I see a lot of people (and commentators and analysts and whatnot) complain about turnovers and criticize the Rockets for having so many, but I gotta say I don't think our turnovers are much of a problem, as silly as that sounds. There is actually a very weak correlation between TO/game and winning. Just look at the league leaders in team TOPG. If you adjust turnovers for pace (turnovers per 100 possessions), I think the correlation becomes *slightly* stronger, but still pretty weak. The Heat, Thunder, and (IIRC) even the Spurs have been near the top of the league in turnovers the past few years, but I'm pretty sure we all know those are excellent teams. The fact is just that many of the best teams play at a high speed and take some chances on offense, and their players are probably told to trust their instincts rather than try to be overly careful. I also think our defense is actually not too bad at recovering after turnovers and stopping the fast break (although I haven't really looked up stats to confirm this in a while). Plus, the flip side is that our style of play also generates a lot of turnovers on the defensive end. ... I understand, though, that it does feel like we have stretches where there are just a lot of consecutive boneheaded plays, but I think it's just one of those things where you gotta take the bad with the good. Agree/disagree?
The only team that will eat us alive purely based on our turnovers would be Golden State. Against pretty much any other team, I'd say the turnover issue is negligible. All the more reason to secure the top 2 or 3 seed.
Good question imo. Here is a link to TO/possession (which adjusts for pace) and also has options to sort by other TO categories: http://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/turnovers-per-possession Without doing an xy plot and correlation calculation, I would say the correlation looks fairly positive. Another way of looking at it is to consider the Rockets turnover about 2.5-3.0 versus good playoff teams. Since average ppp is just over 1 in the league and every TO results in a wasted possession for HOU, +1 possession for OPP, that's a net +/- of roughly -5 points every game. That's actually quite huge for just one stat differential. So no, TO is not negligible and is actually quite a large factor in the outcome of the Rockets' games.
Obviously a turnover in and of itself is a Bad Thing, but I'm just saying wholistically, the effect doesn't seem that significant based on successful teams past and present. It's often the result of an effective style of play -- it's not always the result of just bad offense. Even the link you showed confirms that on first glance, as I bet it would if you plotted it out on a graph. The two best teams in the league this season (ATL and GS) are right in the middle (#18, #13, respectively), and some crap teams and some great teams are on both ends of that list, too. Plus, again, the last few years, at least two of the best three teams in the league have been near the top of the league in turnovers.
A lot of our turnovers are from offensive fouls are lost balls going to the rim. Those types of turnovers are no worse than missing a shot. In the case of offensive fouls, they are betters since it stops play and eliminates any chance of a fast break.
So we are using advanced analytiics to convince ourselves that our turnovers aren't an issue Brilliant!! Next we'll find that playing with more energy is not that important
The Rockets turn the ball over 1.9 times more than GS. 2.3 more than Portland, 2.0 more than San Antonio. That's 2 wasted possessions, meaning it costs us roughly 2 PPG. Turnovers do not create extra possessions for the opponent. They are gonna get the ball regardless once you are done with it. In that respect a TO is no worse than a missed shot that is rebounded. Our TO's forced is 5th in the league, so we steal a few of those possessions back. It is an issue that we could improve, but in the grand scheme it isn't as huge as one would think.
I agree with the Op...it isn't as big of an issue as some make it out to be. One way to look at it would be what would it take for the Rockets to significantly reduce the turnovers...with this same set of personnel.? I submit the changes we would have to make in terms of ball control to significantly reduce turnovers would more than negatively offset any gains in offense efficiency. Our roster must run; must take shots before defenses get set; must occasionally take chances in order to be successful. When Josh misses, on occasion, the guy in the corner waiting for that shot opportunity, its just part of the cost of doing business. No way would I want him to refrain from trying to make that pass. Its results in a high % shot when he makes that pass connect. Same for James on the PnR. He probably gets most of his turnovers trying to make that "roll" pass...but again, no way would I stifle that play because it works such a high % of the time. As hard as it is to do, take the turnovers in stride...they are just a necessary part of our game...a game that has taken this team to the doorstep of the elite teams in the NBA with multiple key injuries. Much more important to get everyone back healthy for the playoffs...and then lets see how the chips fall.
I don't see that at all from the table - I think the overall trend is pretty clear that better performing teams TO less. When you sort for 2013-2014 season or past seasons, it's even more positive of a correlation imo. TO's do not create extra possessions but they do affect the ratio of useful possessions to non-useful (whether or not a shot was taken). Also, the Rockets TO 3.5 more times per game over Portland, 3 more than SA, 2.6 more than GS - not the numbers you listed. If you take a shot that is guaranteed to miss and guaranteed to be rebounded by the opposing team, then fine, yes (and it is equally bad for your ppp and net +/- as a TO). A TO is strictly worse in every other sense. Any taken shot in reality has both a chance to go in and a chance to be rebounded which will positively affect your ppp and ratio of useful possessions to non-useful. When you look at it from useful possessions to non-useful, how impactive TOs are to net +/- is much more obvious. There might be an argument for something like effective offensive schemes and I'd like to hear it. It'll be a hard argument though when the Rockets run such a large percentage of ISOs and broken plays versus a team like SA who pass the ball around so much and rank in the top 10 of not committing TOs each year.
Turnovers are a part of the game. Especially good passing basketball teams will have higher turnover ratios. What we need to look at to see if TOs are killing us is how many points off turnovers the opponent receives and how many points we are losing games by where the turnover ratio is high.
I'm guessing you've never been a big fan of deductive reasoning. No one ever said that turnovers are good or that we shouldn't care about them at all. The point is that I think the turnovers are the result of a lot of things the offense is doing right, and the statistics back that up. If you try to fix the problem, while keeping the same personnel, you change the whole dynamic of this team and risk destroying the offense. It's not as simple as James Harden just being more careful with the ball or something.
We had a problem early in the year with volume bad turnovers, Golden State killed us on it, nothing even came close to that first quarter beat down we got against Memphis though. Since then we've fixed them to the point they seem more part and parcel rather than looking like chickens with the head cut off.
I'm guessing you are not a fan of JVG and 100s of other coaches at the highest levels. Your "deductive reasoning" to say turnovers are not that important is brilliant. Brilliant!! I'm also guessing that if the Rockets weren't the worst TO playoff team in the NBA, and were in fact one of the best...you would not have tried to use deductive reasoning to say TOs are not that important. You are merely digging into whatever numbers you can find to argue against proven facts. Well done...homey
That's assuming that everything remains equal. It is possible that the Rockets' style of play results in more turnovers than they would have if they played more carefully, but that more points are scored even with the turnovers than would be scored if they gained a few more possessions from a careful style of play. In other words, the positives of an aggressive offense outweigh the negatives. The benefit is greater even with the turnovers than substituting the aggressive style of play for a more careful style of play. You might only turn the ball over 8 times per game if you play carefully... but playing that cautious style of play might only result in 85 points per game, and you'll still give up 90 per game. However, an aggressive style of play, while turning the ball over 16 times per game, might give up 100 ppg, but might enable you to score 105 ppg. So yes, decreasing turnovers theoretically would increase possessions which increases points. But the only realistic way to decrease those turnovers would be to change the style of play. Which in itself would do more harm than good. What would be ideal would be to reduce the turnovers while also playing the same aggressive style. But that just isn't realistic.
Dude, we're arguing about sports here. Not the legality of abortion (not that that's worth getting so upset over, either). Secondly, that's not what I said. I have stated repeatedly that turnovers are a bad thing. If you can keep them down without affecting your style of play, then great. But sometimes they are just the result of a very effective style of play, as has been the case with some championship caliber teams like the Thunder and Heat, and as I'm saying I believe is the case with the Rockets. For a paraphrase of some of what I've been saying, see: Basically this.
Turnovers aren't too much of a problem if: 1) They are dead ball turnovers aka they don't start the fast break for the other team. 2) They aren't "dumb" turnovers aka the "jump in the air and throw the ball behind you in panic" aka "Jeremy Lin Turnover" 3) If it isn't compounded by lots missed three pointers, free throws and layups. We can survive a high turnover game if we hit our threes and make the most of our layups and free throws. This team gets in major trouble when we turnover the ball a lot, then miss a ton of threes, layups and free throws.
A turnover is a lost possession. If a turnover is the result of a risky pass which, if successful, will almost guarantee 2 point layup, then it could be acceptable because the other successful risky passes will generate points and after many of such passes team will get a significant point/possession out of them. If a turnover is the result of careless handling of the ball or a careless "pass on" pass, the turnover is a total lost possession because those handling and "pass on" passes are basic maintenance activities that don't generate points. And the Rockets have quite some of the careless handling turnovers that can be improved on.
