Looks like it is 121.3 from Game 59 on. http://www.basketball-reference.com...&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=1&order_by=off_rtg
btw: NBA.com has different results for ORtg, because bref and nba.com use different Pace formulas. nba.com is lower....but it's all relative to other teams....but don't compare between the two sites.
Also interesting... 2PT field goal attempts - Rockets on pace to be ALL-TIME lowest team this season 2PT field goals (made) - Rockets on pace to be ALL-TIME lowest team this season Total field goal attempts - Rockets on pace to be #7 ALL-TIME fewest attempts this season Total field goal (made) - Rockets on pace to be #6 ALL-TIME fewest attempts this season Live by the 3, Win by the 3.
Of course, that would only count seasons since the advent of the 3pt Shot. To put this into perspective...CLE is on track to be 4th lowest 2PA. BOS 6th. DAL 8th. BKN and UTA 12th and 13th. So, it's a new era thing. Rockets are also 3rd All-Time in 2P% at 55.2%* Layups, 3s and FTs. * currently tied with this year's GSW for 3rd all-time.
I think the biggest reason is Morey forbid mid-range jumpers. without those jumpers dragging down the %, 2% are bound to appear better on paper.
Sweet merciful Moses, I bet Daryl Morey is sitting in a hot tub smoking a fatty while giggling like a little girl.
Morey and MDA (and many in the league) don't say mid-range 2ptrs drag down FG%, they say they drag down eFG% and TS% and ORtg. Big difference. So, Rockets have the 3rd best 2P% of all time and best ORtg of all time, because they spread the floor and only shoot layups....easy buckets, 3s or FTs. That's the formula.
Is it the case that a team wit ha "high variance" offense will tend to under perform their expected wins, or that they will tend to be a higher discrepancy between their wins and expected wins? It would be interesting to see if there's any such correlation. I have a hunch, not based on much. that above-average teams with high variance offenses will tend to under perform their expected wins, and below-average teams with high variance offenses will tend to over perform their expected wins.
I don't follow. High variance means we should have a lot of blowouts. But it doesn't necessarily mean that we would over or under perform the Expected Wins. High variance is good for underdog because luck plays a more important role in a small sample. BTW, the Rockets are 28-8 in games that were decided by 10 or more points; 23-4 in games decided by 15 or more points; 15-0 in games decided by 20 or more points. That's pretty impressive. (A lot of those blowouts happened in December when we looked like nobody could ever stop us.) I think a high variance team facing a lot of inferior teams would produce this kind of records. In that sense, underperforming Expected Wins may mean that we are a superior team, sort of like what the Warriors did in the past two seasons.
Of course, I'm just hypothesizing. In all my posts, I should have said the Formula having trouble predicting wins as accurately as normal *could* be a sign of a high variance offense. Expected wins are determined by the pt differential, so blowouts increases the expected wins, but remains just one win. So, the more blowouts versus just steady methodical wins increases your expected wins....thus you under-perform. follow me? So, my hypothesis is not to say that you are under-performing wins, but rather view it as you are over-performing the size and number of your blowouts....wrt to the Formula being able to predict your wins.
Flops = Softness No hand checking = Softness Free Throws were more earned in the 80's/90's. Flagrants, too.
NBA.com's Offensive Rating calculation is probably more accurate than basketball-reference.com's, so the gap would between B.L. (before Lou) and A.L. (in the year of our Lou) would be : OffRtg season (68 games) : 112.4 OffRtg B.L (58 games) : 111.5 OffRtg A.L (10 games) : 117.4
I was responding to the comment "The 3pters seems to get the most public attention but for me it's our 2% which is most impressive." Rocket didn't suddently become a better 2pt shooting team. The % only appear to be higher because they were NOT shooting those jumpers.
In regards to @heypartner 's comments about the pythag and overperforming/ under etc .. some good points. Most GM's will likely tell you this is just statistical noise. In baseball with 162 games , deviation from the pythag outcome can often be surmised as a sample size issue lol. I think Us underperforming the pythag record is probably nothing major. Yes, it generally means that your blowouts are big and that your losses are close, because that's how you achieve the point differential anyways. I get how the next logical step is to say well, we take so many 3's this increases the variance so that's a reason why we are underperforming the point differential. BUT...for me to believe that its our variance effecting the pythag performance I would have to see this trend continue and I would probably have to look over the games this season to see how other teams guarded our 3. IF it was a case of us just missing shots I could see it, but if we were missing because of how it was defended OR they ran us off the line and we took fewer attempts then that's not variance... its us having an exploitable weakness. Also if the trend continues it might just mean that Dantoni is a shitty in-game manager. Do we have any data from how his other squads have looked in comparison their pythag records ?
