Stats & JVG: How efficient were we really last season?

It's not about being right or wrong. Anyone can be wrong, or luck into being right. The key is if they present a logical argument.

The Rockets are not perfect by any means. Their play in the first Kings game looked sloppy, and we couldn't guard their bigmen at all. Historically, JVG's defense has not be effective against high octane offenses like Dallas, Sactown and Seattle. If we meet one of these teams in the playoffs, can JVG adjust his defense to matchup better to them? Who knows.

These are some of the things you can bring up that may be the down fall of our team. And i would be happy to debate about our team's approach to them.

But when you say,

Oh look, we got 22 TOs in one Preseason games with scrubs playing the majority of the game. HAHA i told you we'd suck!

Thats when i don't feel like arguing. Thats when making fun of you is just plain more enjoyable for me.

How long have i been posting for? Can you not read where it says the date i joined? What does when i joined have to do with anything? I've been a Rockets fan all my life and i have probably seen more Rockets games than you. Again, what does that have to do with anything?

People like me drove away all the "great" posters? I doubt that. Since me and Houkom's thread is the only one on here talking about real basketball. But if all the "great" posters are as clueless about basketball basics as you, then i say good riddance.

Maybe one of these days you'll follow suit with all the "great" posters, cause these arguments your bring up are just gettin dumb and dumber.

 

The effect of turnovers on a game is overrated. It's the same as a missed shot. A great defensive team like Houston is even more likely to overcome turnovers. The difference b/t Francis & McGrady is about 1.5 turnovers a game - that means the other team gets the ball 1.5 extra times. They have what, a 40 percent chance of scoring each time, max? (guessing) We're talking about a couple of points here, at most. I'm sure with a team like the Rockets, the chance that another team scores on any given possession is lower than almost every other team. All this turnover talk is a waste of time.

 

"Same as missed shot?" Heh...At least on a missed shot you had an ATTEMPT! TURNOVERS prevent even getting off ATTEMPTS! So statistically, it may "count" as an "missed attempt." The negative effect of a TO on the whole game is much worse.

Also, the problems with the Rockets was more than *just* the 1.5 you talk about (TO comparsion between McGrady and Francis). You're overlooking the total effect effect of an extra 115 TO per year just from ONE player: Francis. Not only that, but the PG was the central figure in setting up each and every offensive play. And whose pass timing was crucial to everyone else on the team. And this has a direct effect on the outcome of each game, especially the last few minutes of a close game.

So, all you did was take the "1.5" figure and try to make it seem like it's a small difference. Each of Francis past Rockets games were made up of a broad range of TO per game; sometimes 5 sometimes 3 sometimes, 7, sometimes 2...and when you average that out for the season it comes out to be 3.7 TO per game for ONE POINT GUARD! Nice try in painting a pretty picture on that "1.5." Makes a world of difference when you break out the stats and read between the lines, huh?

Now, while it's true that increased JVG-defense (not played under Rudy) helps lessen the negative effect of each TO, this is only a band-aid for the root problem: the PG causing the TO in the first place. Once the root problem is removed our defense will help that much more (i.e. Trade Francis for McGrady. Problem solved!). Then, we don't have to spend so much energy trying to get back points (or opportunities) from the other team, those of which WE helped give up (TO) in the first place.

Waste of time? Yeah, right. We wasted 5 years trying to teach a dumb PG. Overrated my ass!

"Pay no attention to the (turnover) man behind the curtain!"

 

BUMP


To answer our recent offensive question proposed in "Offensive Woes" thread etc., please read through this thread. All the way through. Houkom's data and conclusion in the beginning of the thread was later disproved by him and myself.

The gist of it is a statically analysis of how efficient JVG's offense was, last year. Though we have a complete new group of players this year, the results should still have some barring since its the same system.

What we found out? Without accounting for turnovers, we were top 10 in offensive efficiency. Since, in my words, we traded away the bulk of our turnovers, we should be much better at offense this season.

I realize that one of our biggest problems is still turnovers, in preseason. However i believe thats a function of chemistry and preseason rust. However if we do not improve at Allstar break, i will gladly eat my words. Well, not gladly, since we would probably suck.

 

I usually don't have a lot of time to watch games (which I would like) or to post - so I lurk from time to time. Busy getting laid off this year and building my own business. But this has been about the best thread I have seen here in a while in objectively showing the real numbers - and in my opinion indicating some very strong evidence as to why Dawson & Van Gundy made the trade. Great work!

Now of course, as some have pointed out, we wait to see how long it takes the team to gel and take advantage of McGrady's talent and JVG's defensive tutoring. And I can't wait for Bobby Sura to come back.

I am very hopeful.

 

This is a great thread

Now I have some questions about your formula for offensive efficiency:

Successful possessions / Total possessions => (FTM/2+FGM) / (FTA/2+FGA+TO)

First,
What if a missed FGA or FTA leads to a offensive rebound?
For eample, team A hits a shot and gets 2 points
its oe is 100%
team B misses a shot then gets an offensive rebound then
hits a shot and also gets 2 points
its oe is only 50%,
but both teams have the same scores.

In that case, I would think an offensive rebound as a successful possession
So,

(FTM/2 + FGM + ORB) / (FTA/2 + FGA + TO) would be more
accurate.

Second, what about 3-pointers?
how about
(FTM/2 + (FGM-3PT) + 3PT*3/2 + ORB) / (FTA/2 + FGA + TO)

Just my 2 cents

 

According the above adjusted formula,
here is the new offensive efficency ranking
1. Mavs 0.601
2. Kings 0.577
3. Sonics 0.567
4. Bucks 0.565
5. Wolves 0.563
6. Grizzlies 0.563
7. Blazers 0.562
8. Lakers 0.562
9. Nuggets 0.560
...
15 Spurs 0.555
...
18 Magic 0.550
...
24 Rockets 0.540
...
28 Bulls 0.530
29 Raptors 0.525

 

Too much math for me =)

 

Well, the take-home message is that ROX is the worst offensive team in the west conference.

 

Your results are about the same as our original. Rockets are no Mavs or Kings, or Sonics in terms of offense. However, the only difference between them and the second tier offenses, Lakers, Grizzlies, Nuggets etc, is our ridiculous amount of turnovers. Once that is cured, and assumingwe keep up with last year's defensive prowess, then we should be contenders.

 

Just an observation. But the Rockets were the 2nd worst (28th) in OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS. Which made each of our possessions much more crucial (coupled with our turnover problem, and lackluster FG%). It was like we were always fighting against ourselves. And if we missed a shot, there was a good chance that we WOULD NOT get the offensive rebound. MoT, Cato and Yao were not good offensive rebounders. With Yao getting knocked to the ground. Cato with his hands of stone. MoT with his unwillingness to block out and bang in the post.

How bad were we? Rockets 10.3 ORPG (28th best). Who was the best? The Mavs at 14.3. Even the Clippers had 14.0 ORPG.

What about our players?

Lets look at our *power* fowards and center positions:

Yao with 32 MIN, averaged 2.4 ORPG
MoT with 27 MIN, averaged 1.8 ORPG (power-shooter, not a power-foward!)
Cato with 25 MIN, averaged 2.2 ORPG

Even Francis, with 40 MIN, averaged 1.5 ORPG (5.5 total; better than 2/3 the team). But he was a point guard, not a power forward! That's disgraceful for our power forward and center.

Who was our most efficient offensive rebounders, w/limited minutes?

Clarence Weatherspoon, with 17 MIN, averaged 1.6 ORPG (4.2 total)
Torraye Braggs, with 12 MIN, averaged 1.4 ORPG (3.1 total)

For comparison....Who was the best in the league individually at ORPG? Eric Dampier, Ben Wallace and Elton Brand (4.7, 4.0, 3.9). Shaq was 4th with 3.7. And remember Kenny Thomas? He achieved 3.5 (Only 6'7" but laterally quick and always blocks out).


Another interesting team stat is that the Rockets were the 3rd BEST in DEFENSIVE REBOUNDS.

Just to use the Bulls of 1996 as an example. Every possession was soooo crucial to their opponents. And for good reason. If the Bulls missed their shot, there was a pretty good chance (Rodman) they would get another shot (offensive rebound). And when the opponent gave the Bulls an extra shot, they were basically shooting themselves in the foot. They already had a awesome FG%. Offensive rebounding was just an extra weapon.

And when the suporting cast (outside shooters) know that Rodman "has their back" they feel more confidient in taking the shot in the first place. They might think, "Hey, if I miss at least Rodman can give us an extra chance."

That has a huge effect on the team confidence in taking shots. Scared to miss? Sure! If your team's offensive rebounding is below average.

 

With fewer total possesions, it stands to reason that we would have fewer offensive rebounds. A better measure would be offensive rebound percentage.

 

True. Possibly...

But watch our players. That's one part. You're still able to tell if we have good offensive rebounders or not.

Second, wouldn't a team that has more possessions be more of a fast-breaking team? Yet, those players (guards and small forwards, mostly) on the fast-break don't necessarily *get* more offensive rebounds unless they miss a lot of those fast-break layups in the first place (power forwards and centers usually trail the play). Bringing the ball up fast into a half-court isn't what I call a "fast-break team" either. That's what we do. Just in case you were thinking that. Ward and Lue still bring the ball up fast enough (i.e. they don't waste time) even though the half-court is our main offensive philosophy -- allowing our power foward and center to catch up and get in position.

Thus, most offensive rebounds are acquired in the half-court, right? Basically, what I'm saying is that good rebounders are *good* no matter what team they are on.

Put Dampier on this team and he'd still be our best rebounder (11.5?). Even over Yao (9).

Just a note. Sacramento is 24th in offensive rebounds. The Timberwolves are 25th. They have more possessions than we do, yet they are at the bottom of the list too.

I have to belive that Howard will benefit from more offensive rebounds on THIS team. Why? Cleaning up any of Yao's missed shots. Howard didn't have an All-Star center like Yao in Orlando to benefit from.

 

deleted