Posted by nixluva:
We do have shooting as I posted above: We have Q and Steph. Q was at 37.6% and Steph at 35.7% from 3. Jamal didn't have good 3pt shooting year but I expect him to improve with more of a focus on setting his feet. Nate is also a good 3Pt shooter at 39%. With a greater focus on this part of the game I expect to see some improvement.
This is the, excuse my expression, SHIT, I'm talking about. You say we HAVE (present tense) shooting, then refer to FUTURE to back up your point. Do you see the contradiction? Yes, you're lying. I'll give you Nate. Q is always injured, and is most years he's been an average three point shooter who takes a lot of them. Marbury is average to slightly above average. People were talking about having one VERY GOOD shooter, like Allan Houston, Glen Rice, etc... that we had in the past. We don't have that.
Posted by nixluva:
We do have Perimeter defenders. Q, Steph, Balkman and Collins are good defenders.
Balkman and Q don't count, they're usually playing the three. Again, fabrication. People were talking about our BACKCOURT defense. Why do you intentionally twist things?
Posted by nixluva:
Not great or perfect but they have the ability to defend and I don't see a reason why they can't get better. I can see this team developing greater chemistry defensively as many teams do the longer they play together. They have the physical ability to defend better as a team.
Fine. That's your opinion. Not evidence. Let's make the distinction.
Posted by nixluva:
We don't need a Hi IQ PG!
LOL. Apparently losing is fine, then.
Posted by nixluva:
Would I welcome one? Of course, but that's never been the main reason a team wins.
With rare exception, most teams that win championships have one. Main reason? Not necessarily. Major piece, yes!
Posted by nixluva:
There have been many teams that have good PG play, but not spectacular PG play and won. We have enough at the PG position. With Steph, Mardy, Jamal, Nate and maybe even Dickau if he keeps him. When you speak of a "need" it puts a priority on that and for this team that isn't the case.
You've now twisted from high IQ to talent/potential. No point rebutting a change of argument. Nobody has ever said Steph wasn't talented enough. That's not the reason he's a career loser. That's all I'm going to say.
Posted by nixluva:
We don't have great interior D
Understatement of the century.
Posted by nixluva:
but that's the one area that can be said to be truly weak. It's going to take a much bigger effort from Curry, Lee, Jared and Zach to improve in that area. It's not impossible, but so far it's the biggest ?
Nice, but again all speculation. It's not a weakness.. it's a GLARING and potentially DIASTEROUS weakness.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.