Thursday, March 10, 2016

The Evolution of Steph Curry

Cain Marko:  I’m not here to discuss his great handle, his court vision, his ability to finish at the hoop, or any of that.  I’m here to discuss what makes Steph Curry tick.

It’s shooting.

We’ve talked about this before, but if shooting is just a combination of muscle memory and hand eye coordination, then it’s surprising that no one has mastered the half court shot.  In this era of spacing you’d think some Blake Hoffarber-esk guy who can’t jump would spend a year of his life, practicing and practicing until he can hit 37% from half court.  You can’t tell me there isn’t room and a couple million dollars on an NBA bench for that. 

And then we come to Steph Curry, I don’t know the stats on his half court heaves, but he’s hitting one just about every other game. At some point it stops being a novelty and starts being a true weapon.  We’ve already seen this year that he’s as good from 3 or 4 feet behind the line as anyone else in the league is from three.  You have to go over every screen.  What happens when the start setting screens out on the logo?  Do you still have to go over the screen? 


Walter Kovacs:  You’re absolutely right.  He’s on a whole different level, and the implications are staggering.  What he’s doing right now is Ruthian.  Back in the 1920’s, everyone was hitting for singles, and the Babe was like, nah- I think I’ll go all the bases at once.  In 1920 Ruth hit 54 homers to lead the American league, and Cy Williams led the NL with 15.  In 1927- Ruth smacked 60, and Williams and Hack Wilson led the NL with 30. 

Right now Steph is just playing a different game.  I think we’ll remember him as someone who kicked off a new era of basketball- nodding their heads are all the AAU kids who are switching from practicing dunks to practicing shooting from long-range.  To me the real question is what happens to the game as a whole.  3 point attempts continue to go up, and Steph is the poster child.  As players like Steph make the 3 a higher percentage shot that’s also worth more- does the game shift to one that’s played mostly between the arcs?  Does the league take steps to counter it? 

Right now, Steph and Golden State have something unique going on.  To your point, last night he was BEING GUARDED out at the half court line, and still made the buzzer beater.  Everything about that is insane, and with range like that, you basically have to play him like that.  And that also opens things up for the team because of that fear.  I’m content to just watch and enjoy for now, but imagine if there were 6 Stephs in the league with unlimited range, or 20- which might not be unheard of since shooting is a skill that is more or less egalitarian (not everyone is able to fly like MJ, or be huge like Shaq, but anyone can practice shooting).  What would be the broader future implications?


CM: I absolutely agree.  After a season of 5th grade basketball, in which I fouled out of most games, my father, pulled me aside and said, “I know this is hard to hear, but there is a reason you come from a family of wrestlers.  You will never be Michael Jordan.”  And he was right.  But if Curry had existed then, who knows?  That dream would have been much more attainable.

Another thought I had.  Do you think anyone has calculated the defensive value of being a good three point shooting team?

Picture two scenarios: 

LeBron breaks into the paint, rises up avoiding contact, slams the ball in to the hoop, and then falls and skids to a stop against the padded back of the hoop. Warriors grab the ball and have it headed back down the court while LeBron is still on his back.  LeBron then has to get up and sprint back down to get into position. 

Conversely, the Warriors are kicking the ball around with 4 behind the arc and Bogut just standing there trying not to get in the way. Green sets a screen for Curry out beyond the 3 point line.  Curry rises up, shoots the ball and starts walking backward.  He’s at the top of the key before the ball even goes in the net.  And the whole team, except Bogut, are already back on the defensive side of the court, without even having to run.

Now Curry is nowhere near the defensive player LeBron is (or any of the top slashing wings) but a Curry who is already back in position without having to use any energy and with the defense already set up behind him is probably going to give up less points then a LeBron who is on the run. 

We see it time and time again.  Half court offense is hard.  Transition points are easy.  The longer 3s you can make, and the more people who are a threat to make them, the better your defense is.

That’s my theory at least.

I came up with it after watching this video of Curry’s 3 pointers against the Thunder. First, just watch how far back and how well covered he is when he shoots.  But then go back a second time and watch where Curry is when the ball goes in the hoop and watch where the rest of the Warriors are by the time the ball gets inbounded.



WK:  This is a very strong point.  I read/listen to a lot of Zach Lowe, and he has recently done some investigating into the lost art of offensive rebounding- teams are ignoring potential offensive boards to minimize transition points.  Yet another benefit of the 3 is longer rebounds that favor incidental offensive boards, and if not, assists transition D.  They’re probably presenting a paper on this at the Sloan Conference right now.  

No comments:

Post a Comment