We dont need a Plan B yet. It was only 1 loss and we will get over it. But Plan B would be to rebuild. Trade Harden for some young guys/picks Look to have a 5 year plan and go after a chip then There are a lot of talented teams in the association. Only 1 team wins a championship a year. Outside of Raptors and Mavs over the last 20 years, every other team was a dynasty of perfectly assembled teams with lots of luck with personnel go their way (Warriors, Heat, Cavs, Spurs, Bulls, Pistons, Lakers, Celtics etc.).
First off Roxtxia, I appreciate your take and trying to amending your tone. Not looking to pick a fight or jump on you. Just forward the conversation from your post. I think this is one of those things that would fall under the "pulling the goalie" type of logic as it relates to risk and reward. I'm assuming (ie having blind faith) that MDA and Morey have done the homework and the game plan they have settled on is the one that has the highest statistical probability of winning regularly. Like in blackjack, I've heard that if you hold a 10 and a 5 and the dealer is showing 8 you always hit. Statistically it is always the right move. Every. Single. Time. Does it mean you will always win. No, not at all, but you are more likely to win. Now, maybe there is a problem with not properly executing the strategy that's been put in front of them (other than making more 3's) but it seems to me the strategy is sound. I hate it when they are missing threes. However, I love it when the 3's fall and they can erase a double digit lead, or put up a double digit lead, in a matter of a minute. 3 is more than 2.
We can add some cuts, we are STILL going to have to make outside shots. Do you really think we are going to successfully beat teams all game on cuts? Please That’s an easy adjustment. Like it or not we have to shoot a respectable percent from outside. They are giving the shot to us we need to make it. The good news is we don’t need anything crazy from outside. We can stay in just about any game at 33% which is below league average. It all starts with James.
Plan A is 3pointer Plan B is free throw Morey need to sign 3 best bench 3 point shooters. Rivers, House and mclemore are not playable 2nd round playoffs.
So what are we arguing? We both agree on the issues to just stubbornly sticking to a game plan. I do see we're not talking about the same thing, just getting by a defender who is closing out is the not the same as when you give a guy the ball that he can options to really shake the defender and create. And still, getting by a defender is usually not in the minds of our players. You just see them passing it back or around, it's basically just a matter of waiting who takes the 3. Especially given the Clippers defense, we need true wings who can create, not occasionally get by a defender. Just my two cents.
Plan B should be call a designed play. They have them and they work well but the Rockets like the freedom of Jacking up threes that are the first available not the ones you earn thru good ball movement initiated by solid player movement. Sometimes you will have to take a stand still 3 like when the shot clock is going down but you should not be taking 35 of em like that
If you think that the decision to trade Clint Capela for Robert Covington and double-down on small ball was exclusively on Mike D'Antoni and not endorsed (or even pushed) by Daryl Morey and/or Tilman Fertitta - you'd be wrong. Mike D'Antoni and Daryl Morey have both alluded to bailing on small ball for the Suns and going to Shaq as a reactionary move. We know how that turned out. If anyone thinks Tyson Chandler or Isaiah Hartenstein are going to turn this team around you apparently didn't watch November or January. Doubling down is inherently risky but you take the risk when the alternative wasn't working. Do you know what the answer to all of life's questions is? Make open shots. This system is generating wide open shots. Professional players are required to hit them to win. These are not leaning high-degree of difficulty shots (except Harden, but that's another topic.) Now the defense repeatedly falling asleep and not appearing motivated to box out has plagued the Rockets under Mike and I do consider motivation to be a coach's job. I lay that on him. The small-ball gambit has rationale, though. We can blame it if it loses, but we weren't winning without it anyways.
You know how sometimes you have to take a step back to progress forward full steam ahead? This is what the Rockets have to analyze in regards to attacking the defense and making them work. I agree with you some of these losses are about executing the strategy correctly and consistently
#1 in 3pt FGA by a mile #23 in 3pt FG% Spamming 3’s like they’re going out of style when you’re not even middle of the pack. **** don’t make no sense.
They were guarding the 3 really well yesterday. We have to figure out how to counter it. We have enough slashers/athleticism now that we need to figure out how to get good looks in the paint or open 3 point shots.
When a computer harddrive fail, wouldn't you be glad if you had a plan B ? (local backup or in the cloud).
That Black Jack analogy only makes sense if the game doesn’t have a memory. The thing is, it does. You know what has already been played. Basketball is more like that. You wouldn’t always hit that if you were counting. In basketball, the thing you did the play before changes how the defense plays.
But it was against a title contender and Rockets couldn't even compete....in playoffs or against good defensive teams 3 point shots more likely not to fall most of the times....
Was going to say this. It's easy to see a team miss ten straight shots and think 'they're cold, let's try something else', but 3 point shots are just inherently volatile. I highly doubt the analytics bear out that if your team goes 1-10, 1-15 or whatever, that you're more likely to shoot below your team average for the rest of the game. I'd honestly expect it to be the opposite - the more shots you miss, the more likely the defense is to back off and give more open shots. I get the criticism that MDA should throw in more wrinkles, but what is he supposed to tell his players in elude to a 'plan B' - stop taking wide-open threes? Last night was rough on multiple fronts, but I'd think that's about the bottom you'll ever see in terms of shooting performance. And I think better coaches are confident in their approach and not very reactionary - it's less about the outcome than it is the process, and if we believe our best chance to beat teams is by hitting a high amount of open three's, it doesn't make sense to go away from that just because you've started bad and feel uncomfortable not tweaking things.
If you can give an example I would appreciate it. Also, I'm not necessary saying it's a direct comparison. Just the idea that I'm sure the whole strategy statistically speaking (when they give us the 3 or take it away) is a sound one regardless of whether they go 1-15 or 14-15.
Both the Clippers and the Knicks tried their best to limit Plan B (Westbrook fast breaks). Plan A failed because 3 pointers weren't falling until the 4th quarter, as in too late. The only possible Plan C for this format is utterly physical, scrappy defense. Problem is that lots of players seem to have new assignments/responsibilities or effort/focus issues on that side of the ball for the past 2 games. Someone on this team needs to take on that role and demand that of everyone else. And hope the Rockets are physically sound enough to do it.
