The Clippers didn't do better than we did (and even this season we were robbed of game 1). No one has done better against Durant's Warriors. The majority of the media regards us as the #1 threat to them. A huge portion of NBA fans see this series as the Finals. There is just no denying we have been the number one threat to a dynasty that no one was ever supposed to be able to even threaten. The reason the Rockets were up 3-2 was because our offense was on par with them and our defense slightly better. Our offense should not be on par with them. It is a massive overachievement. I feel like you are ignoring that this team when healthy is offensively outclassing 26+ NBA teams even when Chris Paul looks like he's 40 years old. The offensive output when James Harden was surrounded by our roster minus Chris Paul was abysmal, which is normal. You can bring all the offensive geniuses on the planet together, that roster minus Paul and Moute would get hammered 9 out of 10 times by the dynasty featuring Durant, Curry, Klay and Draymond. This team's offense is smashing expectations. It has been for years. The idea that because it is not as good as the Warriors in a playoff series means we are not maximizing our offensive potential is an illogical argument. Given the same coach, they should outperform us easily on offense. Instead we produce roughly equivalent offense, even in the playoffs. THINK for a second about what would be the source of that performance. It's either Harden or the system or both - and you are heavily critical of both those things. Unless you are comparing their regular season offense to our playoff offense. They look far less efficient too, go check out a Warriors board. We're not going to look great on offense because these two teams are excellent defenses who know each other so well.
This is the part that is so crazy to me, and that I can never really wrap my head around this viewpoint -Dantoni sucks, hes barely a coach, and his system is bad. It's predictable and it always gets shut down -Harden is a playoff choker, he is so inefficient, and he plays bad defense, he has no heart -Our shooters are all terrible, brick brick brick brick, Morey sucks, he needs to get us some knockdown shooters -Steve Kerr has the best system, I love all the ball movement and the passing -Steph Klay and KD are three of the best shooters of all time -I love watching them shoot midrange shots, we need to shoot way more of those, that's clearly the winning strategy How can you not realize this is a massive contradiction? All of these things cannot be true at the same time!
But the other teams will adjust to defending the 3-point line only, making it harder to get to that 35%. You need to mix in some mid-range shots in order to have the defense guessing
I don't understand the logic either, but I guess that's what discussions are for. Maybe they hadn't thought it through, I've been guilty of that.
It counts for something? and what would that something be - rings for regular season wins? The self comfort that you produce the same level of offense as GSW is hilarious. That GSW team has had a 73 wins season before with Barnes instead of Durant - that is what they are capable of when focused and Rocket have never come close to that level of production. But GSW also learnt the hard lesson that all those regular season wins dont count for anything without the rings to show for it. I am sure they will happily trade those wins for another ring. Now GSW just broods through the regular season and only get up for it in the playoffs. if you think quality players dont care about the system and role they would have, I can only suspect your are self delusional. After all, one of the reasons Harden came to Houston was so that he could be the #1 option, or do you think it was wins and lifestyle that made lebron leave Miami or Kyrie go to Boston? Klay is probably the best 2-way guard in the game today and am sure Morey will be following his FA closely. If Klay is willing to join the rockets, Morey would likely be willing to go pick him up from the airport in person, but then that is why he is the GM and you are not.
The only time I feel the team overvalues the 3 pointer is in 1 minute situations, when you have fewer than 3 or so possessions. From a more global picture, is there way to determine: 1. the rate at which a 2 pt vs a 3 pt is more likely to result in an offensive rebound. 2. if a 2 pt or 3 pt miss is more likely to lead to a "run out" against a transition defense. Those could be hidden inefficiencies in the current model.
Morley should have been more aggressive in getting JJ Redick. Didn’t it come down to Houston and Philly and we wouldn’t give him a player option or something like that? He’d be a 20 ppg guy on this team.
No one in history has come close to that level of production, and that team lost in the Finals. Which is the whole point. Based on our roster, we should not be in a competitive series with these guys. All teams running all systems - including other teams running their system - are losing. They are clearly choosing the wrong system. It's specifically because they are not as productive as their roster should be that they don't have a 3-peat yet. It has not stopped their role players from getting bored along the way. Your assessment is not based on any kind of logic. You are being ridiculous if you think the system that has come closest to beating Durant's Warriors is wrong because it doesn't incorporate things which all other teams who haven't come as close have incorporated. Being actually competitive with them for 2 consecutive years is indicative we are doing something extremely right and they are not. It should not be competitive. There is no logical line leading to the idea that we are not maximizing the F out of our potential, ring or not. You are saying the only indicator of a good system is a ring, regardless of personnel. This is an ignorant mindset. We are not losing due to system. All signs point to us losing due to personnel. The only conclusion you can draw is that our talent is not close enough to theirs for a system to make up the gap in talent. Harden came here primarily because of a dispute over money i.e. lifestyle. Lebron and Kyrie had rings already. Klay is not the best 2-way guard in the NBA. The best 2-way guard in the NBA is the person whose offense minus defense make the greatest impact on wins. Harden is the best 2-way guard in the NBA despite pretty bad defense. It's because he's a historic offensive machine whose offense only takes a dip against historic teams like the Warriors. Again this is something you don't seem to understand. Kawhi is 2nd. Klay is in the top 5, but on offense he is heavily dependent on others to create for him so his ability to personally generate a win has a ceiling. LOL @ your Morey comment. I am 100% in sync with Morey, he would be telling you everything I'm saying, and I would drive to the airport to pick up Klay too if he were available for us. What in the F have I been telling you all this time? Our problem is talent, not system. Give us Klay and the Warriors should STILL beat us (Curry/Durant/Draymond vs Harden/Klay/Paul), and they wouldn't beat us. Because we have a better system. If we are competitive in series with a massive gap in talent, what do you think is closing the talent gap? I really want to know. What do you think is closing the gap if the system is bad and Harden is taking the type of shots you don't like and Paul is underperforming and Durant/Curry/Klay/Draymond are running your dream system? What's closing the talent gap? Give someone props here. What are the 2-3 things that are causing this?
The premise of your argument seems to stem from last season's WCF, which is overrated by a lot of Rockets fans imo. The number of games a series goes is not always a clear indication of the competitiveness of the team. Clippers series went to 6 games not cos clippers were that good but that warriors never really took the task serious enough. More importantly, If they hadnt lost Iguodala, last WCF series would have likely been over in 5-6. Its like the Green suspension against the Cavs, it cost them rhythm and momentum. Prior to Iguadola being injured, they were up 2-1 and had stolen home court. At that point, Rockets were looking down the barrel. We are not equally competitive imo and this season is about to show it. You can come close, but unless you close the deal, it doesnt count for anything imo. Harden left OKC cos they chose Westbrick long term over him.The dispute over money was simply a consequence of that. OKC didnt have any money issues paying Westbrick $80m while offering Harden $55m. I have never heard anyone describe harden as a 2-way guard cos your personal definition is not shared by the rest of the world. You dont get to make up for your shortcomings on one end with your contributions on the other. We can revisit this when you have an actual 2-way guard candidate e.g. Jrue (Please note that Kawhi is a SF not a guard) Thot you didnt care where Klay went in FA? I am not interested in closing the gap but in beating them. If the system cannot beat the GSW, then I really dont care how close it comes. The GSW are too good defensively to lose a series to a system whose offense has been telegraphed from a thousand miles away. It hilarious how they have turned our 'Curry hunt' into a shot clock wasting process. Without any variation in the offense,there is no chance we beat the GSW in a 7 game series. You can console yourself that we have lesser talent, or blame it on the NBA hierarchy, but the truth is that the system we have cannot accomplish the goal we set.
2017 Blazers, Jazz, Spurs, Cavs, 2018 Spurs, Pels, Cavs, 2019 Clippers. All shoot way more 2s than us. All together they have 5 wins against the KD Warriors. We have 3 with our 3 point heavy offense. The Warriors are much much better than everbody talent wise. You gotta push your ceiling cause you'll never match their floor.
I bet the all those people in the "3>2" camp have never studied mathematics or statistics in depth. They pretend to know about advanced analytics, but in reality all they got is "3>2". People who are illiterate in maths tend to think in linear terms: If something works at point A, it must work at Point B too, or the more the better. Optimization is a foreign concept to them, and they can't fathom the notion that at some point this simplistic linear relationship breaks down. Shooting threes is more efficient than shooting midranges in vacuum. But in the real world, this becomes a highly predictable strategy that other teams can adjust their defenses to. There's also that psychological aspect that when you're cold from three, making few easier shots can get you going again. The pseudo pro-analytics crowd overlook the fact that most events in this world are described in terms of curves with ups and downs, not straight line up. You cannot just shoot 100 threes a game and nothing else because "3>2". Just because you feel cold right now and want to turn the heat up, it doesn't mean increasing the room temperature indefinitely will yield a good result. Or see what happens when you invest all of your money on one single stock because it has the highest ROI. Most people eventually lose money with this strategy because they thought in terms of simple linear relationship when the world doesn't work like that. Usually the winners of the stock market all have diverse portfolio which includes less 'efficient' product, and there's a reason for that.
Guys aren't open shots more effective than contested shots? I mean 3pts 2pts 1pts are all great as long as they go in right? If u have a chance to take an open midrange instead of a contested 3 why shouldn't u?
Great post. Didn't have the nerve to explain it too. Im no mathematician genius but I know a thing or two about it from my software development studies and man I hate this pseudoanalytic "3>2" talking so much. I wanna see those advanced stats from playoffs only when teams are actually trying to shut us down
Hey dude, I'm done here. Go enjoy yourself on a Warriors board with their homers, that's where your arguments will make sense. Can't take stuff like this seriously. Even the average NBA fan/analyst doesn't agree with this gibberish.
For what it's worth, these are not hidden inefficiencies in the current model, I have heard Morey speak directly on all of these these things before on various podcasts or sloan talks. It is odd to me how often the team goes for 3 pointers late in close games with a lead, because he has specifically said that he doesn't consider that to often be the best move, and neither does his data. Regarding #1, I believe threes are more likely to result in an offensive rebound, but I don't remember. I am sure that he has talked about it, though. Regarding #2, Morey has said that opponents points per play (PPP) is higher on a missed 3 than a missed 2, by a non negligible amount. It is a small amount, but not small enough that you can pretend it doesn't exist. The numbers haven't been released, at least not that I know of.
We already have near that with Harden and CP3 - then Gordon....not quite the same but not far off. DD
Morey's strategy isn't simply based on "3>2". I'm sure he's aware of the optimization issue, but he can't actually implement the optimized version of his strategy in real time. That's MDA's job, and to certain extent Harden's. Both are known to be stubborn as hell tho, so the end result is this simplistic implementation of Moreyball devoid of all the nuances and exceptions.
