It's a lot harder to play tight defense on a player from 30 feet out for 40 minutes a night than you think.
I'm responding to the post that was made to me... The answer is the answer.. sorry you don't want to hear that.. T_Man
True... But I actually saw Bev do that the last 2 years... The problem is coach's, teams nor players put the emphasis on defense today like they use to. T_Man
going to have to put a man on curry, like in football. He just plays pure defense. Just stays right on curry the whole game. Someone like Pat Bev. And that's that. no other way
It's hard, but there's room for improvement there. He gets a couple buckets a game just from defenders backing off at bad moments. They forget who they're guarding...and especially in these crunch time moments, you cant back off inside 40 feet. You dont have to be playing intense D, just stay on his hip, he'll think twice, then force a leaning shot over a balanced one.
This assumption that players from the older eras would be better in the modern era simply because they played a "man's game" is COMPLETE BS. No one stops and wonders, "hm, how would older players adapt to the modern rules of the game?" Players do what they can within the confines of the rules. Would Big O and Michael Jordan be able to hand check Steph curry? F**** no. Would they be able to muscle past players because of their "dominant physicality"? Maybe, but the game is called a lot tighter now, both would definitely pick up their share of fouls. The fact that the officiating today is softer affects all players. Jordan and Big O would not walk into today's game and be able to play the way they played in their eras. They would foul out in minutes. It's comical when you think about it. Every argument these guys make has the critical assumption that they would be able to play "their way" in the modern game, which is complete BS. They would not be reffed differently from any other players. They would have to adjust to flopping, new rules, not to mention more advanced defensive schemes. As a result, they would likely have very different styles. Conversely, players now would be able to be much more physical if the old rules were reinstated. So just because you've never seen the guys in the modern game be as physical in the older eras, it doesn't mean they can't be. Bottom line, you just can't compare different eras. It's simply not possible. And these retired players need to get their head out of their a**es and respect what each era can do within the boundaries of the current rules. And dell curry be a superstar in today's game? C'mon, really? Gimme a break
only way to guard curry is to get up in his face starting from half court and have your guys make sure he doesn't get those illegal screens from his big men.
It comes down to how you defend off the picks. They use a ton to get him open, and I've seen both strategies backfire (having the defender fight through, or switching everything). There's also his ability to still pass the ball... Which shouldn't be ignored. If you over commit to him, he typically finds a wide-open cutter or another shooter (Klay) which eventually causes the defense to adjust back.
You can't just have a man on Curry. Even with perfect defense, he would get lost in the many good picks that the Warriors set. Even if you're half a step late fighting through picks, that's enough day light for Curry to pull up, or force your big to switch onto Curry. The ONLY way to contain Curry is that all 5 guys on the floor need to be aware of him at all times, which is incredibly hard if not impossible when the rest of his team are above average scorers.
Im referring to a few buckets a game...defenders just lose him...most of the time, yeah, it's hard, but if defenders got off of auto pilot they'd make him more human. The way he is playing, letting anyone else shoot is a better option. Sounds crazy, given the other options, but you have to avoid the deadlier poison.
The fact that you accept flopping as a "skill" that a player from a previous era would have to adjust to is a really dumb statement... As is most of your points. And I'm of the ilk that believes Curry would have success in that era. The older generation does have a valid point. They had to score their points against much more physical defenses. Guys were still scoring 30+, games were still in the 100's. When physicality started to surpass offensive talent, the league went south... And required rule changes. But even the league acknowledged that it was likely a cyclical down-period in offense, but they couldn't afford to wait it out. I'm also sure those guys would be able to adjust to the ticky-tack NBA of today, while now getting a chance to score their points against less physical grind. Now, dead-eye shooters like Curry would still find a way to get their points.... But it remains to be seen if his body would hold up from the extra contact. He's not even built like Reggie Miller was (who was lanky, but tall)... And I believe Curry is better than Miller ever was.
You act as if teams haven't tried to completely shut him down over the last 2 years... I'm sure the Warriors would relish that as typically they win those games easily when they get all the other players wide open looks off the extra attention given to Curry. Tonight's game is actually the more likely example of how the Warriors could potentially lose a game/series... When Steph goes off, but everybody else is relatively held in check, the Warriors usually have to grind it out.
I totally agree with you about Big O and MJ hand checking Curry.. And I agree they could not play the same defense.. But on the other hand.. Those 2 would have a field day on offense... Then NBA today is geared for offense so I agree with you.. But here is 2 things that most teams don't do to Steph... 1) They don't pressure him 94 feet.. Because that's how the players are condition today.. 2) Most teams don't make Curry work on the Defensive end... The biggest thing that Dumars did back in the to MJ was guard him 94 feet and also make MJ chase him on the defensive end. Also, I don't agree with you on Dell Curry... Dell Curry and Dale Ellis would be Super Super stars in todays league... Especially the way they shot the ball with the quick release and accuracy... it would be unreal.. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8-Ms2PlQpWg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> T_Man
People keep bringing the hand check thing, yet ignore the fact that today's defense is much more sophisticated, not to mention the abolition of illegal defense and more mobile big men who can trap at the perimeter.
I agree, but the big men of today are nothing like the big men of the past.. The big men in the past, especially the PF's would punish you if you can in for a layout. But I do agree that they are more mobile... T_Man
The problem with this mindset is that Curry is one of the best ball-handlers in the game. If you get up in his face, he's going to dribble around you and push it up the court. Now if you're Bev or the player defending Curry, you're "hurting" your team by making it a 4-on-5 because you're now trailing the play. All Curry has to do is penetrate into the paint or find a cutter, and GS has scored. Then, if you keep getting burned by the same method of play, coach probably says to lay off the full court pressure. Now, Curry and the Warriors are free to jack up 30ft jumpers. There's just no way to defend this style of play.
From Hall of Famer, NBA Champion and former Rockets great coach Kevin McHale: They're assembled to be a versatile team. All those people, on twitter, none of that stuff works. Good luck. Everyone always has an answer to do this to Curry, do that to Curry. None of it works. He's really good. He's impossible to guard. You heard the man. All your ideas and "just do this" and "just do that" to Curry, doesn't work. STOP!
