Harden is a star player who can make his own shot. But we don't want to rely on this because it mucks up the other ways we can score. We don't want to be the Lakers with Kobe taking 40 shots a game. The problem with Harden is that he is really good at the PnR but he hasn't been able to use it that much this season because Asik is a poor PnR partner. If Asik sets a screen (usually a poor one) the defender will just double the guard. And Asik isn't athletic enough to roll to the basket all the way from the top of the key to make them pay..
The mid-range shot has really disappeared in the whole league, actually. You really only see it when teams post up there all stars at 15 feet. The reason is because lay ups and three pointers are the most efficient shots in basketball. Though, this isn't true about all PLAYERS, obvious ex. Dirk Nowitzki. The league is really made out of all stars and specialists, and the specialists can either knock down the three or dunk it.
N.O. announcers said it was the old Celtics trick. McHale wants the opponents to defend the full court on fast break, and McHale also wants opponents to defend the full half court on half court offense.
The idea is to run their opponents as much as they can and to take advantage of being an younger team.
I don't know, tha internets says everything is Schaub and Kubiak's fault, so maybe this is their fault too?
Well, the reason for that is because guys like Morris, Patterson, and Asik have been such a liability on the offensive end lately, Morris can't hit an open jumper and Patterson's offensive production has disappeared, opponents just don't bother paying any attention to them and just clogs the lane to prevent Harden, Lin, Delfino, and Parsons from attacking the rim. Other teams know that the Rockets top players love to attack the rim and get to the line so they just play zone and clog up the lane which makes the Rockets into a 3 point shooting team. If any of our 4s can at least be consistent from downtown, other teams have to respect them enough to go out and contest their shot which leaves room for Harden or Lin to attack the rim. But because they can't hit an open jumper, teams just don't even bother paying any attention to them...
Mid rangers are "low percentage and low reward" however I think a midranger is high percentage because it's closer and used to surprise opponents and force them to always take it into consideration.
All this inefficient shot bs about midrange is just stupid imo. Stats do like sometimes. Michael Jordan won 6 championships using midrange as his bread and butter. Karl Malone's midrange jumper made the pick and roll deadly with Stockton. Same for Amare/Nash during the Suns' D'Antoni era and same now with the Spurs' Duncan/Parker who have dominant midrange games. OKC, Clippers, Miami, all the top teams utilize midrange. Teams that live and die by the 3 ball don't win championships.
Teams that have very little experience and so few legitimate shot creators on their team, like the Rockets, also don't win championships. So what? The goal is to win as many games as we can. And while our strategy might backfire when shots aren't falling, if in the long run we win more games with it isn't that what matters most? For the season, our effective FG% is 51.8% which is 5th in the league. Overall, our offensive efficiency is 8th. Considering our lack of strong scorers on the team, I think that's better than what anyone could have reasonably expected heading into the season. And our shot selection, while extreme, definitely has something to do with it.
The league has changed a lot since Jordan and the Bulls. Today 24% of all NBA shots are from 3P. % of total shots from 3P up till 01/12/13 NYK .34 HOU .33 (2011-2012 was .24) LAL .31 POR .29 ATL .29 SAS .28 MIA .28 TOR .27 BRK .27 CLE .26 LAC .26 OKC .25 GSW .24 WAS .24 DAL .24 IND .24 SAC .23 MIN .23 NOH .23 ORL .23 DEN .22 PHI .22 PHO .21 UTA .21 DET .21 MIL .21 CHA .20 BOS .20 MEM .17 CHI .16
we are taking a lot of 3s but sometimes it seems as if we don't even get the best looks and we still take those shots... chandler parsons takes 3s with his feet crooked sometimes. theres no reason he should have to take a 3 like that
Like others have mentioned, the layup or close to the rim shots and 3 pointers are the most 'efficient' shots to take. However, if like many such strategies a mixed strategy is often the best. Sure, layups have a higher % than 3 pointers and have a higher PPP, but if one only took layups, the opponents can pack the paint and stop your layups having such a high efficiency. Similarly, at the other end of the spectrum, if you only take 3 pointers, the opponents can stay up close to you to prevent you getting uncontested threes. I think this train of thought extends to midrange jumpers. If one only takes 3-pointers and layups, then when you drive, the opponent _knows_ that you wont stop and pop - hence they can back off of you and defend the layup or pass. To optimise your strategy, then, you may need to include the mid-range jumper in your arsenal such that the opponent cannot just defend the layup or pass when you drive, but will need to stay up close enough to you in case you pop a jumper. For example, if your team's average point-per-play is 1.2, then when you drive and you have the option of taking a jumper which as a 60+% chance, then it is a good choice and reasonable option to take the jumper. Taking only 3-pointers and only layups removes options that the opponents have to defend against, and although _most_ of the time one should take mainly 3-pointers and layups, an optimal strategy must include jumpers if they give a better option on that particular play (eg if you're open, and you're a good mid-range jump shooter).
i feel the same way. Missed 3s will not be higher efficiency than midrange 2s. Statistics could guide the strategy, but limited our shots to 3s or bring to the rim will make our O too predictable. When the defense adjusted to our strategy, then our % of 3s and shot at rim will drop, which will make mid range 2s not necessary less efficient. Also, IMO games are all about adjustment of match up, we could not keep one strategy regardless of our player's hot or cold. When they are hot, obviously it is the best for them to shot 3s, not settle at long 2s. But when they are cold, or opponent are packing the lane, they should try to mix in some midrange to make their shot easier, and try to gain their feeling and confidence back.
Either that, or have or our players shoot better. During the winning streak, we were making 3s at borderline top-10 in %. These past few games, they've been utter crap. We don't have to be great at it, just slightly above average and we should win 45-50 games. If these guys were shooting long 2s instead of 3s, we'd be even worse. No one on this team can make 45-50% of their 2pt jumpshots.
The mid range game is needed when the other team has great help side defense. This is why a dominant defensive big is almost always needed to win in the playoffs. A guy that can play helps use allows the guys outside to defend the 3 better, and it often forces players into the mid range area. Even if they throw a floater or a tear drop at the rim, they still shot an inefficient attempt. It's also why stars with mid range games shine in the playoffs(Kobe,Melo, Jordan) notice how Lebron didn't dominate the finals until he developed a midrange, back to the basket game.
There is a value in mid range shooting IF you have a knock down mid range shooter in terms of forcing the defense to be honest. However, the mid-range is still an inefficient shot, just one with fewer trade offs if you have a knock down mid range shooter. The problem is, there really aren't all that many top flight back to the basket or mid range shooters to go around. Until we get an ELITE mid range shooter, that person is pretty much just going to clog the paint. If you are going to have a mid range shooter, then they have to be good enough that you can force a double team or mismatch through rotation. Right now, we don't have any mid-range shooters that are that good. Here's an article with some interesting commentary on the mid range vs 3 point efficiency argument... http://www.krossover.com/blog/2012/10/death-of-the-mid-range-jumper-statistically-speaking/ Essentially, the problem Houston has is not that it isn't shooting mid range jumpers, it's that we don't have the personnel to force other teams to play the mid range game efficiently. What we have is one All Star/Superstar in Harden, and then a bunch of role players who are below to above average. This is why we need a Star level PF. One big who can force a double team in the post or stretch the floor at a highly efficient rate would have a tremendous effect in terms of creating opportunities against the best defenses.
do we really live and die by the three? Our bread and butter had been getting points in the paint, without really having a post game and our shooters making a below average percentage of 3s. THe problem is nothing is going in right now, and teams are dictating pace! who do they think they are? let us run and stop playing d on us!
