The Fundamental Problem With the Rockets Offense

I agree. Recent related post here :

http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47943&pagenumber=3

 

<blockquote><hr>Originally posted by SmeggySmeg
As chance of given them some time to change , i mean we're all still holding out on you improving your posts <hr></blockquote>
Hey, but he's a fan favorite in the Hangout for all those salon threads..."here's a topic, talk amongst yourself."

Manny,

imo, all you really said was realists believe that the fundamental problem with the Rockets offense is to make a speculative trade.

Why not discuss the actually hand dealt and what we can and can't accomplish with it....like Rudy has to face. A lot of the "realist" suggestions made about doing something better than what Rudy can is not accepting what we *can't* accomplish, thus not really accepting reality like a "realist" should. We think we can just be the Kings, but Yao has shown only limited ability to play the high post. We think we can just be the Mavs, but the Mavs are going no where on bad defense come playoff time, and we want to field better defense, and we can do it.

Nothing wrong with your discussion, but "Fundamental Problem" while claiming to be a "Realisit" is a bit superficial and speculative as a "realist" approach when it is offering dreamcasting as the solution.

So, what's in your CD Player now.

 

Not the Kings - the Jazz, HP .

We can't be the Kings. We can be the Jazz. We CAN win even with our current players, in the two-man game with lots and lots of defense. We can't expect KT to pass like Webber. SF won't execute like Bibby. And so on down the line. BUT they can effectively run the two man game. Steve can break his man down and score, Yao can, and both can find a decent second or third option in a diciplined, slow-it-down p&r set. Malone and Stockton scored easy baskets for themselves and their teammates, and made the other team suffer, even when they had really crappy teammates. It's the helter-skelter stuff that gets us in trouble - the opponent cruises through our defense, we get jack happy and ignore our best options. I much prefer our chances in a low scoring game, and I certainly would prefer that 3 of the 5 spots on the floor go to defense players instead of offense players, because I don't want the other team to crush us if they only have to worry about 1 or 2 players defending them.

 

yeah, that was a sad thread of yours, wasn't it pasox2

also, I don't think Utah plays the 2-man game like they did anymore because of zones. The PnR is too easily defended. Utah has a lot more things going on, and they still have trouble winning more than we do.

btw: even in Utah's plodding pnr set, they still ran every chance they got. imo, everything we do this year should start with defense....second focus is fastbreak/transition points...3rd focus is getting Yao used to getting hammered for position...4th is mixing in some motion, but stop it when it busts. I'm not a big advocate of winning in the end with pure motion, so you have to work on your 2 minute drill as well, and I'm not convinced dumping it to Yao no matter where his positioning is in the last 2 minutes is any more reliable than Francis trying to work a midrange jumper or Mobley ISOing for penetration from 15' at the free throw line. Not yet, at least. The last 4 minutes is an entirely different animal, and I don't think motion is always the answer given your personnel.

 

nice post manny!
but just a question:

are there many teams out there right now whose success depends on 2 good guards and 1 good post presence?

Dallas - Nowitzki, Finley, Nash
Nets - KMart/Deke, Jefferson, Kidd
Last year's Bucks - Robinson, Allen, Cassell

i don't know. i think it is possible to win with our lineup, it just takes a bit of getting used to playing with each other...

 

In your opening post.

<i>I feel that Mobley either has to be moved or become the 6th man. If he is out there with Francis and Yao, we just don't achieve that balance on offense. </i>

The thing that is really outragious to me is people who say Mobley would be better as a 6th man Vinnie Johnson type. Ummm, that is really, actually all he is doing. He is a better defender than Vinnie, and better 3 pt shooter. So, when he is not doing his Vinnie J thing, he is playing D and standing in the corner and cutting to the basket and getting fastbreak. Do you realize that he shot 5 open 3 ptrs last night and had 5 fastbreak attempts for half his shots.

Anyhow, the point is that Mobley is not the problem, and anyone who says that role players are the fundamental problem or who say that Francis needs to be a Shooting Guard is not viewing this with the hand that Rudy is being dealt. You are not a realist.

 

Manny, a realist can also see that Yao is having trouble freeing himself from fronting defense. A realist can also see that NBA defenses are frustrating Yao and stripping him of the ball before he makes his move. A realist can also see that we are winning on defense and fastbreak improvement as much as what Yao provides, until we can run something consistent with Yao, all the while when he is getting tired. A realist also saw that our best motion was never run without Mobley. A realist also knows that dribble penetration and spot up shooting are key ingredients to motion systems.

Most importantly, a realists also does not blame fundamental problems on role players. You are either not the better team, or your star(s) need to play better.

All you said Manny was we need on clear-cut guy on the perimeter and the post, and that merely describes the Lakers. What is new about that and more realistic than my take or Rudy's that Defense, Fastbreak and a 5-Man game is more important than a two man game.

 

HP I would appreciate if you returned to this point.

My opinion and one I said in related other threads is I think the current transition with Yao is harder for Francis than it will be for Mobley. I also am of the opinion (very contrary to say MManual) that Francis overall may not be that much if any better at a 2 guard than Mobley anyway. IMO if Franics took Mobley's role as the primary 2 guard (w/Mobley traded, on the bench, or whatever) he would be less effective than playing beside him because 1) Francis will always get the better, longest, wing defender the opponents can throw at us, and 2) Francis will not be able to put as much pressure on the D as he does from a 1 spot. Nontheless whether Francis will integrate as a PG in an offense with 2 other very capable individual offensive players and in a offense trying to maximally utilize 5 guys is an unknown to me.

 

I do think Steve, Cutino, and Yao can coexist and we can still have a winning team. Look at the big 3 in Dallas, they learn how to play together and win. All Houston need is to give them time to adjust. Look at the game against the Kings and the Phillies. When they play team ball they prove they can beat anybody. I think we just got a glimpse of what this team can do when they are on the same page. I think Cutino can be a good spot up shooter from what I saw last year when he hit those open 3. But when the clock run down , he can also hit those tough shot. As long as Cutino doesn't tried to take on the other whole team by himself, we are fine. We definitely can use his talent. I think eventually Yao and Steve would average in the 20's point range and Cutino in the high teens. So we just have to be patient and endure the growing pain for a little while longer. And I think in the second half or next season at most, we will se a more consistent winning team.

 

I agree with you on the matchups point. Unless we got someone like Gary Payton or Jason Kidd at the point, it's not going to improve us much if we moved SF to the 2 guard. Case in point is all the games with Moochie at the point. If he's at least equivalent to an average point guard in the NBA, we generally sucked with that lineup, used whenever Cat is out this year and last, and favored by Rudy with Cat in the game at the same time in crunch time versus some teams for some reason.

 

Here's a realistic problem Cuttino Mobley 6'4 and almost a twig.
I can understand people saying Cuttino plays hard on Defense but he's by no means a great or decent defender by giving up 32 to EJ....Let's see our future playoff opositions, Michael Finly 6'6, Kobe Bryant 6'6, Doug Christe, 6'7, Steve Smith 6'8...Cuttino might cut it in the regular season but in the playoffs he won't be able to get his easy buckets or looks.

 

First, I think your heights are off, with Kobe and Finley 1 inch too short, with Christie two inches two tall.

Some have said move Steve F to shooting guard, how exactly is the a better defensive match-up with any of those guys.

BTW Jones points mainly came against the zone, when it was the whole team leaving him open.

Finley and Kobe are tough match-ups for anyone, except for McGrady, Carter, Allen, maybe Stackhouse, Jones, and who knows who else, who would you rather have applying some pressure on both of ends of the court on them than Cuttino? I'd take Cuttino on Christie (though normally pretty even, but after Doug's complete choke job last year in the WCF I know which one I'd rather have on my team) or the 6'8" Smith (really lick my chops here) any day.

 

madmaxu,

I said that Cuttino is the better defender than Vinnie Johnson. And I disagree; he is a decent/good defender. Anyhow, that whole bench Cat for a defensive specialist argument has been done time and time again. Cat has very long arms and keeps his man in front and outplayed Jones. Jones shot 11-27. That sucks, dude. How's that for a realistic problem. Cat also made the winning play in OT by stripping Jones. Jones got hot in the 4th (largely from downtown), and that is all. Before that, Cat was outplaying him.

Desert Scar,

I don't think this teams needs a pure PG. I think that is overrated given Yao. I also agree with you that one of the reasons Francis wants to play PG is because he doesn't want to be pitted against NBA SGs.

like I've said over and over. Dribble penetration and spot up shooting are key ingredients to motion. Spectacular passing by a floor general PG isn't a key ingredient to motion, hence the reason the Kings can win with no true PG. The team just needs to dance in synch and make the right read between, penetration/pass/shot/pick/cut. They pleased me with that enough this year to be completely satisfied with having SF and CM as guards.

 

I dont necessarily think the defensive situation will be any better at the 2 guard spot. However, Steve playing 2 guard will be able to average 30 PPG considering he already averages around 24 PPG now juggling both responsibilities. Majority of nights, Steve will win his matchup. The bigger advantage tho is that this team would be able to have better defense at the point of attack which is extremely important imo. When players like Jason Williams and Andre Miller consistently get inside the defense with ease, it puts major pressure on the interior defenders causing them to have to help too much and resulting in bad position for rebounds and such. Watch Jamaal Tinsley tonight and you'll see what Im talking about.

Also, you can have the best passing center in the world, but if you have three guards that make bad reads and bad decisions your simply not going to be a consistent team. Its actually pretty comical that all three of our guards have a sub 2 to 1 ast to TO ratios. Thinking that a passing center can make up for all these deficiences is extremely short sighted and looking at the game in a one dimensional manner. There are 80 shots a game going up, Yao is not going to create all 80 of them. There are still huge areas where the guards have an effect on making effective reads and creating plays.

I can guarantee you that if you took Sacramento's three guards (Bibby, Christie and Jackson) and replaced them with Francis, Mobley and Moochie, that team would be no where near what it is. Even though the Kings run a lot of their offense through passing big men, there is still large chunks of the game where the guards have to make correct reads and be smart about the game. You cant just assume that one type of offense will work for 48 mins for 82 games in this day and age of the NBA. You need a diversified attack and that means three bad decision low IQ guards is not going to get it done.

 

Heypartner is correct in stating that the Rockets win when they defend well and run the break well to get easy shots. When they don't do those things, they struggle.

Addressing the offense, which, if improved, would allow the team to struggle int he areas mentioned above yet still solidy (4 - 10 points) defeat teams like Miami / Memphis, etc, is a seperate issue, and one that is made too complicated in this thread and by the Rockets, imo.

The Rockets have added a few interesting plays, are working on ways to get Yao the ball, etc, but they just don't understand how much more effective ball movement is than forcing the action. It really isn't that hard. You make a move, get by a defender, force a double team or rotation and either recognize a scoring opportunity or passing opportunity. Rudy can talk all he wants about how they really have more assists than show up in the box score, but they don't. Few Rocket players are good at setting other players up. Some are good at setting themselves up, but even that can use some work.

I just don't see why it's so complicated, after 2+ years, for them to learn this basic concept.

 

JayZ, why can't it be more complicated they saying...."Hey, just pass it to Yao" or, as you say, "Just drive by your man and pass it to Yao." You make it sound like you really can have 5 players just spread out in their positions with one go dribbling. Surely, that's not what you meant, and I'm probably oversimplicating your statement to make a point.

Dancing is time better than a well-timed team defense is not that simple, or more teams would succeed. Nearly every offense struggled early. We are coming out of it, but still sputtering.

Sure, we can break down when Francis made the wrong decision, and when Mobley went to the 15' elbow ISO too often (which is actually pretty successful when he gets it right at that mark), but we have to also look at when Yao got striped and when he couldn't get open, and then think that sometimes you have to believe Francis just trusts his midrange juking over forcing it to Yao against the frustrating defenses that Yao sees sometimes.

my bottomline is more concern for regaining our motion we had, which was nothing about basing an offense around 2 players. When you discuss that, it does become more complicated.

 

I did make it more simple than it actually is, but I think you have to start there. What I was trying to describe was the simplicity of basketball fundamentals. When you go play pickup, you can tell which players you are playing with that have been schooled/coached in the sport at some point. They understand how a simple pick and roll can automatically create mismatches. They understand how if they get by their defender and the defense rotates, someone is open, often a big man cutting to the basket.

These are simple concepts that the Rockets seemed to understand for a 3 game stretch there, where they made quick, sharp, crisp decision, not only getting the right man the ball, but giving it to him in a position to score. To me, that is the only difference between their 27 assist game and their 12 assist game. Yes, Yao was pushed significantly further off the block in the last game, but that's not why their offense sputtered. It sputtered because they took simple concepts and made them complex.

Look at the Kings or the Mavs. What they do isn't rocket science, no pun intended. They just play smart.

I think that for NBA players these skills should be simple and the fact that we haven't seen any consistent improvement in this category for a while (minus a few games this season) makes me start to question Rudy's capabilities as a coach. I simlpy think he doesn't adequately develope these skills , quite possibly, because he expects his players to know them already. For Yao, this may be the case, but for an increasing number of NBA players, this isn't true, and thus we are seeing consistently lower scoring games.

 

That is also my guess about Rudy's problem. He might not fully appreciate the deficiency of today's young players. He might subconsciously assume that those fundamental skills will somehow work out in their minds. He might be too optimistic on the players' development. I don't know. Maybe it's just us fans who are too impatient with these kids.

It's a lot harder to judge a coach than to judge a player. For a player, it's all out there for you to see on the floor. For a coach, a lot of the things are done behind the scene and the fans know very little about them.