Just curious, how is this metric gauged? From my eye test, yes the Rockets score pretty well in the paint, but when I watch the Warriors offense, all the pieces are moving around (different from ours). How is it that GSW dont' have the best half-court offense?
Our offensive system has basically stayed the same. We are still running multiple screens in a PnR/P heavy offense. The only difference is that OKC made the choice to take away our 3pt shot so we took what they gave us and bludgeoned them over the head repeatedly with layups and FT's. When they decide they had enough, then Ego and Lou go to work from outside. To OKC's credit, they played Anderson and Ariza very well on offense. Capela just needs to figure out how to deal with big men who body him up better.
I saw it in this article on The Ringer, Bill Simmons' new website. Looks like they were basing that on points per possession in half-court sets. Here's the bit in the article where that is mentioned: But once the postseason begins, every team is prepared, so the game slows down, transition-scoring rates plummet, and the easy offensive-rebound opportunities no longer present themselves. In a macro sense, coaching actually evens out in the postseason. Russell Westbrook built his MVP candidacy by turning basketball into football: exploding through disorganized defenses and leading the league in fast-break points per game. In the playoffs, though, the Thunder will have to rely more often on a half-court offense that finished the year 25th in the NBA in points per possession. As for their first-round opponent? The Rockets were the best half-court offense in the league.
Yep thanks. But in the playoffs, I would say the Warriors appear to have the smoother (albeit not my much) and more efficient running offense. I don't see them stalling or getting bogged as often as the Rockets this series. Maybe that was a product of playing the Blazers?
In fact, to contrast Klay Thompson and Ryan Anderson so far in the playoffs (just hear me out), Klay has just been assertive in the catch and shoot. Many times he would not even have 1/2 second daylight and he would just shoot and make at a good clip. That's exactly how Ryan Anderson should be shooting. He needs to catch the pass from Harden or whoever with the mindset of shooting. That's where his focus should start and had been lacking in the OKC series.
It's hard to shoot many 3s in playoff games. it has a different intensity. it has to start in a good D to get a nice offensive flow.
Anderson should be benched for dekker or Troy Williams. They both are decent enough shooters but can also drive to the basket unlike Anderson.
None of them are more valuable than Ryno if he's hitting. He's our pure shooter. He just needs to take them.
Does anybody really believe that this offense is as good as the Nash-led Suns offenses? What do you think Nash's and the Suns' numbers would look like if they had taken 15 more threes a game? Those Suns offenses were as analytically efficient as this team but with a whole different degree of unpredictability. As several posters have mentioned, we are predictable. Oh, we're good at what we do. Especially against lottery teams that simply are too young, inexperienced, or not talented enough to defend us. We can dominate those guys. But when we go against legit NBA defenses, the top ten defenses, our offense becomes much less efficient. Don't you expect that? I mean, it is logical, isn't it, to expect our offense not to perform as efficiently when we're playing the top defenses? OKC was at the edge of the top ten defenses at ten. They played quality D. (And they might've beaten us if their offense consisted of more than Russ chucking.) They did take away our shooters. But did you expect any different? You guys that think Ryan and Ariza are all of a sudden slumping, that's funny. They've been covered. Imagine that. They're not efficient when they're covered. Whoda thunk it. I mean come on now. They're not slumping any more now than when they were covered tight during the regular season. They are who they are. Cover them tight when they catch and force them you put the ball on the wood. Isn't that what every NBA scoring report says about those two? Because every scout, coach, and NBA follower already knows neither man can dribble the basketball successfully. Can we really act like we didn't know this was going to happen? OKC's defense simply was not good enough to deny Harden the ball back after he passed it off. We were able to get the ball beck out to Harden and he was able to go to the rim and get on the foul line and put the Thunder down in the fourth quarters after they had basically beat our tails for three quarters. So we survived to play the #1 defense in the NBA. They'll be waiting, at the rim, and at the three-point line. They'll foul a lot less than the Thunder did. They won't put us on the free throw line as much as the Thunder did. And James Harden will keep forcing the ball to the rim. And Kawhi Leonard will be defending Harden down the stretch. Do you think Harden is going to get all those calls he got against the Thunder when we play the Spurs? Do you really think Anderson and/or Ariza are going to "explode" at the three-point line against the Spurs? All I can say is I hope those things happen. Because this is my team. But I have not one shred of empirical evidence that it will.
Rockets Regular Season Points per 100 Possessions = 114.7 Rockets Points Per 100 Possession vs. OKC in Round 1 = 114.4 http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2017.html http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2017.html
I believe this offense is as good or even better then the suns team because put simply, offensively harden is better then any play by miles on either team. We also have better shooters across the board. Now the predictability part of the offense is what we need to change a little, and ive seen us go to more lou P&R in the playoffs. This is still the first season in the MDA system and iam sure harden will keep getting better,and that we will keep adding new wrinkles to keep teams off balance.
We aren't really built to be that team. Harden isn't Nash and D'antoni doesn't expect him to be like Nash. We don't move the ball the way the Suns did, we don't have the interior passing they did, we're different. And that's fine. I agree with your premise, but I think you might be overrating this Spurs team and underrating the way this Rockets team can attack San Antonio.
playoff ryno happened. may the lord have mercy on his soul, cuz if he keeps this up i most certainly will have none! https://i.redd.it/jyvhm4tlomty.jpg
We'll just have to disagree then. If you can understand why Harden is a better offensive player than Westbrook (which he is by a mile) then tut should be able to understand why Steve Nash in his prime is a better offensive player than Harden is now. Nash gave you 11 assists while keeping his turnovers 40% lower than Harden. Then when you look at their shooting percentages and TS% You can see Nash is the much better shooter. The excuse there is James takes so many more shots. Yes, he does, because he is not a true point guard and Cabot create the myriad of great shots for his teammates that Nash could for his guys. Those Suns teams had the same offensive rating we have now while taking 15 less three-point shots less than we do a game. If you gave prime Nash our shooters, pour offensive rating world climb to 118-120 and Nash would average about 14 assists. Harden is simply not as creative not as efficient as prime Steve Nash when it chins roti running an offense and creating great looks for others. Harden's playmaking involved a high degree of risk and a reliance on getting favorable officiating, Teri factors that inevitably turn against him in the playoffs when we go against the best teams and the best defenses. Nash's landing want based on those factors. Nash could go out, take care of the basketball, and still create great looks for his mates even when the officials were swallowing their whistles. Those are just a few of the reasons why those Suns offenses were better than this one. I don't expect you'll agree.
What way can this Rocket team attack the Spurs that the Spurs haven't seen or won't be prepared for? They're the number one defensive team and the second best offensive team. How am I overrating them?
Elite defensive teams including OKC are able to take away your first option: the drive and kick 3-point game. Too bad Spurs, Warriors and Grizz are the best defensive teams in the league and the first two plays great offense too.
You're acting like they're some juggernaut we have no chance against. They aren't. The #1 factor is still and will always be talent. To me, Tony Parker and David Lee can be liabilities. It's doable.
Sorry. We've got about a 10% chance of beating them in a 7-game series. The only way to increase those odds significantly is if one of their main cogs goes down with injury. Your acting like we're the favorites to win it.
