Are we going to ignore that Harden's MidRange TurnAround Jumper is unstoppable?

Our primary issue in the Spurs series wasn't 3 point shooting.

SA identified that we relied on Harden to generate a huge amount of our offense. He had to score and he had to create shots (both 3s and 2s) for his teammates.

The Spurs strategy was to swarm Harden and force him to give up the ball. That made it more difficult for Harden to score but more importantly there was nobody else to create open shots for all of his teammates.

SA was more than happy to let guys like Ariza or Anderson try to create for themselves. Without Harden creating open shots, we end up with guys taking contested shots and shots that they aren't good or comfortable taking.

That was one of the primary reasons that we went and got CP3. Having a 2nd playmaker prevents teams from trying to take Harden out of the game and shutting down our offense. It also allows us to continue to have a playmaker when Harden goes to the bench.

 

btw: Are we just going to ignore that Harden is shooting better from 3 than both Durant and Klay, this year.

 

We were up in Game 5 (on the Road) with less than 40 seconds left, and the game went to overtime. The Spurs had by far the better talent.

Nitpicking our offensive system vs a clearly superior team, is like all the team in the league whining and blaming their offense against the Warriors.

If anything, we lost because we couldn't get enough stops against their superior team, and our offense system is what even allowed us to take that 61-win team to the brink of losing a historically criticial Game 5, to go down 2-3.

 

Actually, if you use his career averages its 0.84 from mid range and 1.095 from 3. That's a difference of 0.255 per shot. So 4 shots would be just over 1pt per game at 1.02 a game.

Unpredictable doesn't mean better. We have been extremely predictable for years now yet have had multiple multiple best offenses of ALL TIME. Being "unpredictable" doesnt make us better.

This is make believe theory. We already get an insane amount of wide open 3pt shots. Probably the most. The numbers on 3pt shots we take and how close the defender is.

0-2ft or very tight, 0.6 a game
2-4ft or tightly contested, 6.9 a game
4-6ft or open, 16.5 a game
6+ ft or wide open, 17.3 a game

So our "extremely predictable offense" creates 33.8 open 3s and only 7.5 3s are contested. Furthermore, Harden takes 4.2 of the 3pa that are defended from 0-4ft and chris paul takes another 0.9 of those shots.

So chris Paul and james Harden are taking 5.1 guarded 3s a game. The REST of the team is taking 2.4 guarded 3s a game. And the remaining 33.8 3pt attempts are open or wide open.

I can see your concern /s

When you are tired EVERY shot decreases. Layups, mid range, 3s and FTs. Quit trying to make believe that somehow a layup is harder to make when your tired but a midrange is easier. This is false. The easiest and most rested shot, the FT, gets worse when your tired and dont have your legs.

Stop with the nonsense.

This is absolutely false. Gtfo here with this nonsense. There are turnovers, steals, fouls and blocks on mid range shots also.

So settle for bad shots because your not getting your calls? Talk about laying down and dying and being controlled.

Every team wants to inflict "Their" style of play on the court. But your suggesting giving in to the other teams?

Cool...

Know what keeps the score board moving at a higher %? Layups and the by product of FTs. Those keep the score board moving and are calm and steady.

It's not some mythical paradoxically efficiency. Its PROVEN.

For the past few years we have been one of the most dominate offense of ALL TIME. We have consistently been a very top team in terms of efficiency every year up with GSW.

If the stupid warriors had an epiphany and started playing like us, there would be ZERO hope. They have the talent to take our team philosophy and be ELITE at it.

They would go up to some ridiculous 120+ Ortg.

Make. Believe.

Adding a mid range game makes us easier to defend.

Learn basketball...

 

Bad analogy.

The reason to take three's is that getting 50% more points for a made shot is such a huge advantage that it's still more efficient to shoot 3s even if you aren't an elte 3 point shooter. That's the reason that the Rockets could lead the league in offense last year despite the fact that we didn't have any elite 3 point shooters. That's why, unless you are just a horrible 3 point shooter, then you take the 3 if it's open.

The worst 3 point shooting team in the league this year is OKC. They shoot 32.1% from behind the arc. That percentage is equal to 48.15% on two point shots. Currently, no team in the entire league shoots that high of a percentage from midrange. We shoot midrange at 42%. We don't need to be elite or good or even average 3 point shooters to still be more efficient than that.

As long as we're able to generate open shots, then why do you care if it's predictable or not? The Rockets are great at generating open shots despite the fact that everyone knows what we want to do. Knowing what a team is doing and being able to stop it are two different things. Houston having both CP3 and Harden is a huge advantage that allows us to generate more open shots than any other team. Teams can certainly stay with the shooters if they like but then they'll be allowing layups for Harden and Paul. Those are also highly efficient shots. It's a pick your poison.

Were you under the impression that teams had "figured us out" and now, all of a sudden, our shooters were covered and we were taking a bunch of contested shots? That's not the case at all. Even early in the year when we shot so badly, we were still getting a ton of open shots...we were just missing them.

Late in the game, it depends on the situation. If you are down 3 then you obviously take the 3. If you only need 1 or 2 then you take the shot that you are most likely to make. In that case, you're more likely to make 2 point shot that you hit at 47% than a 3 pointer that you hit at 37%. It just depends on the context.. On a last shot, you're not concerned with effficiency, you're concerned with the highest likelihood of a made basket.

On last shots it also depends on what shots are available and to whom. I'd trust Harden or Paul from anywhere over most any other player on the team. Now if we are down 1 and Harden gets an open 15 footer, you don't think that he'll take it? Can you think of any examples where Harden or Paul passed up a game winning shot because it was a midrange shot? I can't think of any.

 

I get the concept of shooting 3s. It does make sense, BUT............. Harden is pretty damn good at mid-range jumpers!

 

You mis-added. It should be 33.8 open or wide open 3s per game ( 16.5 + 17.3) rather than 23.8. That just bolsters your argument even more but I wanted to point out the correct number.

The Warriors would love to get more FT, Layups and open 3s. No doubt, they understand the advantage. The issue for them is that they don't have the ability to generate those type of shots above what they are already doing. That's why Harden and CP3 are so special. They allow us to create a ton of open looks.

 

He's never even shot as high as 42% from midrange in his entire career. Why do you think that he's good at it?

 

Wait so they shot 8for 12 in the midrange yet you are still complaining?

 

Like non of that made sense.

And you had the nerve to mix drop, talk about self owned.

 

Are you talking about the Memphis game? In that game Houston shot 3/5 from midrange. CP3 1-2, Gordon 1-1, Green 1-1, Nene 0-1

Our season average is 4.9 midrange per game so we were right at that number

 

Not really. It's more an issue of the fact that the increase in shooting percentage that you gain by moving in doesn't overcome the 50% increase in points that you get on 3s.

You'd have to shoot 50% higher on midrange to make it equivilent. The league average last year was 36.2% on 3s. You'd have to shoot 54% from midrange to be equivilent. No team shoots midrange anywhere near that well.

 

yeah a simple error on my behalf lol

Exactly...

 

40.306% I did the math for you but here's the link.

https://stats.nba.com/teams/shooting/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular Season&DistanceRange=By Zone

Some standouts

We are actually the 6th most efficient at mid range. Gsw and Toronto are 1 and 2 at 48.1% and 47.9% respectively. 48% from 2 equals 32% from 3.

The spurs take the most at 25.9, at only 40.9% [yikes!], followed by golden state at 23.2. Thank god they shoot so many mid range shots it's the only reason the league semi competes with them.

We obviously take the least per game at 4.9 and Milwaukee is 2nd at only 6.4 attempts.

 

this is what confuses me about James HArden... WHY DOES HE NOT SHOOT MORE MID-RANGE SHOTS?
The man LITERALLY gets to the middle of the paint with no one guarding him, PASSES UP THE OPEN MID-RANGE SHOT, and he WALKS BACKWARDS to the 3-pointer and jacks it up.

In his defense, I think James Harden is so confident in his skill set that he truly believes that he can make every 3-pointer he takes. But... he HAS TO LEARN TO TAKE MORE MID RANGE SHOTS!

HE IS NEGLECTING an important offensive tool in his arsenal. He should take more mid-range shots.

 

His gravity is stronger and more beneficial beyond the arc than it is inside it because it provides more space, and draws help defenders even further out of position.

 

It's called math.