It's insulting to call Kawhi an 8 defensive player. He's a 2x DPOY winner by default that merits at least a 9.
Exactly. Rox lost by 2 pts against full force SaS team in a game where Ryan Anderson missed 1 quarter due to injury and both Ego and Lou Will shot 3s way lower than their average. Rox make 1 more three in the game and they would've won, simple as that. Tos didn't lose the game, 3 pt % lost that game. In fact Rox had 2 less turnovers than the Spurs and they lost the game. You're the only one who would look at this and conclude tos cost the Rockets the game. Rockets had lower tos than average and lower tos than their opponent but they lost the game due to turnovers. LOL!
Wait, you would say if we made one more 3 we'd win the game, but wouldn't say if we committed one less turnover we'd win the game?
Not really. Turnover just means 1 possession. Rockets score 1.1 pts on average per possession. So we still lose by 1 pt. I guess you could argue if we had 1 more possession we vould have made a 3 to clinch the game, but by that logic anything could have given us that 1 possesion, a steal, offensive reb, block or assist could have given us the missing two pts besides the 1 turnover. Then you're not really arguing anything anymore. Point is for all the hulabaloo about Hardens tos the Rox had two less turnovers than the Spurs and still lost the game. First, Spurs had the diverse game plan and primary ballhander with Parker/2ndary ballhandler with Kawhi Holic keeps espousing, how come Spurs had 2 more turnovers than the Rockets? Secondly, if the Rox had less turnovers than Spurs, how can you then claim turnovers cost us the game? That's like literally the opposite of logic. Sure Harden had 7 turnovers, but if you're gonna single him out why don't you blame Anderson for missing an entire quarter or Ego and Lou for shooting like crap? Criticizing Harden for his dumb turnovers is acceptable. Pinning the loss on his 7 tos when he had like 38 pts and 11 assists is just dumb because he did more than his fair share in the game. If everybody on the team had 38 pts, 11 assists and 7 tos we win this game.
Problem is a big word, but it is definitely not a positive how high his TOs are. You can bring up all the arguments you want, we see it in games where he just turns the ball over unnecessarily due to sloppy passing. Still we are winning, so it doesn't really matter and he makes up for it in other areas and gets high assist numbers, but he should definitely try to become a better ball handler in the summer. Do a lot of drills to improve grip, both hands etc.
If everybody on the team had 4 or less turnovers we win. 1 turnover is worth 2.3 points. We score around 1.17 points per non-turnover possession and we give up 1.17 points per defensive possession. That's a little over a 2.3 point differential. You can deny all you want. But individual turnovers are a benchmark. There is a reason no player has ever won a championship while averaging over 4.1 turnovers per game. It does affect the team when one guy turns the ball over that much and it tells you what's going on with the team when one player has 50-70% of the entire teams turnovers.
He handles the ball extremely well. The issue is the sloppy/careless decisions he makes with some of his passes. As I've stated numerous times already turnovers in the playoffs (where the games slow down and every possession is critical) can mean the difference between winning and losing.
He is a good ball handler. He does take too many risks. And he does force the play too much. These two things account for the bulk of his turnovers. Agreed? Now, the question is why? Why does he keep taking such high risk and why does he force it too much?
How does your first statement link to your second statement? You mean to say if Harden had 4 turnovers but Anderson also had 4 turnovers we win the game even if the turnover count actually increased by 1? Basketball is a team game individual statistics is just important in terms of analyzing the contribution of each individual player but when it comes to actually winning the basketball game then you need to compile the overall team stats. If the Rockets have less turnovers then the Spurs how can you even say turnovers cost them the game? The game doesn't separate whos turnovers it is between the players in terms of contributions, a turnover has the same impact no matter who made it whether it was by Harden or by Ariza or by Beverly so why is it if Harden gets 7 turnovers it's really bad but if that same turnovers are distributed to the other Rocket players that's gonna result in a championship? If a guy gets 4.1 turnovers but he's getting the team's 50-70% of the turnovers that means the team will get 8 or less turnovers total. I'd take that scenario every day of the week as the average turnover total of NBA teams is a lot higher than 8. Would it better if the Rockets had 0 turnovers per game? Obviously yes. Would the rockets have won if they had 0 turnovers the entire game? Obviously yes. However when you see what won or loss you the game, then it's obviously 3 pt shooting that did them in, just like in 90% of their losses this season. Rockets only lost by 2 pts, it's easy to say anything that will result in 3 pts and then state that that cost them the game. 1 steal would have resulted in the same 2.3 pt differential, therefore lack of steals cost them the game! 1 Block would have resulted in the same 2.3 pt differential, therefore blocks cost them the game! 1 offensive rebound would have resulted in the same 2.3 pt differential, therefore rebounds cost them the game! Btw 2.3 pts wouldn't have won the game it would've just resulted in a tie. A missed 3 turning into a made three on the other hand would have won the game right out, but no, turnovers cost us the game. Rockets 3 pt shooting: Anderson 1-4 (missed 4th Q) Ariza 2-8 Dekker 0-3 Gordon 2-7 L. Williams 0-3 Do you swear to god you think Harden's turnovers (3 more than what is acceptable according to you ) cost the Rockets the game over their 3 pt shooting (collective 5-22 out of non Harden and Bev players)? I'm done here there is no point in arguing with you, fire could burn your skin and you'll still claim it's cold as ice.
He is only human he is not perfect, he will have flaws just like any player in the NBA. The bold statement also applies to Westbrick, why don't you ask the two of them why they do it.
You'll get your exact scenario in the playoffs. Defenses will gear up to shut off the threes. They'll dare Harden to beat them by scoring 60. They'll fade off him into the paint inviting him to jack it on the pull up and begging him to drive into them. Harden won't be able to hold it. His scoring efficiency will go down, his turnovers will increase and we will be gone.
This can happen but it's still not due to turnovers its gonna be due to horrible shooting. This game Rox lost by 4 pts when they had 6 less turnovers than the Jazz. 8 tos for Houston to 14 by the Jazz, did we still lose due to turn overs? Hint: Rox shot 25% from the 3. Turnovers should be the furthest thing on the team's mind right now they should be locking themselves in the court shooting 1000 3 pt shots a day. Working on anything else at this point is a waste of time. When the big heavy Jazz shoots a higher 3 pt percentage than a team composed of 3 pt specialists you have a big problem.
Already blitzed away the all time record for regular season turnovers. Has several games left to build on this lead Still though James Harden does not have a turnover problem
And he blames Dekker.... Dekker should have said don't jump in the air when you have nowhere to go with the ball. DD
well said. I don't think he is able/willing to process when a given play isn't working in a given situation. He just has a set of plays/moves in his mind and he cycles through them fairly indiscriminately. thoughts?
