I think the Rockets have one of the best offensive systems in the NBA

I gotta disagree with that. The more experience they gain with each other, the more efficient their scoring will get. Players will become more aware of each other's 'sweet spots', and trust/confidence in each other will improve ball movement to those spots.

 

I think you missed the point of my post. We don't just take 3's. The concept of "live by the 3, die by the 3" is basically that a team relies on hot jump shooting to win games. We don't take more jump shots than most NBA teams. We shoot just as many jumpers as everyone else. We get more shots at the rim than anyone else in the NBA. We just decide that since it's only marginally easier to make a long two point jump shot during an NBA game than a 3 point jump shot, but a 3 is worth significantly more, that WHEN we decide to shoot a jump shot, it should be a 3 rather than a long 2. But we're not taking more 3's at the expense of quality 2 point shots, rather, we're taking 3's at the expense of bad 2 point shots. It's good, smart offense.

And BTW, we're making more jump shots from everywhere on the court right now, not just the mid-range. The correlation of improved mid-range shooting and winning is not a causal relationship. It's hot jump shooting in general. We're still throwing up 3's at a high rate, as we should.

 

So what you are saying is that the Rockets run one of the best offense considering there personel. Sure that is fine. But that is fundamentally different than saying the Rockets run one of the best offense in the NBA.

 

Why do you assume that we're so much more likely to make those type of 2 point jump shots, when we're already struggling with jump shots, to offset the difference in value of a make? If we're struggling on 3s, teams are going to play off of us from 3, making it much easier to contest a 2 point jump shot. And making those long 2s really won't do much to open up the rest of the offense, whereas starting to make 3s would spread out the floor more and open up more easy looks at the rim.

Look, an NBA team that struggles to score in the paint AND can't hit 3s in the same game, is going to lose, save for their opponent being equally inept offensively that night. The smart play is to continue taking smart, efficient shots and hope that you start making the shots that you're good enough to make.

 

i never said we just take 3s, but we do take the 2nd most 3s in the league. add to that the most shots at rim, and where is the basic mid range 2? it is obviously at the expense of the other 2 shots.

and again, im not talking numbers im talking about the mental aspects which you never mention. its a fact that shooting a 3 is harder than a 2. and the mental effects of missing them cannot or should not be overlooked.

really? second in 3pt attempts in the league and none of them were at the expense of a quality 2 pt shot (that btw never existed because we choose not to shoot them)? and again, all of this is based on black and white numbers. asking ppat to shoot 3s is stupid and yet it happened earlier this season. recently he hasnt been shooting 3s so much and instead his 2s have been killer. the thing is his ability to shoot 2s was ALWAYS been there, they just never put him in a position to shoot it as much. instead he camped behind the arc. so how can you say the 3s werent at the expense of quality 2s? in fact how can you assess the quality of a 2 pt shot that never existed?

 

imo we dont generally struggle with 2s. this is obviously debatable for the simple fact that the team doesnt shoot enough of them to make a determination. but for me patterson is a case in point. his 2pt shooting is great. its been generally good all year. the same but to a lesser extent with lin. when he attempts 2s, he generally makes them. earlier in the year his 3s were awful, yet he hardly took a step in and shot a 2. he continued to brick 3s.

also the 3s have a HUGE effect on us. if we sink them, we look great. if we miss them, we dont adapt, instead we continue to shoot them and we most likely lose. some games our paint production is great and that makes up for an off shooting night. other games, our drives are not there, and if we miss the 3s, we lose almost for sure. this is where i believe that we do in fact give up "quality" 2s for a "not so quality that night" 3.

openning up the floor is overrated when the defense packs the paint and/or is really good with zone/switching. when they take away our drives. we rely too heavily on 3s. thats basically my point. not talking about when its working, im specifically talking bout when its not. we dont seem to adapt, to change strategy and grind out a win. instead, it seems more like a hope and prayer that the 3s start going in...

if they take away the paint, hitting the 3s becomes much more important. if only it were so easy to shoot lights out every night....

 

I consider a "quality 2" a shot at the rim. We're #1 in the league in those. So no, I don't think we're sacrificing quality 2s to shoot more 3s. We sacrifice mid-range jump shots to get more 3's. I'm not saying a mid-range jumper is necessarily a bad shot, but it's not nearly as good of a shot as a shot at the rim, and we take plenty of shots at the rim.

No, asking 2Pat to shoot 3s is not anywhere close to something one could consider "stupid." In fact, statistically, it's smarter than asking him to shoot 2s. And you're acting like we asked him to shoot a bunch of 3s early in the season, but now he's shooting less 3s and it's making him better. That's incorrect as well. He's been steady shooting right around two 3s per game each month this season. And I'm glad he has, because his effective field goal percentage on 3s is higher than his effective field goal percentage on 2 point jump shots between 10 and 23 feet. What I'm saying is, when he shoots a 3 pointer, he averages 1.08 points per shot, compared to less than 1 point every time he shoots a 2 point jump shot. You're underestimating the impact of making 3s.

 

again i agree with you when things are going well. but what happens when the defense takes away our shots at the rim? we rely too heavily on 3s to make up for it. and imo thats a tall order.

his 3pa has gone down since mid jan. in the last 14 games he has attempted more than 1 in only 5 games (1 game with 4, 2 games with 3, and 2 games with 2). from mid dec to mid jan he only had 1 game with 1 attempt.

 

Have you been watching the games or do you not consider points in the paint as 2pt shots? Example: the Rockets had 86 FGAs against Portland and 60 of those were 2pt shots. Also throughout most of the season the Rockets were not one of the better 3pt shooting teams (although they have improved to 8th now) in the league even though they shoot the most 3s. The reason they have won a lot of those games is due to the relentless nature that they attack the paint.

 

The past Rockets championships embraced the same philosophy. In and out offense. The only difference is that the offense back then started in the post(Olajuwon) and kicked it out when doubled/tripled - for the open 3. The current one starts outside with a drive to the basket, then kick out if the paint is packed.

The defensive team has to pick their poison. Allow the driving player to be defended one on one or pack the paint and gamble that the offensive team misses the long ball. From what I can tell, they usually choose the latter.

 

Rockets score an average of 46 ppg in the paint (3rd in the NBA)

 

They do chose the latter because guys find it very difficult to guard Harden & Lin one on one. They are to quick. Plus they don't want them drawing contact & getting to the FT line. It is a safer gamble to bet on the 3's not falling than it is to bet on Lin & harden's not being able to dribble penetrate.

 

Best offense... Best offensive systems...

The best way to judge an offense is by the production (points scored) and the Rockets have been one of the highest scoring teams in the league from the start of the season till now. So I would agree with however you put it.

Obviously it's more to do with the players than it does the system because it's the skills and the talent of the players that make a system work. And what the Rockets do is not complicated so it's not like the coaching brain trust are a bunch of geniuses. Their best offensive play is the fast break...Lol... And giving the ball to Harden. How hard is that...???

 

I think the system is fluke-ish, but that can be because of the personel. I think the system adelman ran was a lot better. If adelman had a player of hardens caliber,the offense would be a lot better and harden would be a better player. Jmo

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwhaW2nVVcg

You think we have the personnel, and that we'd be maximizing their abilities if we ran sets like these?

 

http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2013/02/08/the-dissection-of-shot-selection-lessons-learned/

Has anyone read this article on hardwood paroxysm?

Seems to confirm the fact that our offensive system (choice of shots) has boosted our FG percentage, since no player on our team, save say Harden, Delfino, and maybe Lin, were expected to be great on offense.

Good read

 

I am not sure if I understand what you are saying.