Kevin Martin 14th scoring in clutch(less than 5 min left in 4th and score +/-5pts)

I value stats, I just don't OVER value them, the criteria here is limited....last 5 minutes etc....

Why not something like? Behind by less than 5 points, in the last 2 or 3 minutes? When you really need a basket?

I guess the problem for me Meh, is in the definition of Clutch......to me, it is more important if you are behind or tied in a situation under 2 minutes....maybe even under a minute.....and has the ball in his hands.

You know what, now that I think about it, I would be more interested in seeing how often he generated a GOOD QUALITY shot in the clutch.....that to me would be more indicative of being clutch.

I will concede that the eyeballs say he is a VERY clutch FT shooter.

I like Kevin Martin, but the guy is not the type of player you build around, he just does not have the skillset necessary to lead a team....

DD

 

Tyrus Thomas

 

The irony of your statement is that the Rockets lose games because they can't make shots down the stretch while they have the lead.

 

carmelo is 6th :grin:

 

So, you must be trying to say that Lowry is really, really, really good since such a high degree of Martin's baskets are assisted.

Martin is a very efficient scorer....period. He is our true alpha dog. And he's doing it within the limitations of his game. No, he's not Kobe, Lebron, or Rose. He's Martin. And no, he does not have the advantage of playing alongside a Nash, or Lebron, or Kobe either.

Martin is our alpha dog that really should be our beta dog. If he were the beta dog, he would be even that much better. And whichever alpha dog we eventually get to play alongside him is going to enjoy very much how Martin converts plays.

 

The past week has really illustrated how horrible this team is in the clutch, on both sides of the ball. The Hornets, the Thunder and the Blazers games were all winnable and in none of those games were we able to generate good shots or play good defense in the final minutes of the fourth. The stats may bear out but my gut usually tells me we're going to lose when the games get nip and tuck in the fourth.

 

No, they lose games because they can't stop anyone all game long, and inevitably the Rockets have a lull in scoring while still giving up easy baskets on the other end.

There is only one guy on the team that can be trusted in a win or lose situation with the ball in his hands, and that is Aaron Brooks.

No one else on the team is capable of creating a great shot either for themselves or a teamate.

Check that, TWill might have that ability, but we don't know that yet.

DD

 

Totally agree that we lose games because we can't stop our opponents and they always go on a run at some point and either blow up our lead and put us in a tight game or they blow out a game that was previously close.

As for Brooks, he is sensational going one on one with a single defender and getting off his shot. But when the opponent decides to clamp down on him and force him to give up the basketball, as they usually do when the game is in the balance, then he is not so good as he holds the ball way too long and doesn't give his mates maximum space and time to operate. When we go to the iso offense with Brooks at the end of close games, we fail miserably. NBA defenses are just too good for that.

For that matter, you can look at stats of every player and you are going to find that realistically there are only 8 to 10 guys in the entire NBA that get the calls at the end of the game and therefore have the ability to get their offense because the defense has to back off because the defense knows the calls are going to go against them. Kobe, Lebron, Paul, DWill, DWade, Dirk, Amare, Durant, Rose......that's about it. There may be a couple more close like Westbrook. Those are the guys that the opponents know are going to get the calls going down the stretch and they cannot be touched going down the stretch.

Unfortunately, neither Brooks nor Martin falls into that special class. They can make the exact same basketball play as those tops superstars and not get the call. They can make the exact same basketball play as they made earlier in the game, and most of the time they don't get the call.

The NBA is a superstar league. It is officiated as such. Neither Martin nor Brooks fits into that category. So, with that in mind, when we go to Brooks and the defense starts trapping him out high, he's as useless as t*** on a boar hog. He's got to give up the basketball to the open man............typically Shane.......or Hayes........or some other low scoring player. We don't have anything else to go to.


Our closing offensive lineup should be:

Lowry
Brooks
Lee
Scola
Martin

Spread the floor with 4 guys and one effective post option. That's about the best we can do for one offensive possession at the end of the game.


With this team as currently constructed, we are maximizing Kevin Martin, and Kevin Martin is maximizing what he can do for us. We can't expect him to be Kobe. There's only one Kobe. We need more effective two-way players that can play effective at both ends and we need one of those players to be an alpha dog in the Melo mold.

 

This is surprising and interesting. And I agree with ashishduh, the Rockets have definitely struggled protecting small leads in the final minutes of 4th quarters, so I wouldn't neglect those scenarios when considering "clutch time".

A couple points:

• Stats are only updated through 1/6/2011.
• Sample size is 52 minutes.
• Martin only plays 70% of minutes in clutch time. That's smallest amount of all our starters, other than Chuck Hayes.
• In games he does see clutch minutes, we're 7-11.

I'd like to see these stats split into wins versus losses, and also splits based on level of competition. My sense is that Martin tends to disappear in crucial 4th quarter stretches. Maybe I'm just used to seeing a player trying to break down defenses 1-on-1 at the end of games, rather than get their points in the flow of the offense.

 

does anyone know what brooks ranked (approximately) last year?

 

http://www.82games.com/0910/09HOU1.HTM#clutch

http://www.82games.com/0910/CSORT11.HTM

 

Careful, Slim. Name calling isn't tolerated here. But for the record, I get showered with rep (not that I'm into rep) from plenty of respected posters here everytime I call out your less-than-intelligent rants so people obviously do care.

To address the subject of the thread, I'll say that it's sad that someone has to post stats like this to defend a guy who is easily the most efficient scorer on the team, who scores within the offense without taking good shots from other players and who gets to line with the best of them. Somehow the seed has been planted on this forum (probably by you) that getting to the line is a bad thing but most of us still realize that's a r****ded opinion.

At the end of the day we got a legit, super efficient 20+ppg scorer for a backup PF. Why people are comparing Martin to Lebron, Durant etc. is beyond me. What we have in Martin is a super role player. It's flat out stupid so say "he isn't a guy we can build around" when nobody ever claimed that's why he was brought in.

 

Why are you looking at per 48m when we are discussing the last 5 minutes of the game? That doesn't seem like a closer look at the numbers.

 

"per 48m" is the same thing as per minute, multiplied by 48.

 

LOL - you say that then call me slim....nice.....well played.

But.....rep...wooohoooo....of course, eveyrone wants a piece of the big dog, when they can't make it on thier own, they have to take a nip at my heels....I get it...that is what the weak minded do.

If you can't make a name for yourself with good solid takes, sure take shots.....only way to grow that e-penis without actually earning it with basketball discussion. (But you don't care, even though you were showered with rep...lol)

Yeah, it is all me....I run people's thoughts, more weak mindedness.

I like the guy, you can find lots of posts about Martin from me BEFORE we got him, I have always admired his game.

That being said, if he is your best player, your team is not very good, he is a great complimentary piece, but not a lead dog....

And getting to the line as a main source of points is not reliable, when you are relying on a 3rd party to make your game work, you are at the mercy of an uncontrollable element.

Making shots is more important....than drawing fouls.....fouls are a great complimentary piece of a scorers' abilities....but, IMO, Martin does it a bit too much...

I agree. KMart is a very efficient scorer.

It is not his fault the roster is unbalanced and broken....he has some great strenghts and some glaring weaknesses....got to cover those weaknesses up with a big at the rim...and how long have we been saying that?

DD

 

The second link is very useful. Landry/AB carried us last year.

 

Great try, but the definition of clutch here is:

1) Neither team up by more than 5 pts

2) Last five minutes of the game

The stats show that Kmart does well in those situations. Oh but do not be misled by concrete and factual data! Like how Lebron shoots 40% from the 3, but he's still a horrible 3 pt shooter, right?

 

It's actually a bit misleading. Landry played 2nd and 4th quarters at the PF for us. Scola played 1st and 3rd. Scola was just about as good/efficient a scorer for us as Landry was. Of course if you're not in the game in the 4th, you can't be "clutch", right?

 

Is having your best clutch player listed 14th really good? There are only 30 teams. When games are decided by 5 pts or less, the Rockets will lose half the time.

 

I was paying you a compliment. Don't be so paranoid.

If this came from Durvasa, BimaThug or some of the other solid posters here that might make sense but coming from Mr. Quantity over Quality it doesn't mean much.

Well, you know what they say. If you repeat something enough times people will believe no matter how stupid it is. Again, quantity over quality.

No kidding. That's why it's stupid for you to repeat what is obvious to everyone. Not only that but you frame it in a way that suggests the guy was brought in to be the lead dog. How many times do you repeat that Aaron Brooks or Luis Scola are not lead dogs? That's the point.

Good for you.

Again, good for you. You're finally learning. I noticed you've stopped saying Aaron Brooks is as good as Tony Parker here lately. So I think there is hope for you.