Threes in theory are better but...

Come on man. This ignores everything else. Turnovers and offensive rebounds gave the Warriors FOURTEEN MORE total shot attempts than us. And they only outscored us by 6.

 

It's not really about trying to replace one shot with another. It's a willingness to demonstrate that all types of shots are in your arsenal so that you can adjust to whatever shots the opponent chooses not to guard.

A good example was last series when the Jazz used that weird side/back defense to take away both the lob and the 3 from Harden. Mid-range jumpshot 2s might have been an effective counter to that instead of the awkward floater that wasn't working well. If he hits a few, maybe they adjust their defense and it opens up the 3 or the lob again.

 

This is ridiculous. Gordon can hit the same shots as Steph Curry too. Does that make the two equal? No. No one is talking about Eric Gordon as the best shooter ever. Why is that? Because Curry makes the shots at a severely higher rate.

You don’t have to be an NBA vet or a stat guru to understand this principle. Certain players make certain shots at different rates.

Nene and Faried are “capable” of knocking down wide open 3s. That doesn’t mean we want either of them doing it. Because the frequency that they will make the shot makes it not worth it.

 

Changes the flow of the game and the defense has to respond to that. It's not always about points, at least not until the end.

 

We're missing the effective of the Capela lob because of Durant's ability guard the Center position.

That one play opens up so much open space that players like House and Green can be threats as opposed to the liabilities they are right now

 

Firstly, it was the same 2016 season that they were beaten by the Cavs which you referenced

Secondly, and more importantly, that MDA is coaching houston has little to no bearing ( beyond your fabricated relevance) on which teams have had the best shot at beating this championship GSW.

The relevant time period is from their first championship season, and in that sense, OKC came closer than rockets, having them on the brink of elimination for 3 games

 

Take all the threes you want if you agree to also box out on the defensive end... people get too tied up in one story line at a time.

 

Not with Harden dribbling the air out if the ball.

Curry and Klay are so effective cos the players and ball move, and each gets plays called for them.

Also you discount what Green and Iggy does for them defensively.

 

You think harden can't get those 2 open? They will have a field day just standing and waiting for the ball

 

but we are streaky at them, gud at times but not great when we really needed them down the stretch.

 

Draymond Green and Iguadola are great shooters? They each had 15 points.

 

The Warriors strategy is wholly deficient to the Rockets’ strategy. The only reason why they win with all those midrange shots is because they have an elite lineup. It’s really annoying that they win with that strategy.

 

I said 3 great shooters

1: Steph
2: Klay
3: KD

Are you capable of counting to 3?

 

Yeah I’m pretty certain I have heard on some podcasts before that their analytic shot quality chart is usually not close to the best in the league, but they still are a historic offense because their shooters are just so good at making low quality shots.

 

There is so much truth in that.

 

In both games the Clippers beat them it was because they drove into the paint and scored. Durant nor Green could stop them. I am pretty sure we have players as capable as Lou and Trez. If not, then we never should have traded them. They didn't ISO to death before driving in. We do.

 

One thing that often gets lost in this argument is your assumption that the other team is going to start guarding the midrange. I think what you're saying here is if Harden and Gordon start shooting a whole bunch of 18 foot jumpshots, the warriors are going to start guarding that area and sag off the three point line, right? I don't agree. If the rockets started taking a whole bunch of midrange shots, the warriors would let them shoot those shots and be happy about it. And we would score less points.

 

Your whole post is good. I just need to absolve you of the need to say these magic words, my brother. All of us who ever question the three here have been forced to say "In theory..." always followed by something to the effect of "...but in practice..." And it gets old, but we're scared to not say it even if it feels like penance for having a opinion.

Here's the deal: it's at best an incomplete theory. Obsessive three ball looks good and often works well on the big scale of the 82-game season, but it doesn't necessarily hold at the small scale of ANY individual game. Sometimes, the team is cold or it's just well-defended or it just needs to score any points to keep a lead, and flooding with threes is counterproductive. There's loads of actual evidence backing this observation up for the Rockets, but it's easy enough to simply conceptualize that it will at times fail and alternative plans are needed.

Since these times of failure are NOT accounted for in the plan to win individual games (most notably in the playoffs where every game matters), I say it DOESN'T WORK. Not in practice, theory, or even hypothesis. It's an incomplete model. And you've expressed very well in your post why that is, and how the Warriors are well aware of it. So stop prefacing things with "it's good in theory," because you, my friend, already know better before you type that.