So then why don't we have a worse record when he has high turnover games? If it's truly that big of a problem then you would expect that we'd have a worse record when his turnovers are up. How is it a huge problem this season when we have the same record when he has high turnover games as we do when he doesn't? You keep quoting the Nylon Calculus article but that was speaking in general. How many of Harden's TOs directly lead to other teams points? Do you know or are you just making assumptions? If you are going to declare something a "huge problem" then please provide some metric to back that up. It's certainly not wins and losses.
From the wins and losses provided in this thread we look like a mediocre team during high turnover games Even if we didn't, the small sample size of one or two seasons isn't conclusive. On the nylon article, I did say I was speculating. As far as the data, the work has already been done. There is correlation between turnovers and wins. Some formulas have it essentially worth half a 3 pointer Saying turnovers don't affect wins and losses is like DD saying rebounds don't matter in defending DMo.
High turnover games? He's averaging 4.5 TOs/gm. Which games are we talking about? Are we talking high for him? Or high for all starting guards?
Yes we were and we actually won at a higher percentage when Harden had 6 or more turnovers in a game. Last year we were 10-4 when Harden had 6 or more TOs. That's a .714 winning percentage which was better than our overall winning percentage for the season (.683). This season our record is the same when Harden has high turnover games compared to when he doesn't. So exactly how is this effecting our win/loss record?
Duh! Of course we look mediocre,that's because we are. Did you also notice that we are still mediocre when Harden doesn't have high turnover games? Were you somehow under the impression that we were a good team this season when Harden didn't have high turnovers? Maybe that means the high turnover games aren't a major cause in our losses? Ok, then provide some relevant statistics regarding Hardens turnovers and their correlation to our winning percentage based on a larger sample size. You're the one claiming that they are a huge problem so do the work to backup your claim with something more than an assumption you made after reading and article on a website. The article isn't based on Harden's turnovers it's a generalization of all turnovers. You have no information regarding the actual points generated off of Harden's turnovers and our win loss record isn't worse this season and it was actually better last season. You're arguing what a prediction says should happen and you're totally disregarding the reality of what has actually occurred. That predicted outcome didn't come true last season and it's not true this season either. So basically you're complaining about something that was predicted to occur but didn't. Predictions are fun but when you are looking at the cause of our problems, actuals are much more meaningful. Seems like I spend a lot of time asking you why you continue to site predictions when actual data is available.
You are correct. We're a .500 team. We're a .500 team when Harden has high turnovers and we're a .500 team when Harden doesn't have high turnovers. So what does that tell you? Maybe high turnovers aren't the problem?
Are you saying there's only one problem? Are you saying high turnovers for the whole team (as well as Harden) is not a problem? prove that
I think you guys are arguing the wrong thing. Turnover number in itself don't tell the whole story. Not all turnovers are created equal. Some are more damaging than others. Just pointing at the numbers aren't going to give you objective conclusions. Besides, as aelliott points out, you can't draw direct correlation between turnovers and win-loss. But what he says is somewhat misleading because it sounds like turnovers have nothing to do with anything, which is obviously not true--I think even aelliott would admit. Let me give you another example. We all know that DMo is a poor rebounder. But if you try to make correlation between DMo's rebounding numbers and the Rockets' win-loss records, I am pretty sure you won't get anything. Does that mean if DMo was a better rebounder, it wouldn't help us? Of course not. If Harden had less turnovers, would we have won more? Of course. The problem of this thread is that you isolate Harden's turnovers as the Rockets' problem, and try to use win-loss to prove either way. That's not going to tell you anything meaningful.
This is a joke, right? When Harden has 2 or less turnovers we are 10-4. When Harden has 3 or more turnovers we are 21-28. Look, you can go back over Harden's game log for his career here and see very clearly that when he holds his turnovers down we are significantly better. And when he has high turnovers we are at best a .500 team. It just so happens this season that we have a compounded problem with our poor defense and our very poor defensive rebounding. But some of that compounded problem has to do with the fact that we've got ball-chasers like Bev and Brewer around Harden for the express purposes of stealing the ball back to offset his huge turnover count. We can't play honest defense. That's why we're getting the crap stomped out of us defensively. Because we are either on transition defense which is a total loser for any team in the NBA not named the Celtics. Or we are ball chasing outside with Bev, Harden, Ariza, and Brewer all 4 guys trying to steal the ball and their man walking past them to the rim for layups, dunks, or to volley ball the ball around 4 or 5 times on Dwight and toy with him down low until they can throw it down. That's why our defensive .efg sucks and why our defensive rebounding sucks. Because our perimeter guys are going for steals and leaving our bigs totally vulnerable down low. Because our perimter guys have to go for steals because Harden is throwing the ball to the opponent way too much. Harden's turnover are a huge problem for this team. Each turnover is basically a 2 point differential. We lose a point because we lose a possession and the opponent gains a point because they gain a possession. So, if Harden puts up a 9 count....dude that's an 18 point differential. It's virtually impossible for us to win under those circumstances. Hence we go with all the gambler defenders who do not play honest defense but just run around trying to steal the ball. Honestly, watching these guys defend is like watching a bunch of 3rd graders out there. They just chase the basketball around and leave their man wide open all the time. Only difference between our defense and the little league guys is the big boys can find their man at the rim all the time in the NBA.
The idea that turnovers don't negatively affect W's is ridiculous. Harden is the most turnover prone star in league history this year. A lot of that could be his high usage - but that is not an excuse. He makes reckless decisions. He's a player that still values style over substance. The behind the back passes remind me of white chocolate. The dribbling off his legs happens a bit too often. he's a bit careless at times. He has some maturing to do - thank goodness for that. And he will mature. The sooner he does the sooner we return to contention. That...along with getting him the right supporting cast.
Harden's turnovers are a necessary cost for his style of play and his greatness. He once again is playing like the runner-up MVP and has to get 40 for us to win these close games against good teams. But yeah, you guys keep harping on his turnovers while the highest paid player on the team gets off with no criticism despite his mediocre play. Capela was clutch in place of dumb Dwight fouling out again.
If you look at his game log, his 14 Extreme (7+) turnover games this season are a mixed bag but probably slightly positive overall. There are a couple of absolute stinkers (Cavs & Nets) which the Rockets lost, as well as some monster nights, 1- 50 pointer and 3-40 pointers. The common theme though, except for the two stinkers, was that they are all (mostly) super-high usage games often with 20+ FGA and 10+ FTA's The issue is that while Harden's downside is high due to TO's, his upside with the basketball on offense is not only extremely high overall, probably as high as anyone in the game, but it's very high relative to the other options of a non-Harden initiated play. There's the Dwight Post-up, the occasional Brewer-Beverely-Ariza pumpfake- foray into the lane, and that's about it. All of the following are probably better options: Harden Shot Harden foul Harden pass to open teammate Harden Miss at the Rim drawing defense in and leaving offensive rebounder in position
Thats what delusionals do. They will argue that we play just like the Warriors. Harden dribbles just as much as Curry, they turn it over the same too.
