I’ve been enjoying the back and forth on the blog between some incredibly intelligent posters lately. A year ago when the blog first kick started we used to get some crazy trade ideas and really elementary misunderstandings about pro basketball and the Thunder. Now you, the fans, are just extremely knowledgeable and insightful. It’s great to see.
After the loss to the Rockets the other night I was pretty steamed. I was upset and disappointed at the way our second-year point guard ran the show in our third loss to Houston. I’ve been trying to put aside the anger and take a real constructive and not too biased view of his play this season and see if I can come up with some conclusions. The bottom line for me isn’t so much his stats as much as it is wins and losses. If RW is a bit player or a major player in a win I care not. But in a loss his role and it’s execution come under much sharper scrutiny. Check out Russell’s splits in wins and losses:
| Wins | Losses | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FGA/gm | 12.3 | 15.46 | 20.4% more field goal attempts in losses. |
| Min/gm | 33.5 | 35.5 | 5.6% more minutes played in losses. |
| FG% | 39.4% | 37.8% | -1.6% decrease in FG accuracy in losses. |
| 3pt attempts | 34 | 33 | Nominal difference |
| 3pt % | 44.1% | 15.2% | almost 30% dropoff-huge! |
| FTA/FTM/FT% | 64/79 81% | 51/67 76% | -15% in losses. |
| Reb. | 59 | 64 | He rebounds better in losses. Significant? |
| Assists | 101 | 71 | -29.7% fewer assists in losses. |
| Steals | 8 | 15 | Almost twice as many steals in losses? |
| Turns/turns gm | 38/2.9 per game | 49/3.8 per game | 22% increase in turnovers in losses. |
| Pts./game | 15.8 | 16 | nominal difference |
First of all it’s a good time for comparisons since the team is 13-13 and Russell has started every game with almost exactly the same starting lineups in all 26 games. Now I know that the first thing in your mind is probably “so what, Russell plays better in wins and plays worse in losses, who doesn’t?” I see that. What I’m suggesting, and what the data is suggesting is that not does he merely play worse in losses, but that he significantly alters his style of play in losses. He is doing different things in wins and losses.
Take another look at the table. Notice that in losses Russell shoots considerably more. I’m not talking about the quality or makeability of shots, just pure volume. It’s like he is pressing and trying to take over the offense as the strike leader. It’s over a 20% increase. Next notice that he gets to the line 15% less in losses. This speaks to the style of shot as well. If he’s driving to the hole he will get more fouls and more free throws. If he’s settling for jumpers he’s unlikely to draw many fouls.
Another eye popper is the assists. 101 in wins and 71 in losses (7.8 assists per game in wins and 5.5 in losses). That’s almost 30% reduction in assists. You can’t get an assist if you shoot the ball yourself. Granted, in losses the team usually will shoot more poorly and so there may not be as many made shots so there will be fewer assists, but 30%? And finally turnovers. 38 in wins and 49 in losses (2.9 per gm. and 3.76 per gm. respectively).
So the picture is clear, in losses Russ plays differently; he shoots more, turns it more, facilitates for others less, and gets to the line less. Thus the team loses. At least Russell’s play is one factor among many in losses if nothing else. Russell at times plays like a premier ball dominating shooting guard and we need him to be our point guard.
But if you look at the data in another way it shows the trend from a different angle. Just looking at field goal attempts in wins and losses it becomes clear that the trend is accelerating. Russ has shot the ball 15 or fewer times in a game in 18 of the 26 contests so far. In those 18 games the team is 11-7. So far so good. He’s shot the ball 16 or more times in the other 8 games and in those games the team is 2-6. It’s clear the team is more effective when he moderates his shooting. But here’s the rub: in the first 13 games of the season he only shot the ball more than 13 times twice. Yep, he kept himself from forcing too much in the first 13 games. However, in games 14 through 26 he’s jacked up 14 or more shots in 10 of the 13 games. I hope that’s clear; read it again. The first 13 games he shot the ball more than 13 times only twice. In the second set of 13 games he’s shot the ball 14 times or more in 10 of the 13. The shot happiness is accelerating.
I don’t claim to know why. My only guess is that he is pressing. In those first 13 games he shot 43%; in the second 13 games since he’s shooting 34%. Maybe he’s trying to shoot his way out of a slump. But the truth is that the team performs worse when he shoots more, and when he’s shooting more he’s distributing less, turning it more etc.
Russ, I hope you’re reading man. Get serious about playing defense first, set up your teammates second and shoot last.
@4razr
Not to speak for Royce and Joe, but I'm not sure a forum is in Royce's plans for the site. As evidenced by some of the comments during a few of the game threads.
@Jeff
Hey Jeff, yeah, nobody should like the blame game. But there is a big difference between analysis of strength and weakness and discussion of strategy, and placing blame, on Brooks, Presti, anyone.... For me, the fun of watching the team comes from watching them build for success in the long run. I take it as a given that the goal is to build a championship team, and that everything happening on the court and every decision should be looked at in that light. To get there, there needs to be a vision and a strategy for achieving that vision. Adjustments here and there to pull out another win now at the cost of building for long-term success just frustrate me. I want to be able to see the vision and strategy of the team reflected from the front office down to the towel boy. OKC has a good start on that, in building a winning culture; but I have some concerns about whether what is happening on the court is aligned with a long-term strategy for success. Switching and gambling (overplays) on defense, for instance, seems to have improved the defense overall (this is an oversimplification), but I question whether this strategy is a winning defensive strategy for a championship team. I don't think it is, and I don't want to see the team develop bad habits. Now, I may just be impatient--there are times to switch, and it takes a while to figure out how to play the passing lanes and use length and quickness on defense without sacrificing fundamental defensive positioning, and what they're doing now may be part of the growth process for a young team figuring it out on the floor--but I want to see my team's play reflect a strategy that I think has championship potential. Many people point to the Spurs as a model for an organization that reflects a consistent vision and strategy in every choice and decision, and I concur. So when I see play on the court that I think will not lead toward long-term success, I enjoy thinking about what should be done differently and discussing what we think would be the best strategy going forward. This is not placing blame, this is critical analysis, and that's what I most enjoy about being a fan. I was lucky enough to be a kid when the Sonics won their championship, and have spent a long time wanting to see the team get back to the top. Keep your eyes on the prize!
Along those lines, I would love to see this site implement a forum, where individuals can begin threads and we can have more focused discussion. Royce, JG, etc, is that technically possible and philosophically consistent with your intent for this site?
@J.G.
People forget that we are still in a rebuilding year. I say trade wins now for future :)
edit - Hasselbeck
@Jeff
Oh I wasn't offended, just wanted to place an emphasis on the "discussion" part of the series as the goal of the article (and maybe it failed at this) was to highlight both possible reasons for the offensive struggles, illustrate why the struggles might actually be for the best in the future and then discuss if the struggles would be worth sacrificing wins now for a championship contender in the future.
I do think the scheme of Brooks is a reason for the offensive struggles, but I also think the players are just as responsible. But blame is something I rarely do so I have to be pretty upset or non-objective to ever do that.
And I don't feel attacked, Jeff, so no need to apologize. Just had to make sure that what I had hoped was a 50/50 discussion article was that and not, in fact, a "blame Brooks and grab your sticks and pitch forks" diatribe.
@justin
Haha. Thanks. I personally enjoy differing viewpoints in discussions. Otherwise, they're not really discussions as much as nods of agreement. And hang in there! Looks like the Seahawks should get a nice Top 10 pick in the draft and even though Hasselback might be on the decline part of his career, drafting OU's Trent Williams to be his RT should help protect him enough to extend his time there a little longer. Maybe that can help reawaken that formidable home field advantage at Qwest Field.
Also, thank you J.G. even if I disagree with some of your points I enjoy your Sunday articles. Takes my mind off of the Seahawks..
@J.G.
I went back and re-read the article. I am not trying to attack you or anyone else with what I am saying so please don't take it in that light.
To be honest the first 2/3 of the article looks to me to place blame on the offensive scheme which would belong to Scott Brooks. That is just how it came across to me when I read it.
However, in the last part of the article you do make a disclaimer that you are not trying to assign blame to anyone and that you are just looking for solutions.
I was most likely too succinct in the early part of my comment because I was trying to be careful and not post a wall of text as I am prone to do.
I intended no offense and apologize if you were offended.
@Jeff
If you're talking about my Sunday Discussion article, then I think you need to re-read the column before saying that it "blamed" Scott Brooks.
I am a little disappointed seeing these types of articles starting to appear. There is this one blaming Westbrook for being the "problem" and the one before it blaming Scott Brooks.
I would like to remind people that this team is currently sitting at .500 after playing the toughest schedule in the NBA to date. Before the season started did you think we would do this good this year?
All of our players could improve in some way. I believe it is best to address the needed improvements in this manner.
I believe what you are seeing out of Westbrook in the losses when he starts taking more shots, is his attempt to hit a couple in a row and try to spread the floor back out.
It hasn't really worked yet, but I don't believe he is thinking he can win it on a personal shooting spree when he starts that.
I would much prefer seeing all of our players start pushing to the rim more in those circumstances, but all of them start taking wild mid to long range shots instead.
However, I believe you will start seeing less of that soon because our schedule is about to improve soon and we should start moving back up again.
We aren't a championship contender yet, but I do believe it may be that we will secure a play-off spot. That is certainly a lot more than I expected before the season started and even after the pre-season.
Sorry that was me.
KD looks like one of these things when he's open and wants the ball: http://www.wavyads.com/images/cartoon-eyes.jpg
I don't blame Russ for being terrified..
I think someone mentioned it earlier, but in the 4th against the Rockets, Durant was wide open for a three in transition and Russell instead jacked up a shot and missed . . .
@J.G.
it seemed to be that losses came when the top scorer had a bad shooting night, so other players the PG and usually the 2nd best scorer tried to make up the difference
I think it's obvious without looking at much of these numbers that the reason our offense is poor is because we stink at shooting three pointers and we don't get enough easy baskets.
If we put Nick Collison and James Harden into the starting lineup and gave them starter's minutes it would go a long way toward solving those problems. I don't think Nenad Krstic -> Nick Collison is a drop off defensively, and I think the benefits of having Harden in the starting lineup outweigh the benefits of having Thabo in there at this point.
People worry about the second unit if this happens, but the starting five is more important..
@f5alcon
So, given the obviousness of the fact that when (generally) a PG shoots more, their team loses, why in the world does it not become something of a rule that the PG should resist the temptation to shoot more to make up for a possible lack of scoring from teammates and continue distributing the fall for the best shot available?
This is assuming, of course, that just PG's shots go up in losses...one could argue that shots themselves would almost have to go up in losses for most players (the hypothesis being that a loss typically occurs on a bad shooting night, thus to score points said team or player would be forced to shoot more to accomplish that).
The last 5 opponents faced on average were just a bit better than average on offense. 2H, 3 Away. Part of the story and there will peaks and valleys but something to watch...
Krstic, Collison, Ibaka, White and Thomas have 5 of the top 6 eFG% on the team but they only get about 18 of the 79 shots per game. Green helps balance things with 12+ shots and the other top 6 eFG%.
Shave a few shots off other perimeter guys (but does that boil down to just Westbrook?) and give them to Harden or the bigs.
Thabo is down about 1 shot over the last games compared to before and his FG%s are up a bit.
Westbrook taking almost twice as many shots as Harden is not right for the long-run.
Green has picked up his assists over the last 10 games and cut his turnovers for a significant change in his A/TO compared to previously. Will be nice if it lasts.
They are probably getting the least assists out of backup PG tag team in the league. Not much more than 1 a game.
Harden helps about at SG as a whole they are just barely above average.
SF 12th, PF 13th, C 13th on raw FG%.
Looks like the shooting problem is still with the guards.
At PG they are right at league average for attempts (maybe should be a bit lower?). At SG they are next to last in attempts. Because of Durant but how much easier does this make it for the defense?
Last season OKC was 30th on FG% at both at PG and SG and better elsewhere.
This season they are 29th on raw FG% at PG.
SG is now up to 22nd with Harden's arrival but at modest minutes.
Shooting more shots by a PG may not mean "that he is not following orders". It may mean opportunity and attempt to show leadership but I think too many Coaches (often ex-PGs) let the PGs or perimeter guys in general shot too much, they don't give strong enough orders about what a good shot is or who should take them. But it is usually easier to shoot quickly from the perimeter when you are down
@Crow
I was thinking something similar, give westbrook 4 plays to start with, a dribble drive, he can make layups and get foul shots that way but no ill timed jumpers, a pick and pop with krstic/green, and pick and roll with durant and a screen play that gives durant the quick mid range jumper, then if that doesnt work branch off to look for the iso with durant, find a mismatch or send it into the post.
yeah ill do more analysis later into the season.
Stringing some things together I was going to say the basic offense might be- Westbrook looks to drive / create, if not there pass out to Green or Durant, if they have an opportunity take it right then, if not pass to Harden or Durant, assess one more time and create or do it yourself, don't wait much past halfway thru the shot clock.
That would probably cut Westbrook's shots and increase Durant's assists.
Thanks for sharing that analysis f5alcon.
It will be a bit better to go off the full season eventually but always worth checking stuff when you think of it I say and then check it again later, think about it from other angles, etc.
Or I should have said big time game impact.
I'd think a niche free agent at a good value is more likely than a big name. Even if a big name is perhaps more of what is needed.
however the sample size is so small it still could be wrong, i mean westbrook could go and shoot 66% for the next 5 games and we win all of them and the data changes
I attempted to, though im not 100% sure that my math is correct, to do a linear regression with the null hypothesis that there is not a correlation between FGA and losing, and reaffirmed that joe was correct in that more FGA by westbrook means more losses, and is statistically significant. However the same assumption for assists is wrong, as is turnovers. So, there is no statistical correlation between less assists or more turnovers and whether we win or lose.
With Durant, there is no correlation with FGA, PPG or FG%, but there is one with assists and winning.
For Green there is no correlation with any stat, he can be up or down in any given stat and it doesnt affect our wins.
I also did one for westbrooks assists to krstic FGM and there is a relation for the two.
Either he never goes after a Spur or he might, especially if they are cutting costs.
Wonder how big a fan of Matt Bonner Presti is.
Wonder what kind of money he gets offered next summer.
The winning bid probably does not come from OKC
... but I wonder.
Some good stats.
Not yet 30.
Probably too old for Sam.
Great research!
@f5alcon
jameer nelson, brandon jennings, rodney stuckey, derrick rose, mario chalmers, raymond felton, gilbert arenas, deron williams, jason kidd, derek fisher, chauncey billups, baron davis, tyreke evans, stephon curry, mike conley. All of them shoot more in losses, that including westbrook is more then half the league. So i dont see how shooting more shots by a PG means that he is not following orders.
Keith :@f5alconBrooks was a career backup and three point specialist. If he is trying to impart his career path to Westbrook, we are in for a lot of problems.
No disrespect, I certainly like being a .500 team over a .100 team under PJ. But he needs to stop coaching like an interim guy trying to win over the players. He needs to start treating this gig as long term. Bench guys who aren’t producing or who are playing the wrong way. It’s simple, but it’s something that only a coach with a little front office support and cajones will pull off.
excellent post . . .
someone please explain why Livingston didn't play in the second half against Houston???
Krstic does shoot well comparatively late in the clock so if nothing special is happening I don't mind him taking the shot and especially if it replaced a Green or Westbrook mid-ranger.
I went and looked at other teams PGs and 2nd leading scorers(which westbrook is both) and see if they have FGA increases in losses
DAL:
jason kidd 7.05 FGA in wins 7.75FGA in losses 9% increase
jason terry 12.4 FGA in wins, 15.87 in losses 25% increase
LAL:
derek fisher 6.14FGA in wins 8.75 in losses 35% increase
andrew bynum 11FGA in wins 11.75 in losses 6% increase
DEN:
chauncey billups 10.94FGA in wins 12.86 in losses 16% increase
Now thats just 3 teams, but it seems like it is a pattern that PGs shoot more in losses
@f5alcon
Brooks was a career backup and three point specialist. If he is trying to impart his career path to Westbrook, we are in for a lot of problems.
No disrespect, I certainly like being a .500 team over a .100 team under PJ. But he needs to stop coaching like an interim guy trying to win over the players. He needs to start treating this gig as long term. Bench guys who aren't producing or who are playing the wrong way. It's simple, but it's something that only a coach with a little front office support and cajones will pull off.
and brooks was a score 1st PG so that is how he thinks
@J.G.
im not saying you are blaming westbrook, but a lot of others on here do, and I am more arguing that him altering his play is not whats costing us games. You say he shoots more and we lose, but you are assuming that if he didnt shoot and somebody else did we would win, which probably isnt true. He is only taking 3 more shots per game in the losses, at most thats 9 points, if all 3 of those shots went to somebody who hit three 3 pointers, so we then win 3 more games and tie 2.
Durant shoots roughly the same number of shots whether we win or lose but misses a lot more in losses, somebody needs to shoot more shots to make up the difference in points, if everybody took the same number of shots as normal then we lose. I agree it shouldnt be westbrook, but when durants off who else steps up, it usually isnt green, and maybe once it was harden.
Our biggest problem is rarely is just one player off, usually they all are, if durant has a bad game, green, westbrook and harden rarely step up to handle the load. if durant doesnt score 25 points we lose, The great teams can win when their primary scorer has a bad night, the lakers have 3 wins when kobe had under 21, cavs have 4 wins with lebron under 21, denver has 4 when melo has under 22, dallas has 4 when dirk has under 22. Somebody else steps up, we dont have that.
f5alcon :
J.G. :@f5alcon And how are his points? Those %’s are all well and good, but you’re talking about actual numbers of 8 rebounds versus 6.07 rebounds, 3.8 assists to 2.07 assists and 1 more turnover a game as the basis that he’s more up and down in how he plays (shoots, passes, drives, etc) than Westbrook.You blatantly sidestep the fact that he averages pretty much the same Field Goals, Steals, Free Throw Rate/%, Three Pointers and Blocks.So I’m thinking you might have missed the purpose of the article, which wasn’t to say “Wow, Westbrook plays worse in losses than wins.” Well no, duh. The point was that Westbrook’s ENTIRE STYLE of play dramatically changes during losses than wins. So Durant’s stats and style of play is in no way more Jekyll and Hyde than RW’s because Durant’s primary function on the team is a scorer and, in wins and losses he’s putting up 25+ points, pulling down 6+ rebounds and contributing 2 assists, ie, playing the exact same way he always does.It’s Durant’s job to score, rebound when he can (and 6 rebounds for a SF is great in a losing effort) and shoulder the offensive load/focus of the defense.That’s what he does game in and game out.
his points are 4 less per game and he misses a lot more.
the consensus seems to be that when westbrook shoots more we lose and that he needs to stop shooting, but we didnt look into why he shoots more and I think I proved why, durant shoots a lot worse in losses and westbrook is trying to make up the difference, though not effectively. I would even go as far as to say that the coaching staff wants westbrook to shoot more if durant is off, somebody needs to make up the difference.
A lot of people on here seem to blame westbrook and or green everytime we lose, but durants numbers are much worse in comparison to our winning games, and we just dont have a player to make up for his production.
Okay, you're still not following my point but let me say that I'm in no way blaming Westbrook alone for the offensive struggles. And I'm sorry to say this, but to me you didn't prove anything about WHY Westbrook becomes an entirely different player because A) No one outside of RW and Brooks' know the answer to that and B) Just because Durant averages a tiny 4 points less a game (from 29 to 25 is not a huge jump), that does not give Westbrook the greenlight to shoot when he is one of the WORST shooters on the team.
A point guard's responsibility is not to solely make up for the offense of one to two players if they're struggling from the floor, but to facilitate the offense in a way that it creates easy buckets for the team and better scoring opportunities, be it for himself, for Durant, for Green, etc.
You say that you think he is trying to make up the difference, but acknowledge that he doesn't do it effectively. Thus I find it very difficult to believe that Brooks would knowingly encourage his point guard to go into tunnel-vision scoring mode instead of running the offense like a point guard.
Durant's #'s are not much worse in losses than wins than any other member of the team, THE POINT is that in wins or losses, Durant still plays the we he is supposed to play as the scorer and leader of this team, whereas Westbrook, for whatever reason, bucks the trend that has been proven to win games for the Thunder (shoot less, create and pass more) and completely changes his play style, to the detriment of the team. It doesn't matter why he shoots more when the end result is crystal clear that when he shoots more, the team loses. Plain and simple.
And honestly, are you surprised that Durant, Green, for that matter Harden, Krstic, or ANY other Thunder player's #'s are worse in losses than wins. Isn't that kind of a no brainer? Thus, you can't say, "well the reason Westbrook's #'s decline in losses is because everyone else's does, too."
It goes both ways, either they're all equally accountable (ie, it's just as much Westbrook's fault for the decline of his #'s as it is Durant's, Green's, etc) or none of them are accountable for their own #'s dipping and you can go around pointing fingers at everyone but the player in question.
yeah i forgot about that, i think my splits are still right it is just 12 and 12 not 13-13, early in the season he was taking a lot more attempts. 8 or more attempts in 9 of his first 10 games. and only 4 games with 8 or more attempts since.
Let's def not put too much emphasis on the last 5 games, esp. re defense. Look at who we were playing!
What I have noticed in part is Russel regressing. Remember in the first game, and earlier in the season, where Russ was looking more like a point guard? These are things he clearly worked on all summer--but now he is falling back into old habits, especially in the face of adversity (these last few games weren't the easiest). Someone needs to remind Russel of all the work he did and what he was working on, and get him to focus in on making the smart pass, not losing himself under the basket, slowing down a bit and staying in control. Talk to him about consistency. Keep doing the right thing, every night, don't worry so much about the results:
"I executed the game plan. As long as I stick to my game plan I am pleased. I don't judge myself based on results. He finds way a way to score points because he is a great scorer." Shane Battier, after Melo dropped 38.
f5alcon :@Crow
nenads FGA are also down in the last 13 games vs the first 13. 109 vs 72
and 100 vs 81 wins to losses.
I think he needs to shoot more and if he is missing pull him for collison or ibaka, but if he is scoring decently well get him more shots
I think you might be forgetting that Krstic missed a few games with the foot injury since you are using total FGA's not FGA's per game.
krstic does have the highest FG% among starters at 48.1% and even shots 57% from his sweet spot and the top of the key.
What Id like to see is for 5 plays in the 1st quarter ran to get him an open shot, if he misses 3 or more, sit him and use collison and ibaka for a quarter and give him another 3 shots in the 3rd quarter. if he heats up feed him the ball and it will strech the defense and he can get durant more wide open shots. When he is hot he opens up the whole floor.
If Krstic were to shot more you'd probably have to take it from Westbrook or Thabo. The overall numbers don't really argue in favor of doing so but maybe Krstic finds a rhythm and has spinoff effects? Perhaps he could some games.
@Crow
nenads FGA are also down in the last 13 games vs the first 13. 109 vs 72
and 100 vs 81 wins to losses.
I think he needs to shoot more and if he is missing pull him for collison or ibaka, but if he is scoring decently well get him more shots
I checked the last 5 games and Westbrook's assists were pretty spread out. Krstic might #1 or 2 recipient but it only by like 1 assist over others.
82 games released a look at player to player assists a few years ago but I haven't seen anything like it since. It would be valuable to see that for RW.
Cpt Cnote :
How many of RW’s assists got to Krstic? It seems that if Nads is cold, RW assists are down. Is there any credence to this assumption?
btw…Good work Joe! Thanks for the breakdown.
probably a decent amount, its the same reason why without chandler CP3 assists went down, and why if we had a low post scorer RW would go up.