The game wasn't a blowout either, so if anything, the defense was played; both teams just had a good shooting night.
I think some fans can't comprehend that there's only so much defense you can play; some fan's idea of what a defense should be is exaggerated.
You can't play the '90s or '00s NBA defense anymore in today's league, but also, you can't penalize the methods in winning the game because the overall objective is to win by any means necessary, so if shooting the 3 with reckless abandon is the answer, then
.
100.
Their interpretation of defense is based on defending traditional methods of scoring - like defending the entry pass to the post, or someone taking a 16fter after the PG had set up the offense. All rudimentary actions of past offenses. Defenses of the past didn't have to worry about a player pulling up from the logo; defenses of the past didn't have to worry about as soon as someone caught the ball from behind the arc that the ball would be shot.
Now, teams don't follow any traditional methods of setting up their offense, they come down the floor, and everyone can act as a playmaker, and they immediately look to score as soon as they enter the halfcourt.
As soon as the ball enters the halfcourt, you have to be on your shyt to anticipate someone will take a shot from anywhere and everywhere.
That didn't happen in the past.
In the past there were limited zones where teams would look to score from, and in the past there were limited actions in which teams would look to score from. Now the ways the offenses look to score with and the areas they look to score from are limitless.
The game really has evolved to the point where it's taken full advantage of the rules without any care for tradition.
You either get with it or get lost.