[NBA] East Finals
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
- Status
I can't speak for @SacTownKid but my response would be, "Not until coaches and general managers become more creative/learn to use their imagination." They've had access to advanced analytics for two whole decades now, supposedly the most powerful and useful tool in the history of sports, and the only thing they've figured out in all that time is that three is more than two. I feel like Ultron, in the second Avengers movie: the most versatile metal on the planet, and they used it to make a frisbee.
We get fed this line about positionless basketball and versatility. In reality, the game has turned into 3pt specialist and penetrating guards. One trick ponies. Big men who have forgone using their biggest asset, size, in favor of passing. It looks nice and all in the regular season.
But when that 3pt shot aint falling, nobody can score in that mid range. The small ball team can't get those easy buckets at the rim and aren't carrying a good post player on the roster.......blowout.
Teams either hit 3s or fold. Thought smart people would have seen the warning sign when Houston blew that game 7 vs the Warriors.
But when that 3pt shot aint falling, nobody can score in that mid range. The small ball team can't get those easy buckets at the rim and aren't carrying a good post player on the roster.......blowout.
Teams either hit 3s or fold. Thought smart people would have seen the warning sign when Houston blew that game 7 vs the Warriors.
Last edited:
What Slim said but also a player has to come along. Someone like a Shaq/MJ type that's so physically dominant and mean while also so acceptable in an entertainment sense that the league builds itself and it's rules around that type rather than pick and roll guards. Since the 80's the league has built itself around someone they can rake in the $$$ off of. In the 80's it was huge PG, flashy, full court play behind Bird/Magic. 90's it was MJ's flat out physical domination along with players like Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing, and Shaq. late 90's to mid 2000's it was Shaq. This current era started with Steve Nash and has continued on through Curry/Luka/Harden etc. I was hoping maybe Zion would usher a change but so far he's certainly been more Larry Johnson than Barkley.
And it's gone full blown insane with these playoffs. Your 3 MVP candidate bigs just got blasted by Nellie ball. Now, there were obvious injuries but the point remains. It's going to be interesting to see what happens moving forward. If Bol Bol can find a team and health, Chet is a home run, and Victor Wembanyama is for real, the next big thing might be what Shawn Bradley could have been when he was drafted. 7 and a half foot tall point C's blocking everything in sight that weigh about 210 soaking wet, haha.
Eh. I don't think such a player would be enough to shift the math. What has to happen is the fans need to get bored watching this style of basketball. Once the league feels pressure to inject new life into the game because they're making less money as the fans tune out, then they might consider what I think are pretty sensible rule changes like reinstating the hand check and eliminating the short corner 3. Problem is, the fans don't seem bored of this style of play yet. 
Eh. I don't think such a player would be enough to shift the math. What has to happen is the fans need to get bored watching this style of basketball... Problem is, the fans don't seem bored of this style of play yet.
Eh. I don't think such a player would be enough to shift the math. What has to happen is the fans need to get bored watching this style of basketball. Once the league feels pressure to inject new life into the game because they're making less money as the fans tune out, then they might consider what I think are pretty sensible rule changes like reinstating the hand check and eliminating the short corner 3. Problem is, the fans don't seem bored of this style of play yet.
do you think it's more than creativity? Perhaps the next generational talent that comes out of the draft in a time we don't yet know is transcending the game like Bron did in his time, Curry in his time and all these GM's were trying to find their own version of that when that's not something you can replicate and instead just end up losing to those talents anyway if they were to meet in the Postseason. Every now and then you have a team come out of the blue and win a title such as Toronto and Milwaukee so it can be done without following a specific blueprint.
That's great and all, but paradigms in sports aren't shifted by one-offs, it's going to take a dynasty. And even a transcendent, generational talent isn't creating a dynasty by themselves. GMs weren't going all-in trying to emulating the Warriors after the first championship. It's going to take a team winning multiple championships (or at least multiple trips to the Finals), playing a style that nobody else is playing, to cause that shift to happen. And that's going to require a generational talent and a creative coach, with a front office with the imagination to get that coach the right complementary players.
Yeah, and I already stipulated that. It's part of it; you can split hairs over whether it's the most important part with someone who's more interested in that conversation than I am.
That's because they're not, which is the point: one-off champions don't shift the paradigms in sports. The current paradigm in the NBA is that you win championships by shooting a high enough volume of three-pointers. The question that was presented was "Do you think that it'll ever go back to the [game of chess] basketball used to be?" My position is, "No, it won't, not unless a new team steps up and forms a dynasty by playing basketball completely different from how it's being played right now. And that's not going to happen until we see some imagination from coaching, backed by management that actually demonstrates some creativity in using analytics to build a dynasty around a unique, generational talent.
I feel like the conversation that you're having is, "Can a team win a championship in defiance of the current paradigm?", which is not the conversation that I was trying to participate in. The conversation that I was trying to participate in, and the one that I thought that the rest of us were having is, "What has to happen in the NBA in order to create a 'new normal,' and/or bring that 'old thing' back?"
That's because they're not, which is the point: one-off champions don't shift the paradigms in sports. The current paradigm in the NBA is that you win championships by shooting a high enough volume of three-pointers. The question that was presented was "Do you think that it'll ever go back to the [game of chess] basketball used to be?" My position is, "No, it won't, not unless a new team steps up and forms a dynasty by playing basketball completely different from how it's being played right now. And that's not going to happen until we see some imagination from coaching, backed by management that actually demonstrates some creativity in using analytics to build a dynasty around a unique, generational talent.
I feel like the conversation that you're having is, "Can a team win a championship in defiance of the current paradigm?", which is not the conversation that I was trying to participate in. The conversation that I was trying to participate in, and the one that I thought that the rest of us were having is, "What has to happen in the NBA in order to create a 'new normal,' and/or bring that 'old thing' back?"
If there's only 10 years in a decade and 3 rings is the minimum entry point to a dynasty, I think you just made a case that they are the norm.
That said, league does seem wider open than it has been at any time since the two years Jordan was playing baseball (kindly ignore the Rockets winning both years).
I think Slim is right - for the game to change significantly it will take a transcendent star and a creative coach who finds a way to exploit the current rules and the star to create a unique advantage.
That said, league does seem wider open than it has been at any time since the two years Jordan was playing baseball (kindly ignore the Rockets winning both years).
I think Slim is right - for the game to change significantly it will take a transcendent star and a creative coach who finds a way to exploit the current rules and the star to create a unique advantage.
- Status