Funny how that happens. One day the fans are with you, the next day they are screaming for blood. Imagine how the players and coaches feel.
Some people are so caught up in numbers and percentages that they are unable to accept even the most common sense conclusion, such as when A is not working, how about giving B a try? wow what a radical idea. If 3s are not falling for whatever reason, the most sensible thing to do in that occasion is to try to score points in other ways, as opposed to doing the same shiit over and over, and (unsurprisingly) fail over and over again (definition of insanity.) Another interesting fact : Warriors are only 10th in 3PA per game. In fact, in my observation most elite teams seem to maintain a healthy balance between prioritizing efficient shots vs. adjusting to the defense and taking shots that are available to you. Contrary to popular opinion, Moreyball is not some advanced concept that only a select few could understand and implement. Any team can go ahead and jack 40+ 3s a game like we do and get pretty decent result. They just don't pursue that line of strategy because most coaches and players know better than that. This notion that we need to stick to the principles of Moreyball regardless of situational circumstances is pure idiocy, and is a form of ideological extremism.
Take a look at the team's shot chart: https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=...asure=FGA&Season=2017-18§ion=team&sct=hex Our mid-range game is way more dependable shot than anything else other than a corner 3. And we take those mid-range shots way less than those 3s at the top.
The only reason we won that game in the end despite having a lower FG% and 3PT% was because the Warriors took 21 non-restricted area 2 pointers and we only took 14, we outscored the warriors in the paint and got more FTs thanks to an increased focus on driving and rolling to the rim. We beat a superior team thanks to shot selection and making sure we took the more efficient shots, if the warriors took as many 3s as we did last night we would have been run out of the building. This is what MoreyBall is all about.
That's one way of thinking about it . But you can't just treat all shots of a certain category the same . All 3's are not more efficient than all 2's . And the defense plays a big role in what the offense does . Why do you think the Warriors took those 2's instead of threes ? Were the twos the Warriors took good twos ? I remember klay air balling a tough contested two .. Thats not an example of 3>2 duh .... It's not an example of a good two point shot .
They took those long 2s instead of 3s or 2s in the restricted area because the defense played amazingly, we simply refused to let them run their bajillion screens into a backdoor cut offense and forced them to take either contested 3s or ISO long 2s. Also, i never said 3>2, because a shot at the rim is the best shot in the game.
We should be 3pt team first but I don’t think we should discourage players to take two point shots spec at the end of games as the thread suggest. The warriors shoot a lot of threes but they don’t discourage two point shots. Green, paul and harden have been taking more here lately then the previous rockets team. I think it’s great because sometimes we get to predictable and sometimes a quick two mid ranger is what we need as a boost
Lol what, we won because we demolished them on the glass and got to the line. We were the more aggressive team, had nothing to do with shot selection. If anything, their shot selection was superior, they scored 97 points from the field and we scored 96.
"we outscored the warriors in the paint and got more FTs thanks to an increased focus on driving and rolling to the rim."
"That's one way of thinking about it, the right way, but hey guys what if you make all the long 2s?" Never change midrange monkeys. Some day the maths will turn. Its science.
Is a midrange 2 easier to make than a 3 ? Are there times when you would rather have a higher percentage chance for a bucket vs the higher point per shot ? The answer to both of those questions is yes. I disagreed with @Swiss Roll 's post because I felt that he oversimplified that we won because "moreyball" .... We did indeed have a better shot selection that the Warriors , but that's because our offense manufactured those looks and their defense couldn't stop it . It's not always some vaccuum where you get a 3 , a layup , or a FT . The defense can dictate a lot . On the fact that the Warriors took some inefficient midrange twos.... Those shots weren't bad shots because they are midrange ... They were bad shots because they were contested . Would you rather harden take a contested 3 or an open step-back 2 ? Most games can be modeled down to the math... But I don't think a lot of people actually can apply it correctly .
Allow me to clarify, I was more responding to the idea of "The Warriors are only 10th in 3PA so taking more midrange is justified!". I know that a stifling defense produces more long 2s than 3s and layups for the opponent, and I assume that our defensive effort led to a more inefficient shot selection than ideal for the warriors, but I saw a lot of KD post-ups and Curry ISO midrange that didn't seemed forced, but those shots lowered the warriors chances of winning and played right into our math game IMO. It wasn't like they weren't hitting stupid contested 3s all game either, so I mark some of the rockets victory to the warriors playing around in the midrange when they couldn't miss from 3. Also, getting a long two out of an opponent is a large part of modern day defenses, even if they hit at a high rate (like the warriors last night), it is highly unlikely that they will be anywhere near as efficient as a 3 or a shot at the basket. PS: Why would Harden step back if he is open?
Honestly. I feel like the Midrange shot . . . .esp from Harden or CP3 Should be our RUN-BREAKER When we absolutely must have points When the offense is clogging and the shooters are gripping I think 3~4 good midrange shots in the row will loosen up the defense Make them unsure until we get our rhythm back Rocket River
It is not. it should be whatever opportunity you have, no matter it is in the paint, middle range or 3points.
Oh really? Warriors were 17-36 from 3 last night. Rockets were 14-37 from 3 (below their average in 3pt makes for the season). It appears the Warriors DID shoot as many 3s as the Rockets but just hit a better percentage of them (EGO and Ryno combining for Zero 3s made). Oh, and the Rockets STILL won. Let’s not forget that Ariza and Green could have very likely provided at least 2 3pt makes each had they played. Rockets have a lot of weapons in the arsenal now.
It's getting worse for them, the Rockets offense actually has the least variability now. Not only is the net higher from 3>2, but even the volatility is showing evidence of being lower now too.
Agree, my thoughts are the same. End-of-Game SITUATIONAL SCORING ONLY, not for the entire game. If you have a lead in last 3 minutes and want to preserve it, do you want a 45% chance to keep a team buried, or a 35% chance? If other team is on mini run, when you make a basket it makes them GROAN more from the added deficit you put on them. They're not looking at "efficiency", they're only looking at stops & makes & possessions. Advantage should be for leading team because trailing team will look to take away either the paint or the 3 or both. They literally HAVE to concede a wide open midrange look. A versatile offense should have no problem adapting
