Clippers vs. Houston - Game Preview
2009/2010 NBA Regular Season
vs.
8-10 9-8
Staples Center
December 2nd, 2009, 7:30 PM
Prime Ticket, 980 AM
Probable starters:
Baron Davis
PG
Aaron Brooks
Rasual Butler
SG
Shane Battier
Al Thornton
SF
Trevor Ariza
Marcus Camby
PF
Carl Landry
Chris Kaman
C
Chuck Hayes
The Back Story:
First meeting of the season. Rockets won the series 3 games to 1 last year.
The Big Picture:
The Clippers come into this game off of their most exciting win in recent memory. For three quarters against the Grizzlies they looked disinterested and lackluster, as indeed they have frequently this season. But for the final 4 minutes, they were a team possessed. A 33-7 fourth quarter, featuring a 22-0 run to close the game, gave them a much needed victory. Unfortunately, it may have come at a price. Eric Gordon tweaked his hamstring in the fourth and is considered a game time decision for this game. Gordon scored 29 points Sunday, and keyed the comeback. It was the first time he'd looked 100% since returning from an 8 game layoff with a groin injury. Given how badly the Clippers struggle without him, the team can ill-afford to have him miss more time. Of course, that may be the argument for holding him out of this game. Better to have him heal completely than to risk a more serious injury. If Gordon can't go, the Clippers will be back to relying on Baron Davis and Chris Kaman to carry them. Unfortunately, Kaman has struggled in three of the last four. Baron has been solid all year - though he's still not shooting a good percentage from the field.
The Antagonist:
I think of the Rockets as one great big test tube. When you look at a statistical rating system like Win Score or PER, there are always players that jump out as being scored too highly. And while you can make a case for one or two of these guys on a team, the trump card for most critics is to say "What would happen if you fielded a team of five Shane Battiers? You'd get killed." Of course, it never happened, so no one ever found out whether it's true or not. It never happened until now that is. With Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady injured - that's $40M of the Rockets $74M payroll - the team is made up of 'value' players. Guys who don't look particular impressive by some of the traditional measures, but who ostensibly are off the charts in Daryl Morey's super secret rating algorithms. So far the unavoidable experiment is going better for the Rockets than I would have thought - they're 9-8, including an impressive win over the Lakers in LA. But the conventional wisdom would hold (and I have to agree in this case) that you need a better number one option than Trevor Ariza. Looking at the numbers, it's actually pretty hard to figure how the Rockets have a winning record - their effective field goal percentage on the season is 49%, while they're allowing their opponents a .511 eFG%. But they don't turn the ball over much, and they get a LOT of offensive rebounds (third best percentage in the league) which all adds up to more possessions for them. So taking care of the ball and boxing out will be keys for the Clippers tonight. Houston's starting power forward and third leading scorer, Luis Scola, is likely out of this game after being scratched in the eye on Sunday in Oklahoma City.
The Subplots:
- Momentum. Wouldn't it be great if the Clippers opened this game the way they closed the last one?
- Smoke and mirrors. I'm not completely convinced that Morey has any new system to speak of. Or rather, I don't really see much evidence of it. The simple fact of the matter is, much of what he's done during his tenure (he became assistant GM in April 2006 and GM in May 2007) would appear to me to be based on good old fashioned talent evaluation, and not on computer algoritms. Consider this: of the nine players currently in the Houston rotation, six of them were rookies for the Rockets. It's hard enough making sense of the data from NBA games - are we to believe that Morey's algorithms are so good that he can identify Luis Scola and David Andersen from their Spanish League stats, and Aaron Brooks, Chase Budinger and Carl Landry from their NCAA stats, against such variable competition? Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me like the Rockets have been doing the good old fashioned job of evaluating talent to pick in the draft. And they appear to have done well at that.
- ...and Rick Adelman can coach. I don't think Adelman has gotten enough credit for what he's done with this team. Obviously they're exceeding most expectations this season. In year's past, they've remained competitive during long stretches without one or both of their injury-prone superstars. Clips Nation is well-acquainted with the difficulties presented when a team suffers injuries to key players. Adelman's Rockets continue to perform at a top level no matter who they put on the floor. Kudos to him.
- Never to early to think playoffs. Of course, it's way too early to think about the playoffs, but.... The Rockets are currently tied for the eighth spot - though of course they were widely considered to be the playoff team most likely to drop out of the picture. If the Clippers still entertain thoughts of the playoffs, they have to win these kinds of games - at home against a division rival that figures to be competing for the 7th and 8th spots.
- Rebounding. As I mentioned above, the Rockets are third in the league in offensive rebound percentage. Memphis is first, Detroit is second. These happen to be the Clippers last two opponents. They did a terrible job keeping Detroit off the offensive glass, but won anyway. They did much better against Memphis - partly because they allowed the Grizzlies to make almost everything they shot through three periods before waking up. The Clippers need to do a job on their defensive glass and limit the number of chances Houston gets.
- Kaman. The Rockets starting center is Chuck Hayes, who is listed at 6'6". Now, I realize he's in there for his defense. But he's giving away like 6 inches to Kaman. It sure seems like Chris out to be able to either face him up and shoot over him, or back him down and score with the jump hook in close. In his last four games Kaman has thrice been ice cold (combined 12 for 49 vs. MIN, IND and MEM), and once been red hot (11 for 13 vs. DET). We could really use one of those red hot games.
- Point guard matchup. If you think Kaman is a lot bigger than Hayes, what until you see Baron Davis next to Aaron Brooks. Expect the Clippers to post Baron against the diminutive Brooks early and often. Of course on the other end, Brooks may give Baron trouble with his crazy quickness. The point guard that successfully puts his counterpart into difficulty in this game gives his team a decided advantage.
- Defending the three. The Rockets are third in the NBA in three point attempts. Ariza, Brooks, Battier and Chase Budinger are the main gunners. If you can keep Houston quiet from deep, they have difficulty winning games.
- Ariza. Trevor Ariza may prove the old adage - anybody can be a top scorer if they shoot enough. Ariza is leading the Rockets in scoring at 18.2 points per game - more than double his prior career high for a season. But he's done it while shooting a dismal 38% - far and away his career low.
- Carl Landry. The Clippers have for the last few seasons struggled to defend the undersized, high energy power forwards off the bench like Paul Millsap and Craig Smith. The Rockets Carl Landry fits that bill, and torched the Clippers for 20 points in 30 minutes in a game last November. If Scola is unable to play tonight, Landry will step into the starting lineup. At any rate, he'll definitely be a big part of the game plan going in. Hopefully the Clippers can handle him a little better given the chance to prepare for him.
-
Movie Quote:
Woody, Toy Story (1995). I've mentioned many times my fondness for Pixar movies. Part of it is timing. Toy Story, the first Pixar film, was made in 1995. My first child was born in 1996. So my kids grew up with Pixar. Toy Story remains one of my favorite movies of all time.Wait a minute, I just lit a rocket... Rockets explode!
- Get the Rockets perspective at The Dream Shake.
0 recs |
108 comments
|
Comments
rockets are the team NOBODY wants to play with this season.
by Fan of the Game on Dec 2, 2009 12:00 AM PST reply actions
Expect the Clippers to post Baron against the diminutive Brooks early and often.
I don’t expect that, because Baron never does it. It seems like we’ve been saying this since he got here, but he’s refused to post up smaller PG’s like Brooks, Flynn, et al in the past (both last season and this season.) I think he should do it, but I don’t expect him to.
I know people hate the “ISO” game, but if I were coaching this game, I would be throwing the ball to Kaman and Baron every play (assuming Baron would actually post up Brooks) and let them exploit these matchups.
You're right...
It hasn’t happened enough. They went to it in the fourth against Ty Lawson in the Denver game… which forced Denver to bring back Billups, which was a good thing for the Clippers as Lawson was actually scoring much better than Billups. But it hasn’t happened very much.
Still, I keep thinking it will.
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Baron abused Nash in the post for a short stretch against Phoenix. It was so effective that the Suns switched Nash onto Gordon and put Grant Hill on Baron.
Putting Nash onto Gordon wasn't too effective
I remember Gordon getting into the hole easy. Evetually Nash just fouled Gordon before he could drive.
Never?
It happened against Ty Lawson as Steve pointed out, and it happened against Darren Collison when the Hornets came to Staples (this was when CP3 was healthy).
I wouldn’t say it never happens. It certainly doesn’t happen enough. But whose fault is that? Is it Baron refusing to do so, or is it the coach calling the plays? I genuinely don’t know. But you seem to be putting it on Baron (“he’s refused to post up…”). On what are you basing that on? Is it really your position that Dunleavy is calling a play where Baron is to post up his man and Baron simply refuses to go on the block?
Never was certainly too strong
That’s a pre 8 am commenting blunder; that one’s on me. I have noticed him do it as well, even this year against Flynn he posted up beautifully dished to Kaman for an easy bucket. It looked great and I was frustrated they never went back to it.
I’m not blaming Baron, like you say, I have no dea what’s going on. To me, Baron and Dunleavy are the Clippers. I am the fan. I’m not interested in assigning blame to one or the other (I assure you I have no dog in the fight) so I just view it in black and white. It didn’t happen and it should. I hope it does tonight.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 10:16 AM PST up reply actions
Gotcha
Makes sense. No question that Baron needs to post more often. He seems to create from that position pretty well also.
I think tonight will be a tough one. We don’t really have anyone who’s great at defending small quick guys like Brooks.
Plus, this team is notorious for not giving 100% effort all the time. If they come out flat tonight, they could find themselves down by 15 in the 1st quarter.
Not Telfair...?
Or Gordon? To my mind, I’d rather see Telfair or Baron move to the 2 rather than Butler… assuming Gordon’s out anyway. The other night, when Gordon had to come out in the fourth, Dun put in Telfair. Baron finds him in the corner for the dagger 3-ball… he was probably in there as a quick defender but he can drive, dish, and hit the open shot. He’s small but Brooks is infinitesimal.
I was thinking Telfair too
but I’m not quite ready to believe he can hit the open shot. His TS% of .508 on the season is excellent but a bit above his career numbers. I want to believe that he’s finally figured it out (he’s only 24 but this is his 6th season in the league) but I’m not quite ready to say he’s turned a corner yet. What’s funny is when the Clippers traded for Bassy the Minnesota fans were saying that Bassy’s game had gotten much better recently because he seemingly realized that he’ll never be much of a shooter so he stopped being a chucker.
I do think he would fill in well guarding Brooks and with Gordon out I like the idea of starting Baron and Telfair, even if that leaves us thin for shooters (because guess what, Butler can’t shoot anyway!.)
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions
Any interest in going to the game tonight?
My wife is sick and can’t make it.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Man, i wish I could. Actually, deliasman invited me tonight as well but I couldn’t take him up on it.
He may still be going, if you want to reach out and meet up with him….
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:32 PM PST up reply actions
Telfair's D
leaves much to be desired. He’s a mediocre defender at best. Plus, Brooks averages 32 mins a game and Bassy averages 16. So unless the plan is to play Bassy huge minutes, it’s going to be tough.
I’m assuming of course that Gordon doesn’t play or isn’t 100% enough to be chasing Brooks around.
Of course, Telfair might play huge minutes
Against the Rockets, with EJ out, I’d start him with Baron, and let Baron guard Ariza.
I was watching the highlights of the lakers vs clippers 1/9/09
There was some amazing plays in that game. The bench came out hungry and delivered. If Ej is unable to play this game, i’d like to see some Mardy, DJ, Ricky Buckets, and Novak in the mix. I think we should be able to pull this one out tonight but the offense needs to move the ball around. I hope they don’t try to dump it into Kaman every play because as a fan, it gets boring to watch.
Bigolbad
yeah I'd like to see some mardy and Ricky is things are shaky out of the gate
I don’t understand why Dunleavy plays guys for a game or two and then sits them, never to been seen again when in fact they actually played well. Seriously, Collins or Ricky should be stealing minutes away from Butler. It’s ridiculous that Thornton gets the bench treatment and Butler doesn’t. He needs a night off or something; he’s been as dead weight as you can get. Might as well play some 4 on 5.
by dulciusEXasperis on Dec 2, 2009 12:07 PM PST up reply actions
Kaman. The Rockets starting center is Chuck Hayes, who is listed at 6’6". Now, I realize he’s in there for his defense. But he’s giving away like 6 inches to Kaman. It sure seems like Chris out to be able to either face him up and shoot over him, or back him down and score with the jump hook in close.
And yet so many post players have a difficult time doing this. It might be as if – zOMG – Chuck really is a great defender. According to the Rockets, their own proprietary stats show him as one of the best post defenders in the league over the past few years, and the publicly-available stats bear this out. Height is merely one part of defense in basketball, and Hayes’ combination of strength and lateral quickness makes him a far better defender than the guys he plays against.
are we to believe that Morey’s algorithms are so good that he can identify Luis Scola and David Andersen from their Spanish League stats, and Aaron Brooks, Chase Budinger and Carl Landry from their NCAA stats, against such variable competition?
Yes.
Kaman vs. Hayes
Yea, I actually think Kaman will struggle. Every GM in the league must think that before they face Hayes – “He’s 6’6! Just shoot over him” Yet Hayes delivers time after time. If the refs let them play, Hayes will be all over Kaman. Especially because he’s quick enough to come out on that jumper.
You decided to quote Steve and say that we should believe in the algorithims.
You conveyed your point brilliantly by simply saying, “yes.”
Excellent. If you wouln’t mind though, it might be just a tad helpfuly if you explained why we shoudl believe that.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
exactly
the little things (hustling after rebounds, defensive rotations, making the right passes, not bathing for a week) matter.
Morey gets way too much credit.
Hardly anyone mentions Adelman, easily a top-3 coach in the league, if not a clear second to the Zen Master.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's doing down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Dec 2, 2009 3:44 PM PST up reply actions
Obviously,
these things go in tandem. If the Rockets had an awful coach, then they’d probably be a terrible team. But, at the same time (and this is something Adelman is always quick to point out), the coach can’t do anything with bad players. Morey gets good players, Adelman figures out how they fit.
I have to admit
Greg Pop has had quite a core since he’s been with San Antonio. They’ve Parker, Duncan, and Manu, not to forget a solid core consisting of Udrih, Bowen, Horry, Barry, Mohammed, Finley and Oberto; not to mention capable of developing players like Bonner and (previously mentioned Mohammed and Oberto.) Houston had to work with an often injured McGrady and Yao. Adleman has less to work with than Pop, but I’m not going to take a swing at whos the better coach…
Awww come on
Just one swing, nice and round, for old time sake.
I’m flat-on-my-back sick today, so I could use some more diversion.
Jeez, tough crowd around here
Really, everything Morey has said has indicated that they (of course) look at “traditional” scouting, but that advanced statistical information is used as a primary tool.
Was Scola identified purely by stats? Of course not. Scola was seen as the most NBA-ready player in Europe when the Rockets traded for his rights. Everyone knew he was good. The issue was that the Spurs didn’t know how good he really was, and so they were unwilling to pay for his buyout from 2002 until 2007.
Stats haven’t magically given the Rockets the ability to identify good players. What they’ve really done is give the Rockets the ability to better understand how much each player really contributes on the court.
In the end, I suppose you can say that stats didn’t really help on those decisions and that traditional front offices would have done the same thing, but the fact that the Rockets’ FO says that stats matter, along with the fact that other “traditional” FO’s continue to make stupid decisions that the Rockets don’t make should indicate that statistical analysis really does matter.
I mean,
in the end, you can say that what stats say about basketball isn’t all that revolutionary: Defense, rebounding, and efficiency win ballgames, not pts/game. A lot of coaches say that. But the difference is that the Rockets actually follow those principles and don’t overpay players who other teams overpay and find guys that other teams don’t want to pay for.
I was impressed by Michael Lewis' story on Battier
I’m looking forward to taking a closer look tonight, and to catch a glimpse of the team-oriented play that evidently eludes traditional statistics. I’m not overly skeptical… but I do want to actually see it.
Good stuff, what the Rockets are trying to do. I’ll probably wait another season or two to decide how legit it really is.
I like Houston too
I think they are a good squad, I loved watching them put a beat down on Portland last year and even participated in the open threads during last years playoffs over at The Dream Shake.
I just felt like Steve detailed why he was skeptical that Morey is actually using a unique brand of statistics to evaluate talent. I don’t mind that Only A Lad disagreed, I was just looking for a more detailed reason than “yes.”
He has since done that, so no biggie….
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:31 PM PST up reply actions
Wonder what it was about, for example, Budinger
that showed up in advanced stats. He was not that great of a player in the Pac 10. He did, however, have a pretty nice jump shot and he was kind of athletic. Of course, those aren’t secret “advanced stats.”
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:29 PM PST up reply actions
Easy now...
Actually there are a lot of Daryl Morey fans on the Clipsnation site. A really lot. The point was, simply, that stats didn’t ID Scola or the Rocket’s good draft picks.
There’s another interesting detail in here… the reason the Rockets had to find economic ways to build a team is because they had massive contracts for two contracts for players that have rarely been on the floor. You can’t lay that off on current ownership or Morey… but the stimulus behind their smart moves wasn’t “let’s be the smartest guys in the room and change the way we do business”, it was because they were desperate. They HAVE to find a different way.
Wait a minute
Aren’t they paying tons of cash to Yao and TMAC?
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
I believe those were signed before Morey came in
So Morey basically has to operate under a budget that already tied money up to those two guys….
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:34 PM PST up reply actions
Who did he sign?
Wasn’t Battier already there too? Are we talking about Brooks, Budinger and Landry? Do you really need advanced stats to notice who is hustling and who is not? Don’t basic statistics like defensive stats show you that?
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:37 PM PST up reply actions
I think he dealt for Battier.
The fanshot swami linked yesterday goes through some of the moves, but Morey basically hides behind his stats being a “trade secret” so I think questioning whether they are real or whether he is blowing smoke is fair game. Not that I blame him, if I felt like I had developed a methodology that gave me a leg up on the competition I wouldn’t be telling New York Magazine about it either.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:41 PM PST up reply actions
He's winning so he can argue that it's his "formula" I guess
He would never have chosen someone like Al Thornton, I suppose, who underperformed in rebounding, assists, blocks and steals at F St. Hollinger pointed that out, and it was one of the reasons why he wasn’t high on him, in addition to the bball IQ question.
I need to see Budinger’s stats at AZ. Can’t believe he was good in the hustle stats. Brooks was a no brainer though. Great player, always hustling, always all over the floor. Caught him in college in person a few times and I always loved his game.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:43 PM PST up reply actions
Kind of like
Billy Beans advanced defensive metrics before anyone else had them.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
so I think questioning whether they are real or whether he is blowing smoke is fair game
Given the amount of money the Rockets spend on this, I seriously doubt it’s just a smokescreen. You may doubt if it’s really valuable (though, again, I think that’s a pretty weak contention), but it’s clear they think it’s valuable.
Simple experiment
Switch out Adelman for MDSr for a month. See what happens.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
He may spend the money on stats
and he may use them.
Doesn’t prove that its the reason for their success. Which was Steve’s point.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
Then the question that has to be adressed,
is if it’s not statistical analysis, then why haven’t other teams experienced similar success? I think, by the end of the season, it will be clear that the Rockets achieved quite a bit without their best player for the entire season (only time will tell how much McGrady will contribute). So that must mean that the players they have are pretty good – better than the “non-stars” on most other teams, right?
At the end of the day, the Rockets obviously value players differently than other teams do. That’s why they punted Alston to the Magic and handed the team to an undersized, waterbug PG last year. That’s why they continue to employ Chuck Hayes and give him significant minutes. You can say that other teams would make similar moves, but they do not do so.
And the prime difference between the Rockets and most other teams is their use of statistical analysis. No, that’s not definitive proof that the “statistical revolution” describes anything true or different, but it’s pretty good evidence, right?
I swear I do like your team, but you keep mentioning the “success” they have had as though they’ve won a championship or something. The team is currently 9-8. Yes, they are doing this without their two top paid players, but again, the results could be a result of coaching.
At the end of the day, the Rockets obviously value players differently than other teams do
I just don’t see how any of that is obvious. Moving Rafer? Please. A ton of non-enlightened folks would be fine unloading a free shooting point guard when you have a 7 footer who can score at will in the paint who should probably get the ball a lot.
The logic on this is all too circular.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
Morey came in as the assistant GM in 2005-2006.
He and his staff were the ones who pushed to trade for Battier, for instance. Basically, when talking about who are the players Morey signed, traded for, or was instrumental in acquiring before he became GM, we’re talking about Battier, Hayes, and everyone else not named McGrady or Yao.
Do you really need advanced stats to notice who is hustling and who is not?
No, of course not. But you do need them to tell you how valuable “hustling” really is. Given his statements in the Michael Lewis article and elsewhere (for example – the interview Matt Moore did with Chris Ballard describes a little of this), that’s the real value of the stats. Any coach will say that a guy like Battier is valuable, but Morey’s point is that he is as valuable as many all-star players out there.
Don’t basic statistics like defensive stats show you that?
Yes and no. Blocks, steals, etc. show something meaningful, but they also can disguise bad defense. What statisticians try to do is filter out that sort of thing.
You can filter it out simply by watching the players play
Much better than “advanced statistics” in my view. Watch Battier play D and hustle. He’s always been a great defender and that was known around the league since he first started.
So I disagree that you “need” advanced statistics. Give me basic stats and an experienced scout any time.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:54 PM PST up reply actions
For example
Did Coach Pop need advanced stats to know that Bowen is a good defender who he could pair up with three reliable scorers, a stiff center and a jump shooter to win a few championships.
Doubt it.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
I think Camby's block totals inflate people's opinion of his defense
and to your point, i know this because I watch every Clipper game and I see him float into the paint instead of manning up on his guy at the 3pt. line.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:57 PM PST up reply actions
Ditto for his defensive rebounding numbers
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions
You also know that ZBO is a particularly
effective offensive player and a great rebounder, but his lack of blocks for a big man also suggest that he’s not always a motivated defender, which is borne out by watching him play (I know you don’t want to see that).
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 4:00 PM PST up reply actions
In fairness, he's really a C - so that's what he's used to doing
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
He's a tweener
He’s a center on defense, but his lack of a post game on offense has him shooting too many jumpers, which as a result take him away from the basket, which keeps him from doing what he does well— rebounding.
That’s why I’ve never been too fond of Camby. I think he’s a nice player to have and add depth, but he’s not good enough (particularly being injury prone as well) to be a cornerstone in the front court.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 4:06 PM PST up reply actions
Perhaps not,
(though the Spurs are probably a bad example, given that we know RC Buford looks at a lot of this stuff; it is, after all, the organization that produced Sam Presti and Kevin Pritchard)
but here’s the difference. Advanced stats will
1) Give you some rough dollar value for a player’s contributions, something that traditional scouting has a much more difficult time doing.
2) Be more accurate in the long run. It’s objective. The way we interpret data will change as new data comes in. I guarantee you that a statistical GM will make fewer mistakes than a “traditional” one. Maybe he’ll hit fewer home runs on players that the stats say aren’t good, but he’ll waste much less of the organization’s resources on guys who aren’t really contributing on the court.
How do you know advanced stats will be more accurate in the long run?
You are taking a ton of leaps of faith here. Unless you know what these stats are i don’t see how you make such an affirmitive statement on the success rate compared to traditional stats.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 4:16 PM PST up reply actions
Where is the proof? There is none
Here’s an advanced stat for you – sign up Kobe, Lebron or Duncan, surround him with a couple of other scorers and some good defensive players, based on traditional stats and scouting, and you’ll have a pretty good team.
The Rockets are interesting but they will not win it all based on their current configuration.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 4:33 PM PST up reply actions
Because I have a certain faith that human knowledge has become larger over the years. We know more about the world today than we did yesterday. Scientific study (and scientific theories) tend to become more accurate as time goes along simply because more data is incorporated and more experience is accrued, and that data and experience is then used to amend or disprove old theories and create new ones. So I feel pretty safe about saying that we’ll know more about basketball ten years from now.
i don’t see how you make such an affirmitive statement on the success rate compared to traditional stats.
Because the teams that use advanced analysis tend to be the good teams. From the 2010 Pro Basketball Prospectus:
The Blazers and Rockets are amongst a group of eight teams known to have used statistical consultants in their front offices in one role or another last season. As it turns out, this group also happened to overlap with most of the NBA’s contenders. Of the eight teams, only one—the rebuilding Oklahoma City Thunder— failed to win 50 games and reach the playoffs. Though barely a quarter of teams make such heavy use of statistical analysis, they made up more than half of the spots in the conference semifinals round of the playoffs (five out of eight).
Scientific theory becomes accepted once others are able to replicate the work
Or something like that.
The Rockets do not disclose what their advanced stats are, therefore they cannot be tested. As such, you cannot positively state that their “success” is a result of the application of their alleged innovative new statistics.
Their “success” could be coaching. It could be luck. It could be stats. But bringing up science is bogus, since there is no way any of this would pass a scientific inquiry.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 4:47 PM PST up reply actions
I come down in favor of the two-fisted approach
That is, use stats and use scouting. And use a human element to grasp such intangibles as “chemistry” and the like. A team may make decisions more slowly this way, especially if the office vote has to be unanimous, but I’m willing to show some faith (for now) that the results are likely to be better.
The Dodgers about a decade ago made that trade for Penny (sending away their hot catcher, whatever his name was, and a couple of other chemistry guys) and the team totally lost its magic. The coach was pissed about it, as I recall. — Even if this doesn’t completely prove my point, it still suggests that a purely statistical approach (like their young GM was taking; sorry, I’m sick and spacey and can’t remember names today) is likely to create problems.
Part of what I’m curious about is if Morey has developed more subtle statistics to legitimately get at things like ‘good team play’, ‘chemistry’, ‘personality synthesis’, etc. For some of these, I’d also be inclined to hire a psychologist.
Finally, the fact that the playoff teams use statistics doesn’t necessarily mean the stats are part of the cause of their success. It could just mean that the front office works harder in general. What would be nice to have would be a breakdown of some of the differences between these front offices, to see if use a stats might be one of the few common denominators.
Why do advanced stats give a rough dollar value
for contributions that you can’t get through scouting and regular stats? Can’t you look at young players who are doing well, notice their stats, see how they play, and then sign them for less than a comperable veteran paid more?
I guess not.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 4:36 PM PST up reply actions
Apologize if this has been covered elsewhere, but
does anyone know what’s up with Kaman? He’s gone from All Star status (on this site – numerous posts about why he was left off the All Star ballot) to shooting 40% from the field in the last 15 games. A 7 foot center.
Is anyone concerned?
yes
In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. - Elwood P. Dowd
Wonder what's up with him
We are going to need Kaman 3.0 (or whatever the correct nomenclature is) when they start playing some of the better teams regularly.
Are you able to talk with the players freely when you visit practice?
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 2:19 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe
If the Clippers weren’t 4-1 in the last five. And here I thought only W-L’s matter.
Coaches don't matter. - Bill Simmons, The Book of Basketball
YOU DONT PLAY IT JUST TO PLAY IT!

"Four goals in sixteen shots... I'm really tired of the...............25% rule." -John Tortorella
You mean
no one is clamoring for him to be on the all-star ballot anymore? Did everyone really expect 3.0 to hang around all season?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I for one thought he'd shoot better than 40%
To me, that’s an indication that something may be wrong with him.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
I think Kaman still leads the team in minutes
That was not a smart strategy….
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:33 PM PST up reply actions
You beat me to that...
I know it’s early but driving that big body up and down the court, being a better than decent defender and rebounding take a lot of effort.
Well he regressed to the mean
a little to fast, he’ll normalize and be better then 40% but we may never see a streak like he had at the beginning of the season ever again.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
A 7 foot mobile center who can also shoot the outside shot should be
above 48%, no? I suppose his rebounding numbers are down a bit due to Camby.
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:38 PM PST up reply actions
Doens't the fact he is shooting
so much from the outside mean he should have a lower shooting% then someone who only has a post game?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Yes, he should be shooting more inside as a 7 footer
But if he’s going to shoot 17 footers, he’s still got to hit 45%, which when combined with the gimmees, should be . . .
by Jax on Dec 2, 2009 3:49 PM PST up reply actions
Perfect Example
Deandre Jordan has a TS% of .615.
That’s the “my offense is basically all dunks” game.
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 3:51 PM PST up reply actions
...and why won't we see another streak like that?
He’s allowed to be streaky. But he was much better in his first ten games than he was all last season. Seems to me he should regain some of that even if it isn’t game in and game out.
I think it was the best 10 game stretch of his career
so right now for he has the streak as the best 10 game streak of his career which is now six seasons long. So saying we may never see another 10 game streak like that again does not seem far fetched.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
I'm betting
that a 10 game streak like that is not purely an outlier. It’s a lot more likely that when EJ and others heat up again from the outside (with some consistency), that Kaman’s touch will soon enough return.
Really
your willing to bet that a guy who never had a touch from the outside is more likely to now have a better touch from the outside then the previous five seasons? The same guy who has missed more gimme shots in the history of the team is all the sudden going to figure out in the long run how to slow his brain down and softly make those putbacks?
I’ll bet on Eric Gordon becoming an elite player, but I won’t be betting on Chris Kaman. He’s got value with his size and skills but 3.0 he is not going to stay.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
40%
He’s taking way more jump shots this year. Plus Mr. Flippy bunnies do nothing to help.
"Buckle your seat belts, folks. This one's doing down to the wire." -The inimitable Ralph Lawler.
by Gordon for President on Dec 2, 2009 3:46 PM PST up reply actions
If you're asking for kudos
For mentioning that he’d be a good “trade while his value is high” comments, then i’ll oblige. Good call.
Extra ticket tonight
any one want it. Section 215 row 2, I can email it.
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Start Bassy
I too would like to see Bassy start alongside Baron. With a 50 percent eFG there is no reason to think he can’t play off the ball when necessary. Bassy has never been a chucker. His shot totals have always been reasonable, he was just missing a lot up until the second half of last season. Last year, he shot a respectable 33 percent from three and he is now hitting his midrange and layups at a really high clip.
by SFJ on Dec 2, 2009 3:52 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Novak is probably a waste of money
Still somewhat surprised the Clippers even signed him since the coach is also the GM and the coach never really plays him.
But from Houston’s perspective, with so much money tied up in Yao/TMac, can you really afford to have a gimmicky player who can’t play any defense?
by Michael White on Dec 2, 2009 5:13 PM PST up reply actions
I disagree!
Novak is a luxary! As Steve has always said, you can’t always have too many shooters!
Plus, Novak proved to be pretty useful in some of those 19 games last season, including game of the year (for us Clippers fan) vs NJ last season.
Sincerly, The Steve Novak Clan Chowder Society.
Let me rephrase that
*The Steve Novak Marching and Chower Society.
Man, I had to look up what you called your’s…
It will be interesting to see if last years pattern
comes around again. Novak didn’t seem to see to ever play in the first 20 games last year but was being used quite a bit after the new year. Will it happen again?
Patience is for those who die waiting for something to happen
Official Gordon is sitting out
said he is feeling better and should play Saturday.
In Gordon we trust

by 











