I told y'all muh'fukkas that Pop's being left behind.....

[#1 pick]

Answer the muh'fukken question -

"This is the only point worth addressing in your nonsense post - it's no good playing to the strengths of your personnel if you're being left behind in the process. Making Blake Griffin shoot 3s isn't playing to his strengths, because he's not a natural shooter, but he's made it a strength because it's a necessity not only for his own offense to succeed but for his team's. Do you seriously think he and the Pistons would be better off shooting more long 2s (than 3s), sacrificing efficiency and spacing?

Every single team (sans Spurs) are attempting more 3s than long 2s, not because they're playing to the strengths of their personnel, but because it's a nessacity to win."

Your topic doesn't match your answer Gil. That's why this is a textbook @Swagnificent thread.

You trying to be right doesn't match the premise of your message which was:

A. The game left Pop by in your opinion. Your explanation while questionable isn't exactly wrong.
B. That is why he is struggling and washed... False, this is a Swag like take. Take something that has room for discussion, run to left field and say some stupid shyt. This is textbook @Sccit and @Swagnificent.
C. Troll and Spam posters who think differently or users just using common sense which your dumbass lacks. Textbook @Sccit and @Swagnificent

I think all three of ya'll autistic as fukk. The difference between you and them is you make less threads. If you made as many as they did, you would be in the red too.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.

Answer the muh'fukken question -

"This is the only point worth addressing in your nonsense post - it's no good playing to the strengths of your personnel if you're being left behind in the process. Making Blake Griffin shoot 3s isn't playing to his strengths, because he's not a natural shooter, but he's made it a strength because it's a necessity not only for his own offense to succeed but for his team's. Do you seriously think he and the Pistons would be better off shooting more long 2s (than 3s), sacrificing efficiency and spacing?

Every single team (sans Spurs) are attempting more 3s than long 2s, not because they're playing to the strengths of their personnel, but because it's a nessacity to win."

Don't reply with some nonsense about what you think the point of this thread is, just answer the question I'm asking. It's that simple.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

YES IF YOU CAN HIT THE fukkING 3.... bricking 3's is a lot less beneficial.... which is what would happen with these shytty nikkas shooting them... old textbook ass nikka. now i see why actual basketball players hate y'all nikkas.. talking about make believe, what if's, as if nothing else in the game would be effected by all these bricks and outside play by two players who CANNOT play out there... Like Bum Griffin and the Pistons, 24th... Cause they waste time chucking up 6 trash 3's, when he should be going to the hole

Why are you talking about "going to the hole" for? I'm simply speaking about long 2s v. 3s. DeRozan and LMA are taking a combined eight long-2s per game and completing them at 40%, they'd be better served to take a couple steps back and replace them with 3s, even if they combined only to shoot 30% from behind the arc, they'd still be more efficient than shooting 40% on long 2s.

And it's not as simple Blake should be "going to the hole", he needs to stretch the defense with his shooting, in order for him and Drummond to co-exist on the floor, and give his teammates more space to operate in. If all he's looking to do is "going to the hole" teams will play off him, and it'll stagnate the rest of the offense. Taking 3s is essential to success of the Pistons offense, just like it's essential to every single other offense in the league.

How hard is this for you to comprehend?

How the fukk is Blake wasting time chucking up six 3s, when he's hitting them at the equivalent of 56% on 2-pt shots? The Pistons offense would be even worse if he replaced those 3s with long 2s, again, because he'd be less efficient and he'd only shrink the floor spacing. The Pistons offense is bad because they lack the personnel, Blake's production is the reason why they don't have the worst offense in the league.

Again, again, again, if Blake took LMA's and DeRozan's approach on offense by replacing his 3s with long 2s, the Pistons offense would be considerably worse off. How can you not understand this?

Hollinger's NBA Team Stats - ESPN Insider - National Basketball Association - ESPN

Hollinger's formula doesn't weigh up offensive possessions accurately, they're actually rated 9th -

And here's the funny thing about this, the Spurs starting lineup is 16th in offensive efficiency (lowest 3-pt activity in the league), and the Spurs bench is 7th in offensive efficiency (7th highest in 3-pt activity). The Spurs bench is the reason why they're rated 9th on offense because of their 3-pt activity, without them they'd be below-average on offense, because the starters are taking more long 2s than 3s. Never mind the fact, their offensive rating is boosted by this recent stretch with a favorable run - not too long ago they were ranked below average on offense, and their starting lineup was in the bottom 10.

we just aren't gonna see eye to eye... i'm gonna check in next season, when actual 3 point shooters, are shooting the 3's.. Nobody wanna hear about these bums, Blake included, chucking up a bunch of bricks. Pop is EFFIFIENCT.. he's not gonna install an offense that says "Let the two guys who shoot 28% in their career, take all the 3's guys"

Except shooting 3s is a more efficient shot than a long 2 - shots which LMA and DeRozan take on the regular. Again, I'm going to reiterate this to you again so you understand -

LMA and DeRozan shoot 40% on long 2s this season - that's 4 on 10 shots = 8 points = 40%
If they replaced those long 2s with 3s and shot 30% - that's 3 on 10 shots = 9 points = 30%

And that's without taking into account that LMA and DeRozan are more than capable to shoot higher than 30% on 3-pt attempts with more reps and familiarity - I mean they only have to take a few steps back.

There's no reason why LMA and DeRozan can't shoot 33% from behind the arc combined, which would be the equivalent of shooting 50% on long 2s, which is 10% higher than what they're now shooting on long 2s.

Give it up... Nobody with any ties to the NBA, is making this argument cause it's nonsense.. But you know more than allllllllllllllllllll those guys right? You seeing what nobody on the billionaire spurs head office team can see... "Just chuck up more 3's Pop" "Wow I never thought of that"

Just stop it

How the fukk are you saying this nonsense when EVERY single team is shooting more 3s than long 2s (besides the Spurs)? Every single team (sans SA) agrees with what I'm saying which is why they're taking this approach on offense. "Chucking up more 3s" is more beneficial to an offense, than chucking up long 2s, again, that's why EVERY single team is doing it.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

@The Devil's Advocate

Since you can't grasp something so simple, just marinate on this: how is shooting 40% on long 2s (eight points on 10 shots) better than shooting 30% on 3s (nine points on 10 shots)?

 

[Family Lives Matter]

Casuals

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

It's hilarious how something so simple as 3 > 2 is so hard for nikkas to get their head around. SMH.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

@The Devil's Advocate

Since you can't grasp something so simple, just marinate on this: how is shooting 40% on long 2s (eight points on 10 shots) better than shooting 30% on 3s (nine points on 10 shots)?

you the only one who can't grasp shyt... the entire nba is with us and you talking nonsense

yes.... IN THEORY.... it would work out better... problem is, there aren't only two shots to take... so how about not shooting long range at all and LMA big goofy ass go dunk the damn ball or learn to post up...

you cherrypicking ONLY long 2's vs 3's... you not taking into any account what else they could be doing with the ball... like, i don't know, passing it to someone who could actually shoot it at 40%... how about not taking either shot and backing a nikka down? what if, since your theory has to be perfect..... what if they shoot more and miss more cause they actually getting guarded out there, cause they are now a threat. what if the opposite teams see's this and plays 3-2 zone and forces them to go inside and make those 2's... what if they get tired from shooting the longer distance? what about anything??


that's why they hate these stat guys... you living in a fantasy where they just step back 2 inches, everything else about the game stays exactly the same, including how they shoot, how tired they get, what the defense is, etc etc etc




no i'm not playing your game.. b-b-b-b-b-b-but what's the difference... obviously it was that damn simple, even the players would revolt and just run out there and launch 3's. fukk pop.. chuck it up there right?

cut it the fukk out breh... LMA and DeR suddenly start chucking up 30% threes and I can assure you they won't be winning anymore than they are now. you keep on talking about these other teams... these other players... who suddenly sucked one year then just launched bricks the next, and the team was better off


how about instead of this make believe, you answer one simple question, then you win................



name these players who IMPROVED their team by shooting more 3's, when they sucked at it before... just give us this long list you have, and we'll all read it and say, wow he's right.... until then... don't quote me

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

It's hilarious how something so simple as 3 > 2 is so hard for nikkas to get their head around. SMH.

and while we at it... lets look at blake


his 3 point attempts started going up in 2017... from 2 to almost 6.... how many games did he play that year and the next 2....... 58, 33, 25


so you cherry picking a nikka who ain't even really playing out here... lets continue... in those years his ppg went 21, 22, 19... whooooaaaaaaaa big difference brehs.. his scoring went DOWN as he shot more 3's.. cause it's not efficient

THIS YEAR, he's up to 25 ppg... you know why???


he's attempted 1 more 3, 1 more 2.... but here comes the rub... FOUR more free throws a game.. so it seems, that his improvement in numbers and scoring, has to do with him................. wait for it.........................



going to the goddamn hole and getting fouled for the 3 point play vs. bricking that extra 1 3pter he takes a game




Blake Griffin Stats | Basketball-Reference.com



but go ahead and find us these guys

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

you the only one who can't grasp shyt... the entire nba is with us and you talking nonsense

yes.... IN THEORY.... it would work out better... problem is, there aren't only two shots to take... so how about not shooting long range at all and LMA big goofy ass go dunk the damn ball or learn to post up...

you cherrypicking ONLY long 2's vs 3's... you not taking into any account what else they could be doing with the ball... like, i don't know, passing it to someone who could actually shoot it at 40%... how about not taking either shot and backing a nikka down?

This has always been about long 2s v. 3s.

YOU NEED SPACING IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE ON OFFENSE, AND THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO THAT IS BY SHOOTING THE BALL.

You can't keep "going to the hole" and running post-ups, because there's not enough space to operate this way in the halfcourt, you need to be able to stretch defenses with shooting to open space up, which results in opportunities to go to the hole and post-up. Let me reiterate - shooting is essential to the success of an offense.

Why does a player need to shoot 3s at 40% in order to take them? That's the equivalent of shooting 60% on 2-pt shots. Since teams need shooting to be effective on offense, it's better to take 3s than to take long 2s because it's a more efficient shot, and stretches the defense more. You have to have some form of shooting, you can't just take shots in the paint, and run post-ups on the low block. Why do I need to keep repeating basic shyt?

Again, every single team* is taking this approach on offense (taking more 3s than long 2s) to force defenses to cover more ground, exert more energy, which maximizes points per possession and creates easier scoring opportunities because there's more space to operate in. If defenses are guarding the 3-pt line it only stands to reason there's more space to drive and post-up.

"The entire NBA" is with me, not with you.

name these players who IMPROVED their team by shooting more 3's, when they sucked at it before... just give us this long list you have, and we'll all read it and say, wow he's right.... until then... don't quote me

Nearly every single player, because it's more efficient and beneficial to floor spacing than every type of shot. Ad nauseam.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

and while we at it... lets look at blake


his 3 point attempts started going up in 2017... from 2 to almost 6.... how many games did he play that year and the next 2....... 58, 33, 25


so you cherry picking a nikka who ain't even really playing out here... lets continue... in those years his ppg went 21, 22, 19... whooooaaaaaaaa big difference brehs.. his scoring went DOWN as he shot more 3's.. cause it's not efficient

THIS YEAR, he's up to 25 ppg... you know why???


he's attempted 1 more 3, 1 more 2.... but here comes the rub... FOUR more free throws a game.. so it seems, that his improvement in numbers and scoring, has to do with him................. wait for it.........................



going to the goddamn hole and getting fouled for the 3 point play vs. bricking that extra 1 3pter he takes a game




Blake Griffin Stats | Basketball-Reference.com



but go ahead and find us these guys

You need to find a new hobby, cause basketball clearly ain't your thing.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

You need to find a new hobby, cause basketball clearly ain't your thing.

it's me and pops thing.. reason he has 5 rings, took his team to the offs last year, is in 10th place with nobodies and paper all stars... and STILL is number 5 in efficiency



so like i said many times... you go ahead with your theory on pop... i'll stick with 150% of actual nba players, coaches and staff who say the exact opposite

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

This has always been about long 2s v. 3s.

YOU NEED SPACING IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE ON OFFENSE, AND THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN DO THAT IS BY SHOOTING THE BALL.

You can't keep "going to the hole" and running post-ups, because there's not enough space to operate this way in the halfcourt, you need to be able to stretch defenses with shooting to open space up, which results in opportunities to go to the hole and post-up. Let me reiterate - shooting is essential to the success of an offense.

Why does a player need to shoot 3s at 40% in order to take them? That's the equivalent of shooting 60% on 2-pt shots. Since teams need shooting to be effective on offense, it's better to take 3s than to take long 2s because it's a more efficient shot, and stretches the defense more. Why do I need to keep repeating basic shyt?

Again, every single team* is taking this approach on offense to force defenses to cover more ground, exert more energy, which maximizes points per possession and creates easier scoring opportunities because there's more space to operate in. If defenses are guarding the 3-pt line it only stands to reason there's more space to drive and post-up.

Nearly every single player, because it's a more efficient beneficial to floor spacing than every type of shot. Ad nauseam.

is Nearly his first name or last? cause you did all that typing but I don't see any names

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Blah. Blah. Blah. Blah.

Spurs are the only team in the league who take more long 2s than 3s. Are you telling me the Spurs have it right, and every other team has it wrong?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

is Nearly his first name or last? cause you did all that typing but I don't see any names

Again, every single team* is taking this approach on offense (taking more 3s than long 2s) to force defenses to cover more ground, exert more energy, which maximizes points per possession and creates easier scoring opportunities because there's more space to operate in. If defenses are guarding the 3-pt line it only stands to reason there's more space to drive and post-up.

"The entire NBA" is with me, not with you.

 

[The Devil's Advocate]

Spurs are the only team in the league who take more long 2s than 3s. Are you telling me the Spurs have it right, and every other team has it wrong?

as i look at their last complete season.... where they was top 8 in the west... i'd say a majority of nba teams is definitely doing it wrong... trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, cause they ain't fukking winning nothing and he is... until when???

until he lost his finals MVP, two champions, a starting pg, all in the same year



case closed up