Newsflash: Defensive teams don't need a lot of scoring to win 50+ games but the D should be consistent
I agree with this post but I would like to see more. I would like to see Ariza and Parsons' defensive stats further broken down. Offensive stats sum up a players offensive abilities much more accurately than the basic defensive stats. Fore instance, how did Ariza affect opposing players FG% compared to parsons? I want to see more stats like this if anyone has them. At the end of the day, what I am asking is, does Ariza's defense make up for the 2.2 ppg differential?
First people complain about why Lin hasn't been traded to Philly when Philly was rumored to have wanted the Pelican's pick from the Asik trade. Then people complain when Lin is traded with the Rockets' pick which will be lower value than the Pelicans' pick and they start to say it's the dumbest move that Morey has made. It's just like those people who call Morey a jerk for treating player's like assets then an idiot when he doesn't treat them like an asset. Haters are gonna hate. Jerks are gonna knee jerk.
I think you might be presenting a false dilemma - either have superstars who are so elite that they make all role players expendable, or lose. Harden and Howard are currently not, and may never be, like Kobe and Shaq or Lebron and Wade before our championship window closes. But that doesn't mean we can't still win... we will just need the right help. There is a happy medium that we should strive for - build a balanced team that includes superstars. Currently our team is very unbalanced in terms of perimeter play and a good scheme or defender could bottleneck our entire offense by stopping Harden for stretches of time. however, I hope I'm completely off base here and everything you said is correct. Otherwise, we're in for one UGLY season.
Another way of looking at it is that we have two all-stars...and not a single other proven NBA player on the entire roster. Ariza is our third best player as things stand now...and this is a guy who had a slightly above league average contract year, preceded by four consecutive below league average years. He's a guy who shot 40% from three in that contract year, but has a career mark just under 35%. He's a 28 year old who has played for six different teams (and one of them twice). That's your third best player. Otherwise, you're filling your roster with young, unproven D-league guys with obvious holes in their games, unproven Euros, and castoffs. And you're supposedly in win-now mode with a two-year window... I think making Parsons a RFA is the only outright blunder Morey has made, but you have to have your head fully immersed in the Kool-Aid to think this is -- as things stand now -- anything but a catastrophe.
I would say Beverley and Jones have done enough to prove themselves as good NBA players. As for Ariza, I agree his offense hasn't been completely proven (that'll be decided next year), but he is certainly a proven as a defender. And in his defense, the last two seasons before this past year he was on crappy teams having crappy years, that tends to affect player's performances; and I doubt this Rockets squad will be crappy next season. So, I am fine with our starting lineup. I agree our bench is unproven with D-league studs and Euros and castoffs, BUT like I said we have 3 assets to add proven NBA players (MLE, BAE, Lin's TPE). Even if you add just 1-2 proven vets with those weapons, that is 6-7 proven NBA players on your roster. And let's say realistically 1-2 of these many D-leaguers/Euros/castoffs pan out as solid rotation players. That's a nine deep roster of legit players, including 2 All-stars. If Ariza's play declines and none of the D-leaguers/euros/castoffs pan out, well we are s*** out of luck. But the opportunity is there to be a competitive team still. It is still early in the offseason, we can still add veteran proven players to this young, but talented roster.
I think depends on whether we get that third star or not. If we do, then they don't have to play that way but if we don't, I think they'll have to. It's becoming more and more apparent we're going to have trouble attracting the better role guys. We're going to have to settle a lot.
Beverley has never even played a full NBA season, and he was well below league average last year. I like his attitude and determination and he can do some things well -- I think (but don't know) he can be a nice bench piece on a championship contender -- but I don't see how you can objectively say he's proven himself as a good NBA player. Jones is another young player who had one nice year, but I don't think you can say he's a proven NBA player after one year. What you most certainly CAN say is that he's proven he's not a starting PF on a championship-contending team in the West. These guys have shown some flashes and some promise. We'd like to think they can be good NBA players. But they haven't proven anything yet.
OK, I'll give you Jones, though I do think he had tremendous upside still, but that might be wishful thinking. But, Beverley was named to the All-NBA 2nd defensive team. That's impressive and proof enough to me he can start in this league. He can knock down the three and showed he could play well next to Harden. He might be better off the bench, but we are just fine with him starting at point next year.
The Lin trade was not a good move because it was unnecessary and premature. Even Morey admits he would not have done it if he knew that Bosh was going to bail out at the last minute. Unlike the Ariza-Parsons swap, there is no one on the team that can come close to what Lin produced. Asik may be the better player but the NOP pick and a combination of Dorsey-Motiejunas-Dorsey-Adrien will be able to pick up his slack or better. Lin's role as facilitator and offense off the bench is still missing. For the Lin trade exception and Gee, Rockets need to figure a way to S&T for Lance Stephenson so we can be in the best position to contend this season. Stephenson would be an improvement over Lin actually.
The half-court offense was ALWAYS a problem.... Fewest screens in the league, players standing around, too many contested shots and turnovers. The question now is how much will this changes with the Rox' new players? We'll find out next season if this stagnant offense was more of a player problem or coaching problem. Although I still think the core problem with the offense is this gimmick "Moreyball" strategy. I just think limiting your choices in shot selection really takes options away from the half-court offense.
The problem is not the getting rid of Lin part. The problem is we have not got a replacement yet. Maybe Canaan. Maybe Johnson. But they most likely not be ready yet. Waiting for rondo.
Something about that Lin stat on drives was bugging me, so i looked it up... It's actually just a playoff stat, with Lin having a sample size of 6 games. LeBron played three times that. Also, in the regular season, Lin shot 48% on drives and his ppg on drives was 4 pts. Worst part of all, I kept seeing Dragics name asking the league leaders
I always find these statements funny. Like the guy can just pick and chose when he's gonna play well... "Well, it's the last year of my contract, I think I'll shoot 45% from the 3pt line, average 15ppg, and be one of the biggest reasons my team almost goes to the ECF. I'm gonna suck after that though." Oh yeah, sure! That makes sense...
Well offensively you're accurate. But you don't look at the +/-, which is obviously whole encompassing. Ariza will score 16 ppg, but he will probably take away 10 more points than Parsons would have from a SF, so really he "contributes" 26. Obviously this number is completely arbitrary and is not, in any way, an actuality. But the point is, Ariza will more than cover the +/- Parsons provided to the point where the portion of contribution from the combined Lin & Parsons will be extremely minimal. So Lin + Parsons score 30, but give up 30. Ariza scores 15 but gives up 15. So hte point differential would stay the same. In other words, basically a wash! Once again, it's arbitrary, but it's the concept that needs to understood on CF. I'm sure an advanced stats guru could actually figure out the real numbers that I'm talking about. I would use the +/- statistic, but that involves way too many variables.
Well the no-midrange game is sometimes ok, but when you're playing an elite defense in Chicago or in Indiana, you need to take what you can get. That being said, when you're playing non-elite defenses, then you can get away with the strategy. We need a coach (HC or AC) that can draw up better half court plays that we can completely master. Screen, slashes, PnR; all of these are extremely simple, but if a team knows how to really use them, it can be hugely advantageous, and at times, necessary.
