So I'm looking at the stats and comparing them in all losses and in all the wins. 118pts on 48.1 fg% during wins. 106pts on 43.7 fg% during losses. 39.1% on 40.1 3pt attempts per game during wins. 31.2% on 38.7 3pt attempts per game during losses. 26.3 ast to 15.1 tovs during wins. 24.2 ast to 16.3 tovs during losses. 115.3 Ortg with a 102 Drtg during wins. +13.3 net. 104 Ortg with a 115.3 Drtg during losses. -11.3 net 63.1 ast% w/ 1.74 ast/tov on 14.8 tov% during wins. 63.8 ast% w/ 1.48 ast/tov on 16 tov% during losses. 57.2 efg% and 60.4 ts% during wins. 50.7 efg% and 54.7 ts% during losses. 29.7 attempts at 66.4 fg% in the restricted area during wins. 31.9 attempts on 63 fg% in the restricted during losses. 40.1% from corner 3s and 39% above the break 3s during wins. 38.7% from corner 3s and 29.4% above the break 3s during losses. We hold teams to 33.4% from deep on 29 attempts per game during wins. We allow 42.1% from deep on 36.7 attempts per game during losses. We give up 29.9 attempts at 61.7 fg% within 5 feet during wins. We give up 28.5 attempts at 71.5 fg% within 5 feet during losses. We snag 45.8 reb w/ 10.5 being O-reb during wins. We snag 39.1 reb w/ 11.3 being O-reb during losses. We have a 51.7 reb% w/ a 76.2 D-reb% during wins. We have a 48.2 reb% w/ a 75.2 D-reb% during losses We have a 30.3 contested reb% during wins. We have a 33.5 contested reb% during losses. Live and die with the 3. We are worse offensively and defensively from the arc. While we are already bad with interior defense we are even worse during losses. Turnovers are worse but don't appear as deadening as its claimed. By all means if you have any other win Vs loss stats please post.
Great post. Seems like turnover are not the issue. By the looks of it, teams are playing better defense and contesting our shots and getting out and scoring on us with the long rebounds they get igniting their transition. I wonder what would happen if we had a Shaq to dump it down low to on every possession who would pass out on doubles. Could we get a zero turnover game that results in 0 transition points for the other team?
^^ Not this crap again. "Many things are an issue so turnovers aren't an issue?" That's is what we call pseudoscience. How many threads do we need to flesh this out? It has filled the void of Donatas Motiejunas talk. There are actually multiple contributions to our losses. Shooting is a huge part; but the rest could be lumped into "effort" - that includes interior defense and turnovers. Last night was a train-wreck. It seems like sometimes the Rockets are just all on, or all off.
The huge drop in above the break threes is a concern. Teams making us waste the shot clock resulting in a contested above-the-break 3. I doubt it's coming as much from the deep ones to Gordon and Anerson that Harden assists to. These threes result in long rebounds explaining why the other teams are scoring more. So much of our defensive efficiency relies on making shots and getting back when we miss.
I don't want the Rockets to start hesitating on passes when they're already hesitating on shots. We want to encourage passing. When Harden throws a (smart) full court pass just count it as a shot attempt because if he completes it it is 2 points. If he does not then it's a turnover (a miss). Now, lately teams have been scouting the Rockets so some of these passes are not even two points if he complete them and just risky. He might be getting baited into throwing them sometimes.
Turnovers are clearly a problem, just not as detrimental as other areas, mainly shooting. Whether win or lose W turnover way too much. Turnovers need to be addressed, not the point of this thread. The point is identify the problem during losses.
It also looks like teams are shooting more 3s in our losses and hitting more. The reason could be the Rockets are in foul trouble and sagging off their man baiting (bad shooters/fast players) to shoot rather than drive because they don't want to get in more foul trouble. Also, teams are shooting 10% higher close to the rim in our losses supports the idea that the Rockets are scared of picking up fouls.
Yes this was my biggest realization. I concluded it's probably Harden pull ups when he is off and trying to force it. Along with 1 pass ariza 3s no matter where the defender is. Plus Ryan attempts a lot of long 3s and if he's off that's another explanation.
I think the team needs another playmaker. It's as simple as, if the 3s are not falling, we need players that can do something else (drive in and score). Having another F or PF that is a capable ball handler/scorer would help a lot I think. Right now, Ariza, Capela, Anderson, nor Harrell can put the ball on the floor more than 2 dribbles. Harden has to create too much in my opinion. His numbers are gawdy and nice, but not a winning formula. Nash was the engine for the old Suns, but they could always give it to Amare and he could create and score for himself in multiple ways. Same for Joe Johnson when he was there and Diaw could do it as well. We currently don't have that type of F. We need one.
I agree we need another play maker. Not from the guard position, but the forward position. My ultimate goal that is reasonable this year via trade would be Gallo.
I think he would be fine here (even Wilson Chandler). Do you think it needs to be someone to replace Ariza or Anderson in the starting lineup, or someone off the bench? Not sure if we can bring Anderson off the bench at $20mil a year. That's what I struggle with, bench or starter for this F.
haha yep, he can only take 2 dribbles then he has to pick it up. If he could handle the ball better and attack the rim we would be a better team.
This is true. Harden as the sole playmaker is an issue. If his shot is not on, then he and the entire Rockets offense is much more easier to guard because it is built so much around him and his drives/playmaking. This is why the Suns were a consistent 50+ win regular season team. Nash was a much more consistent shooter than Harden and they had more playmakers who could put the ball on the floor in Joe, Marion, Barbosa, Amare, etc.
Looking at multiple stats as it relates to our winning % is more helpful than looking at one single stat as it relates to winning % - or, even worse, one single stat from just one player! After all, aren't we winning like 90+% of our games when Ariza scores 15 or more? That being the case, would it make any sense to conclude we need to ensure Ariza scores 15+ every game? No, of course not. That's silly and ingores all other context to the point of being meaningless. That's LOF-level analysis. Point is: good thread idea. It'd be neat if we could also show our opponents' relevant numbers, but that'd be difficult to do. For example, rather than just looking at our numbers in a loss to the Celtics, look at them relative to other teams playing the Celtics. I would wager that the Celtics rarely score 120, and that our team defensive numbers were substantially worse than the typical Celtics opponent. How much better or worse were we on certain statistical categories than others who played the Celtics? That'd be interesting to know for all of our games.
Yeah I tried focusing on team performance rather than individual to see if I could notice patterns, which I did. But of course there is much more context to take into consideration such as home and away and talent of competition. Still we get a general consensus on what needs to be improved in order to prevent future losses, which is the goal.
Nash was a more consistent shooter, Harden is a better scorer. I think it's more about having that F that can create his own shots in the offense. It would provide balance and not make us depend on having to hit 3s at a high rate to win games. The floor is already spread, so if we had a F that could create, he would have a lot more space to do so. I remember Amare being able to do whatever he wanted because he had so much space. Now I know its not easy to just go find an Amare, but I hope Morey can find that guy out there that would fill this need. Doesn't need to be an allstar, just a guy that has that skill set who would thrive in our system.
I think that's something else we could absolutely use and that is a forwars/big that can pass. A diaw so to speak. Draymond while I hate him, is that perfect forward that can defend, pass and knock down the open 3. He's so underrated. I would settle for literally diaw off the bench and see how it would go or try and find a cheap big that can pass.
