Western Conference Finals: #1 Warriors vs. #3 Thunder

[KingsFanSince85]

The Warriors style of play is a temporary facade, styles of play come and go. This is not the exception here. The formula to beat them is there, the question remains can OKC get one more in Oracle?

I was discussing this with my brother-in-law last night. IMO, the team that actually started the trend towards what is now considered "the Warriors style of play" was our 1998-2004 era Kings. I'm speaking with regard to 5 skill players that cut, move and pass the ball extremely well. Even the defensive philosophy is similar. The only difference is the small ball and the volume of threes. The Kings obviously had legit bigs that could do the things the Warriors get out of their smaller lineups. The Kings had much better post play and didn't have to rely on the volume 3 point shooting.

The Kings were the team that ushered the NBA out of the 1990's Hardcastle and McCormick style of thug ball. The only difference between now and the Kings "greatest show on court" era is the dearth of dominant or even just good post players. There just aren't many around today because of the 1 and done rule -- stunting the development of fundamentals -- and this live and die by the 3 point shot mentality that has filtered all the way down to the HS and AAU levels.

The game of basketball has really come down to who can make the most bad shots. For example, the Thunder and Warriors took a ton of quick shots in the 4th quarter tonight. Most of them weren't good shots. However, the Warriors simply made a lot more of them so they won. But in the 3 games the Warriors lost in this series thus far, those bad shots didn't fall and they got blown out twice.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

End of smallball, sure. Also the end of a ****ing gimmick team. The three point shot is artificial. It was added into the pro game by a bunch of ABA clowns desperately looking for extra attention in between dog and pony shows and used car giveaways.

Otherwise there's absolutely no justification for why a 23 foot shot is worth a full 50% more than a 22 foot shot.

I couldn't agree more. And now Larry Bird is even talking about a "4 pt" shot. Lord help us.

I said this earlier in the season. Basketball has historically been about working as a team to get the highest percentage shot possible as close to the hoop as you can get it. Obviously layups and dunks are the highest % shots you can get followed by short jumpers and post ups around the basket. Most the time, there's an art to it and the byproduct is a lot of movement and passing.

Now the game is evolving into a glorified pregame shoot around. Quick shots, bad shots, any shot is ok as long as it's behind the line. I just fail to understand the idea of rewarding someone for taking a shot that is much easier to get. Anybody can get an open shot 4-5 feet (or more) behind the line. There are only 5 defenders on the court and you can't stretch out and cover that much real estate.

I mean -- why stop at 23.9 feet? Why not award 4 pts for a half court shot and 5 for a 3 quarter court shot? That way we can watch a half court shootout as players practice the shot ad naseam. You'd only have to make 25% of them to make it a worthwhile shot attempt.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I can't get worked up over it too much because we won't see shooters like Klay or Steph in our lifetime anyway. For as good of a shooter Steph is, I think Klay is better and that's telling. We, nor the entire league, should be looking to try to find themselves a Klay or Steph because these are once in a generation type of shooters, plain and simple.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. We're just witnessing the beginning of an era where players at all levels are being given the freedom to practice and take these kinds of shots. I have no doubt that there's an 8 year-old kid somewhere that will perfect it to the point where he's better than either of these 2 guys. Honestly, imagine if Larry Bird played in this era and worked on these types of shots from a young age. He's the best shooter I've ever seen and would be tougher to stop at 6'9". Heck, a more recent example is Dirk Nowitzki. At 7ft, you could never stop him getting a shot off. And he is/was a fantastic shooter too, but just about 10 years too early to the party.

There will be some 6'9" + phenom that comes along and tops everything we're seeing now. Bookmark it.

 

[jalfa]

what the hell were the Thunder doing at the end of the game? from roughly the 3:00 minute mark, I didn't see them run a single play, except for an out-of-bounds where Durant and Ibaka screened for each other. only isos for either Durant or Westbrook who were mostly just attacking Iggy, who played some admittedly phenomenal defense. that was tough, they really need to get it together for Game 7, which can't be easy after this loss.

 

[KingMilz]

I wouldn't be so certain about that. We're just witnessing the beginning of an era where players at all levels are being given the freedom to practice and take these kinds of shots. I have no doubt that there's an 8 year-old kid somewhere that will perfect it to the point where he's better than either of these 2 guys. Honestly, imagine if Larry Bird played in this era and worked on these types of shots from a young age. He's the best shooter I've ever seen and would be tougher to stop at 6'9". Heck, a more recent example is Dirk Nowitzki. At 7ft, you could never stop him getting a shot off. And he is/was a fantastic shooter too, but just about 10 years too early to the party.

There will be some 6'9" + phenom that comes along and tops everything we're seeing now. Bookmark it.

I'm not sure the party starts without Dirk changing the game of basketball tbh, the stretch 4 that Dirk was allowed for the space/pace type system to be brought in and thrive when not many others were doing it. I don't think we see the type of basketball being played now if it weren't for a player like Dirk along with some of the Euro coaches.

 

[John Galt]

Just stayed up way later than I should have last night and watched the ESPN 30 for 30 on the Bad Boy Detroit Pistons. Man that was a great show about a really interesting period in the NBA. Such a contrast to what we are seeing with the Warriors.

I think the NBA game today is kinda starting to suck - when some guy can just go 11-18 from downtown and render everything else meaningless.

Coaches just have to figure out how to counter it I guess... hope they do soon.

I hate the Warriors and all they represent.

 

[chief bromden]

Just stayed up way later than I should have last night and watched the ESPN 30 for 30 on the Bad Boy Detroit Pistons. Man that was a great show about a really interesting period in the NBA. Such a contrast to what we are seeing with the Warriors.

I think the NBA game today is kinda starting to suck - when some guy can just go 11-18 from downtown and render everything else meaningless.

Coaches just have to figure out how to counter it I guess... hope they do soon.

I hate the Warriors and all they represent.

That Bad Boy one is great, really enjoyed it. I watched most of the one about the 90's Magic with Penny and Shaq recently, enjoyed that one too.

I'm not sure how I feel about the 3's or layup approach to the game, seems similar to the Kaepernick/RG3 craze in football that ended up having a short life. I thought the Warriors were out of this series, and it would start to be the end of this incredible run they've had. Game 7 at home, however, looks like it will just be another notch in the belt for that Warriors team and their style. Hats off to Klay for an incredible performance last night.

 

[pshn80]

The game has changed although the team withe most points still wins. The Warriors have shown grit to bring it to a 7th game. They might do it yet. Hope he "Bridge" can do it!

 

[peacelate]

I couldn't agree more. And now Larry Bird is even talking about a "4 pt" shot. Lord help us.

I said this earlier in the season. Basketball has historically been about working as a team to get the highest percentage shot possible as close to the hoop as you can get it. Obviously layups and dunks are the highest % shots you can get followed by short jumpers and post ups around the basket. Most the time, there's an art to it and the byproduct is a lot of movement and passing.

Now the game is evolving into a glorified pregame shoot around. Quick shots, bad shots, any shot is ok as long as it's behind the line. I just fail to understand the idea of rewarding someone for taking a shot that is much easier to get. Anybody can get an open shot 4-5 feet (or more) behind the line. There are only 5 defenders on the court and you can't stretch out and cover that much real estate.

I mean -- why stop at 23.9 feet? Why not award 4 pts for a half court shot and 5 for a 3 quarter court shot? That way we can watch a half court shootout as players practice the shot ad naseam. You'd only have to make 25% of them to make it a worthwhile shot attempt.

3 pt shots are much easier to get off but harder to make and be more consistent with so it makes sense to award more points for it. Anybody can get open 4-5 behind the line, but few can make it with as much consistency as Klay and Steph. If you watch the Warriors, their offense isn't simply based on giving the ball to Steph and Klay and everyone move out of the way. There might not be 2 teams in the league with better ball movement. Sure, sometimes they give the ball to Steph and Klay and say, "Here go get me some points," but how is that any different than a team giving the ball to Westbrook, Cousins and Kobe and telling them to do the same thing?

 

[KingsFanSince85]

I'm not sure the party starts without Dirk changing the game of basketball tbh, the stretch 4 that Dirk was allowed for the space/pace type system to be brought in and thrive when not many others were doing it. I don't think we see the type of basketball being played now if it weren't for a player like Dirk along with some of the Euro coaches.

With regard to the "stretch" 4, I don't disagree with you. Dirk definitely had his hand in changing the game. I was referring to the types of shots we're seeing now. Quick shots, often 2-5 feet behind the line, etc, etc. While the Mavs were a run and gun team a dozen years ago, even they didn't have the green light to do the things we're seeing today from the likes of the Warriors, Rockets, Blazers, etc. I'm suggesting that had Dirk (or Bird)and their offenses been working on the shots that Steph, Klay, Lillard, Harden and Co. are all taking now, he probably would have made a lot more 3's and been equally good at it if not better than these guys. At 7ft tall, his shot is even harder to defend 28-feet from the basket.

 

[New Era]

Just stayed up way later than I should have last night and watched the ESPN 30 for 30 on the Bad Boy Detroit Pistons. Man that was a great show about a really interesting period in the NBA. Such a contrast to what we are seeing with the Warriors.

I think the NBA game today is kinda starting to suck - when some guy can just go 11-18 from downtown and render everything else meaningless.

Coaches just have to figure out how to counter it I guess... hope they do soon.

I hate the Warriors and all they represent.

You guys are a bunch of whiners. The guy set an all-time NBA record for 3's made in a playoff game. Give him some credit. It's not like that happens everyday. Sounds like sour grapes to me...

 

[KingsFanSince85]

3 pt shots are much easier to get off but harder to make and be more consistent with so it makes sense to award more points for it.

By that logic they should award more points for a half court shot and even further out because those shots are harder to make consistently too. But why reward someone for throwing a shot up well before a defense can realistically setup to defend? It makes no sense. Just because they are lower percentage shots doesn't mean they should be worth more. This isn't a game of horse. It's basketball. A game that has always been about working together to create the highest percentage shot you can get.

Imagine if the football suddenly started awarding points for long distance touchdowns. Say 9 pts for touchdowns over 40 or 50 yards. The game would suddenly turn into a long bomb contest and teams would be less likely to try to actually drive the field for a measley 6 points. I don't think anybody wants to see that.

The game of basketball is quickly turning into a game of horse. Who can make the most high difficulty bad shots. It's only going to get worse if or when they add this 4pt shot that Larry Bird and others are suggesting.

If people really want to see this kind of event, isn't that what pregame shootaround and the All-Star Saturday night 3-pt shootout is for? They should just add a HORSE event and call it a day. But get this bad shot crap out of the game.

More than HALF of the Warriors 87 shots last night came from behind the 3pt line (44). While they shot a blistering 47.7%, which is great, that's far from the norm. The top 2 three point shooting teams of all time were at 42 and 41 % respectively. Most teams are in the mid-to-high 30's. Do we really want a game where the norm is jacking up more than half the shots at a range where they are typically making under 40% of them? I surely don't. I'd rather see a great shooting night where the teams shoot 50 - 60% taking the highest % shots they can get.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

You guys are a bunch of whiners. The guy set an all-time NBA record for 3's made in a playoff game. Give him some credit. It's not like that happens everyday. Sounds like sour grapes to me...

LOL. And here you are whining about the whiners and sounding like sour grapes as well. Fitting.

Great for Klay. He had a great shooting night, as did the Warriors as a team from behind the line. But they also took more than half their shots from that range. While not easy, it's certainly easier to break records when you are taking more of those shots than anybody in history. And that's the point you're missing. Us whiners don't particularly care for a system that motivates teams to take these kinds of shots. It's not the Warriors fault. It's the system. And now there are rumblings of making it worse with a 4pt shot. Even if the Kings were the beneficiary of all this, I still wouldn't like it for reasons already stated numerous times. This isn't basketball. It's a long distance, quick shot shootout.

BTW, is is really any shock that Warriors are the best at this style of play? They have the 2 guys dominating the 3pt contest every single year. It's only logical that they'd win games that are now glorified 3pt contests.

 

[KingsFanGER]

So OKC's style of play is less gimmicky than the Warrior's style of play (because Ibaka is 6'9 and not 6'6 like Green, while still playing his role as a floor stretcher and not like an old fashioned big guy)?
It's not as if OKC is dominating the Warriors with big guys or something. Sure Ibaka and Adams play their role, but OKC is giving the Warriors trouble because of their length and athleticism at the guard and wing positions.
Westbrook, Durant and Roberson do a great job on D and on the boards. Like Portland they really have the edge at those long rebounds due to their length and quickness. And because both teams are mainly early offense and jumpshooting teams there are a lot of long rebounds.
The Warriors really look out of sync in this series. Not enough movement, not the usual amount of screens, lots of forced shots. We have to give the Thunder's D credit for disrupting an offensive juggernaut and paying attention to the regular season games in which the Warriors struggled (Bucks, Celtics).

 

[peacelate]

By that logic they should award more points for a half court shot and even further out because those shots are harder to make consistently too. But why reward someone for throwing a shot up well before a defense can realistically setup to defend? It makes no sense. Just because they are lower percentage shots doesn't mean they should be worth more. This isn't a game of horse. It's basketball. A game that has always been about working together to create the highest percentage shot you can get.

Imagine if the football suddenly started awarding points for long distance touchdowns. Say 9 pts for touchdowns over 40 or 50 yards. The game would suddenly turn into a long bomb contest and teams would be less likely to try to actually drive the field for a measley 6 points. I don't think anybody wants to see that.

The game of basketball is quickly turning into a game of horse. Who can make the most high difficulty bad shots. It's only going to get worse if or when they add this 4pt shot that Larry Bird and others are suggesting.

If people really want to see this kind of event, isn't that what pregame shootaround and the All-Star Saturday night 3-pt shootout is for? They should just add a HORSE event and call it a day. But get this bad shot crap out of the game.

More than HALF of the Warriors 87 shots last night came from behind the 3pt line (44). While they shot a blistering 47.7%, which is great, that's far from the norm. The top 2 three point shooting teams of all time were at 42 and 41 % respectively. Most teams are in the mid-to-high 30's. Do we really want a game where the norm is jacking up more than half the shots at a range where they are typically making under 40% of them? I surely don't. I'd rather see a great shooting night where the teams shoot 50 - 60% taking the highest % shots they can get.

By that same token, should a layup be worth less because not everyone was back on defense? Should teams let the defense have a chance to set-up first before they attempt a shot? The highest percentage shot isn't always a layup. Offense is simply creating the most points per possession. If you have a choice between taking an open 3 pt shot vs. driving into the lane shooting against 3 defenders, which is the higher percentage shot?

There's always going to be change in sports. Someone comes up with a new idea to revolutionize the game. 30 years ago the idea of a point guard creating a shot for himself using up the entire shot clock would have been blasphemy, but today it's an accepted practice even though it is one of the most inefficient ways to score points.

I don't know about you, but I don't see players today dribbling across the half-court line and jacking up a 3 pt shot before they make a pass. I see that teams work to get high volume 3 pt shots through passing the ball. An open shot is generally a good shot. You don't have to be close to the rim for it to be a good shot.

Isn't football already moving towards higher octane offenses with rules prohibiting old-school tough defense? The NFL is seeing more offense by moving from run-heavy offense to pass-heavy, yet the game is more popular than ever.

 

[Gilles]

Thunder were really unlucky to have a very bad day from 3 on the same day, Warriors managed a really good one. Warriors managed to launch 44 3s after averaging just 29 in 5 previous games, including 28 and 24 in their two previous wins. This also concealed the fact, that Warriors got nice job from stripes in this game, not previous one, when GS got 34 FTs with 61 non-threes, but 12 FTs were intentional for 36% ratio. Last night Warriors shot just 43 non-threes and 22 FTs, leaving last 2 by Klay out - that's 51%.
Also worth noting, that before Klay's FTs, last two possesions by Warriors resulted in 5 points after 2 TOs by Thunder - OKC's transition defense failed them at worst possible moment.
All in all not everything is lost for Thunder, but they will have to make their shots in Oakland as whistles won't be forthcoming. Maybe pressure 3s a bit.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I never hated the 3 point shot but I never understood why they had to move it back after the experiment in the 90s that moved it out.

It's debatable whether or not moving it out would hurt or help the Warriors or teams in that mold. But certainly worth revisiting. Far more worth revisiting than a 4 point shot which is just plain stupid.

 

[KingsFanSince85]

The highest percentage shot isn't always a layup. Offense is simply creating the most points per possession. If you have a choice between taking an open 3 pt shot vs. driving into the lane shooting against 3 defenders, which is the higher percentage shot?

I agree. Sometimes an open 3 is a better shot. But not a majority of the time. And not even half the time. Teams often aren't even working for a better shot -- and therein lies the point. And during the Finals last year, Andrew Bogut passed up an uncontested layup to kick it out for an open three. He essentially passed up a 99% shot for a 40% shot. That's the kind of nonsense you don't want to see.

Isn't football already moving towards higher octane offenses with rules prohibiting old-school tough defense? The NFL is seeing more offense by moving from run-heavy offense to pass-heavy, yet the game is more popular than ever.

But they aren't throwing bombs on half their pass attempts. That was the point. While they are passing more than running, they are still driving it the length of the field often using the highest % pass plays they can. In that respect, the game hasn't changed at all. If both teams started chucking it deep on half the plays resulting in a feast or famine TD or INT/incompletion, the game would lose much of it's popularity.

Tangentially, it's hard to compare the sports popularity to 25+ years ago because the game's weren't televised as they are now. The increased popularity for all sports is largely due to the 24 hr coverage, not the way the games/rules have changed.

 

[kingsboi]

I was discussing this with my brother-in-law last night. IMO, the team that actually started the trend towards what is now considered "the Warriors style of play" was our 1998-2004 era Kings. I'm speaking with regard to 5 skill players that cut, move and pass the ball extremely well. Even the defensive philosophy is similar. The only difference is the small ball and the volume of threes. The Kings obviously had legit bigs that could do the things the Warriors get out of their smaller lineups. The Kings had much better post play and didn't have to rely on the volume 3 point shooting.

The Kings were the team that ushered the NBA out of the 1990's Hardcastle and McCormick style of thug ball. The only difference between now and the Kings "greatest show on court" era is the dearth of dominant or even just good post players. There just aren't many around today because of the 1 and done rule -- stunting the development of fundamentals -- and this live and die by the 3 point shot mentality that has filtered all the way down to the HS and AAU levels.

The game of basketball has really come down to who can make the most bad shots. For example, the Thunder and Warriors took a ton of quick shots in the 4th quarter tonight. Most of them weren't good shots. However, the Warriors simply made a lot more of them so they won. But in the 3 games the Warriors lost in this series thus far, those bad shots didn't fall and they got blown out twice.

The Warriors take and make some of the worst shots you can take. They get away with it because they have the shooters to do so. Why hesitate to shoot when you have two of the best shooters in the game on the same squad?

 

[kingsboi]

I wouldn't be so certain about that. We're just witnessing the beginning of an era where players at all levels are being given the freedom to practice and take these kinds of shots. I have no doubt that there's an 8 year-old kid somewhere that will perfect it to the point where he's better than either of these 2 guys. Honestly, imagine if Larry Bird played in this era and worked on these types of shots from a young age. He's the best shooter I've ever seen and would be tougher to stop at 6'9". Heck, a more recent example is Dirk Nowitzki. At 7ft, you could never stop him getting a shot off. And he is/was a fantastic shooter too, but just about 10 years too early to the party.

There will be some 6'9" + phenom that comes along and tops everything we're seeing now. Bookmark it.

Sure, we can speculate all we want that there will be another phenom with Curry like shooting and LeBron like athleticism. Until that day is among us, I'll go ahead and rest assured that we won't be seeing two of the best shooters on the same team, rather than in your examples where it was strictly Larry or Dirk by themselves so the defense can focus in on one player rather than two.

 

[pshn80]

By that logic they should award more points for a half court shot and even further out because those shots are harder to make consistently too. But why reward someone for throwing a shot up well before a defense can realistically setup to defend? It makes no sense. Just because they are lower percentage shots doesn't mean they should be worth more. This isn't a game of horse. It's basketball. A game that has always been about working together to create the highest percentage shot you can get.

Imagine if the football suddenly started awarding points for long distance touchdowns. Say 9 pts for touchdowns over 40 or 50 yards. The game would suddenly turn into a long bomb contest and teams would be less likely to try to actually drive the field for a measley 6 points. I don't think anybody wants to see that.

The game of basketball is quickly turning into a game of horse. Who can make the most high difficulty bad shots. It's only going to get worse if or when they add this 4pt shot that Larry Bird and others are suggesting.

If people really want to see this kind of event, isn't that what pregame shootaround and the All-Star Saturday night 3-pt shootout is for? They should just add a HORSE event and call it a day. But get this bad shot crap out of the game.

More than HALF of the Warriors 87 shots last night came from behind the 3pt line (44). While they shot a blistering 47.7%, which is great, that's far from the norm. The top 2 three point shooting teams of all time were at 42 and 41 % respectively. Most teams are in the mid-to-high 30's. Do we really want a game where the norm is jacking up more than half the shots at a range where they are typically making under 40% of them? I surely don't. I'd rather see a great shooting night where the teams shoot 50 - 60% taking the highest % shots they can get.

I like the game the way it is. Unlike some here I don't blame the Warriors for winning. Our game has rules, the team scoring the most points wins, and they don't allow people cheating. Let's hope the Kings brain trust puts together a winning plan for the coming season- find a way to beat the Warriors.

 

[kingsboi]

I like the game the way it is. Unlike some here I don't blame the Warriors for winning. Our game has rules, the team scoring the most points wins, and they don't allow people cheating. Let's hope the Kings brain trust puts together a winning plan for the coming season- find a way to beat the Warriors.

I just don't want the Kings to become sheep and try to emulate the Warriors. We've beaten this drum a numerous amount of times and at some point, it's time to stop making noise and make some music with the notes you have in front of you.

 

[pshn80]

I just don't want the Kings to become sheep and try to emulate the Warriors. We've beaten this drum a numerous amount of times and at some point, it's time to stop making noise and make some music with the notes you have in front of you.

I want to emulate the Warriors' winning record. Don't worry, we can't emulate their style because we have Rondo and McLemore not Curry and Thompson. We just need to learn to win with whatever players we have. Somehow I trust our management and caching staff to figure the best way to do that. If it happens that we do this just like the Warriors that's fine with me.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Pretty funny back in the 90s on usenet all anyone talked about was how nobody could shoot and the game was ruined by scores in the 80s and 90s.

 

[Big Cuz 15]

andre roberson not checking either of the splash bros for an extended period of time hurt

 

[peacelate]

I agree. Sometimes an open 3 is a better shot. But not a majority of the time. And not even half the time. Teams often aren't even working for a better shot -- and therein lies the point. And during the Finals last year, Andrew Bogut passed up an uncontested layup to kick it out for an open three. He essentially passed up a 99% shot for a 40% shot. That's the kind of nonsense you don't want to see.



But they aren't throwing bombs on half their pass attempts. That was the point. While they are passing more than running, they are still driving it the length of the field often using the highest % pass plays they can. In that respect, the game hasn't changed at all. If both teams started chucking it deep on half the plays resulting in a feast or famine TD or INT/incompletion, the game would lose much of it's popularity.

Tangentially, it's hard to compare the sports popularity to 25+ years ago because the game's weren't televised as they are now. The increased popularity for all sports is largely due to the 24 hr coverage, not the way the games/rules have changed.

The only team that I see on a regular basis that does what you say are the Houston Rockets. For all 3 pt shots the Warriors take, they were still 9th in the league in points in the paint. If anything, teams are still focusing on getting shots at the bucket, but are taking more threes at the expense of long twos.

The Warriors do work for the shots. This season, they were 22 out of 30th in frequency of isolation plays run. They get their shots through ball and player movement rather than Curry and Klay crossing the half court line and throwing up a junkball.

I'll say it again. The Warriors are top 3 in ball movement.

 

[New Era]

LOL. And here you are whining about the whiners and sounding like sour grapes as well. Fitting.

Great for Klay. He had a great shooting night, as did the Warriors as a team from behind the line. But they also took more than half their shots from that range. While not easy, it's certainly easier to break records when you are taking more of those shots than anybody in history. And that's the point you're missing. Us whiners don't particularly care for a system that motivates teams to take these kinds of shots. It's not the Warriors fault. It's the system. And now there are rumblings of making it worse with a 4pt shot. Even if the Kings were the beneficiary of all this, I still wouldn't like it for reasons already stated numerous times. This isn't basketball. It's a long distance, quick shot shootout.

BTW, is is really any shock that Warriors are the best at this style of play? They have the 2 guys dominating the 3pt contest every single year. It's only logical that they'd win games that are now glorified 3pt contests.

You make no sense. I'm not even a Warriors fan but I don't have this jealousy thing with them that a lot of other posters have. Just because you shoot a lot of 3's doesn't mean you are going to win NBA championships. What they have is pretty special. Did you forget that they just won more games in the regular season that any other team in NBA history? You can say what you want about the game changing but such is life. If you don't adapt, you die.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You appear to be mistakenly conflating jealousy and contempt.

 

[pshn80]

You appear to be mistakenly conflating jealousy and contempt.

Both of which have no place here in my humble opinion. People don't like the three? What to do?

 

[VF21]

This isn't basketball. It's a long distance, quick shot shootout.

Amen.