OK Computer
Formerly known as Dejounte
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2025
- Messages
- 1,005
- Reaction score
- 763
A typical reaction every time the other team hits a three: “our three-point defense is terrible.” Doesn’t matter if the shot was contested or not. If it goes in, people jump straight to “bad defense.”
I think it’s wrong.
There’s a saying: “good defense, better offense”. And sometimes it’s luck. You can close out, contest, do everything right, and the ball still drops. That doesn’t magically turn good defense into bad defense.
I’m not saying the Spurs are great or awful on the perimeter. To judge that, you’d need numbers that separate contested threes from wide-open ones and compare that ratio with the rest of the league. Just looking at opponent three-point percentage doesn’t really tell you much by itself.
The only point here is simple: a contested three going in is not automatic proof of bad defense. Acting like every made shot is some defensive disaster ignores all the nuance of how defense works.
I think it’s wrong.
There’s a saying: “good defense, better offense”. And sometimes it’s luck. You can close out, contest, do everything right, and the ball still drops. That doesn’t magically turn good defense into bad defense.
I’m not saying the Spurs are great or awful on the perimeter. To judge that, you’d need numbers that separate contested threes from wide-open ones and compare that ratio with the rest of the league. Just looking at opponent three-point percentage doesn’t really tell you much by itself.
The only point here is simple: a contested three going in is not automatic proof of bad defense. Acting like every made shot is some defensive disaster ignores all the nuance of how defense works.
