Well I Think JJ Reddick Gave Without A Doubt A Poor Response To The Current Discourse Around The NBA Product
As a representative of the NBA causals, I am compelled to write this counter-blog to Greenie's from yesterday where he laments the growing negative narrative on NBA three-point shooting.
Since I just posted a blog the other day in support of the NBA haters with graphs that show the quantitative growth in three-point data over time, I have two words for Greenie I want to say loud and clear from the safety behind my computer screen and the fact that I live on the complete other side of the country.
A couple main points from my blog to show just how absurd three-point shooting has become:
But Greenie already knows I disagree with him. How? Because I reached out to Greenie. Like an adult. I didn't just sign into Barstool Sports HQ and start slamming keys to write a scathing dunk blog. I messaged him. Not for an argument. But for a discussion. Like an adult. And we chatted back and forth listening to each other's points and responding in a respectful manner that progressed the conversation. Like adults.
THEN I went to Barstool Sports HQ.
That's how it's done kids. But seriously. Even though everything Greenie said about JJ Reddick reeks of cope, we had a great discussion and I learned we both view on the same major fix the NBA needs to make the game more exciting. I'll get to that.
But let's get to Greenies takes from his blog. Because they're bad. But I'm going to try to do the reverse steelman. Instead of build him up only to inevitably tear him down, I'm going to hash out the bad takes first so I can end it where I wholeheartedly agree with him. Because personally, I'd love to see the game get fixed, and as it turns out, we agree on the single thing the league could do to get back on track.
Let's start with the first two paragraphs of Greenies blog. Here's the gist: "The same people who are very quick to tell you they no longer watch the NBA are somehow the ones who are telling you how boring it is to watch or how much a certain approach has ruined everything"… "My question to those people would be, if you're not watching, how would you know?".
I see this type of argument online and it makes my skin crawl.
Think about a genre of music you don't like. I'd wager to say whatever that genre is, you don't listen to it. Well, then how do you know you don't like it?
That's the logic of Greenies question. In order to know, we must Bird Box ourselves to the TV and watch. Of course, if we do that, then the argument turns into "if it was so bad, then why are you watching?" Just like the NFL with awful roughing the quarterback penalties everyone hates.
Here's the real answer though, just to cater to the question. Speaking on behalf of the NBA casuals, we turn on games periodically and can tell within minutes that players aren't giving a full effort. That includes settling for threes with minimal ball movement in many instances. Eventually we waive the white flag and turn it off. Not all games are like this. But enough that it's a legitimate problem.
Next thing. We need to talk about this JJ Reddick interview. Which was the main point of Greenie's blog.
Let's start with the fact that we're using JJ Reddick as his appeal to authority. Convenient choice, I'd say. Don't get me wrong. JJ is both smart and entertaining. Including his "brief" response to the three-point issue. I'd sip a cab and talk ball with him anytime. But let's not act like he doesn't have a real potential bias here. He's a current coach. You really think any coach is going to say what they teach their players to do is boring? And the fact that he just so happens to have taken more threes than twos in his playing career doesn't exactly help. I mean, come on. Looking at the stats, there was only one player in NBA history who shot at least 9,900 field goals (including playoffs) and had a higher three-point attempt rate than Reddick. Any guesses, any guesses?
Kyle Korver. 62% on 10,204 career shots (playoffs included). Reddick 54.5% on 9,929. Just so that doesn't keep your brain from wandering.
But hey. I actually hate it when people disregard opinions because they presume a personal bias. Let's hear some of JJ's actual argument. He threw a few things around, but this angle struck me as an especially sad take:
"If I'm a casual fan and you tell me the product sucks, Well I'm not gonna watch the product and that's what's really happened over the last 10-15 years." - JJ Reddick.
Sad. Just sad. We're really going to do the chicken or egg thing? You mean to tell me that the NBA is this hidden suspense-filled wonder that's not being watched only because of online haters? I thought Adam Silver was just spin-zoning the ratings drop with "hey were' really cool online though!" Which one is it?
This argument is what terrible employees tell themselves when they don't get a promotion for 10-15 years. They blame it on their coworkers who said mean things about them doing a bad job. Spoiler alert, it's probably because of the bad job that they did. If you build it, they will come. If you knock it down. They will leave. It's really that simple.
JJ Reddick can be as handsome as he wants, but little of what he said in that 4-minute clip made any sense.
But if we're just cherry-picking past NBA players that just so happen to also be current coaches who were all-time predominantly three-point shooters themselves, then why not see what less bias-encumbered ex-players think of the game? Shaquille O'Neal? Charles Barkley? Kenny Smith? Gilbert Arenas? I'm probably missing plenty of others, but none of these guys would mince words with how unappealing the game has turned into. We've all seen it. But to blame this on them for artificially building a false narrative is such a sad cope. Absolute loser mentality.
But let's be fair and exlore what it is that makes people like Greenie still think… the NBA, it's fantastic!
Greenie shared a perfectly valid perspective in that he enjoys watching the differences in play-style that lead up to teams taking threes. The tactics that spawn an uncontested look. For instance, the Celtics often run five players all capable of drive and kick outs:
Or the Warriors with screens and off ball cuts:
"The idea that everyone plays the same and it's all just chucking 3PA is simply not a true statement. But in order to know that, you have to watch." - Greenie
Greenies gripe (great name for a blog segment btw feel free to use) here is that even though the end result of a three being shot is the same, there's beauty in the process. Perfectly valid perspective. Miley Cyrus would agree. And of course, not all threes are boring. The Cavaliers know what's up as there's a reason they have a better three-point shooting percentage than the 30 other teams in NBA history that shot at a higher rate.
Ball movement. It's beautiful. But overall, this isn't the norm. And that's the problem. The ratings are telling us that. Down 28 percent from an already abysmal baseline of whatever the numbers were last season. Yet other major sports are up. I understand there's issues with finding ways to watch the games, but there's no way that accounts for 1/4th of its audience to drop from a year ago. Are illegal streams really that much better than 2023? Are the x's really that much easier to see?
One last thing to pick apart. Shot variation. Greenie uses this tweet below in his blog to show the real difference is that we are just losing long-two point shots in replacement of threes. So things really aren't that bad, right?
If there's one thing I know, it's when a graph is telling tricks. This one leads you to believe the only thing that's changed are long twos near the three-point line. But you'll notice it doesn't distinguish between a short midrange from a long midrange. That way you can't really see the finer details.
But the league-wide shot heat maps hide no details. And although I made this a couple years ago now and it needs to be updated, you can imagine how much more dichotomous it is for the 2024 and 2025 season.
This is what people are talking about Greenie. The x-rays shows all the broken bones. The midrange is getting carved out like the middle class. And we all know why this is. Analytics. Team's would be dumb to not use the numbers and play to win. That's why something needs to change in the league office.
And that's where Greenie and I agree!
BRING BACK THE HAND CHECK BABY! I was shocked to learn he was on the same page as me here. That and re-adjusting the officials to allow for physicality for something other than Giannis' left shoulder. Want to chuck some threes? Well you're not going to get the space when you have a wrist on your waist. There's nothing wrong with having subjectivity on where too far is too far. Think of the trenches of the NFL. "They could call holding on every play" is a cliche we hear all the time. But you know what? The refs for all their foibles, do a decent job of policing holding calls. Watch flopping decline as a result of this change because players won't be trained like Pavlovian dogs to take a dive for a cheap whistle.
All in all - Greenie and I are far apart in many ways here, but I think I have the public on my side as well as unbiased past-players. Haters unite! But he's right in the fact that the focus of the NBA's problems aren't really three-point shooting. That's just a symptom. It's the loss of physicality. 2004 broke the NBA. Changes were reactionary and not thought of long-term. We're seeing the result now, and have been for years.
I'll end with this. JJ Reddick did say something I have to give credit for: "The league is more talented and skilled than it was 18 years ago". SAID JJ. So why not take the bumpers off the lanes so we can see who the truly great players are? The ones that can work through the physicality. When everyone looks like Michael Jordan, no one looks like Michael Jordan.
Maybe then you might be able to get someone to try on defense, or just in general at all, don't you think?