The Rockets this season are notoriously bad in close games, worse if you count OT losses as close games, even if the final score may indicate otherwise. Just want a discussion on why you think this is the case. Possible culprits 1. No defense - This line of thought does tend to coincide with the traditional idea that shots come and go, but defense is consistent. The JVG/Riley school of thought. Yet oddly enough, both D'Antoni's running Suns teams and Don Nelson's successful running Warriors teams outperformed their pythagorean win rate. Golden State teams were in particuar an apt comparison to the current Rockets in pace and lack of D. Yet they managed to win as expected compared to their point differential. 2. Coaching - You know, McHale sucks line of thought. On the surface, this seems to make no sense. Keith Smart and the Kings are outperforming their expected win rate by 2 games. While possible COTY candidate Thibadeau and the Bulls are only +1 in this regards. Is Keith Smart a better coach than Thibs? Of course not. Heck, even Adelman and Rudy had years where they severely underperform their expected win rate. However, the way McHale has no set rotation may be part of the problem? 3. Luck - The stat geek answer where luck always play a factor in the short term, good or bad. So the question is, have we reached a point where the sample size is big enough to no longer blame it on luck? 4. Inconsistent Youth - That we tighten up in close games because of our youth and get outfoxed by wiley vets. Or that because everyone except Parsons/Harden gets in consistent minutes, we lack chemistry. To me this seems like the most logical explanation, even if there's probably no data to back it up. 5. 3 point shooting reliance - I have always been a huge proponent of us taking tons of 3s as long as they're open. Because making 35% of 3s is so much better than making 45% of mid range jumpshot. But in close games, where it's more important to score than score 1 extra point on that possession, can this change? Then the question becomes how often do these things happen, and do they happen often enough where we need to run different plays at end of games. My personal opinion is a combination of bad luck and youth. But I have nothing to back it up besides it just seems right.
Our defense pretty much sucks. I don't know how people can expect us to close out every game with bad defense. Our shots don't always fall, so we're not gonna always win, unless we get better defensively.
All the points you mentioned are actually good reasons but I think these two are the most important: (1) no defense and (2) coaching. No defense - I've always thought this to be the Rocket's biggest weakness. They're a fantastic offensive team, but there will just be those nights where the shots simply won't fall. I just don't think the current commitment on defense is enough for a team gunning for a championship. Coaching - As you already mentioned, no set rotations. Also, I'm a firm believer that the team needs to set plays when closing games.
This is the youngest team in the NBA. They are good! They just have to learn how to "consistently" win games. This will come with experience.
You'd think the staff would want the same 5 closing games out, especially close ones. As the season progresses that 5 would develop more chemisry, and after so many review sessions the same players would remember and realize their mistakes and successes during crunch time situations. People argue hes being inconsistent, others argue McHale is making coaching decisions depending on the situation. I could see both working, but you;d think keeping the same 5 in close game 4th qtr situations would be the best long term because those 5 have buildt up their experience over time.
How do you learn to win "Consistently" when: A) You're coaches rotations are inconsistent. B) Even when you're playing well you may still be on the bench during crunch time. Thus how do you gain experience? C) You do not consistantly play defense? The only "consistant" thing we do well is score but as Mchale and players have said it's a very free offense with little set plays. So I'm wondering what exactly is McHale teaching our young team?
So it's the chicken or the egg argument. Does giving consistent minutes result in consistent production? Or does consistent production let the coach give you consistent minutes? There have been plenty of players who got inconsistent minutes early in their careers, but have improved over time. While many others had all the minutes they wanted and never improved. I don't think you can clearly state correlation, much less causation, regarding these two measures.
This thread is nothing diffrerent then the other 10 threads going on right now. its pointless. going to turn into the same responses and reactions as the other. McFail McFail McFail you're so stupid our coach is fine no we need a new coach no jeremy lin suckcs no jerermy lin is awesome and should never sit the 4th quarter, he will win us every game in crunch time you're wrong. no you're wrong no you are repeat.
This team, like Lin as a player, is feast or famine. When the offense is going, we can look really dominant. When it's off, it's frustrating to watch. There is no such thing as an easy win for this team, nor a tough game for that matter. Some times we look really good and some days we don't. We could be really good for the first 5 minutes of the game and look terrible in the next 5. Overall, this team is just not very good at adjusting.
They dont employ a post game .... Harden is a good option but couple him with a post threat and he's that much better. I know they havent really had a post presence on the offensive end this season but .... I think they should give it a go with Motiejunas and Harden on the same side of the floor. Post & repost .... it makes a defense really commit and opens up the options for an offense to exploit when a guy can get deep position.
I believe the whole season is a tryout. Think of the moves we could make with that cap space - more teams will be looking to unload salary. You can play him, show him off, and then you can package that with Donuts to land a good PF from a team trying to free up space.
You're right. It's bad luck. It's bad luck that Asik is one of the best defenders in the league and has to sit in the fourth. That's bad luck. Bad luck that our starting PG gets treated like a 3rd stringer. Bad luck that our rookies are in during crunch time and commit rookie errors That explains it. Bad luck.
So a double double machine isn't consistent? double double in fifteen minutes and the only defensive anchor in the team who sets otherworldly picks isn't consistent enough over a 6'8 rookie who's played 4 games? Dropping 29/8 then something like 20/7 in the previous two games then shooting 50%FG and playing solidly with what arguably should have been an end of 3rd quarter three ball was inconsistent coming into the Mav's 4th? Warranted benching because 'more energy' with 0pts, three consecutive rookie errors, is a fine rationale moving forward? Might as well throw him under the bus.
Aren't you basically supporting my argument? I said that inconsistent minutes doesn't necessarily lead no improvement. If anything, Lin and Asik are proof positive that a chaotic rotation environment can allow a player to become better and better as time goes on. Now, if Lin and Asik had become worse and worse due to their lack of consistent minutes, then you would have a case. But as you said, Asik has become a double-double machine. Lin had spurts of Linsanity lately.
This...as far as I'm concerned. I wonder what this team would be like if our rotation were already in their prime with a couple of years experience together.
