I was just responding to somebody who said Jalen will be a role player when his athleticism fades. We don't know when Jalens hops will disappear but by the time that happens Wemby is likely on his Blake Griffin Nets arc.
Every player has a role, just like every coach on staff has a role(s) and do it best to their ability Dream role was superstar who anchored both the offense & defense, super-duper star Role at that, and his co-stars/support cast had roles they fulfilled, some play bigger or lesser roles, depending on their ability n skill set, Thorpe played his role to a T, along with Horry etc
I do think its important, more so with his role within the offense. I can also see impact and improvement outside of shooting. Every coach preaches corrrct read/correct shot. Making the correct choice. I do understand that. Making shots is obviously best case scenario, but bad efficiency on great looks and correct reads is less problematic. There are greats, who make terrible decisions and convert bad looks and they are rightfully celebrated. But then there are typically avergae players, who constantly make the correct read and loom significantly better like FVV.
Well, thats just not accurate. Teams constantly win being less efficient by having better turn over margins and significantly better rebounding numbers and a higher free throw rate. Efficency is incredibly important, no doubt. But its not end all be all.
It is accurate, unless you have your own definition of what it means to be efficient. I'm not talking about field goal percentage. Turnovers, offensive rebounds, free throw rate - all of those things are factored into efficiency. At the end of the day it comes down to points per possession, or offensive rating, or whatever you want to call it. And the more efficient team (team with the higher offensive rating) always wins.
Im drinking at my baby shower, so i dont have the time to prove this incredibly wrong. But man is it wildly innaccurate in observation. Many teams win, all the time, being less efficient. Many teams lose, all the time, being more efficient. I shouldnt have to defend this, its happening likely tonight in the nba and idc to check.
It's not an observation, it is a fact, though it does have one small caveat, and maybe this is what you're getting at. The one exception to this - in any given game it is possible for one team to get one extra possession over the other team. So if one team gets 105 possessions for example, and the other team gets 106, it is possible that a team with 105 possessions could have an offensive rating of 120.0, and the team that got 106 possessions could have an offensive rating of 119.8, and in that case the team with the lower offensive rating would win 127-126. So in those cases it is possible to win if your efficiency is VERY slightly lower than your opponent. But in all other games, the more efficient team wins.
I just went through every single Rockets box score of this season. The team with the higher offensive rating won 100% of the games.
Tonight, The nuggets shot significantly better and lost to the mavs. The heat shot similar but worse, yet beat the pistons. Not only that, they had more possessions, took more shots, won the rebounding battle and had more free throws. Efficiency typically wins, but is not the only thing that matters.
If you're only factoring in field goal percentage or whatever you're not getting the full picture in terms of efficiency. Offensive efficiency includes turnovers, offensive rebounds, free throws, etc. The more efficient team always wins; that's just basic math. The goal of defense is to reduce the opposing team's offensive efficiency. There is no way to win if you get less out of each possession than your opponent. Period.
When you look at efficiency you look at fg%, 3pt% efg%, ts% and maybe 2pt%. None the less, accross the board the nuggets outperformed the mavs and lost.
This is actually a good one! That would be another rare exception to the rule. Right, but the mavs were the more efficient team. That's why they won. They scored more points per possession.
So are you saying point per possession is the most important efficiency stat? Surely, this explains how efficiency is important but not the most important. Possessions is very important. Within that is nuance, how much more important is an offensive rebound vs a defensive rebound? How important is the ability to create foul shots. What are turnovers? Basketball is simple yet complex, 5 steph curry's dont win because of efficiency. Also, 5 draymond greens are terrible. If efficiency was king, and i think it is at the end of the day, harden and houston would have a ring. But he doesnt, and we dont.
Sorry to burst anyone's bubble but Jalen Green is HIGHLY unlikely to be moved this summer. There is so much involved in making this move financially. Dude has his shortcomings for sures, particularly in shooting, and I believe thats an issue the Rockets are willing to gamble on in fixing in the near future. Dude does things on the floor NO ONE else on the team is capable of doing, and fixing his shooting could unlock a potential All-Star. Even if it was a Jamal Murray like player, that's a gamble the Rockets will be wiling to make.
So basically regardless if either team is more efficient than the other....it just comes down to the team with the most points after regulation right? Points for the total game That keeps it very simple like the Truth has always been since time immemorial That is why both sides of this efficient talk holds weight, now combine both and that is efficient (recipe for major success) The efficiency of a player wasn't as loudly spoken in general as say the 90's as opposed to somebody saying 'efficient' in every other post (rather praise or slander) today Efficiency has exploded But like Wilt said in the 70s, ''We are just trying to make sure we score more points than the other team by end of the game'' (paraphrasing) That's all that matters, no matter how efficient/un-efficient, just get it done, on both sides, like they are currently doing
Sure, I can help you out here with these definitions according to the way the NBA sees it. For starters, offensive rebounds don't give you "extra possessions" despite the way many fans will describe it. You can think of it as "extra possessions" conceptually, but according to the stats, an offensive rebound means you continue the same possession. So if I miss a shot, get my own rebound, miss it again, get my own rebound, and lets say I do this 10 times, then I finally make the shot - that is classified as one possession. According to the NBA anyway. So offensive rebounds are very helpful to your offensive efficiency. This is why big offensive rebounders often have higher than expected (to most fans, anyway) offensive "analytics" scores, especially when its guys that don't really score a lot. Second is turnovers, turnovers also count as an ended possession that results in 0 points. It counts basically the same as a missed field goal. So turnovers do not "generate extra possessions" the way some people may describe it. A possession that ends in a turnover is still a possession that ends in 0 points, just like a possession that ends in a missed shot, or a blocked shot, or an offensive foul, or whatever. And with foul shots, those count as the possession they were generated on. So if I have possession of the ball and I make a shot, that's a possession that ends in 2 points for my team. Similarly, if I miss a shot but get fouled, and I make both shots, that's the same result - a possession that ends in 2 points for my team. The way to put all this together is to realize that both teams get the same number of possessions every game (plus or minus 1). So points per possession is the most important efficiency stat. And yeah, I agree with you that basketball is complicated. How efficient would 5 Steph Curry's be? Probably very very efficient. But so would their opponents. Doesn't matter if you have a 150 offensive rating if your opponent has a 155 offensive rating. As I said the goal is to have a higher offensive rating than your opponent, which is why defense matters. Good defense is just reducing the other team's offensive efficiency, that's the goal. EDIT: and in the game you brought up tonight, it looks like the Mavs squeezed out one extra possession in the game (yay 2 for 1s), and the pace was 95.5. So the Mavs got 107 points on 96 possessions, which is 111.45 ORTG, and the Nuggets had 105 points on 95 possessions which is 110.53 ORTG. So the more efficient team did win here.
