Where Do the Rockets Go From Here – The Power Forward Position

You guys are being contrarians for the sake of being contrarians. Give me Aldridge or Love if it's even feasible that we can get them. They are the two most sought after PFs in the league right now for a reason. And they'll have immense trade value if for some reason it doesn't work out.

Isn't Morey having an AMA today? Someone can ask who his dream power forwards would be if he could have anyone.

 

Aldridge's increase in midrange shooting is being overblown. Stotts was attempting to use him at the elbow in a motion defense, artificially inflating his midrange FGAs. He's a great player, but you can't plug him in an offense designed for Dirk and expect him to excel.

http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2013/01/11/aldridge-skepticism-starting-to-fade/

 

Ersan ilyasova is the perfect stretch 4 for this team. Very efficient offensive player from most spots on the floor, good rebounder, and a decent defender with a long term favorable contract. As much as I would like to get a star pf like LMA, ersan just feels like a Morey type player on a Morey type contract.

 

I think the mistake a lot of people reflexively make is to assume that correlation also implies causation.

Now I am not a stats guy, but I do at least understand that the stats from last year are the stats because of the results on the floor. If, for example, MORE of the 2-point shots we DID take had actually gone in, then the conclusions about 'what works in this offense' would be totally different.

The reflexive assumption, looking at the stats results, is that 'our offense does not use the mid-range jumper well'. But the logical assumption could very well be that, had we had shooters who could hit the mid-range 2 at a higher rate, 'this offense utilizes the mid-range jumper very well'.

The first assumption leads to thinking thoughts like 'don't bother adding a player who hits the mid-range jumper better than anyone we currently have'.

The second assumption leads to thinking thoughts like 'we should add a player who hits the mid-range jumper better than anyone we currently have'.

Since I am neither a stats analyst nor the coach of the team, I cannot say which assumption is correct, or if either one is actually even close to correct.

I just think it would be wise to be very leery of concluding things about how the offense is designed simply based on which shots did and did not go in. Plus, was the offense designed to best utilize the players we have, or were the players simply adapting to the offense, and, as the OP seems to imply, did Morey in fact go out of his way to acquire players specifically for this offense?

Bottom line, it's a complex issue, unfathomably complex most likely.

Trust in Morey.

 

I just want to say I love this thread, one of the best discussions I've seen on a pertinent topic in awhile. I made a similar post in an NBA dish thread not long ago with points that various people in this thread have hit.

The problem in Aldridge's case is that he's not inherently good at hitting the mid-range jumper that he takes so frequently. He hit basically right at or slightly below league average last year.

If the Rockets were intrigued by Aldridge, it would likely be due to his ability in the post, simply because analytics aside, everyone who watched last year knows it would have been nice to have a low post option in crunch time. Of course, the Rockets just went out and signed Dwight Howard. Do you marginalize your biggest FA signing ever for a guy who can be put in the post, but isn't an exceptional rebounder, defender, or shot-maker at a $14MM pricetag?

As meh pointed out, he always has huge games against the Rockets and went to UT, which causes posters here to overrate him.

 

I like this analysis, but it looks at our offense too simplisticly to be useful.

the offense has to change. I believe Morey himself stated that the offense last year would be good in the regular season, but could be a hinderance in the post season.

As the offense becomes more complex, we will need versitility. That's what LMA provides. He can play backup minutes at center to relieve Dwight and be very effective in the post, or he can play with Dwight and hit the midrange to keep the lane open for Dwight and Harden.

Don't get me wrong...the PnR and 3/drive-the-lane will still be our bread and butter. But when someone shuts that down, we need another alternative.

 

Yes

I liked the article. I am also not on the LMA bandwagon. I do think he is an All Star and will continue to be one on another team. If the Rockets did not have a great Center in Howard and an above average SF in Parsons and of course Harden then the Rockets should do whatever needed to bring LMA here. We have 2 All Stars now though and a budding star. What the 4 spot needs even more than a stretch 4 in an above average Defender. Sure one that can score at times as well but get a great defender at that spot and we are a true Championship caliber team.

 

Ersan signed long-term at $8 million or Lamarcus at $14 million??

No contest.

That midrange jumper of Lamarcus' looks like a terrific shot. He's so smooth with it and it looks so good and when he gets on a roll...he can knock down 6-8 of them in a row like nothing. But the final results...come up short.

I keep saying a guy has to be able to knock down that midrange jumper at a bare minimum of 55% for it to be worth anything. Lamarcus is below 42%. A 29% 3-point shooter is better than LaMarcus at below 42% from midrange.

 

Totally agree. For a 3rd-5th option it doesn't make much sense to spend big money. With our young stars, our up-and-comers, and our draft picks intact, we have a chance to be a successful organization beyond the next 4 years. No need to hamstring ourselves now.

 

After a massive fail of finding a 4, we will only have 1,2,3,3,5 positions.

 

Just a quick point... LA is one of the best midrange players in the game.

One of the few players you are "ok" with taking that shot. In all your analysis your point was basically that a corner 3 point shot is wiser because the percentage is not too much lower then league average for mid range and the points per shot yield a much higher return.

The thing with aldridge is that he shoots 50% from 8-16 ft and within 8 feet combined

which is 10 percent better then league average. And .8 Points per shot better.



He also increases our FT points per position by both volume and percentage...and increases our Points per shot in the paint compared to all rockets...and this is an even GREATER upgrade in all these areas when compared to JUST our PF output from last year.

So while your analysis was solid...Aldridge's elite skill and talent trump the "plan" . If you can add him...you do it...and you make it work...then you will be a better team across the board with him over Jones or Dmo.

Thats just the offense analysis...the defensive presence from his size and help defense and back up/ insurance policy at the center is for another day ; )

 

OK

The one thing that you said and others have said about LMA is that we make it work. Why not get a 4 that we can be more sure of working for us? We at this point do not have to get a player and TRY to make it work for us.

 

Your table alone disproves your point, and validate the whole point of this thread.

LMA midrange: 0.86 PPS
Rockets 3pt: 1.11 PPS

Why pay LMA and have him take midrange shots when your own 3 point shooters are more efficient?

 

Do you think that LMA's preference for the midrange is in his DNA? He takes those shots because his coach has designed an offensive gameplan that has him taking a bunch of those shots. If McHale determines that LMA taking those shots in a Rockets' set is inefficient, he'll have LMA do something else. It's not like he'll just keep jacking up 15-footers while coach is yelling at him to get on the low block.

Right now, we shoot at the rim or from 3 to take advantage of the efficiencies there. It's possible though that a midrange shot will make sense in the future if the personnel is there and the defense leaves it as the most sensible option. Having the capability to shoot midrange diversifies the offensive options, which doesn't seem like a bad thing to me. If you have the option but don't want to take it, you don't have to. LMA is good at a lot of things.

 

I agree, and I'm not inherently against LMA as a player -- I recognize he's skilled and would be an asset, but the point is fit and value.

If you're paying him $14MM to be a 3rd star, where do you put him? It's either in the post, which marginalizes Dwight, or camped at a mid-range spot, which hinders your spacing more than a 3-pt specialist and has an inefficient resulting shot.

 

I very much agree that LMA settles for too many mid-range jumpers. I also do not believe that Aldridge is the perfect fit. If given the choice I'd take Bosh, Horford, Love and probably even Anthony Davis over Aldridge for this team.

That said, I totally disagree with the 55% number you threw out there and I do not believe that a 3-point shooting big is a necessity for this team.
All things equal, you would prefer one that is capable of hitting 3s, but all things are pretty much never equal.
You cannot ignore the value of defense, shot-creation and the fact that the threat of a mid-range jumper often directly lead to high percentage scoring opportunities near the basket.

I already touched on this in the other thread:

 

Maybe because with LMA on the team the two wouldn't be mutually exclusive?

You guys really need to stop. You're using base level stats and extremely shallow analysis to try and come up with conclusions comporable to that of an MIT trained statistician and his brain trust.

 

Add LMA to the team. Have him take mid-range shots in a game. You think his mid-range jumpers would suddenly become more efficient than a 3pt shot?

Nobody is trying to analyze things at a similar level to Morey. Base level stats can still give an indication of something greater. This forum as a whole is very high on LMA, he gets brought up in a lot of threads. What's wrong with a thread being realistic and suggesting that maybe he isn't the fit people want him to be?

 

You build your system to the players you have.

Lamarcus Aldridge would give us dangerous in the midrange.

did you see the playoffs last yr? not having a midrange game impacted us greatly in my opinion.

 

its the same argument when it comes to posts up..last yr we had barely any...does that mean dwight will not fit in with us?

you adjust your system to the players you have.

we would adjust our system to implement the strengths of lamarcus....