End Game Playcalling: Give your best player the ball or working for the most efficient shot?

This makes the assumption that giving the ball to your best player and letting him work is not working for the most efficient shot.

Harden is one of the best PnR players in the league. His PnR creates a ton of open looks.

 

HTML:

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/S2BlOTeoZVE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This.

 

Errr....

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/S2BlOTeoZVE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Hero ball is typically less effective than making the smart play imo. Thats just my opinion but like I said before it depends on the situation. A 40 foot fadeaway jumper(Kobe) should never be taken over an open Nash 3 for example.

 

Synergy says that the Rockets, as a team, have a PPP ("points per play") of 0.92 on plays that aren't transition attempts or offensive rebound attempts. So, that's like our average expected points in a half-court setting, disregarding offensive rebounds.

By comparison, Harden's PPP in isolation or in pick-and-roll as the ball-handler is 1.00 which is among the very best in the league. And that just includes plays ending on him taking a shot, free throw, or committing a turnover. It doesn't account for all the open looks he can potentially create by drawing the defense.

So, if the point of that TrueHoop article was that teams should go with the most efficient option at the end of games, I agree. Harden it is.

 

You don't want Asik taking a 15 ft. jumper; give it to Harden.

 

Steve Kerr's open catch and shoot is one of the most money shots in nba history.

 

Sadly our best play for a game winning shot is a iso play with Harden or a P&R with Asik and Harden. Asik's ability to dislodge the defender makes him invaluable in late game situations....think ala TMAC's Dallas game winning jumper with Yao setting the pick...

 

if you were mchale last night, what play would you have called?

 

That wasn't the point. The point was that unconventional means are not necessarily always the best means to close a game. You have to take into account who is playing well and who is not. Duncan and Kawhi Leonard were not playing well offensively all game long and we were having a hard time stopping Tony Parker.

Its not as simple as give the ball to your best player. You should always read the situation. If Harden was playing like crap for example would it be a good idea to do that?

For example, say Harden was 0-4 from 3. We are down 3. Delfino made 5-5 of his shots from 3 point range. It would probably be better to try to get Delfino an open look from 3. Its all situational typically though like I said an open shot from a player that can shoot that shot pretty well is better than a very difficult contested shot by a superstar in clutch situations.

 

Harden is just a really good player, so I voted for the Harden iso. That 0.92 includes Harden isos, so the PPP of other plays is even lower than that.

 

Disagree. The point of the article is given at the end:

[rquoter]
The Spurs lost this one, and it might be tempting to use it as evidence that Pop's approach has holes.

But I'm reminded of something a very smart stat geek told me once: The more they dig into the data, the more they find that Popovich does almost everything the right way. The two-for-one, the substitutions, the play calling, his tactical errors are few and far between, which is a big part of why Spurs wins can be greeted with shrugs -- it's a team that operates with machine-like efficiency. That efficiency isn't despite unconventional play calls, though. It's because of them, which isn't really food for thought in San Antonio, but it might be for 29 other teams.

Why is Popovich so rare in getting these things so right? [/rquoter]

And how do you get Delfino an open look? What if they prevent the pass to him (defenses will tighten up in end-of-game situations) and you end up dumping the ball to Asik or having Parsons try to create something off the dribble? How do your role players respond in that situation?

Unless someone else has a clear advantage, I'm most comfortable giving the ball to Harden. I don't think Harden lets a bad shooting night effect him like a lot of our other players. And I trust him to kick the ball to open players if the defense doubles him.

 

Even if your playmaker doesn't touch the ball, he's still going to be the focus of the play. He facilitated by his mere presence on the court.

 

Another factor to consider is that Harden, more so than almost any other player, relies on free throws to give a major boost to his efficiency and TS%. As we all know, the refs like to swallow their whistles during crunch time. I would go Harden ISO currently with this team, but if we had another top 15-20 player, I would go with the team ball approach, that is until Harden develops a post game and more reliable mid-range game. Ideally, once we get a stud 4 (Love, Aldrige), and Jeremy gains some seasoning, we can run a 1-2, 1-4, or 2-4 PnR as our crunch time plays. Make no mistake though, Harden ISO, without him having a better mid-range game, would not be better than team ball if we had an elite PF.

 

Always go for the most efficient shot imo. These are NBA players who are all capable of hitting open shots.

SA's play last night was a great play but was defended very well by Houston. That set worked on GSW a couple of weeks ago so maybe Pop thought it'd work on us. Great scouting by the staff to prevent that though because had that play gone perfectly, we wouldve lost via a Manu layup.

 

Harden has came up big in the clutch time and time again. I really don't think the claim that Harden struggles in crunch time is even remotely viable anymore.