Game
Breakers
By
Alex Gordon
On June 25, 2009, the Golden State Warriors selected Stephen Curry, out of Davidson, with the 7th overall pick. Even then he was an enigma of sorts, but not the offensive mold breaker that has sent the internet into a tizzy recently. He was more a question mark than an exclamation point. He was an undersized combo-guard with a tremendous shooting stroke, fresh off stealing the nation’s hearts with one of the great individual march madness performances of all time. Scouts also harped on the duel threat of shaky ball handling and weak ankles that raised questions of if he could ever actually “play point guard in this league.” Those demons seemed to manifest themselves more than anything else in Curry’s first five seasons. Ankle injuries were more of an eventuality than a nescience, and his pairing with backcourt mate Monte Ellis made for exciting but rarely winning, basketball. Even as recently as the 2014-15 season Curry’s positional questions remained. As the preseason GM survey ranked him as the “3rd best shooting guard in the league.” A shift had already occurred by then, however, in the 2013 offseason, Curry signed a four-year 44 million dollar deal with the Warriors. At the time, considered “risky,” but referred to now as “larceny.” The same year Ellis was traded to Milwaukie for Andrew Bogut, Klay Thompson began to come into his own, and the Warriors had just brought in what could be looked back on as one of the great single team draft hauls ever in Harrison Barnes, Draymond Green, and Festus Ezeli. The ball was now, literally and figuratively, in Curry’s hands. It was just the exorcism he needed in to start pushing the boundaries of what basketball can be.
It’s a theme in basketball, however, when someone begins to perform and do things on a level we never thought possible to start asking if it is “good for the game?” Basically, every transcendent player has been regarded in this way. From Allen Iverson’s crossover, Jordan’s aerial supremacy, and Kareem’s sky hook (or just his existence, when he came into college they outlawed dunking as a way to limit his dominance) the basketball purists look at it and fears next generation of players out there. Watching these guys play are going to be too become absorbed in learning how to copy the flash of their game instead of the substance. For Curry the cry has been that “kids just run to the three point line now,” and there is some truth to this complaint. It is important to realize watching him that, Curry is the ultimate shooting outlier. The shots he takes and makes look so easy are absolutely horrible shots for anyone else. So maybe if you watch his game on a superficial level it’s bad for the quality of the sport, but in terms of young people who are taking the time to learn about the nuances of the game, I would argue Steph is actually much better than a lot of players who reached this echelon.
Just as examples, take Jordan and Iverson. Iverson is (correctly or incorrectly) already a poster boy for me-first basketball. Hunting his own shot at the expense of his teammates, and as a result, team success. His defenders would argue that he never had enough help, which I would agree with, but the point is those who grew up watching Iverson generally weren’t experiencing team-first basketball. Even Jordan was probably more “detrimental” in this regard than Curry. MJ was as perfect an individual basketball player as one can create, but the fact is that he was so dominant that there were many times where he was his team’s offense. His sheer control over the game was so much that he didn’t need his teammates at times. Of course, he needed Pippen, and his cycling cast of quirky, clutch role players, but in terms of truly making his teammates better, Jordan was not at the highest level.
Steph’s game more closely resembles that of Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. All-time greats that could carry you offensively, but as anyone who understands the game will tell you, their greatest skill was their play-making. Beyond just getting the assist, guys who could see the play develop in their head before it happened, making the pass, to the pass, which leads to an assist. Curry uses his incredible offensive leverage to open up the floor for the Warriors offense. Not to get too technical, but there is an advanced stat called “gravity” basically how much “pull” a player has towards defenders. Steph is hands down the leader in this stat, and you don’t need to run any complex algorithm to observe its effect. You see it every time he runs a pick and roll. Against most any other player, you have a lot of options covering this play, most of the time the default is to go under the screen until they start hitting from outside. With Curry it’s taken for granted that he’s hitting from outside, you have to send help to him every time in this situation, or you’re going to lose.
This is what separates Steph though, even though he can (and sometimes does) make these tremendously difficult shots, he normally opts to move the ball. Unselfishly delivering it to his screener, normally Draymond Green or Andrew Bogut (great playmakers in their own right) who can now work what’s called 3 on 4 (three defensive players against four offensive) which, with a team as talented and smart as the Warriors, will almost always result in a good look. Yes there are times when he can get rolling, and it doesn’t matter who else is on the floor, the ball is going in. The thing that makes Curry, and this team, so special, though, is that their dominance comes from a place of tremendously intelligent team basketball. So even if most people just see the highlight 30 footers with two people guarding him, if you look a little closer, he’s running a clinic on how to play the right way.
It’s a theme in basketball, however, when someone begins to perform and do things on a level we never thought possible to start asking if it is “good for the game?” Basically, every transcendent player has been regarded in this way. From Allen Iverson’s crossover, Jordan’s aerial supremacy, and Kareem’s sky hook (or just his existence, when he came into college they outlawed dunking as a way to limit his dominance) the basketball purists look at it and fears next generation of players out there. Watching these guys play are going to be too become absorbed in learning how to copy the flash of their game instead of the substance. For Curry the cry has been that “kids just run to the three point line now,” and there is some truth to this complaint. It is important to realize watching him that, Curry is the ultimate shooting outlier. The shots he takes and makes look so easy are absolutely horrible shots for anyone else. So maybe if you watch his game on a superficial level it’s bad for the quality of the sport, but in terms of young people who are taking the time to learn about the nuances of the game, I would argue Steph is actually much better than a lot of players who reached this echelon.
Just as examples, take Jordan and Iverson. Iverson is (correctly or incorrectly) already a poster boy for me-first basketball. Hunting his own shot at the expense of his teammates, and as a result, team success. His defenders would argue that he never had enough help, which I would agree with, but the point is those who grew up watching Iverson generally weren’t experiencing team-first basketball. Even Jordan was probably more “detrimental” in this regard than Curry. MJ was as perfect an individual basketball player as one can create, but the fact is that he was so dominant that there were many times where he was his team’s offense. His sheer control over the game was so much that he didn’t need his teammates at times. Of course, he needed Pippen, and his cycling cast of quirky, clutch role players, but in terms of truly making his teammates better, Jordan was not at the highest level.
Steph’s game more closely resembles that of Larry Bird and Magic Johnson. All-time greats that could carry you offensively, but as anyone who understands the game will tell you, their greatest skill was their play-making. Beyond just getting the assist, guys who could see the play develop in their head before it happened, making the pass, to the pass, which leads to an assist. Curry uses his incredible offensive leverage to open up the floor for the Warriors offense. Not to get too technical, but there is an advanced stat called “gravity” basically how much “pull” a player has towards defenders. Steph is hands down the leader in this stat, and you don’t need to run any complex algorithm to observe its effect. You see it every time he runs a pick and roll. Against most any other player, you have a lot of options covering this play, most of the time the default is to go under the screen until they start hitting from outside. With Curry it’s taken for granted that he’s hitting from outside, you have to send help to him every time in this situation, or you’re going to lose.
This is what separates Steph though, even though he can (and sometimes does) make these tremendously difficult shots, he normally opts to move the ball. Unselfishly delivering it to his screener, normally Draymond Green or Andrew Bogut (great playmakers in their own right) who can now work what’s called 3 on 4 (three defensive players against four offensive) which, with a team as talented and smart as the Warriors, will almost always result in a good look. Yes there are times when he can get rolling, and it doesn’t matter who else is on the floor, the ball is going in. The thing that makes Curry, and this team, so special, though, is that their dominance comes from a place of tremendously intelligent team basketball. So even if most people just see the highlight 30 footers with two people guarding him, if you look a little closer, he’s running a clinic on how to play the right way.
No comments:
Post a Comment