And that is the point. These +/- stats have a place, but watching the player and how he plays is far more important. Stats are not a "be all / end all" scenario -- they are only a general indicator. If you looked only at +/- stats, we would be paying Hayes, a marginal NBA player, the big bucks and mid-level money to Yao and T-Mc.
Sure, which is why no one only looks at stats. What +/- provides, if anything, is a clue that "so and so" might be doing something very good or very bad that wasn't noticed before. People don't see everything just by watching games. Sometimes something crops up in the data that's unexpected, and its worthwhile to review the games and try to figure out why that happened. Maybe it's just an issue of matchups. Maybe the player's number were skewed in garbage time. Or, maybe, he's actually doing something out there that wasn't really noticed before. I think that's the correct way to use +/- stats. Surely, if a star's +/- over a significant stretch of games is negative, and the team is blowing out the opponent when he's off the court, there is likely something very wrong (note, in the case of Kobe and the Lakers, they are +5.3 with him). Maybe it isn't his fault. Or ... maybe it is. It's worth inspecting closer. And, I've said it before, but I think +/- stats are far more useful for combinations of players than individual players. Most coaches are internally tracking something like that during a game (how the team plays or score changes with certain players on the court).
This consistent 3rd scorer must have a high %FG .. there is no point scoring 20-30 points consistently when he need to take 20-30 shots to do that.
very true. there's so many weapons on this team that on any given night somebody will be on their game. and if it ever gets to the point where everybody's on the same page, sky's the limit. the problem isn't with needing a 3rd scorer though. the problem is needing a consistent point guard/passer that can get the ball to that 3rd scorer. i think we actually need to put the ball back in mcgrady's hands a bit more instead of him being a "finisher," cause he showed last year how good of a "facilitator" he can be. with him comin off screens and getting in to the lane with the ball in his hands a bit more, that 3rd scoring option would take care of itself.
We need consistent threats on offense at all five positions. Teams sag off Alston and Hayes so we're playing 3 on 5.
hmmm, team sag off rafer, hayes AND battier. So its basically 2 on 5. Anyway as long as rafer is not playing, i think we could easily get an extra 10 points from whoever that is taking over his minutes. Do it RA, take out rafer for the next game, just 1 freaking game that rafer will not play for 1 minute. We be getting to 100 points easily.
We do need a consistant 3rd scorer. Every great team has it. Some even have four. We have a group of back up players, which means they will not be consistant 3rd options. Hell.... even one of our top 2 players is not consistant(Yao). Steve Francis may be able to be that other guy, but he is not getting any PT. So we will continue to be a under achieving team until that happens.
I'm thinking of trading Battier...but only for Tayshaun Prince..he can score and of course defend... We could reunite him with Hayes and I've read somewhere that it was Shane's dream to play for Detroit...
How many teams have consistent scoring threats at all five positions? Just go through the starting lineups, and point them out. I'm certain any that you find are likely also poor defensive teams. I'm just wondering why it is that Adelman is sticking with a starting lineup that has 3 "offensive liabilities", when he is a reputed offensive coach. Is he being brainwashed by Rockets management? Has he changed his basketball philosophy since leaving Sacramento? Any theories on this?
I don't think it's overrated. I think we might be better off if both Tmac and Yao avg ~20 pts a game and the rest of the team stepped it up. With Tmac out, we're seeing other guys be more aggressive. But when both Tmac and Yao are on the floor, you can tell guys are more tentative and worried about taking up Tmac & Yao's shots. Tmac's injury has really exposed the mentality of the team: Tmac & Yao are the only attackers, everyone else will get their points on hustle plays. The problem is the defense doesn't have to take Alston, Battier, or Hayes seriously. They can cheat all day and play loose defense on them while always keying in on our two stars. We need more balanced scoring. Take a look at the Mavs or Spurs, if Dirk or Duncan have below avg days, they will still blow teams out. In our case, we still look like last year: Tmac & Yao both need to get 25+ or it will be a close game. The rest of the team, on avg, needs to bump it up. It doesn't need to be the same guy every night, but maybe Bonzi one night, Scola the other, James, etc.
For those who are interested, checkout the team stats (offensive and defensive efficiency, and rebounding) for various 5-man lineups so far this season: Rockets 5-man units Last year, the starting group was dominant in the regular season. And not just against inferior competition either. They played stifling defense, and very effective offense. This year, the defense is still there (opponents are only getting 95 points per 100 possessions), but the offense has really sputtered -- a 92 points per 100 possessions (yuck!). Perhaps that shouldn't be a surprise, considering the struggles of Alston and Battier in the early part of the season, and Chuck's been virtually invisible in the points department. I think the current lineup will be given a little more time (maybe a week or two), but if things don't pick up with them I think we can expect a lineup change.
Scola has the best skill set to be the third scorer with Yao and TMac. We all hope he takes the starting job before too long. I'd prefer to see Battier go to the bench, with Tmac at the 3. Wells can move up to start at the 2. Bonzi seems to play remarkably well off the other guys, not getting in the way, but still being a threat. Battier isn't a threat, unless he's in the corner. Battier can be an effective bench player, like he was in Memphis. Mike James obviously belongs on the bench - does not play well with others. He can be effective in that role - as the bench scorer with a bunch of defenders like Battier and Hayes. The pg position is our weak spot, of course. IF we have more scoring punch at the other spots, we can afford to live with a horrible shooter like RA. I really hate that, though, because you know the other team is going to try and force an outside shot, and neither Bonzi nor RA is a good shooter. I really wish we could trade for a pg that could shoot. For now, I'd rather take my chances with Steve, who at least can get by his man for a closer shot or a dish, if the ball is forced his way. Rafer is just such a huge negative, taking opportunity from his teammates. .
I don't think we need a consistent 3rd scorer who puts up 20 points a game, but I do think we need a 3rd scorer every game - it just doesn't have to be the same guy that night. Between Bonzi, Mike James, and Scola, as long as one of the three has a good game in addition to Yao and Tmac getting their's, we have a chance to win. Remember the second championship with Hakeem and Clyde, in all the playoff games the two superstars put up good numbers, and every game it was someone else stepping up between Horry, Elie, Cassell, or Kenny Smith.
I am for ANY (legal) proposal for getting Alston out of town. I have strongly advocated for TMac going to SF, and Wells in the starting lineup would create some real matchup problems for most teams. I would keep Battier and use him as a reserve. Scola should definitely start. It just seems logical to get more scoring punch in your starting lineup. TMac closer to the basket, not running all over the floor makes such commonsense. AND, you just can't afford too ineffective scorers in your starting lineup. James becomes your PG.
How could the need for a consistent third scorer be overrated whenever we were bounced out of the playoffs (and a WC Finals appearance, IMO) last year for lacking exactly that?
Yep, how much you outscore your opponent is way overrated. I don't know why anyone would pay attention to it.
Can someone explain why replacing Battier with Bonzi means that T-Mac moves from "SG" to "SF". I don't see how T-Mac's role in the offense would change, and defensively T-Mac and Battier cross matched all the time anyways.
