Let's talk about the Rockets' real Issues

There are many problems, many of them stem from the coaching staff in place, sadly.

Our inconsistent superstars are just as troubling, but just as when we had Tracy and Yao, we need to surround these guys with knifefighters. We need discipline and toughness and defense. We are not much different than Phili, just a whole lot more talented.

Hopefully Daryl can refresh this roster. Ariza/Brewer/McDaniels doesn't cut it at the SF spot. Terrence Jones obviously needs to go... I am happy to roll with Donatas and Montrezl.

 

Just like I always say - rebounding is not defense. Glad you agree and made these points separate.

 

Mr. stat god, sadly for you, I know the Four Factors and it's also the reason why your thread is such a fail. You either don't know what the stats actually mean (which I can see when analyzing your post), or you're trying to fool people.

If you really knew about it and also viewed the criticism of the analysis, you'd know that what you wrote here is a failed view and application of the system.

First (and there are lots of articles about the bad sides of FF, you can look it up yourself): The four factors are ranked and valued with different factors, with a HEAVY emphasis on efg%. More sophististicated analyses that actually broke down and applied the system to actual team performances came up with a weighing that goes roughly like this:

efg%:65-75%
....
FT/FGA: 3-5%

Oliver's values are somewhat closer, with 40% on efg% and 15% on FTR, but it can be heavily picked apart on an individual basis and if applied to actual team records.

Do you see where this is going? The meaning of this isn't closely that you have to be good in all four or that they are even remotely equal.

So when someone (you) posts this sentence "Interestingly, our offense has actually improved from 12th last year. Though, the output has been remarkably similar, with more free throw attempts and less effective FG%. So for those of you who are sporting the narrative that things are much different this year offensively, please stop, thats really not the case.", and backs it up by efg% going from 7 to 10, but ftr going from 6th to 3rd, it shows that you don't really know what the numbers mean.

It may be true that we somehow trotted up two places compared to the other teams, but if you actually knew the weighings you'd know that going down significantly in efg% (which is 45-75% going by calculations, compared to 3-15% for ftr) has a significantly worse impact on an offense than the mere plus of FTR, it's not even close or debatable that our offense got worse in that case and that it DIRECTLY applies to our winning percentage and offensive efficiency.

What the calculated real weighings of the four factors show is, that the overall thing MAY give a somewhat good prediction of success, but that is only because it values efg% on such a high level (which it absolutely should in terms of winning, but what also makes the other factors nearly obsolete).

I have this little site for you, where you can sort the factors seperated and can rank the teams for each one:

http://www.nbaminer.com/four-factors/

Again, do you see where this is going?

Actually looking at the stats and ranks will tell you how irrelevant your post and picking apart each category is. It's true and as I predicted, efg% is the basic factor for measuring a team's success, it resembles the team records really closely.

But the heavy focus on it will actually tell you that the other three factors basically have absolutely no meaning in predicting or evaluating a team's offense and defense, as you'll quickly notice when ranking the teams based on the other factors. A team like GSW is by far the best offense in the league, but less than middle of the pack in TOV%, REB% and FTR, there was a neat article that highlighted how GSW during their 23-0 run actually lost in these three factors more than it won vs opponents in it.

Same with defense and the three factors outside of opp. efg%, even last year's GSW with a historical defense was middle of the pack in the three factors.

You can apply this to other elite offenses and defenses (this year's Spurs, OKC, etc., feel free to do the same for prior years) and it will tell you that the approach you're taking here is a complete mess and mockery of the Four Factors themselves, as you're trying to make it seem like the four factors are valued 25% or close each and that things like rising in FTR while significantly dropping in efg% somehow makes our offense better. Many of the historically best defenses actually were less than middle of the pack in things like rebounding, TOV and FTR.

Or that the rebounding (valued at less than 10%) is a huge factor for our bad defense, instead of focussing on someone like Harden that is a pathetic defender and basically gives the opposing teams open shots and clear lanes all day, significantly boosting our opp. efg% and therefore being the absolute main contributor for the defensive issues.

Looking at his efg% on offense will also tell you that he's below the team's average and part of the reason for our bad offense.

Your post makes it really obvious that you don't understand this, but improving in something like FTR or a mere improvement in REB% will NOT improve this team in a significant way as long as we are struggling with basic efg% and opp. efg%.

It's also why focusing on rebounding, as you do each game, (Motiejunas only 7reb arghhh, bad defense because of our bigs defensive rebounds arghh, not Harden's fault arghh) is not any solution as long as we have guards (especially Harden) who completely botch our defensive rotations and boost opponents shooting by an incredible margin.

My post is merely trying to make you understand that Four Factors is a mathematical indicator on winning with an absolute emphasis on efg%, hence seperating the four factors each and trying to act like the other three are of equal value and using them to deflect blame is a completely wrong approach of using the metric.

Hence why I make my way to say you're handpicking the stats that help your agenda (even though in this instance you completely failed and actually proved that your assesments and defense of Harden are wrong, because he's the main culprit of the two most valued factors in this approach).


All of this leaves out any coherent stat that paints a accurate picture of offense and defense, but it still should show you what the main issue of this team is.

So please, don't act like you know anything about stats or that you can apply them, you clearly can't and it shows in every post.

 

Exactly.

 

Hardens ORtg is down to 111.

The lowest he's been since his rookie year before this year is 118.

Dwight's ORtg is also 111. (His drtg is of course a lot better).

For a guy who does nothing on defense, that's pretty bad

 

I heard turnovers is a worthless stat. What do the stats say about Harden's TOV% in the Spurs game?

I counted 5 Harden TO for 14 Spurs transition points. Each of them momentum swinging. That's almost 3 PPS of Harden turnovers. Incredible efficiency.

I doubt TOV% accounts for trnasition points of the turnover and that is why stats without context is worthless

 

Of court TOV% doesn't account for it, which is why I posted some individual numbers for Harden based on how opponents score when he's in the floor.

But that is of course huge rubbish, as larsv8 thinks they are worthless.

You can easily look up stats like these and will see that Harden is in the very bottom of the league.

 

of course *
on the floor*

damn phone

 

I may be poking my head where I shouldn't but having not closely followed this discussion.. how is defensive rebound not defense? The inability to secure defensive boards has a direct negative effect on your defensive efficiency. Or is this sarcasm?

 

Statistically, the correlation between rebounding and defensive efficiency/potence is extremely small.

 

At first glance there seems to be some correlation, but I'll take your word for it.

 

I am a big Capela supporter but he really needs to come off the bench and spell Dwight.

There is only a handful of minutes, if that, were Dwight and Capela should play together. Their skillsets are near identical. Now if we can have Dwight OR Capela on the floor for 48 minutes a game, that would be great.

 

As soon as we get a true starting PF he will.

 

You better stay out of these statistical discussions. I said the correlation is small, never said there isn't one. But all your posts that you clearly don't understand the value of different factors. You're free to look up the reb% of the NBA teams for the last seasons and then show me how rebounding is as important as you try to implicate in your moronic posts.

And feel free to reply to my last post, but guess you know your numbers and statements make no sense to anyone who knows about the approaches, especially regarding four factors.

 

You don't need any stats to notice that when they play defense they win. It's that simple.

 

Pure comedy how larsv8 still calls out people with insults when his posts are far away from any statistical approach, even the ones he makes threads about. Can't even apply statistics when he makes a thread about them.

 

Harden's usual D and TOs are hard to tolerate. Yes, he's a scorer, but usually a terribly inefficient one. Last night's late fourth quarter flurry of two, and nearly three (kicked ball) consecutive pocket-pass TOs were the final straw for me.

 

I'll buy snacks, you trying to dismiss the actual numbers and approach should be pretty hilarious.