The Rockets put up the 10th best offense last of all time. Not in the league, or for a season...but of all time. This includes everybody.... ever. It was on par or better than most editions of the Showtime Lakers, the Celtics, Jordan's Bulls. Pretty much name any team ever. And it was the only thing remotely close to last year's Warriors (2nd best of all time). But of course, in the playoffs it got figured out (remember how the Spurs "figured it out" in game 1?) by all of those good defenses - I remember posting at length at how marvelous it was that OKC and SAS figured out that in order to beat the Rockets, you have to become a master of the dark art of unguarded FG% defense - and figure it out they did! OKC was able to ride their figuring-outing to barely avoid being swept. SAS won 4-2. Back to the drawing board - time to go Grit & Grind, at least it didnt' get figured out. Shut up with this stupidity. Honestly, just shut up. This is everything that was bad about the way we used to think and write about sports. Back when we were reliant on the Barkleys or radio-call in people for our analysis. We live in a much better, brighter age (which is also terrifying, for other reasons, but I digress..) where arguing in dumb cliches and a sh-t salad of logical fallacies is no longer the norm. Be smarter about things.
Lol bro what are you talking about? Our offensive rating went from like 117 to 110 in the playoffs (7th). We were ridiculously easy to game plan against and didn't adjust. Both the numbers and eye test prove it, but sure it's "absolute nonsense". Spurs only had to guard two areas of the floor. You should probably go back and re-watch the Spurs series and look at how they guarded Harden, a more than capable midrange shooter, and get back to me. I get that and agree, I just hope he can adjust in the playoffs when teams start to game plan against it. We did not adjust last year which is the concern.
My god, are sitting here trying to tell me that our historic regular season offense, which was achieved by going against every level of defense (ranging from the best to the worst) was not as effective when we went against the best defensive team in the league?!?! Groundbreaking! Of course our offense isn't going to be as good when we play better defensive teams. No offensive philosophy is going to improve when you play better defensive teams. Hmm, I wonder if teams who played weaker defensive teams, if there offense improved. Spurs did not "only have to guard two areas of the floor". That is contrived nonsense. Perhaps you misquoted, my comment was about Ryan Anderson.
Dude, relax. Let's have a good discussion. What my point is that while our offense was historically great indeed playing against 29 other teams with limited opportunities to gameplan against us, when we went against one of the top defenses (something we obviously have to do multiple times in order to win a championship) they took away what we like to do and we did not show the ability to adjust. I don't see how that is a ridiculous comment. Our offensive philosophy is fine but if you can't counteract other teams' adjustments you won't win ****. In Harden's case, they were leaving him wide open coming off screens and just parked someone under the rim. He had open jumpers all day long but refused to take them. That's dumb. Same concept. They just haven't done that to Anderson so there's no example to point to. They obviously did it to Harden last year's playoffs.
Rockets shot 22-50 from 3 in Game 1 -- BLOW OUT Game 2: Ryno and EGo shot 7-10 from 3, in a close game, prior to the Spurs 20pt blowout in the 4th Q Harden scored 43 pts in Game 3 with a ton of shots at the rim Rockets shot 19-43 from 3 in Game 4 -- BLOW OUT Ariza, Ryno and Bev were a combined 11-21 for 3 in Game 5, Away, tied 2-2 going to Overtime Pops didn't dare us to shoot the midrange. He dared us to beat him from 3 by using a sophisticated help defense to try to contain the Harden and Capela rim attack....and, imo, our system succeeded, considering how over-matched we were in talent and 4th Q poise, and big underdogs to win.
That is because systems like ours that attempt to deduce the best systemic offensive approach over a certain range of time rely on metrics that are more or less consistent over the course of an 82-game season minus a few outliers (injuries affecting performance, massive change in usage, etc.). Yes we will blow a few games where our team is in a slump, but we are maximizing our ceiling (and lowering our floor; i.e. increasing the variance) each and every game to the point where we should also be winning games we wouldn't normally if we didn't account for analytics and our mean performance should also be higher since we are statistically getting a better return shooting 3's over 2's. More wins + more upsets (wins and losses). This system will be way way more volatile in the playoffs. Doesn't mean it doesn't work or falls apart, it just means its more volatile. There are variables like smaller sample size, the fact that you are playing the same team for an entire series rather than a distribution of teams over a period of an 82-game season. There are mental/physical change of pace differences that could affect players that they probably don't experience in the regular season, coasters play harder in the playoffs, etc. I.E. the system is 100% fine for the regular season given the players on your roster fit the system (3&D). Inevitably, we are not going to beat the Warriors WITHOUT increasing our performance variance. Flat out not gonna happen. If anyone thinks any team in the league on paper can match up with the Warriors in a 7 game series, I would like to see their faces when they, at worst, go 16-2 this time in the post-season. -------------------- Our average shooting percentages last season: Restricted area: 64.6% Paint (non restricted): 37.3% Mid-range: 36.1% Left corner 3: 37.6% Right corner 3: 39.5% Straight on 3: 35.1% Points per possession (per 100 shots): Restricted area: 64.6% = 1.292 ppp Paint (non restricted): 37.3% = .746 ppp Mid-range: 36.1% = .722 ppp Left corner 3: 37.6% = 1.128 ppp Right corner 3: 39.5% = 1.185 ppp Straight on 3: 35.1% = 1.053 ppp Notice how godawful our floater range and mid range are. Okay. Maybe we just suck at the 2. What about the best mid-range/paint shooters in the league? Golden State shot a league best 44.2% from mid-range and the Dallas Mavericks shot a league best 44.9% in the paint (minus the restricted area). Mid-range: 44.2% = .884 ppp Paint: 44.9% = .898 ppp Shooting really well from the midrange has diminishing returns. Even when you have a mid-range god like DeMar Derozan, he would need to shoot a blistering 59% from mid-range jumpshots to match our average points per possession from our three pointers on any given night. TL;DR: Our system is the only reason we are a top 2 team in the regular season. Falling back on the midrange will just mean we lose more games on average and maybe win back a handful of games where we happened to be on a three point drought and we happened to have a great night from midrange.
Harden didn't need to shoot in Game 1 and Game 4, and Harden went to the rim at will in Game 3. That is system success when you are an overmatched underdog. There is no other system that could have had that success with such a talent disparity. Spurs blew us out on a 4thQ 12-0 run when Harden was resting in Game 2, and they beat us with superior talent and 4th Q poise in Game 3 and 5. Our system gave us a fighter's chance at the upset.
It is ridiculous because even Coach Pop mentioned in the 'regular' season that we were the most difficult offense to deal with and he only watched films of us. This is a testament of how good our offense is. Our defense is what let us down last year. Additionally, it has been mentioned that we had one of the best offensive season all time and we will abandon that after ONE year of failure? Why don't we try the approach of fine tuning the same concept, user better personal to fit the system and add better defense?
wtf? why did you associate mid range shots with a step back? thats a serious skilled move. it doesnt have to be a fancy shot. the only thing that matters is whether you're playing yoru best basketball or not, not if its easier to close otu on mid range than 3pt. if the team is better with some kind of a mid range game than it should do it because thats their best gameplan.
MDA & Morey have an influence on how the team plays, that's all I am saying. It is evident Harden has gone away from his mid-range game so my fear that CP3 will do the same is not as far-fetched as some make it out to be. Of course my statement is over the top, that is exactly to get a reaction out of people and start a discussion.
Yep. I've been frustrated even with the preseason wins. It's the same fun regular season offense that will be exposed in the playoffs. I was really hoping CP3 could bring some structure and he and Harden could dominate taking turns running the pick and roll but there's no one good enough to roll or pick and pop from mid range. CP3 is awesome at mid range but he too keeps passing it up even though Morey says it'd be stupid not to let him take those because he's so efficient at it. We'll see if CP3 grows frustrated and starts coaching on his own a little more which I'm sure coach will be fine with.
I’m not even saying the system sucks. I’m saying it needs tweeks and wrinkles. Like more cutting in the paint and maybe some Harden/CP3 PNRs inside the arc to allow Paul to shoot from his sweet spots. There needs to be tweeks
Agreed! That is also why we need someone in the front court who can create his own shots and help facilitate for both Harden and CP3. When okc decided not to guard the Midrange... Nene just ate them up... clear lanes to drive and potentially draw fouls and wide open shots for the big fella. The problem is he is injury prone and he is at the age where he is best coming off the bench playing limited minutes. If Morey is honestly all in, then we need to get that other star to help bring a other dimension to our offence.
I've heard this said a few times. It's parroting what DM started saying last year. I mean I get it. I understand it. There's no team on the planet likely to out-talent the Warriors who, by the way, also have a fantastic scheme. So you're only chance is to get lucky and outperform during a series. I get it. I just don't like hearing it or relying on it, because it does indeed effectively mean maybe we'll get lucky. Which again... might be true... but shouldn't be that key in team formation or strategy or anything. It should be more important that DM continues to try and close the talent gap, not just try and fill the talent gap with wildy variable players. Especially since, imo, the DM/MDA current system introduces that variability as much as the players themselves do. Yes, this X 1,000. I believe MDA was quoted in the off-seasons as saying they'd be adding some of those secondary and tertiary wrinkles in his second year. I have yet to see it. The reality might be we never see it... because part of the basis of the offense is everybody being in their specific spots so the creator knows instinctively where he can go. If Harden has to think "Is Ariza in the corner or did he move to execute a quick downpick for a teammate" while in the middle of a drive, it perhaps messes up the timing they have going.
