6 ms·

> your average viewer is watching a chess match but not even understanding the basic moves Your average viewer isn't tuning in to watch a chess match. You'll n

by lapcat 2y ago

> your average viewer is watching a chess match but not even understanding the basic moves Your average viewer isn't tuning in to watch a chess match. You'll notice that professional chess doesn't have the same viewership as basketball. Regardless of the mathematical strategies, it sucks to watch a bunch of three pointers getting missed. The NBA team average is 36% on 38 attempts per game. Thus, in an average game, there are 76 three-point attempts and 49 misses. The worst is when they take and miss a three-pointer early in the shot clock, maybe even from the logo. Shoot, clunk, possession over, yawn. Draymond Green just said that the modern game is rarely a chess match. https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/43860581/no-substance https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/43860581/no-substance > Green talked about a recent Warriors game against the Los Angeles Lakers and how it was "refreshing" to go against a thinker like LeBron James, who is notorious for finding weaknesses and exploiting them. > "Every possession is some type of chess move," Green said. "You don't get that today in the NBA, often. ... You don't just get that on a regular basis. It's just who can run faster, who can hit more 3s. It's no substance. I think it's very boring."

hardwaregeek 2y ago
So I agree that more complexity is not better and there’s a real risk of alienating fans with complicated schemes. But chess has made real inroads by providing good commentators and analysis. You can’t make teams play dumber but you can teach fans to be smarter. As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. And in turn, the game has become less crowded and more spread out, leading to a higher percentage on dunks and layups. The pace has also dramatically increased, leading to more swings in scoring, which is pretty exciting.
- kenjackson 2y ago
  Thinking Basketball is great. The people who complain about the 3s in basketball probably didn’t watch the NBA in the older days. Horrible defense and far less skill — and that’s the era I grew up and loved. I have two major complaints about the game nowadays: (1) intentional fouling to get an advantage. It’s the only major sport where fouling can often work to your advantage. (2) The block call is so inconsistent it might as well be a coin flip.
  - pepa65 2y ago
    Completely agree, but I would add the incessant need for counting, 3 seconds, 8 seconds, 24 seconds. But the current fouling situation really needs to be fixed urgently.
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    besides 7-footers chucking 3’s what “skills” do these new nba players have? there are maybe 10 that have any skills, the rest can shoot and that’s about fucking it. 90% of today’s players would play in D league two decades ago
    - abenga 2y ago
      > two decades ago Are you talking about the age when teams gave contracts to any random player 6'10 and above just to soak up fouls from Shaq?
      - bdangubic 2y ago
        as opposed to now when davis betrans is pushing close $100 million in earnings? :) don’t be funny
        abenga 2y ago
        Bertans is a close to 8PPG, 40%3P shooter in his career. Sounds like a useful role player to me. Not everyone has to be Lebron James.
        bdangubic 2y ago
        if we paid $84m to role players NBA will need salary cap equal to US GDP :)
        abenga 2y ago
        Are you thinking the salary cap hasn't changed from the 90s? The MLE is 12.3m this year, and that is a high-end role player. If one plays at that level for 8 years, they make that amount you're complaining about. And the cap is expected to go up significantly over the next few years (would have gone up more drastically, but the KD to Warriors situation convinced teams to adopt smoothing). It is true that in general, super stars are underpaid, and role players are overpaid.
- lapcat 2y ago
  > As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. I'd much rather watch NBA players miss 3's than watch a 23 minute YouTube video of someone talking about missing 3's. ;-) But the NBA FG% in 2025 is 46.5%, while it was 49.1% in 1985, so I'm skeptical that 3 pointers are simply replacing long 2 pointers with equal percentages. Obviously the % would go down the farther you get from the basket. > And in turn, the game has become less crowded and more spread out, leading to a higher percentage on dunks and layups Crowding is not necessarily bad. A contested shot is interesting; an uncontested shot, not so much. Even uncontested dunks are less interesting than contested dunks.
  - hardwaregeek 2y ago
    That's not a huge difference. 3% is like an average of 3 extra misses, which is probably not even that noticeable with variance. 3 pointers are not replacing 2 pointers with equal percentages, but they are creating opportunities for higher percentage 2 pointers. > Crowding is not necessarily bad. A contested shot is interesting; an uncontested shot, not so much. Even uncontested dunks are less interesting than contested dunks. That's because you're thinking of a really cool dunk, not a big man backing down his man for like 20 seconds and throwing up a clanker that gets rebounded into another 20 second post possession. Realistically that's what a lot of offense was like back in the day. There's just selective nostalgia for the really cool plays.
    - lapcat 2y ago
      > That's not a huge difference. 3% is like an average of 3 extra misses More like 5 extra misses per game. And we're getting more uncontested misses today. > a big man backing down his man for like 20 seconds and throwing up a clanker that gets rebounded into another 20 second post possession. Realistically that's what a lot of offense was like back in the day. But this clearly wasn't happening 64% of the time. The irony is that contemporary players are better shooters. Yet their overall shooting % is lower, because they're consistently taking longer, harder shots.
      - 2y ago
darkerside 2y ago
Draymond Green is the Joe Rogan of the NBA. He's just optimizing for engagement and controversy. If it were truly as you say, those players would get pulled. Logo 3s are rare. And when someone heats up and hits multiple consecutive, it's anything but boring.
- lapcat 2y ago
  > Draymond Green is the Joe Rogan of the NBA. I personally dislike Green because of his on-the-court antics, but I don't think that comparison is fair. Rogan is a know-nothing meathead unqualified to challenge his guests, whereas Green is a veteran, elite, champion NBA player. His opinions, however controversial, have some basis in experience, expertise, and reality. > If it were truly as you say, those players would get pulled. Why? The mathematics are still on their side, due to the percentages and the value of the 3. I never claimed that jacking up 3's is irrational; I'm just claiming that it's ugly. If I were commissioner, I'd abolish the 3. Then they can shoot logo 2's if they want. ;-) > Logo 3s are rare. Tell that to Dame.
  - darkerside 2y ago
    Is there some magic percentage that must be passed to justify your aesthetic demands? I think the fact that guys like Dame hit 1/3, and seem to hit even more in the clutch, is wildly entertaining.

by lapcat 2y ago

hardwaregeek 2y ago

So I agree that more complexity is not better and there’s a real risk of alienating fans with complicated schemes. But chess has made real inroads by providing good commentators and analysis. You can’t make teams play dumber but you can teach fans to be smarter. As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. And in turn, the game has become less crowded and more spread out, leading to a higher percentage on dunks and layups. The pace has also dramatically increased, leading to more swings in scoring, which is pretty exciting.

kenjackson 2y ago
Thinking Basketball is great. The people who complain about the 3s in basketball probably didn’t watch the NBA in the older days. Horrible defense and far less skill — and that’s the era I grew up and loved. I have two major complaints about the game nowadays: (1) intentional fouling to get an advantage. It’s the only major sport where fouling can often work to your advantage. (2) The block call is so inconsistent it might as well be a coin flip.
- pepa65 2y ago
  Completely agree, but I would add the incessant need for counting, 3 seconds, 8 seconds, 24 seconds. But the current fouling situation really needs to be fixed urgently.
- bdangubic 2y ago
  besides 7-footers chucking 3’s what “skills” do these new nba players have? there are maybe 10 that have any skills, the rest can shoot and that’s about fucking it. 90% of today’s players would play in D league two decades ago
  - abenga 2y ago
    > two decades ago Are you talking about the age when teams gave contracts to any random player 6'10 and above just to soak up fouls from Shaq?
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      as opposed to now when davis betrans is pushing close $100 million in earnings? :) don’t be funny
      - abenga 2y ago
        Bertans is a close to 8PPG, 40%3P shooter in his career. Sounds like a useful role player to me. Not everyone has to be Lebron James.
        bdangubic 2y ago
        if we paid $84m to role players NBA will need salary cap equal to US GDP :)
        abenga 2y ago
        Are you thinking the salary cap hasn't changed from the 90s? The MLE is 12.3m this year, and that is a high-end role player. If one plays at that level for 8 years, they make that amount you're complaining about. And the cap is expected to go up significantly over the next few years (would have gone up more drastically, but the KD to Warriors situation convinced teams to adopt smoothing). It is true that in general, super stars are underpaid, and role players are overpaid.
lapcat 2y ago
> As for missing, the video I linked debunks that. 3 pointers are replacing long 2 pointers which also had a low percentage. I'd much rather watch NBA players miss 3's than watch a 23 minute YouTube video of someone talking about missing 3's. ;-) But the NBA FG% in 2025 is 46.5%, while it was 49.1% in 1985, so I'm skeptical that 3 pointers are simply replacing long 2 pointers with equal percentages. Obviously the % would go down the farther you get from the basket. > And in turn, the game has become less crowded and more spread out, leading to a higher percentage on dunks and layups Crowding is not necessarily bad. A contested shot is interesting; an uncontested shot, not so much. Even uncontested dunks are less interesting than contested dunks.
- hardwaregeek 2y ago
  That's not a huge difference. 3% is like an average of 3 extra misses, which is probably not even that noticeable with variance. 3 pointers are not replacing 2 pointers with equal percentages, but they are creating opportunities for higher percentage 2 pointers. > Crowding is not necessarily bad. A contested shot is interesting; an uncontested shot, not so much. Even uncontested dunks are less interesting than contested dunks. That's because you're thinking of a really cool dunk, not a big man backing down his man for like 20 seconds and throwing up a clanker that gets rebounded into another 20 second post possession. Realistically that's what a lot of offense was like back in the day. There's just selective nostalgia for the really cool plays.
  - lapcat 2y ago
    > That's not a huge difference. 3% is like an average of 3 extra misses More like 5 extra misses per game. And we're getting more uncontested misses today. > a big man backing down his man for like 20 seconds and throwing up a clanker that gets rebounded into another 20 second post possession. Realistically that's what a lot of offense was like back in the day. But this clearly wasn't happening 64% of the time. The irony is that contemporary players are better shooters. Yet their overall shooting % is lower, because they're consistently taking longer, harder shots.
    - 2y ago

darkerside 2y ago

Draymond Green is the Joe Rogan of the NBA. He's just optimizing for engagement and controversy. If it were truly as you say, those players would get pulled. Logo 3s are rare. And when someone heats up and hits multiple consecutive, it's anything but boring.

lapcat 2y ago
> Draymond Green is the Joe Rogan of the NBA. I personally dislike Green because of his on-the-court antics, but I don't think that comparison is fair. Rogan is a know-nothing meathead unqualified to challenge his guests, whereas Green is a veteran, elite, champion NBA player. His opinions, however controversial, have some basis in experience, expertise, and reality. > If it were truly as you say, those players would get pulled. Why? The mathematics are still on their side, due to the percentages and the value of the 3. I never claimed that jacking up 3's is irrational; I'm just claiming that it's ugly. If I were commissioner, I'd abolish the 3. Then they can shoot logo 2's if they want. ;-) > Logo 3s are rare. Tell that to Dame.
- darkerside 2y ago
  Is there some magic percentage that must be passed to justify your aesthetic demands? I think the fact that guys like Dame hit 1/3, and seem to hit even more in the clutch, is wildly entertaining.