Um skip the metrics class, I know efg and TS%.We were talking about the first quarter no? Curry was 2-5 at the end of the first, 2-7 by the half when the game was at its closest plus all those turnovers. In what world is this a good percentage in anyway you slice it? As I said during the game, it was the worse 14pt half I had ever saw.
Game 1?
5-13 at the half when the game was closest.
Nobody cares about empty stats. Curry has only waken up when the team is already up. This would be called front running if it were any other player.
If you know efg and ts%, why are you ignoring them? You keep mentioning his regular field goal percentage which, as I stated, ignores the fact that threes are more valuable and doesn't account for free throws. Saying he was 2 for 5 in the first quarter and claiming he was bad is flat out wrong.
First off, one of his three missed field goals was a full court heave as the buzzer sounded.
Secondly, he hit a three in the first quarter, so his 2 for 5 is actually 2 and a half out of 5 based on efg (50%). I also don't penalize guys for attempting full court shots.
And finally, he was 10 for 10 from the free throw line! That matters. It was a close game and he drew fouls and made the free throws. You can't pretend that didn't happen.
I agree he didn't play well in the second quarter of game 2. But we're talking about 1 bad quarter out of 8.
The 5 of 13 in game 1's first half included two threes, which again, based on efg makes him 6 of 13 (There's nothing terrible about that).
And for the third time, you're argument ignores the 2nd half of both games. The Cavs are a capable team with a lot of firepower that can come back. Curry's performance in both second halfs prevented any comeback from being possible. That is valuable. Saying a players performance when their team is up 10 doesn't matter ignores the possibility of a comeback from the other team.
