What if our Offense needs Fixing more than our D ?

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=940DE5D91038E033A25755C1A9679D94659FD7CF

 

Strange, lol.

 

I agree. The problem was for a large part the offense.

1. We ran everything through James which made his usage to high. This made him make the choice to focus on offense (right choice considering his skillset)
2. We had three "plays"JH drive, JH FT, Beas/Brew chucks. IOW, the opponent knew in transition exactly how our floor was spaced.

I know stats are fantastic, but our offense was not just throw-up ugly, it was extremely predictable and exploitable. Yes, GS and Spurs also returgitated the same plays, but the ball moved MUCH faster and the opponent always was out of balance due to the ball zipping along (or scrambling to stop Curry).

Seriously... if you guys think that the regression of our players into statues was not a major problem? If so many people regress in abilities it's a good chance it's ddue to a huge error in the system. Our players became shadows of their usual offensive skills (except ONE guy!).

That's IMHO the indicator of a huge problem, much bigger than our defensive woes. Indeed, f we get the players rolling again on offense I bet our defense shapes up again as opponents will be much more out of balance after our attacks.

 

The offense was top 10 in the league, the defense was bottom 10 in the league, to suggest that the offense was the problem is....well just not in any way accurate and it shows the reason why stats exist. Some people can just watch the games and be able to tell that the main problem with the Rockets was defense and not offense, for everyone else there's stats to show them that. Pretty much why they exist.

The offense wasn't considerably different from the previous season when the Rockets went into the playoffs as a 2 seed and went to the WCF, the defense on the other hand, much worse.

 

With James playing O and signing a rim protector like Whiteside to pick up our defensive deficiencies elsewhere we could win 50 games every year.

 

Yeah man... because James stats are similar at first glance it's ay-okay. And about the predictability? Let's not go there as well, it destroys your position with Thor's hammer.

Back to the real world: every player except James regressed ofensively. That's supported by stats. Please, please humor me and explain how this regression offensively is explained by their defense?

Also, please explain how this regression in both stats and results is "not considerably different".

Seriously, this "James stats are okay, so our offense is fine"is truly absurd.

This leads to "we are one Durant away from being champions". Idiocy.

Being a fan since the eighties made me a bit less tolerant of starstruck tales of how our offense rocks when actually it's an affront to basketball.

 

1. People would claw out their eyes or fall asleep.
2. In the playoffs we would be kicked to the side by the good teams.

This "We need Horford/Whiteside/Durant" screeching flat out ignores that the problem is not just the talent. It's the system that's kaputt.

 

If it was so predictable how come it was so effective?

 

We paid for it by having James focussing on offense. We also paid for it as our transition defense was shot almost every time. Heck, we almost missed the play offs remember?

Sam, please be a sport and answer why you think it's not a huge problem that everyone regressed on offense.

I'm seriously sick and tired of people looking at James data and screeching that our offense is "good". With his numbers we should be even better, but everyone else dropped dramatically.

I'm puzzled why this is somehow controversial

 

LOL, I wasn't basing anything on Harden's numbers, I didn't even look at them as they are irrelevant to the overall numbers. The team as a whole had offensive numbers in the top ten, 4th in points scored, 7th in efficiency.

I've been a fan since the 80's as well, and I've watched enough basketball to where I didn't need those stats to show me that the defense was the main problem.....but even if I missed it, I'd have still checked them to make sure my eye test was accurate.

The offense was one of the better offenses in the NBA, the defense was one of the weaker in the league. I mean, sure maybe you want to blame the defense on the offense somehow, but that doesn't really work.

 

It's not as puzzling as why people think the problem with a team that saw a 1:1 correlation in decline in defensive efficiency and wins is.....not defense.

Occam is calling. He says.....use common sense.

 

Again: explain why it's not a huge issue that everyone regressed on OFFENSE?

Occan razor: it's probably an offensive problem causing it...

 

Overall the team's offense was just about the same as it was the previous season so....I'm not really sure what you are talking about.

 

the issue is how we play are offense that leads to a poor defense. When you have poor shooters you have to go for the highest % shot, ie corner threes. You also have to hit the offensive boards hard to make up for the misses. These two items lead to crap transition d. That was are biggest fall off.

 

The offense and defense BOTH need to improve. The two go hand in hand. Better defense should improve the offense because we get more fast break easy buckets. Better offense should improve the defense as the other team gets fewer fast break easy buckets. The Rockets just need to improve period.

 

There's no question live ball turnovers and bad shots were putting the defense in bad position a lot more than in previous years.

This was mentioned by the coaching staff.

 

Offence and Defence are connected yes, especially transition defence.
However our defence on its own can't be excused by our offence. Our transition defence is HORRENDOUS but because of our offence, we are put in position more times, to have to defend in transition.
The lack of focus someone else mentioned is actually a huge part of defence. Discipline, communication, trans defence, rim protection all those are aspects of defence that can't be fixed just by making the offence better.
Otherwise every good offensive team would have excellent defence as well.

Both have to improve , but in comparison our defence lacks much more.

 

Here's a good article on the subject:

http://www.todaysfastbreak.com/from-the-courts/nba-can-track-turnovers-better/



" If you think about it, a player committing a lot of live-ball turnovers is a form of poor defense."

 

Seems like everyone trying to findThe Problem. There's more than one problem. As SamFisher said, we improved on our TO's from 2015 to 2016 (16.7 - 15.9). However, we lost ground to the rest of the league (26th - 27th). So TO's are a problem that needs addressed.

Our wide open 3pt shots weren't falling, which led to easy buckets for the opposition, because we weren't getting back on D. 2 problems there.

Howard's good at PnR's, but want's to do post ups (which he's not good at) instead of PnR's. Supposedly that'll be taken care of in the off season.

Last season, teams figured out that no other Rocket besides Harden could beat them. So he faces more & more double, triple teaming; especially at the end of games.

Isn't ft shooting part of analytics!?! If you can't shoot 60% from the line, you shouldn't be playing pro ball.

So, the problems I want addressed this off season are: TO's down to 13, better shooting/shooters, another facilitator and better ft shooting bigs.

I relinquish the soapbox! :grin:

 

yes.
And also in the same way, a defence that causes a lot of steals is a way to improve the offence.
Here is an article by nyloncalculus :
http://nyloncalculus.com/2016/02/15/we-know-better-now-a-note-on-outdated-statistics/

We were no.2 in the nba at that time on steals allowed.
However, the Warriors also were very high on that list, but they were still an elite defensive team.

Bad defence is correlated to bad offence but not fully excused by it.
It's only one aspect. The most important way that offence and defence are connected is through steals.