|
|
Post by sandman on Aug 9, 2021 9:10:46 GMT -5
So, about a decade or so ago and even before that - traditional big C's who would block, suck at free throws and would NEVER dare to attempt a 3 were a thing.
PG's were fast and playmakers, rarely high average points per game.
SG's were scorers.
SF's and PF's played heavy games.
3 pointers weren't super popular.
Then things take a turn. You could credit the Steve Nash led Suns with this high paced offense but it probably started with the Warriors and their title runs.
3 point galore. Oprah's version of "3's for everyone!"
Now, it seems our very own Raptors (and there's hints of other teams doing it) are attempting these lengthy, almost position-less all-ball lineups. Guys who can switch and take over PG's role, guys who can switch on D and offense seamlessly. Guys like OG who can play the C role, which would have been unheard of 10+ years ago.
Is this the new trend in the NBA? Will the traditional "PG-SG-SF-PF-C" roles be changed for the time being?
|
|
|
|
Post by haisan on Aug 9, 2021 10:04:01 GMT -5
Remember how people laughed at Sam Mitchell for wanting the Raptors to attempt 100 "shats" a game? Between 1996 and 2018, only one team had even attempted 90 FGs a game across a season (2007 Golden State). But for the past three seasons, we've had a lot of teams top 90 FGAs/game:
2018-19: 11 teams (led by Denver, with 94/game)
2019-20: 10 teams
2020-21: 7 teams
|
|
|
|
Post by sandman on Aug 9, 2021 14:23:28 GMT -5
The one caveat about the "new" NBA is that is gets boring real quick.
10+ years ago, scoring over 100 was a big feat. Nowadays? Not even noteworthy. Teams don't play D.
It's why watching the Raps has been nice over the past little while. We actually defend.. most of the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pseudonym on Aug 10, 2021 10:25:46 GMT -5
It's a transference from positions to roles. Kind of mirrors the growing acceptance of transpeople. Vaguely, we have:
Playmakers (Lowry, Doncic, Jokic)
Finishers (Ayton, DeAndre Jordan in his prime, Siakam in a proper role, 3 & D players)
Connectors (Gasol, Draymond Green, rookie Barnes,)
With the advent of the 3 ball, I think it's more that the skill requirements to succeed in the league have gotten so high that it's more and more about just being a good player period, instead of having these traits. But even those about roles are fluid. Siakam can dabble in all three. Curry passively acts as a connector, like some super-sweet piece of armour you put on in an RPG, because of his sheer gravity.
In fact the value of players, and development itself is more dipping into other archetypes. Barnes' shot will determine whether he can become a playmaker-perhaps even Kawhi with PG skills-instead of a mere catalyst. Devin Booker's improved playmaking on offense made him far more valuable.
Then there's the context of those roles. Finishing how? 3 + D players are largely finisher on offense. Powell has become a great finisher; while he can create for him, if you give him a situation off movement, then he'll convert at blistering percentage. Or if you're a playmaker, are you heliocentric like Doncic, or barely need the ball at all like Jokic?
It's more context, context, context. Kawhi, the midrange master actually takes shots quite close to the edge of the paint, while DeRozan took his from much further out when he was with Toronto. bout the very kinds of actions and situations to continually put a player in and which ones to avoid.
Which brings me to defense:
Rim protectors (Gobert, Lopez)
Hounds (Pat Bev, Lowry, FVV, PJ Tucket)
Roamers (Giannis, Kawhi, Siakam)
COnductors (Gasol, Barnes in a few years, Draymond again)
Before the roles were set but because of the offensive fluidity, the biggest stand requirement is versatility. Lowry taking charges is a form of rim protection from the smaller dude on the floor and functionally better than a blocked shot. It's more about not being able to be exploited rather than being great. Like Jokic out on the floor with CP3 is there for that elbow jumper is non-tenable defensively. Without Murray and the ability to just outscore Phoenix, they got swept.
With Dinosaur Team, they seem to want to just produce so much pressure that diving to the rim is an arduous endeavour period; a bunch of longbois and one hound, an inversion of the 5 out offense, with a small (FVV) instead of a true big. This would cripple opponents 3FGAs and percentages while still having decent, but not great rim protection. For that reason, I would say that Mobley was actually #1 on their big board, not Cade. I could even imagine Cade being like #4 on their board (Mobley, Green, Barnes, Cade, Suggs).
This is all stream of consciousness and far from being complete, but I love talking about the metagame. Did any of y'all play video games like that? I mean that I would actually turn down midrange shots in 2K to throw up a 3 or attack the rim.
|
|
