What we see vs what really happens

Sweet! Thanks! Then, can someone educate me on what kind of play a Spot Up would be? I never played organized bball. I just can't imagine a play where nothing is planned to get an open shot. They're just swinging the ball around and somebody shoots it? Most likely covered? It's probably a really stupid question.

 

Yeah, that's what I thought. To me, that has to be the worst type of offense. It's like not even trying.

 

The thing is that even if we only ISO 10% of the time, the majority of that time was in the fourth quarter. Same with Post Ups. The majority of the post up possessions happened in the fourth quarter/overtime.

That's the problem with this team. We always go away from what made us successful throughout the game in favor of isolation and post ups.

If you look at our offensive ratings quarter by quarter, you would see that in the 1st and 3rd quarters our rating are amazingly good. Probably because we come out out of the game/halftime with a game plan and proper adjustments. The 2nd quarter is good but there is some notable slip in both offensive and defensive rating. Possibly due to going away from the game plan/ other team making adjustments. The 4th quarter is ugly for us. Our offensive rating dips as our defense over rating spikes. Just as we see during the games, everything the team has built in the previous quarters slips away in the 4th. Our team, players and coaches, fail to make the right in game adjustments. Gone are the transitions baskets and ball movement, crisp team defense and here comes the isolations, post ups and just ugly basketball on both ends.

That's why you have to admire a team like the Spurs. Love them or hate them, they always seems to make the right adjustments and stick to their game throughout the whole game. Of course they have the best basketball coach in Pop but their players are just as disciplined in their approach.

 

I'd like to watch a game and count the number of ISO's myself just to see how accurate Synergy is. I might do that some time...

 

Aelliot shows again why is one of my favorite posters on the board. I like it when the numbers confirm what I observe.

 

Isolation, in general, is not a good offensive play. Only under special circumstances that isolations make sense. The more different players get their touches, the better the team defense.

When a team isos a lot, other players don’t have that shared responsibility on defense. It’s kind of human nature – if you work hard to get a guy a layup, he’ll want to return the favor and play harder on defense. Even if he misses the shot after receiving a good pass from his teammate, he will work even HARDER on D to make up his wide open missed shot.

Offense and defense are always intertwined. The more a team isos, the worse the team defense. The more the ball moves, the less players stand around. Players will feel a part of the team, they feel the movement, they feel good. If one or two guys is shooting all the shots, defensively other players will not try as hard.

Another reason why isolation plays may have fallen out of favor around the league is because scouting has improved drastically. Teams are so familiar with other players that they try to beat them to the spot when iso'ing.

Rockets had one of the highest iso % (10.4) in the regular season while Spurs iso'ed the least. Do you know which team iso'ed the most? NY Knicks and even them had a higher efficiency than Rockets. Do you think it was an coincident that best record team happened to have the lowest % ISO at 5.3%?? People like Pop know what it takes to win while some only read into the stats and neglect the psychological side of the game.

Team ball >>>>> iso ball.

 

I'd love to see statistical proof of that. Your premise is interesting as it is based on player mindsets and "human nature". I'm not saying you're incorrect but I'll admit I'm skeptical.

Offense can drive defense and vice versa, but I've never seen a correlation to a certain kind of offense being the reason a team is good or bad on defense. The only time I can really remember an offensive play or set triggering poor defense is when your guards crash the boards or are penetrating on offense. That leaves easy transition opportunities on a long or poorly timed rebound. And don't forget pace. At one point the Rockets were top 15 in team defense but still gave up a lot of points based on pace.

 

Great post OP. This kind of data should shed some light on many misconceptions. Hopefully folks take the time to process stuff like this.

I knew the ISO plays were effective in the playoffs but I wasn't aware the PPP was that significant. And the eye test (and history) of the playoffs told us that the transition game was going to suffer. From an offensive perspective only it's very interesting to see how the regular season and playoff possessions were broken down. Well done.

 

aelliot,

Fantastic post, as always. Great look into how the Rockets performed this year. Much appreciated.

 

I'm wih oakdogg... Despite the explanation. I still have no clue what a spot up is? Swing to an open man? What does that even mean? A play has to "start" somehow. If it's an ISO that results in a pass then a swing to an open man... That should be an ISO not a Spot Up. Or maybe it starts as a pick and roll that gets the ball moving to a spot up shooter. Point remains... The "action" that caused the end shot is the first play there, the pick and roll, not the spot up.

Also, I think it makes sense to look at stats excluding transition. I'm fine saying what's transition vs halfcourt. But then break half court down without including the transition plays. When people say it seems like we ISO all the time, they are talking about halfcourt possessions. Yeah, we'd love to transition as much as possible. 75% of that speaks to defense and defensive rebounding, not offensively philosophy (25% is philosophy... To run or not).

Also... Usually post up is basically just ISO, too. It's just a front court ISO instead of a backcourt one.

When you factor all of the above in, the team does ISO a lot. Though they do have good players for it.

In any case, as reply 1 in the thread points out, this is about defense as much as offense.

 

Yeah, I'm a bit confused too on how this stuff is counted. Is it the initiation of a play that matters or the finishing of a play that matters?

Ex: Harden starts ISOing, but passes to Lin on a cut (this happened in the playoffs). Does that count as ISO or cut?

If Dwight passed out of a post to a spot up shooter, is that Spot Up or Post?

If Harden or Lin ISOs for 20 seconds of the shot clock and passes out to Parsons for a crappy shot, does ISO get penalized or does Spot Up?

I'm not sure if you can make any sort of conclusions on ISO effectiveness without that figured out.

 

You don't understand what the board thinks.

We ISO 75-90% of the time in the last few minutes of the game.

That's our complaint, not that we ISO 75-90% overall. Big difference.

 

I think the board thinks we iso a lot because our iso's fail most of the time.

 

Thanks, aelliott.

I'm interested in seeing our defensive PPPs vs Portland in this same format.

Could you run basically just the opposite (ie this same analysis for Portland's offense)?

I'd be interested in seeing what types of possessions we defend most effectively and least effectively.

 

Who cares what the Board thinks? Before Harden, the Board was complaining that Kevin Martin disappeared in the 4th because he couldn't create his own shot and that we had no closer. According to them, set plays like Adelman's could not be executed when defenses clamp down. We needed a closer. Well, hello, we have a great closer now, and the Board is b****ing about the opposite. Let's face it - 90% of the Board are idiots, if not more. San Antonio wins a few games, and now we have to copy them. Gimme a break.

 

should compare these stats with the Spurs and Miami.