Toggle shoutbox
Shoutbox
|

Brooklyn Nets @ Houston Rockets on 1/26/2013
#1
Posted 26 January 2013 - 08:16 PM
#2
Posted 26 January 2013 - 08:52 PM
Why so Serious?
#3
Posted 26 January 2013 - 09:56 PM
#4
Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:10 AM
#5
Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:12 AM
a slight side note, if anyone hasn't seen Dave Chappelle's "Inside The Actor's Studio" interview it is a must see. Not only is Dave entertaining as always, but he offers great insights into the business of celebrity.
If it is racism then that makes it easy to dismiss....who cares what racists think? Their opinions are irrelevant. Just my 2 cents.
#6
Posted 27 January 2013 - 12:50 AM
Harden doesn't take as big a rap from his turnovers because he scores a lot, also Lin is the pg and expected to take care of ball more plus recently he hasn't had that many assists. I think in most cases his race plays a only small role in his turnover scrutiny.
During the Linsanity days, Lin scored alot as well but still got scrutinized for every turnover. Also, it is hard to get an assist these days if you rarely have the ball in your hands. It takes having the ball in your hands, passing and the other person to make the shot in order to get an assist, which Lin has not had as many opportunities to do so but is still averaging more assists than Harden despite having a much lower usage rate. Finally, I think we all know Harden pretty much is playing the point guard position more often than not. He may not be guarding the PG but he definitely has the ball in his hands and controls playmaking more than Lin does.
Having said that all of that, I agree with Johnny that race to me has very little to do with it. Lin was probably more scrutnized because of the celebrity factor, playing in New York and that sample size was all everyone had to go on. For Harden, he has been in the league for 3 1/2 years now and turnovers have not really been his problem until he became "the man" for the Rockets. Still, he should be held more accountable for his turnovers and I agree until he can cut down on them, the Rockets won't go as far as they could.
All in the game, yo,
all in the game
!
#7
Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:12 AM
his assist was 7.7 to 3.4 in 2010-11 season and 7.9 to 3.1 which is about 2.5 to 1 assist per turnover, which is slightly better than Lin's. Its just stereotyping a player. Rose is an all-star and he has won a lot of games. Just saying there are a lot of other players for example K. Irving, Lilliard Chalmers who are all hoovering around the 2-1 ratio and they don't get the label turn over prone. Nevertheless Lin needs to be more assertive to show that he should have more ball in his hands
#8
Posted 27 January 2013 - 01:17 AM
#9
Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:33 AM
#10
Posted 27 January 2013 - 04:36 AM
#11
Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:28 AM
#12
Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:39 AM
Based on the box score and recap on various places, it seems like Lin was allowed to continue to handle the more as the last two games despite the poor start. I believe that this is the way to go, so Harden don't have to spend too much energy on doing everything which will lead him to be a lot more efficient once we hand him the ball in the 4th quarter to lead the team. Sounds like it was an unselfish team tonight with harden 7 assist, parson with 11 and lin with 9. Thats Rockets BALL
#13
Posted 27 January 2013 - 05:54 AM
Multiple dunks by Asik in a single game. Couldn't help but smile for the guy. Just amazing how quickly he's improving.
#14
Posted 27 January 2013 - 03:38 PM
#15
Posted 28 January 2013 - 02:57 PM
1. Rockets
2. Thunder
3. Spurs
4. Nuggets
5. Lakers
6. Warriors
7. Pacers
9. Hawks
13. Clippers
Harden wouldn't get passes on his turnovers either if he was only putting up 14 pts per game. So if he puts up 30 points but has about 4 more turnovers than you would like to see and the opposition is shooting 50%, then those turnovers countered about 4 pts out of the 30. Big Whoop.
#16
Posted 31 January 2013 - 10:44 PM
@feelingsupersonic, you're spot on. Not only that, but when a team is constantly pushing the tempo like our Rockets like to do, the passes in transition are way more risky than passes in a half court set. It was mentioned somewhere that perhaps a high turnover rate was a red herring, that there is no direct correlation to a teams' success and their turnover rate. Some notable teams in the top half of the most turnover prone in the league thus far:
1. Rockets
2. Thunder
3. Spurs
4. Nuggets
5. Lakers
6. Warriors
7. Pacers
9. Hawks
13. Clippers
Harden wouldn't get passes on his turnovers either if he was only putting up 14 pts per game. So if he puts up 30 points but has about 4 more turnovers than you would like to see and the opposition is shooting 50%, then those turnovers countered about 4 pts out of the 30. Big Whoop.
Now you've got me thinking....
I am not sure TO's are a red herring. To isolate them ignores other factors such as rebounds, # of possessions, and opp TO's, etc. Ultimately, basketball comes down to execution of field goals. It doesn't matter too much what else you do if that function is lacking. Having said that, certain things can adjust your margin of error +/-.
(for ease of math we will ignore 3 pt shots and free throws...they are important though)
Say Team A shoots 50% from the field. Given 100 possessions in a game it stands to reason they will score 100 points. Easy enough.
So, we can discern that points ( X ) are a function of possessions ( Y ) times fg% ( A ). Stated mathematically that is X=AY.
So, using basic algebra it is easy to see that in order to increase points you would want to increase possessions (offensive rebounds and steals) and efficiency (assists, shot selection, free throws and 3 pointers come into play here).
Conversely, things like turnovers, personal fouls, and bad shots tend to decrease these things.
So, say that team A shoots 50% still. They play team B that shoots 40%, but team B wins the offensive rebound battle by 12, has 6 fewer turnovers and 8 fewer personal fouls. Assuming 100 possessions Team a scores 100 points - 6 points for the 50% conversion rate on the 6 extra turnovers which equals 94. Team B gets 100 possessions, plus 12 extra for rebounds plus 6 extra for the turnovers. that is 118 possessions at 40% which equals 94 points. Now, the game is won at the free throw line. Assuming each team shoots 70% the 5 extra points from the free throw line for team B are the difference in the game--all other things held equal.
So what does all this mean?
It means Morey is looking at the right things. He dissects the game into it's components to find the highest efficiency factors and then seeks out players that excel at those things. (kevin martin was amazing at drawing fouls and converting free throws - the most efficient play in basketball aside from a break-away dunk--and now look at Mr. Harden among league leaders in free throws taken.) Asik is a rebounding monster (currently #3 in the league). Three point shots give you a 50% increase in points with only a 15% drop in efficiency. Hence, Houston drives to the basket, shoots threes, and tries to get fouled. If we can limit our turnovers and increase our rebounding from the PF position (although part of that lack of production is by design) we will be a force in this league plain and simple.
All that being said, none of this exists in a vacuum. Execution and consistency are crucial factors as well. We are applying percentages which are symbols of average performance over the course of time. Player X might average 16 points, but on any given night may score 26 or may only score 6....it averages out to 16.
OK, that is a lot to chew on....for me, this is a more thorough examination of the effect of turnovers plus other crucial game factors as a whole in the context of affecting win/loss totals.
#17
Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:02 PM
ST
#18
Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:11 PM
Houston is almost dead even in personal fouls with only a +.05 differential
Houston is 13th with a +1 rebounding advantage
we are -2.3 in blocks per game (that is roughly equal to 4.6 points since blocks are usually on lay-ups and short, high percentage shots)
we are +.19 in steals per game...negligible
we are 10th in total assists and +.54 in differential (not much)
we shoot free throws 14th best at 75%
we shoot 45.6% fg, but our opponents shoot 45.7%
and we shoot 35.9% on 3's but opponents shoot 36.9%
What does all that say? It says we don't do anything particularly well...we are average across the board.
So how are we above average? Looky here....
1. We have shot 486-1,352 three pointers versus only 391-1,060 for our opponents.
2. We have shot 925-1,227 free throws versus only 783-1,016 for our opponents.
3. we average 18.7 fast break points per game 2nd only to Denver.
4. we average 100 possessions per game and rank 1st in that category.
These are the four most efficient scoring possibilities in basketball.
It isn't magic..it's just math.
#19
Posted 31 January 2013 - 11:13 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users