Whatever happens in games 4-7, can we agree ANALYTICS has proven to be FALSE?

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

4-27 from deep and Cleveland loses. Call it a hunch but that suggests to me that 3 point shooting matters.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

4-27 from deep and Cleveland loses. Call it a hunch but that suggests to me that 3 point shooting matters.

no.. cause if they turned those 27 shots into 27 mid to low range 2's... they'd obviously hit a way higher number... going 50% on those 27 shots would have given them the win

not to mention what the game would change into because it would be a lot closer... and would give gs less time, because the offense would be taking longer to set up these plays



this is the problem with this argument... you want to take 2 vs 3 in a vacuum and say 3 is better.... well no shyt.. but add in the rest of the actual game and it doesn't always work out like that... or people would just get an entire team of shooters, and take nothing but 3s all game

 

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

no.. cause if they turned those 27 shots into 27 mid to low range 2's... they'd obviously hit a way higher number... going 50% on those 27 shots would have given them the win

not to mention what the game would change into because it would be a lot closer... and would give gs less time, because the offense would be taking longer to set up these plays



this is the problem with this argument... you want to take 2 vs 3 in a vacuum and say 3 is better.... well no shyt.. but add in the rest of the actual game and it doesn't always work out like that... or people would just get an entire team of shooters, and take nothing but 3s all game

So they should dribble in and take contested mid range shots instead of open spot up threes? Are you flip Saunders?

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

So they should dribble in and take contested mid range shots instead of open spot up threes? Are you flip Saunders?

read what i said, then read what you typed

where did i say anything about anything you're talking about?? open spot up 3's or whatever type of 3 it was... had them shooting 4 for 27... INSTEAD they could have given it to lebron to DRIVE in... or take mid to low range shots...

either of which, contested or not, would come out to a higher percentage and more points than going 4 for 27

 

[Malta]

no.. cause if they turned those 27 shots into 27 mid to low range 2's... they'd obviously hit a way higher number... going 50% on those 27 shots would have given them the win

not to mention what the game would change into because it would be a lot closer... and would give gs less time, because the offense would be taking longer to set up these plays



this is the problem with this argument... you want to take 2 vs 3 in a vacuum and say 3 is better.... well no shyt.. but add in the rest of the actual game and it doesn't always work out like that... or people would just get an entire team of shooters, and take nothing but 3s all game

Teams don't make mid-range shots at 50%.

 

[Malta]

read what i said, then read what you typed

where did i say anything about anything you're talking about?? open spot up 3's or whatever type of 3 it was... had them shooting 4 for 27... INSTEAD they could have given it to lebron to DRIVE in... or take mid to low range shots...

either of which, contested or not, would come out to a higher percentage and more points than going 4 for 27

You don't beat high volume 3 point shooting teams from 2 point land, period.


The Cavs kept the first 3 games close because they played GS almost even from the 3 point line in those games, GS hit 30 and the Cavs hit 27. They kept the pace slow but were also hitting 9 threes a game which kept the defense in check, tonight they were awful from 3 and got blown out. The GS defense isn't going to give up 14-27 on mid-range jumpers, and the Cavs wouldn't hit that percentage on those shots either.

The lead was ballooning while Mozgov was scoring because the Cavs were basically trading 2 pts to the Warriors making 3.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

Teams don't make mid-range shots at 50%.

i said take mid TO low range... i said IF they made 50% on these 27 shots... not 50% from mid... 50% from close AND mid combined

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

You don't beat high volume 3 point shooting teams from 2 point land, period.


The Cavs kept the first 3 games close because they played GS almost even from the 3 point line in those games, GS hit 30 and the Cavs hit 27. They kept the pace slow but were also hitting 9 threes a game which kept the defense in check, tonight they were awful from 3 and got blown out. The GS defense isn't going to give up 14-27 on mid-range jumpers, and the Cavs wouldn't hit that percentage on those shots either.

The lead was ballooning while Mozgov was scoring because the Cavs were basically trading 2 pts to the Warriors making 3.

oh period huh.. shoot more 3s and you'll always win... i'm glad you figured out this stat before the entire nba did

y'all nikkas are not taking into account ANY other parts of the game... you just boil 48 mins of basketball into, well who made more 3s tonight

 

[Malta]

i said take mid TO low range... i said IF they made 50% on these 27 shots... not 50% from mid... 50% from close AND mid combined

They weren't going to make 50% of those shots

 

[Malta]

oh period huh.. shoot more 3s and you'll always win... i'm glad you figured out this stat before the entire nba did

y'all nikkas are not taking into account ANY other parts of the game... you just boil 48 mins of basketball into, well who made more 3s tonight

Did I say take more threes and you'll win? I said the Cavs MADE 9 and kept the games close as a result.

If you make 8 more threes than your opponent chances are you're going to win They were +24 from 3, how exactly do you overcome that when you yourself only made 4 and you have 1 player that can create.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

no.. cause if they turned those 27 shots into 27 mid to low range 2's... they'd obviously hit a way higher number... going 50% on those 27 shots would have given them the win

I stopped here. Yall muhfukkas don't know what you're talking about.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

Did I say take more threes and you'll win? I said the Cavs MADE 9 and kept the games close as a result.

If you make 8 more threes than your opponent chances are you're going to win They were +24 from 3, how exactly do you overcome that when you yourself only made 4 and you have 1 player that can create.

the only reason you are more likely to win, is because the other team is out there doing the same damn thing

if we both shooting at 100 yards, and you make 50 and i make 30... then yea... you're gonna win

if you shooting at 100 yards and i'm shooting at 50.... well now we will see what happens

if mearly shooting the three more was the answer, everyone would just shoot the three all the time... why even shoot a 2? shooting 80 3s and making 30 is better than shooting 80 2s and making 40 right? so why doesn't everyone just do that??


because of a whole host of other shyt... like pacing, fatigue, mismatches, wide open lanes, defense, perimeter defense, fouls, 3 point plays when getting fouled, bench players, etc etc etc



i'm not one of those, never shoot the 3 type people... fukk yea if you open and you got it, then take it all day... but chucking up 27 shots and 23 of them being straight bricks... you just look stupid... especially when they have ZERO answer for anybody down low... and some of those shots will be fouls and get the other team in foul trouble... which will make their defense even weaker to stop you

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

I stopped here. Yall muhfukkas don't know what you're talking about.

yea cause math..

 

[Malta]

the only reason you are more likely to win, is because the other team is out there doing the same damn thing

if we both shooting at 100 yards, and you make 50 and i make 30... then yea... you're gonna win

if you shooting at 100 yards and i'm shooting at 50.... well now we will see what happens

if mearly shooting the three more was the answer, everyone would just shoot the three all the time... why even shoot a 2? shooting 80 3s and making 30 is better than shooting 80 2s and making 40 right? so why doesn't everyone just do that??


because of a whole host of other shyt... like pacing, fatigue, mismatches, wide open lanes, defense, perimeter defense, fouls, 3 point plays when getting fouled, bench players, etc etc etc



i'm not one of those, never shoot the 3 type people... fukk yea if you open and you got it, then take it all day... but chucking up 27 shots and 23 of them being straight bricks... you just look stupid... especially when they have ZERO answer for anybody down low... and some of those shots will be fouls and get the other team in foul trouble... which will make their defense even weaker to stop you

@Gil Scott-Heroin are you seeing this?

Your yardage analogy just doesn't work, at all. Again, teams do not shoot 50% from "mid-low range" shots, and most importantly the Warriors defense isn't just going to allow you to take a shytload of uncontested mid-range shots.

And you have to hit threes at over 33% to make it really worthwhile to take a lot of them, which is why you don't see teams doing it because not every team is capable of shooting a solid percentage. The Warriors can take 30 and shoot 40% on them which is just devastating

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

@Gil Scott-Heroin are you seeing this?

Your yardage analogy just doesn't work, at all. Again, teams do not shoot 50% from "mid-low range" shots, and most importantly the Warriors defense isn't just going to allow you to take a shytload of uncontested mid-range shots.

And you have to hit threes at over 33% to make it really worthwhile to take a lot of them, which is why you don't see teams doing it because not every team is capable of shooting a solid percentage. The Warriors can take 30 and shoot 40% on them which is just devastating

you do know GS shot 46.8% from 2 last night correct?? with no post player???

so you're saying they couldn't up it 3.2% with lebron going to the hole another 23 times