sluggo_Cal;842127706 said:
Your comments about the NBA are amusingly incorrect. 10 or 15 years ago the NBA was about isolation and athleticism. Now it is a game of skill. This is why Allen Crabbe is going to go so high. Teams runs pick-and-roles in multiple ways, sometimes more than once in a possession. But that is not all. The Warriors run double picks for Curry or Thompson and various types of motions to get an advantage. They have to, since they have to go against very advanced team defenses. Isolation plays against such defenses are very ineffective. In fact, that is what the defense hopes will happen. Almost all players now are good shooters, and they actually track your shooting percentage. Allen Iverson types are out.
The players are not getting bigger, they are getting smaller and more skilled. Coaches have finally figured out, with the help of statisticians, that 3 is better than 2, and the goal of an offense should either be a layup or a corner 3, since the corner is where the line is shortest. The Houston Rockets have eliminated, more or less, everything other than 3s or shots within 5 feet. We have entered an era unlike anything that has come before.
In case you want to understand what is going, I suggest reading Zach Lowe's column at grantland.com.
Sluggo
All a game of skill now, eh? So all of a sudden all these players who grew up in a one-on-one game with individual skills, suddenly learned passing and teamwork and the game was transformed? Alan Crabbe, if he goes high in the draft, will go high not because he is highly skilled, but as so many posters here on the BI have pointed out, the pickings in the draft this year for Allen's position are very slim. Crabbe doesn't have all the skills. He is basically a perimeter catch and shoot guy, who has a year of experience shooting some floaters and other short shots in the lane, against college opposition. At his level of athleticism, he will have trouble executing those floaters against the agile 7-footers of the NBA waiting in the paint to stuff those shots. Crabbe is not a passer, and seldom looks for an open teammate, nor is he a good defender. He rebounds OK. As many have said on this board, he needs to learn how to create his own jump shot. Jimmer Fredette is an example of a guy who could shoot in college. Jimmer had, IMO, more offensive skills than Crabbe in college, and Jimmer is getting 14 minutes a game with the second-tier Kings, and struggling to learn to play in the NBA. Crabbe is a good learner, so he has that going for him. I hope you are right about Crabbe being a high draft pick, but if I had a dollar for every Cal athlete who went as high in a pro draft as he was projected, I could buy a nice meal in a French restaurant.
Pick and roll is your example of a new offensive skill in the NBA? It is a play for two men to execute. It requires the minimum of teamwork. I think we learned that play in the 9th grade. Still that might be a step up for the NBA, if they ran more of them, and more screens. You say "They actually track your shooting percentage". Since when did they not track shooting percentage? I'm not sure what you mean here.
Players getting smaller? On what planet? Could we compare the Warriors of today with say, the NBA Champion Warriors of 1974-75? The Warrior guards of today, Curry, Jack, Thompson, and Rush average 6'-5". The guards of '74-75 average height was 6'-2". The six Warrior forwards today average 6'-8-1/2", and the Warriors in '74-75 averaged 6'-6-1/2" at forward. The four Warrior centers today average 6'-11". In '74-75, the two centers averaged 6'-10".
I would argue that players today are less skilled when they arrive in the NBA. Geoff Petrie said that. Many don't know how to make a layup taking off on one foot. Players 30-50 years ago had far better passing skills, IMO. If there is a Cousy, Jones, Tiny, Magic, or a Pistol Pete around today, let me know I'll buy a ticket. (I do like Curry, by the way).
Shot selection is not just a function of percentage. It is a function of getting the best open look with the highest percentage of making the basket. The layup is a high percentage shot, but only if you are all alone and unguarded. The three was the worst thing to ever happen to basketball, IMO. It has forced the hook and the mid-range jumper out of the game. Why should a wide open long shot be worth more points than a shot in the lane with taller guys hanging all over you? Earl the Pearl was one of the greatest shotmakers in the lane I ever saw. He wouldn't be able to work his magic today, and that would have been a loss for basketball fans.
The corner three? Most threes are shot from either side of the top of the key beyond the arc, not from the corner. Even though the corner three is the shortest three, that also means the defender can close out on you a split second quicker. And you can get trapped in the corner. This season, the Knicks shot more threes than anybody. They shot 2400 threes, and less than 600 were from the corners. Steph Curry shot 594 threes, but only attempted 89 from the corners. [URL="
http://stats.nba.com/teamShotchart.html#TeamID=1610612752&Season=2012-13&SeasonType=Regular Season&display-mode=performance&zone-mode=zone"]
http://stats.nba.com/teamShotchart.html#TeamID=1610612752&Season=2012-13&SeasonType=Regular Season&display-mode=performance&zone-mode=zone[/URL]
Every era is different, I'll give you that, but most of what you see today has been tried before. The bodies playing the game are bigger and more athletic, that is what is new compared to 50 years ago.
If you'd like another perspective, here is a small website of an NBA All-Star from the '60s, Warrior Tom Meschery. Scroll down to his article written at the beginning of the NBA season, where he predicts how things will go, such as the Spurs and Heat will be in the Final, the Warriors will go deeper than round one, and how to guard Lebron James.
http://www.mescherysmusings.blogspot.com/
