By what metric are the Spurs the 2nd best offense in the league? Their Offensive Rating was 9th in the league this year. Quite frankly I think offense will be their downfall this year. It's pretty clear the Warriors and Rockets offenses were far and away better than anyone else in the NBA this year.
The only worry I have is defensive rebounding and cutting down mistakes. We have the firepower to do the rest. To me, Kawhi is overrated on offense. I don't fear him, he's efficient but not typically high volume. LA is only taking 10-12 shots lately. I HOPE that mix stays the same. They'd be easier to outscore. Anyways, it'll be a fun series. Spurs would be favored, I just don't think we would be as outmatched as years past.
What way can this Rocket team attack the Spurs that the Spurs haven't seen or won't be prepared for? The fact that they are NOT Kawhi-centric makes them more dangerous and unpredictable in my opinion. The Spurs have multiple playmakers and they can attack from anywhere on the court, inside, outside, midrange, high post, low post, iso, pick-snd-roll, you name it. They can play matchups and go to whatever works best dynamically within a game. If they're going to have a downfall, it'll be bad luck.
Ya this is the biggest difference between the two offenses actually. Steve Nash is an Elite distributor and harden isnt. He is a great passer but the decision making is still not there. So i do agree with you the Phoenix were a much more efficient offense but this is Hardens first year ever running the point, he will keep improving on both his knowledge of the offensive and passing. If i had to pick an offense to have right now it would probably be the suns for the simple reason that it is better suited for the playoffs( unpredictable,effeciency,diversity). But if you see what we accomplished in year 1,even with just slight improvements,we will be more explosive,have better shooting, and will be more unpredictable because of how many ppl can effectively run the P&R. Now as for the Nash Harden comparisons. The passing for me is equal. While Nash is a better passer he never got the same attention Harden gets so they basically cancel each other out when it comes to creating open shots for teammates...the only difference here is the TOs. As for shooting. They are both considered good shooters and teh argument could go both ways so there is a slight difference if there is at all. The percentage shows Nash is a slightly better one, could be due to many basketball reasons ( shot selection, defensive attention etc). Nash shooting better doesent necessarily mean hes a better shooter, just a smarter shooter.
Amen brother, I don't think you could have said this any better, and I agree 100%. I hope the Rockets learned enough from the OKC series... to adjust to the next level of comp. And I will say this... more than of all the other teams, the Rockets still have much more room for improvement. We can't forget that they are basically in their 1st year together with a new coach, a new system, and a lot of new players. They are still learning each other, and getting better. That might account for something... both good or bad.
@basketballholic if San Antonio actually wins their series and we face them in the 2nd round, I'm willing to wager a tip jar bet. I'll put up $20 that the rockets beat your beloved Spurs in the best of 7 series.
I see the point you're making, and there is some truth there... but I don't completely agree either. Not that it matters much, since this is all speculative to a certain degree. Nash was a much better floor general in terms of dissecting defenses, and finding all the cracks. And he had the perfect compliment of shooters and rim finishers. But Harden is a different kind of animal. He passes very well too. Sure, he's not a master at keeping his dribble alive and darting all around the court like a little water bug, and then making Magic Johnson passes... ala Nash. But Harden is bigger and stronger, and he can take defenders to the basket better than Nash. So there's one big difference. All in all, I think the teams have similarities, but they are not the same. I don't think it's really possible to say one is for sure better than the other. It's good for water cooler talk though.
You don't realize how this works. Your wrong and _holic is absolutely correct. He's smarter than you and if you don't realize this type just not paying enough attention. Take his word for it, he's always right.
4 games against Spurs this year, Harden was: 30-9-12 47% FG% 60% TS% 9 free throws per game Saying Harden won't get to the line against Spurs like OKC has nothing to do with ref calls, but everything to do with how the defense plays him,,,whether they stay tighter on the shooters and soft in the lane. Harden will drive without strong help showing, and he will draw falls on reach in soft ass help and lame big like LMA and Lee trying to pick him up. I worry more about us guarding the Spurs than the other way around. Will we have a high ORtg, no. But we've been in every game nonetheless, and were a fading three by Kawaii from being 2-2 against them. btw: Pops is going heavy ISO with Kashi against MEM in end-game, for those who haven't watched. There isn't any fancy offense going on in their end-game. Of course, that could be partly because he was red hit in one of their losses.
What worries me so much about the Spurs is the same thing that Kenny Smith is always preaching about them. You have to REALLY beat them, because they are not going to beat themselves. They won't make many mistakes, they won't have 20 something turnovers, they won't shoot many low % shots, they won't have many blown defensive assignments, and they won't let you have your 1st or even 2nd options. You have to be ready to execute down to your 3rd and 4th options on offense, and that takes serious execution and poise. And let's face it, the Rockets execution was like Keystone Cops in the OKC series. SA will have a field day if we play like that. (And you can bet your ass SA will see that on film sessions) But my hope is that Popovich was right to worry about the Rockets in mid season. He said Harden and the Rockets were the team he was most concerned with... and that says a lot, coming from him.
As I have clearly stated before, the Rockets are my team. I would never bet on them to lose, never. It's a matter of principle. Besides, $20 is nothing. Show us you are serious. I've given ten times that amount as a donation.
Thank Darwin the Spurs don't have Andre Roberson/Steven Adams. That's all that matters to me. It will be WAY easier for Harden to eat against the Spurs, and they haven't even seen Lou Williams yet. Kawhi, meet playoff Ariza every second you are on the floor.
Awesome that you have donated that much. Bravo really, but I'm not in that realm of leisure money to play and give away. Fine you say rockets are who you die for (even tho almost every post you make is pro Spurs and their amazing glory or it's something anti Harden) what does harden and/or the offense got to do? You believe they will get shut down by the Spurs, I'm begging to differ. What barometer do you want to believe the offense was good? Do you need to see a 105+ Ortg? 110+ Ortg? What would justify in your mind that we had a good offense against the "vaunted Spurs defense"? I'm curious, because I honestly don't think you will ever be happy with the offense. We could have an Ortg of 120 and you would say "yeah but we won't win anything because of the turnovers. Maybe that's a measurement that would satisfy your support? Harden under 4 tovs a game? Under 3? Maybe the team under 10 per game? What would make you feel like we have a good offense? Or is it going to be strictly the "good old eye test" where you will never see a good offense and will always claim it bogs down (even tho it's 109.7 in playoffs so far). I'm being absolutely genuine in my request. What exact data would you need to see? Im also genuine in requesting what you actually [think] our data will show?
Teams might have figured out how to combat our biggest strength, but the fact that Capela can learn on the fly and how consistent (and damn good) Nene has been, can only help us. Now, we don't need to panic when our 3s don't fall - instead of jacking them up, we can be confident in low-post play, or other ways to score besides the 3.
A championship team has to have these skill sets in the top 7 of its rotation: 1. At least two great defenders with at least one of those defenders being s paint and rim protector playing at least 30 of the 48 minutes. 2. Two great rebounders. 3. At least three great shooters who can catch and shoot the three efficiently and in volume when open with at least two of them being able to do more than just catch and shoot, being able ti shoot off the dribble. 4. At least two great passers who can see the court and find guys that are open and fit the ball in small windows with deception. 5. At least two great ball handlers who can efficiently dribble through traffic with very few turnovers and can create something when the offense breaks down because the defense is choking the play. 6. At least one guy who can set great picks, roll, and finish. 7. At least two good free throw shooters with a penchant for drawing shooting fouls or fouls in the bonus. 8. Rotation bigs shooting a combined 55% from the free throw line. And no I didn't just pull this out my hiney either. That's a lot of studying of championship teams. And I ain't got time to write all the detail. Go through this list and see if we meet all the criteria. The Spurs are not my team. But I'm favorable toward them and I watch them a lot. Because they're a top-notch organization. And they've been more successful than us, especially over the last 25 years. Man I hate writing that. But it's the truth. And the bottom line is we have to be better than them to win a championship. And that's why I talk about them and the Warriors a lot. Because they aren't going away. The Spurs have retooled on the fly while their former superstars have faded, retired, and are retiring. And they've stayed championship competitive. We're not going to wake up one day and Kawhi, LaMarcus, Steph, KD, Draymond, et al all of a sudden have retired and that James and Co. can simply pick up the trophy at the end of the season. These guys are all the same age. They're going to war and then they're all going to fade off together, the whole pack of them. So if we expect to win a championship in the Harden era we'd better be figuring out how to beat those guys. Not to even mention teams like the Jazz and Wolves who could come up so fast and bypass us if things fall right for them. So I'm talking about the Spurs a lot. And I'll continue to as long as they are a threat to win a championship. And I'll be comparing us to them until we are as good or better than them.
Right I'm fine with what you believe is a championship caliber team. Not what I asked. I asked what would have to happen against the Spurs to make you feel like the offense is good enough to beat the spurs. You have been consistent in your assumption we can't beat the spurs. You repeatedly say the have the best defense, and discredit our offense. So against the Spurs, specifically, what type of performance or results yielded from the offense would you need to admit our offense is dominant even if unconventional. ?? (I know your reasons why you don't like it and why you think it will fail so please don't refer to these points. But rather just what type of offensive results would impress you as well as what results do you expect)
4 wins. Our offense isn't good enough to beat the Spurs no matter how good it is if our defense isn't good enough. And our defense isn't good enough. You don't win games by playing one end. You gotta play both. I've never said our offense wasn't dominant. It is. What I've said a thousand times is that our offense is not diversified enough. We don't have multiple distributors/passers. We are a one-dimensional offense. And while we are great enough to dominate bad defensive teams. We aren't good enough offensively to dominate good defenses because they and everybody watching on TV knows what we're doing offensively. There's no surprise to our offensive scheme. Pick, Harden goes, finishes himself, or lob finish to big, or throws it to a shooter. And therefore the better defenses in the league can water down our offensive efficiency enough to beat us. They don't have to make us a poor offensive team to beat us. They only have to make us about 5-10% less efficient to beat us because our defense is not good enough. The game is played on both ends dude. Like I said, we're already here. Show me 4 wins. Other than that. Nothing. If you want me to think ahead of time that we can beat the Spurs and Warriors then we can start with these points ahead of time. 1. Play them even or beat them during the regular season. 2. Diversify the offensive play with another playmaker and bring Hardens turnovers down to 4 or less a game. 3. If you want to look at offensive rating then let's look at this. Our offensive rating for the regular season was 114.7. The Spurs defensive rating for the regular season was 103.5. Head-to-head during the regular season our offensive rating against them and their defensive rating against us was 107.9. Their defense pulled down our offensive rating 6.8 points below our average. And our offense pulled up their defensive rating 4.4 points above their average. So I suppose you could say if our offensive rating is above 109.1 for the series that our offense got the better of their defense. But if our offensive rating falls below 109.1 then you could say their defense got the better of our offense. But even if we do stay above 109.1 offensive rating, it doesn't mean we've won the series. We've got to win or at least hold even on the defensive end as well. The combination of the two elements is virtually impossible short of one of the Spurs main players going down.
