ray saved him.. Infact, Lebron only averaged 25 and Wade 20 so Lebron didn't carry the scoring load (didn't defeat maximum defensive attention), while Curry did.. Curry's ring is far superior.. He also was ushering in a new brand of ball to the world.

[SouBeachTalents]

https://i.makeagif.com/media/10-17-2015/NtLU8z.gif





You mean like when Diaw held Lebron to 16 on 39% through 3 games of the 13' Finals while the Heat supporting cast staved off an 0-3 defict and ultimately needed Ray to force Game 7?

By your own bolded criteria above, Curry was far superior in the 15' Finals than Lebron was in the 13' Finals - Lebron completely choked until Ray saved him.. Infact, Lebron only averaged 25 and Wade 20 so Lebron didn't carry the scoring load (didn't defeat maximum defensive attention), while Curry did.. Curry's ring is far superior.. He also was ushering in a new brand of ball to the world.
Diaw's mpg

Game 1: 9
Game 2: 11
Game 3: 0 (LeBron's worst game of the series)

Diaw didn't guard LeBron until Game 5.

[3ba11]

Diaw's mpg

Game 1: 9
Game 2: 11
Game 3: 0 (LeBron's worst game of the series)

Diaw didn't guard LeBron until Game 5.


Stronglurk originally said:



Matthew Delevadova was giving Curry trouble in the beginning of that series lol.


By that criteria, Lebron played worse in the 13' Finals than 15' Curry because everyone (including Diaw) shut down Lebron early in the 13' Finals (16 on 39% for the first 3 games)

In addition to getting shut down for the first 6 games of the 13' Finals (23 on 43%), Wade averaged 20 ppg, so Lebron didn't defeat maximum defensive attention (didn't carry the scoring load) like Curry did in the 15' Finals

So by the most legitimate objective measures (not getting shut down like Lebron and defeating maximum defensive attention), Curry's 15' Finals performance was vastly superior to Lebron's near choke-job and teammate save in 2013..

Heck, Lebron had a teammate match his usage in the 13' Finals (Wade) and still had another elite 1st option playing a spot-up role (Bosh).. Lebron's 4th option (HOF Ray Allen) was comparable to Curry's sidekick (1st time all-star Klay).. Lebron needs more help because ball-dominantors lack sufficient brand of ball to successfully carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD and Kyrie.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters maintain brand of ball at carry-job volume, so they can carry the scoring load against top teams and win with secondary producers like Wiggins, Lowry or Pippen.

[SouBeachTalents]

Stronglurk originally said:





By that criteria, Lebron played worse in the 13' Finals than 15' Curry because everyone (including Diaw) shut down Lebron early in the 13' Finals (16 on 39% for the first 3 games)

In addition to getting shut down for the first 6 games of the 13' Finals (23 on 43%), Wade averaged 20 ppg, so Lebron didn't defeat maximum defensive attention (didn't carry the scoring load) like Curry did in the 15' Finals

So by the most legitimate objective measures (not getting shut down like Lebron and defeating maximum defensive attention), Curry's 15' Finals performance was vastly superior to Lebron's near choke-job and teammate save in 2013..

Heck, Lebron had a teammate match his usage in the 13' Finals (Wade) and still had another elite 1st option playing a spot-up role (Bosh).. Lebron's 4th option (HOF Ray Allen) was comparable to Curry's sidekick (1st time all-star Klay).. Lebron needs more help because ball-dominantors lack sufficient brand of ball to successfully carry the scoring load against top teams (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD and Kyrie.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters maintain brand of ball at carry-job volume, so they can carry the scoring load against top teams and win with secondary producers like Wiggins, Lowry or Pippen.
Imagine trying to lecture someone on a series you proved you CLEARLY didn't watch :lol I've learned by this point arguing with 3ball is a waste of time, but his arguments are so easy to pick apart and dismantle, I'll just do it for fun.

And look, I agree with you, LeBron struggled immensely with his jumper/scoring for most of that series, and it's a series I always point to as an example of people overrating the bejesus out of rings. LeBron gets props for this series despite individually struggling for most of it, but doesn't get any for the '09 ECF or '17 & '18 Finals based SOLELY on team results. It's such an idiotic and non critical thinking way to evaluate individual performance.

Even with all that, LeBron's 2013 Finals > Curry's 2015 Finals. There's a reason one player won FMVP unanimously, and the other didn't receive a single vote. You obviously didn't watch either series, but like LeBron, Curry was getting hammered for his performance during those Finals. And a lot of people, the voters included obviously, though Iggy had been the Warriors most impactful player. I could post threads from 2015 showing posters that thought Iggy had a more legitimate argument for FMVP than Curry did. This notion of Iggy being a completely undeserving FMVP and Curry being robbed is legitimately the biggest revisionist history I can think of when it comes to basketball. That was at most, a minority opinion at the time. And I know you literally don't consider defense to be a part of basketball, but LeBron actually played very good defense in those Finals, locking Parker up, while Curry did no such thing.

I've brought this up before, but claiming LeBron got "shut down" averaging 23 on 43% but having Kobe & Bird top 3 when their career Finals averages are nearly identical to those numbers, once again shows your complete double standard, and proves without a shadow of a doubt you hold LeBron to a higher standard than those two.

And finally, saying 38 year old Allen is comparable to Klay is just lazy trolling/retarded, even for you.

[3ba11]

Imagine trying to lecture someone on a series you proved you CLEARLY didn't watch :lol I've learned by this point arguing with 3ball is a waste of time, but his arguments are so easy to pick apart and dismantle, I'll just do it for fun.

And look, I agree with you, LeBron struggled immensely with his jumper/scoring for most of that series, and it's a series I always point to as an example of people overrating the bejesus out of rings. LeBron gets props for this series despite individually struggling for most of it, but doesn't get any for the '09 ECF based SOLELY on team results. It's such an idiotic and non critical thinking way to evaluate individual performance.





Individual performance is more than just ppg-rpg-apg

Admit it - that's all you're looking at when you evaluate Lebron in that series - you aren't looking at other stats or factors (directly attributable to Lebron) that allowed the Magic to be one of the 5 biggest underdogs to ever win a playoff series.

Do you realize that the Magic had a massive injury excuse in that series (all-star Jameer Nelson)... but still won?..

You make injury excuses for Lebron losing in 2015 Finals or the Warriors losing in 2019 Finals, but the Magic had a similar injury excuse but still won!!!... They were a historic +700 underdog in that series and one of the 5 biggest underdogs to ever win a playoff series.

Here's specifically why the historic upset occurred:

The Magic had 2 big forwards that required both size and perimeter-agility to defend - Hedo and Lewis - unfortunately, perhaps the greatest combination of size and agility in frontcourt history (Lebron) chose to defend a spot-up shooter (Courtney Lee) and occasionally the AND1 backup to Jameer Nelson ("Skip to my Lou" Rafer Alston).. This was a disastrous decision - time and time again the Magic burned the quickness deficit in the Cavs' frontcourt that Lebron could've easily shored up..

In addition to this all-time defensive choke-job and blunder, Lebron choked in the critical Game 4 OT that swung the series (destroyed by Dwight), while also being a turnover machine in the clutch - 1.2 (https://www.nba.com/stats/players/clutch-traditional?PORound=3&Season=2008-09&SeasonType=Playoffs&dir=A&sort=TOV) turnovers in the last 5 minutes of close games, which is 11.5 turnovers per 48 minutes of clutch time.. Of course the Cavs were out-assisted and role player performance was predictably inferior within the team's inferior brand of ball.

So you're praising 38/8/8 but that's vastly outweighed by the horrific defensive choke, OT choke, clutch turnover machine, and simpleton brand of ball with no capacity to grow into anything substantial - a regular season paper tiger that couldn't continue to elevate teammates in the playoffs.

Furthermore, Lebron's own skillset prevents him from carrying the scoring load against top teams.. He never carried bed-wetting teammates over top 5 SRS teams in 2 decades of playing, aka he never beat a top 5 SRS team with poor scoring and efficiency from a sidekick.. He also never carried the scoring load in the Finals (never defeated maximum defensive attention).

And we already know why ball-dominators can't carry the scoring load against top teams - they lack sufficient brand of ball at carry-job volume (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD and Kyrie.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters allow the ball to move - they maintain high team assist and brand at carry-job volumes, so they can beat top teams in carry-job fashion and win with secondary producers like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen.

Ultimately, Lebron lost as the favorite in 2009 to a 1-star historic underdog and then he melted down with 21 on 34% for the last 3 games of the 2010 ECSF to lose as the favorite again.. Then he confirmed both of these choke-jobs by choking with a super-team in 2011.






There's a reason one player won FMVP unanimously, and the other didn't receive a single vote.





That's due to dumb media bias that Lebron has enjoyed since "the decision".. That's when the media basically got in bed with him and they've been fighting against the real truth (obvious truth) from social media every day since.






You obviously didn't watch either series, but like LeBron, Curry was getting hammered for his performance during those Finals. And a lot of people, the voters included obviously, though Iggy had been the Warriors most impactful player. I could post threads from 2015 showing posters that thought Iggy had a more legitimate argument for FMVP than Curry did. This notion of Iggy being a completely undeserving FMVP and Curry being robbed is legitimately the biggest revisionist history I can think of when it comes to basketball. That was at most, a minority opinion at the time. And I know you literally don't consider defense to be a part of basketball, but LeBron actually played very good defense in those Finals, locking Parker up, while Curry did no such thing.





Lebron shot poorly for those entire playoffs - that's why people know that Iggy didn't deserve FMVP

Lebron had higher volume in those playoffs due to the increased scoring load - the carry-job volume required an increased jumpshooting volume that cratered his efficiency.. Lebron was bricking shots repeatedly where Iggy was barely contesting or not playing good defense.. He did this against Jimmy Butler and Jae Crowder in previous series too.






I've brought this up before, but claiming LeBron got "shut down" averaging 23 on 43% but having Kobe & Bird top 3 when their career Finals averages are nearly identical to those numbers, once again shows your complete double standard, and proves without a shadow of a doubt you hold LeBron to a higher standard than those two.





Kobe's Finals stats as 1st option are all-time level and all-time quality because they came against maximum defensive attention (carrying scoring load in Finals) with secondary producers at sidekick and no star 3rd scoring option (no 1b or super-team)

Kobe's superior brand of ball (expert jumpshooter) allowed superior teammate development, fits and brand of ball to win organically and with less.






And finally, saying 38 year old Allen is comparable to Klay is just lazy trolling/retarded, even for you.





It's just a demonstration of how talented those Heat were - Ray Allen was the 4th option and saved Lebron's career with the biggest shot in Finals history - aka must be nice lol..

Show me where Klay saved Curry's career.. Ray was Finals veteran with 20 ppg in the 08' Finals and GOAT shooter before Steph.. again, at FOURTH option

[3ba11]

Yeah it is arbitrary because someone else could come along and list of a bunch of things like defending the paint combined with dominant volume interior scoring as their most important barometers for being a GOAT, which then eliminates your 'expert jumpshooters' from the equation. You may disagree with that but that doesn't invalidate their opinion, and that's what continued to fly over your head.





No because those things still required more help to win

Only expert jumpshooters won with secondary producers like Wiggins, Lowry or Pippen..

Expert jumpshooters won without 1b studs to bird-feed them like centers need, or without super-team talent to support their shit brand of ball like ball-dominators need.

[3ba11]

doesn't get any credit for the '09 ECF based SOLELY on team results.





You're praising 38/8/8 but just because Lebron performs "Iverson-ball" or 'Luka-ball" (whatever you want to call it) better than they do doesn't mean he will win with it anymore than they did...

He peaked early in 2007 and then failed to build anything thereafter despite numerous additions of all-star, all-defender, veteran shooters, top team defenses and league favorite status - regardless of what Gilbert did, Lebron's skillset imposes spot-up roles, which is a simpleton brand that couldn't even beat an undermanned Dwight Howard team and lacks the teammate development or fits to win organically.. This inherent inability to win organically is why he formed super-teams the rest of his career.

So the 38/8/8 is vastly outweighed by factors that caused his Cavs to lose as a massive favorite for the first of three consecutive years, such as the legendary defensive choke (choosing to guard spot-up shooter Lee instead of providing the size/agility needed for hedo/lewis), the Game 4 OT choke, the clutch turnover machine (11.5 per 48 in the clutch), and also a simpleton brand of ball with no capacity to grow into anything substantial - a regular season paper tiger that couldn't continue to elevate teammates in the playoffs (can't win organically).

Furthermore, Lebron's own skillset prevents him from carrying the scoring load against top teams.. He never carried bed-wetting teammates over top 5 SRS teams in 2 decades of playing, aka he never beat a top 5 SRS team with poor scoring and efficiency from a sidekick.. He also never carried the scoring load in the Finals (never defeated maximum defensive attention).. Ball-dominators simply cannot successfully carry the scoring load against top teams because they lack sufficient brand of ball at carry-job volume (too ball-dominant) - since ball-dominators lack sufficient brand of ball to carry the scoring load, they need all-time scoring help like Kareem, Wade, AD and Kyrie.. Otoh, expert jumpshooters allow the ball to move - they maintain high team assist and brand at carry-job volumes, so they can beat top teams in carry-job fashion and win with secondary producers like Lowry, Wiggins or Pippen.

[StrongLurk]

https://i.makeagif.com/media/10-17-2015/NtLU8z.gif





You mean like when Diaw held Lebron to 16 on 39% through 3 games of the 13' Finals while the Heat supporting cast staved off an 0-3 defict and ultimately needed Ray to force Game 7?

By your own bolded criteria above, Curry was far superior in the 15' Finals than Lebron was in the 13' Finals - Lebron completely choked until Ray saved him.. Infact, Lebron only averaged 25 and Wade 20 so Lebron didn't carry the scoring load (didn't defeat maximum defensive attention), while Curry did.. Curry's ring is far superior.. He also was ushering in a new brand of ball to the world.

:roll:

This post is wrong on too many levels. Not worth responding to you anymore. All you have left is trolling.