Over the past two games, I have charted every shot (boy, am I bored!) based on open shots versus shots attempted. I do not define an open shot as one where someone is fouled (even if they make the shot, they are being contested) or a shot with a hand in our player's face. These are shots that do not require adjustment. A defender can be there but there is a difference between being in the play and seriously contesting a shot. Here's what I found out... In the past two games, just over 62% of the Rockets shots were open looks at the basket. Now, they shot better tonight, but below 40% last game. There is nothing more than can be asked of this team except to hit those shots. The offense is doing EXACTLY what it is supposed to. It is creating open looks at the baskets. One other note, I looked at three's and, actually, a higher percentage of three's are contested than 2's! The Rockets got off 51% of their 3's without seriously being contested. The majority of the shots they got and were open for were inside 18 feet. So, no matter what you think about the offense, we are getting good looks at the basket. We just can't shoot the damn ball!
That wasn't my point. My point was that it is senseless to blame the offensive system when it is doing its job. Look, we have a team full of players who would normally be getting 15 to 20 minutes per night now getting 25 to 30+ because of injuries. It is no surprise they are shooting a lower percentage. I just want to place the fault where it actually lies rather than blaming something that isn't the problem. If the team is going to improve, it's important that the REAL reason for the slide is determined rather than just throwing out ideas based on conjecture or anecdotal evidence.
We need clutch shooters, ala elie and horry. Its pathetic when you get your looks and you don't make the other team pay for it. It seems like their aren't that many out there right now, esp available clutch shooters(and versatile ones, not just shooters). I can think of good "atheletes" but not good shooters. Maybe Hubert Davis?
Those stats mean nothing in a vacuum. What % of shots are "open" for other teams? Are the players getting the open shots from spots on the floor that are suitable for them? (e.g. Willis open from 18 may be an open shot but it's not a good shot). But, good effort in your neverending quest to back Rudy and the rest of the Rockets' management / front office.
yeah Jeff quit making like a vacuum cleaner and sucking up to Rudy T. Get Riddy of ruddy = get riddy of bricks.
Not really. Shooting shoudl be easier to teach then a whole new system. But I agree this sytem is of course is kind of debatable. We dont know how many wide open shots the opposing team is getting. Damn it Jeff! Get to work and find out!
My problem is the type of shots and when the shots are availible. How many times have you seen the Rockets have to take a shot with 2 or 3 secs on the shot clock? Its hard to get into your offense, dribble the spaulding off the ball, wait and then throw it to a player with the shot clock running down. What happens is that player can't triple threat or anything as a result the shots seems to be very contested or forced. I look at other teams and see how many open shots teams get in the flow of the offense. Of course most players are going to be free 23ft away because thats a low percentage shot, but watch Minn, Dallas or Indy and see how many good clean looks Miller and Rose gets early and late in the offense. Of course sometimes players are just going o have to hit tough shots, but the goal is to get good looks early if you can. The problem with the Rockets is they have a very hard time because they walk the ball up too much and doesn't have the speed and constant pushing to get early chance points. Thats what happened to Mia vs Char last yr in the playoffs. They just beat them down the court and didn't give them time to set up the d. That should be the Rockets approach instead of the Hornets approach.
Good work Jeff. Although something tells me the opposition is getting more looks. Did anyone notice Rudy switch to a 2-3 offense sometimes. 3 along the baseline with 2 running the pnr. This is new. They would switch high/low post. Anyhow, this is a quick new look to stop the defenses from stomping high pnr. This took one practice. Also, in one practice we got Torres running off of many picks, and we got Mobley running some low post (although largely unsuccessful). Anyhow, the team has had 1 practice in 10 games until yesterdays video practice. Rudy calls it the "perfect storm" where injuries mounted on top of a no-practice period of the schedule and 7-10 away games. This team has the weapons; it needs practice, and it needs to be healthy. Even still...our defense is getting really tired out there, and it wasn't that good to begin with.
Jeff, Can you break it down by player? That way we could see who's not hitting the open shots & who is. Crispee, What do you think of starting (or at least playing significant minutes) Torres at the SF position when Francis & Mobley get back to full speed? I know he's only 6'6" & would be relatively short for a SF, but he's quick, can score, & plays tough defense. We've seen, in the past, what a difference a scoring threat at SF can do for this team.
Jeff: Could you break down the open shots by quarter? If the Rockets are getting them only in garbage time, then it might be more of a testament to how badly they're getting beat.
Put the damn ball in the damn hole and you will stop losing damn games... I started watching the game tonight, but I stopped paying attention when they fell behind something like 56-44. Against Cleveland... The outcome was pretty predictable from there. This is just awful. When is Steve coming back???? If any team has ever missed a player more... Just awful. This team couldn't beat the 3rd team scrubs in a CBA contest. Awful... When is Steve coming back?!??
How about designing an offensive system where the Rockets only take shots from half-court. Im sure the Rockets could get plenty of uncontested shots from that area on the court AND if they don't make the shots, its obviously the players fault.
I was at the game last nite. Cleveland was shooting the lights out from anywhere through the game, but especiallly in the first quarter. Torres and Mobes had 'A' games. I was really proud of them. They lost, but came back really strong in the 2nd half to get within 1pt anyway, It turned out to be a very close game. If we had had Cato to help defend Ilgauskas we might have had a better chance. That guy is so big. I had never seen him play before. He is huge - listed at 7' 3" with a very nice shooting touch. He is very strong. I saw Willis struggle with him. I think this guy missed 2 full seasons with broken feet. Anyway - I think we are turning it around even though we lost. The Rockets looked good in the second half. Shooting went from poor to respectable- 43% I think overall, but of course better in 2nd half. Not looking as bad now.
Mabye the reason they are all uncontested is because the opposers know we will miss....so they immediately look for rebounds??????....thats what Im seeing, the offense is to blame, Im sorry, but u shouldnt have to dribble out 22 secs b4 picking a play to try and run
I think the point of Jeff's post and this thread was: 1. To show that Yes! - we are getting good looks. It is not the offensive selections by RT or even the set/placement/reaction by the players (although that was a problem last night). 2. To show that the system that RT and staff are using is working. The coaching staffs' job is to prepare for the opponent(prep and vid), place the most advantageous personnel on the floor at any given time (matching), and to put in plays that give the players optimum looks. 3. To show that these games are winnable, despite the other circumstances (untried rooks, out place subs, increased minutes for the bench) surrounding the team. 4. To indicate that shooting is a hot/cold prospect. And being such, canswing the pendulum to our advantage. Just requires patience and continuing to do the right things when given the opportunity. That's what having data supporting high percentage looks does.
Jeff, could you also chart the shots based on the fullness of the moon? I'd like to see how well they shoot on Wednesdays when the moon is waning. But one thing wasn't clear to me. 62% of their shots were open looks. What percentage of those shots did they hit?
But how many other teams have shot lights out against us?? Do we always just seem to hit a team when they are hot?? Quite frankly, most NBA players and NBA teams shoot lights out when the players are actually open. While it is understandble to give clean looks to the Lakers, Kings and Spurs (and maybe the Wolves deserve mention too), because after all, they are pretty good at getting clean looks against whoever they play because they have unguardable players who know where to be around them. But giving clean looks to the Grizzlies, Bulls and Cavs is less understandable. We can't defend the worst teams in the league, that shows a major problem that even getting Stevie back won't help substantially.
