Corner Three Walt Frazier, right, shown here in a 1970 playoff game against John Havlicek of the Boston Celtics. Associated Press You ask; I answer. Every week in this space, I’ll field three questions posed via email at marcstein-newsletter@nytimes.com. (Please include your first and last name, as well as the city you’re writing in from, and make sure the subject line reads “Corner Three.”) Q: Please compare and contrast Stephen Curry’s individual style of play to Walt Frazier’s and the ball movement of the current Warriors and the old Knicks. — Bob Purcell (San Diego) STEIN: You must know that I’m a sucker for any question that gives me a chance to talk about or explore the 1970s. So I couldn’t resist your topic, even though I must also concede that I really didn’t start following the N.B.A. until 1975-ish and thus can’t claim firsthand knowledge of the Knicks’ glory days. Fortunately for you and anyone else interested, I was able to consult a true expert on both those Knicks and these Warriors. Jim Barnett has been Golden State’s color analyst on television for the past 34 seasons and played in the N.B.A. from 1966-1977 — including a season and change with the Knicks as Frazier’s teammate in 1975-76. Here’s Jim take: “Comparisons from different generations are always tough, especially since the 3-point line has drastically changed the game. But Frazier was bigger and stronger. And a much, much better defender. Frazier could shoot with a man in his face; he didn’t need as much space to shoot as Curry does. He had great court awareness and vision and didn’t make a lot of mistakes. He was much more deliberate player. “Steph has more flair to his game and is a much better shooter — particularly from distance. Had there been a 3-point line in Frazier’s era, I don’t think he could have taken advantage of it. I believe he would have struggled from that distance; Frazier’s comfort zone was the midrange. Steph is more acrobatic on drives, whereas Frazier used his strength to finish inside. Frazier also didn’t have a left-handed finish like Steph does. Curry is a more clever passer but also more daring, which makes him more turnover-prone. “On defense, both have quick hands for steals, but, again, Frazier’s strength gave him an advantage. He used to steal the ball off the dribble by reaching in and cleverly moving your forearm away while getting his hand on the ball. He was so good at it that the referees could not detect a foul. He kind of slid his arm inside yours and prevented you from getting to the ball. “The bottom line is that both are great generational players. Frazier was more consistent and steady. Curry is more electric and prone to more explosive scoring runs.” As for the ball movement part of the question, Barnett adds: “The ball often stops with the Warriors for more one-on-one play. But there are similarities. The Knicks’ ball movement was magical in 1970 in their championship year. Bill Bradley was constantly moving to get open; he was slow afoot but had a deadly release. With both teams you see stars sacrificing for the good of the team. The Warriors, like those Knicks, are at their best when ball and player movement are in sync — four or five passes without a dribble sometimes.” Q: How do the front offices of rebuilding teams usually approach their coaching searches? Do they try to focus on hiring the coach they think will lead the franchise back into the playoffs? Or are they viewing the first two, three years of a rebuild as transitional and recognize that the next coach is probably not going to last long enough to see the team being a contender again? More specifically for the Cavaliers, they seem to be interviewing all the up-and-coming N.B.A. assistants. Do these candidates usually favor getting their own head coaching gig over remaining a top assistant on a playoff team? What does the league value when assessing coaching talent? — Alexandre Raffalli STEIN: I understand why you’re looking for a common thread, in trying to predict what your team will do, but it would be hard to pinpoint what the “league” is looking for because no two franchises are alike. The Cavaliers have actually made it pretty clear that they are looking for a young head coach who will embrace analytics and try to replicate the heavy-on-development atmosphere that has birthed such good results in Brooklyn with Kenny Atkinson and in Atlanta with Lloyd Pierce. Phoenix, by contrast, isn’t much closer to contention than the Cavaliers are, but the Suns targeted the more established Monty Williams in hopes that he can give them a strong voice and presence. The Suns see Williams as the key to establishing a new culture and reputation for a franchise that hasn’t been able to get out of the lottery for nearly a decade. More teams are going the Cleveland route than taking the Phoenix approach. But there is no universal template. Q: When does it become public? Did reporters know before today that Foster was going to do a game? — @jasonpuckett20 from Twitter STEIN: This question was a response to my tweet last week which explained that the league chooses its referee teams for the first four games for every playoff series before the series starts. The pairings for each game are not publicly announced until game day. So, no, reporters did not know Scott Foster would officiate Game 2 of the Golden State/Houston series until that morning. But the N.B.A.’s referee union (@OfficialNBARefs on Twitter) confirmed the league’s policy here on the timing of referee assignments. Perhaps they should announce the assignments for Game 1 through Game 4 in every series before the series even starts to achieve full transparency. But I don’t dispute that this is the procedure if the union describes it as such.