Derrick Rose shooting in the ECF vs. Miami

[DMAVS41]

One thing I would hope is that people watching the game notice how many of his shots arent just...him deciding to shoot. He missed a lot of shots but just off the top of my head I can remember the halfcourt 3 to beat the first quarter buzzer, the attempted coast to coast at the end of the half, Brewer getting caught clock running down throwing it to him for a long 3 that barely hit the rim, Korver doing the same, the missed 3 for the tie at the end. 5-8 shots every night lately he pretty much...has to shoot.

If the Bulls can get one more guy the team feels good throwing it to in a pinch I suspect next year his shots go down a good bit. Hes not just shooting to...be an asshole or something. And it seems many either dont see that or choose to ignore it.

On nights hes not hot and Deng and Boozer combine for 7/23 shooting...there is no alternate plan. So they keep going to him. Just a guy like Ben Gordon on the floor would help at this point. someone else with balls and skills enough to get that confidence of the team.

Every superstar ever has had to deal with this to an extent. Not to mention that Rose causes a large number of those bad possessions because he can't make simple passes.

I hope you realize why efficiency now matters.....LOL

And its really not his overall numbers. A player simply can't play worse in crunch time and when it matters most. That was the difference in the series. Even as horrible as Rose was, the Bulls still had a chance to win the last 4 games in crunch time. Again, Rose could not have come up shorter in the big moments in the last 4 games.

A horrible series from a great player. No excuses. His supporting cast kept him in every game despite his shot jacking ball domination.

[mrhoopfan]

Derrick Roise is an awesome player yet it is the basics that he lacks. I said it on ISH last summer after the FIBA games where he looked average. Those foreigners packed it in on him and made him pay by taking charges when he left his feet. Westbrook, believe it or not was the better player during those games. If zone was allowed in the NBA, Rose would really struggle. Not too many superstars in today's game or the past I would make that statement about. Rose needs to work on his footwork: Pivoting, reverse dribble, balance when he is being trapped, etc

[DMAVS41]

Why would I count 20? he averages 20 a game. People act like he shoots a crazy number of shots all the time. 21 shots isnt just...absurd. I figured an nice round number. 25.

It is when you shoot sub 35% for a series. Its actually way too many shots.

[sh0wtime]

Why would I count 20? he averages 20 a game. People act like he shoots a crazy number of shots all the time. 21 shots isnt just...absurd. I figured an nice round number. 25.

He just shoots way too much. He's gotta tone it down. He's not a good shooter AT ALL. He chucks. And to top it off, he's not a smart person. He's gotta work on a lot of stuff. His basketball IQ for one.

I dont mind that at any other position, but doing that from the PG position is prejudicial, it has never worked in NBA history, in the season you can get away with it, but in the playoffs the better team will and has always exposed why that kindof offensive traits (Rose, Iverson, Marbury, Westbrook) do not belong at the PG position unless you are really desperate.

Whether the PG is a scoring PG or a pass first PG any PG's main job is to be the main ballhandler with priority of setting up your teammates, a PG is a quarterback. (You dont see a quarterback not pass and most of the time just try to go for the touchdown over and over do you?)

The reason why the PG position must be played traditionally is just because of that. If your PG (the guy who dominates the ball) takes the ball up court and doesnt have a pass first mentality, then that alienates your teammates and beats the whole purpose of the PG role, a PG is not just a position, its a role. Those traits are anyways usual suspects for the PG being selfish, not trusting his teammates or simply being not a true PG.

Thats why a 5'11" Allen Iverson was immediately moved to spend the rest of his career at SG, that way you put a traditional PG in who makes sure the correct people get the ball and makes the correct decisions, the offense doesnt go stagnant and Allen Iverson still can shotjack how much he ever wants, that way nobody gets alienated and everybody gets theirs. That kindof scoring magnitude and attitude does not belong at the PG position.

The only time its not so detrimental to not have a traditional PG in your starting lineup is by strategy, for example if you already have a guy who is not really a PG (by size) but actually does the PG job, a la "point-forward" for example, that way you put a spotup shooter at PG instead who does nothing but shoot the ball (but never to an amplified extent) which actually is good for the team.

[mrhoopfan]

I dont mind that at any other position, but doing that from the PG position is prejudicial, it has never worked in NBA history, in the season you can get away with it, but in the playoffs the better team will and has always exposed why that kindof offensive traits (Rose, Iverson, Marbury, Westbrook) do not belong at the PG position unless you are really desperate.

Whether the PG is a scoring PG or a pass first PG any PG's main job is to be the main ballhandler with priority of setting up your teammates, a PG is a quarterback. (You dont see a quarterback not pass and most of the time just try to go for the touchdown over and over do you?)

The reason why the PG position must be played traditionally is just because of that. If your PG (the guy who dominates the ball) takes the ball up court and doesnt have a pass first mentality, then that alienates your teammates and beats the whole purpose of the PG role, a PG is not just a position, its a role. Those traits are anyways usual suspects for the PG being unselfish, not trusting his teammates or simply being not a true PG.

Thats why a 5'11" Allen Iverson was immediately moved to spend the rest of his career at SG, that way you put a traditional PG in who makes sure the correct people get the ball and makes the correct decisions, the offense doesnt go stagnant and Allen Iverson still can shotjack how much he ever wants, that way nobody gets alienated and everybody gets theirs. That kindof scoring magnitude and attitude does not belong at the PG position.

The only time its not so detrimental to not have a traditional PG in your starting lineup is because you already have a guy who is not really a PG (by size) but actually does the PG job, a la "point-forward" for example, that way you put a spotup shooter at PG instead who does nothing but shoot the ball (but not never to an amplified extent) which actually is good.

^ Right on

[NuggetsFan]

Might just be me but I don't like using the bail out excuse for extra shots for a PG. His job is to create for others. Him winding up with the ball, 3 seconds left on the shotclock having to force a shot reflects him. His job is to run the offense. Can't complain when he couldn't create anything and ended up with the last shot. That's not a knock, can't get a good look 99% of the time and happens to everybody. Not like he's a PF or a SF where he get's heaved the ball because the team has no idea what to do. He's the PG. After he looks for his shot and can't find anything his job is to move the ball and and run a set or w.e needs to be done.

Plus he's the star. When you watch teams play most of the time those guy's get fed the ball with 5 seconds on the clock or any shitty situation and are forced to create something or take a hailmary.

Just my two sense. Bulls fans shouldn't get upset or try to defend his inefficiency's. Be happy Rose is actually good enough to be put in this type of spotlight. When you take the jump he did, win the MVP your game's going to be picked apart like it has been. Happens to everyone.

[Kblaze8855]

I hope you realize why efficiency now matters.....LOL

All it is these days is something for kids online to bring up because it makes their point while allowing them not to show their work. A dozen things factor into what a guy shoots and why. All that word is to me is evidence im dealing with someone who either cant see beyond the obvious or can...and chooses to make the most simple explanation possible because they dont choose to put in the effort needed to explain what really happened.

Got people online telling me shit like "If turnovers and offensive rebounds are equal..the higher TS% wins EVERY GAME! How do you say it doesnt matter!?!?!"

And thinking it proves...something.

Ive been watching the NBA for over 25 years. I can say with confidence that 95% of the people who spew these efficiency numbers know nothing I dont know and have not seen half of what I have. Im not going to learn anything new about basketball from formulas and shit posted dozens of times by children who post "Oh my god...you are shooting 38%! Stop shooting!" when a guy runs a play given to him by the coach for the express purpose of him shooting.

Many people here are just flat out idiots basketball wise and have nothing to teach me about anything. Most of the rest are normal people who dont care to look as deeply into the why as I do. Which Idont blame them for. But the why is what really matters. Its what I pay attention to.

The shit you are talking about skips the why and that is why I disregard it.

[tpols]

The shit you are talking about skips the why and that is why I disregard it.

This.

Numbers and stats without contextual backing have zero meaning. It's always imperative to explain how the stats were obtained and consider all of the variables.

[Kblaze8855]

Might just be me but I don't like using the bail out excuse for extra shots for a PG. His job is to create for others. Him winding up with the ball, 3 seconds left on the shotclock having to force a shot reflects him. His job is to run the offense. Can't complain when he couldn't create anything and ended up with the last shot. That's not a knock, can't get a good look 99% of the time and happens to everybody. Not like he's a PF or a SF where he get's heaved the ball because the team has no idea what to do. He's the PG. After he looks for his shot and can't find anything his job is to move the ball and and run a set or w.e needs to be done.

Plus he's the star. When you watch teams play most of the time those guy's get fed the ball with 5 seconds on the clock or any shitty situation and are forced to create something or take a hailmary.

Just my two sense. Bulls fans shouldn't get upset or try to defend his inefficiency's. Be happy Rose is actually good enough to be put in this type of spotlight. When you take the jump he did, win the MVP your game's going to be picked apart like it has been. Happens to everyone.

Heres the thing...

When someone says "He took 26 shots!" and acts like hes a ballhog just looking to shoot all the time because of it...how do they not acknowledge the situations in which these shots come?

Who does he help by not shooting that halfcourt shot end of the first?

Nobody. But in the end...its not said he took 25 shots...its 26...and the nature of the shots is irrelevant. Its another case of the simple meaning more than the why...

Im more interested in why he took whatever number of shots. And when you look into it....a huge number are often shots he had no choice but to take...or shots the team WANTS him to take...

And as a result of taking shots his teammates and coaching staff ask him to take...hes called all kinds of childish names.

And it just baffles me. How someone can watch the same game as me....and then come list how many shots he took as if he went one on one for 11 seconds 30 times.

Its really as if the final number gives more information than watching the game did and I will never understand it.

[NuggetsFan]

All it is these days is something for kids online to bring up because it makes their point while allowing them not to show their work. A dozen things factor into what a guy shoots and why. All that word is to me is evidence im dealing with someone who either cant see beyond the obvious or can...and chooses to make the most simple explanation possible because they dont choose to put in the effort needed to explain what really happened.

Got people online telling me shit like "If turnovers and offensive rebounds are equal..the higher TS% wins EVERY GAME! How do you say it doesnt matter!?!?!"

And thinking it proves...something.

Ive been watching the NBA for over 25 years. I can say with confidence that 95% of the people who spew these efficiency numbers know nothing I dont know and have not seen half of what I have. Im not going to learn anything new about basketball from formulas and shit posted dozens of times by children who post "Oh my god...you are shooting 38%! Stop shooting!" when a guy runs a play given to him by the coach for the express purpose of him shooting.

Many people here are just flat out idiots basketball wise and have nothing to teach me about anything. Most of the rest are normal people who dont care to look as deeply into the why as I do. Which Idont blame them for. But the why is what really matters. Its what I pay attention to.

The shit you are talking about skips the why and that is why I disregard it.

It's cool not to use numbers. I don't understand how somebody can completely disregard them. Can't watch 82 games a year for every team, every single play. Not the end all be all, but I think there helpful anyways.

I just don't get how you can say something like he's only took more than X amount of shots in the last X amount of games. If you don't care what clip he's hitting them at, why would you care to say how many shots he takes?. Seems like your just picking out what you want to hear. Such as Rose not taking X amount of shots. Once someone brings up what clip he hit them at, it all of sudden is irrelevant. Just an observation.

Anyways can't understand how somebody could think hitting below 20% of your shots in OT|4th quarter wouldn't matter tho.

[NuggetsFan]

Heres the thing...

When someone says "He took 26 shots!" and acts like hes a ballhog just looking to shoot all the time because of it...how do they not acknowledge the situations in which these shots come?

Who does he help by not shooting that halfcourt shot end of the first?

Nobody. But in the end...its not said he took 25 shots...its 26...and the nature of the shots is irrelevant. Its another case of the simple meaning more than the why...

Im more interested in why he took whatever number of shots. And when you look into it....a huge number are often shots he had no choice but to take...or shots the team WANTS him to take...

And as a result of taking shots his teammates and coaching staff ask him to take...hes called all kinds of childish names.

And it just baffles me. How someone can watch the same game as me....and then come list how many shots he took as if he went one on one for 11 seconds 30 times.

Its really as if the final number gives more information than watching the game did and I will never understand it.

Well in my personal opinion I usually look at the number to double check what I saw. If I'm watching him play and notice him settling for taking 3's when there's still +7 seconds left on the clock. If even after it's obvious his shot isn't falling, but still decides to keep shooting a step back midrange J. I think to everyone who watches notices what he's doing out there. It's just easier to say he went 6-18, instead of breaking down every single play we all saw. We all saw him a game ago, airball that jumper on LeBron right after he couldn't get past him and missed another J. I personally felt like he was forcing the issue a tad bit too much ala Westbrook abit. His shot wasn't falling against the Heat for whatever reason. Would have liked to see him cool it down. He wasn't making the best choices with the ball, and he's a PG.

Just easier to explain that by saying how many turnovers he had compared to assists. How many shots he took, and how many he missed.When people say he went 10-28, nobody says OMG EVERY SHOT WAS BAD. It's just a rough number. You throw it out there to show his shot wasn't falling. You complain about the number, if you what you saw you didn't agree with. I called out his %'s because I didn't agree with all the shots he was taking.

I dunno. I guess if you don't take shooting %'s into account you talk about very few players. You'd need to watch every single player, of every single team to gauge how he was playing. In this day in age, we have charts that show us exactly where he shot from. Watching players + using tools IMO is always the best way to go. Just using one can't cut it. You obviously biased towards Rose. Can't deny that. Using what you saw, plus what was recorded is going to be more accurate than just using one or the other.

[jrong]

All it is these days is something for kids online to bring up because it makes their point while allowing them not to show their work. A dozen things factor into what a guy shoots and why. All that word is to me is evidence im dealing with someone who either cant see beyond the obvious or can...and chooses to make the most simple explanation possible because they dont choose to put in the effort needed to explain what really happened.

Got people online telling me shit like "If turnovers and offensive rebounds are equal..the higher TS% wins EVERY GAME! How do you say it doesnt matter!?!?!"

And thinking it proves...something.

Ive been watching the NBA for over 25 years. I can say with confidence that 95% of the people who spew these efficiency numbers know nothing I dont know and have not seen half of what I have. Im not going to learn anything new about basketball from formulas and shit posted dozens of times by children who post "Oh my god...you are shooting 38%! Stop shooting!" when a guy runs a play given to him by the coach for the express purpose of him shooting.

Many people here are just flat out idiots basketball wise and have nothing to teach me about anything. Most of the rest are normal people who dont care to look as deeply into the why as I do. Which Idont blame them for. But the why is what really matters. Its what I pay attention to.

The shit you are talking about skips the why and that is why I disregard it.

But, it's not necessary to go to an advanced stat to see his inefficiency. All you have to do is look at shots taken vs. points scored. Here's Rose in game 4 and game 5

Game 4: 27 shots; 23 pts

Game 5: 29 shots; 25 pts.

You don't need PER or TS to see how horrendous that kind of efficiency is. I mean contrast that to Wade tonight who was almost as bad as Rose for most of the series: 13 shots; 21 pts.

Even in Wade's worst game-- Game 4, he scored 14 pts on 16 shots. That's terrible, but he only took 16 shots. So Wade's shots only potentially (excepting offensive rebounds) cost his team 11 empty possessions whereas Rose cost his team 19 empty possessions potentially. And keep in mind, this is far and away Wade's worst series of his career.

I mention this not to compare Wade vs. Rose, but to contrast an efficienct player and an inefficient player, and how a normally-efficient player adjusts his game when he's not playing well as opposed to the lack of change-in-game from a player who is not being reined-in and thus for whom poor efficiency has become the status-quo.

[Kblaze8855]

This.

Numbers and stats without contextual backing have zero meaning. It's always imperative to explain how the stats were obtained and consider all of the variables.

What makes it frustrating to me is that often...I know im dealing with adults. but they act like I did when I was a kid. I remember clearly me and my uncle(big basketball guy...his best friend a guy named clyde mayes...made the NBA briefly..was a scout later and one of the people I learned a lot from). Watching some game in probably...86 or 87. I dont remember who was playing but a guy kept missing shots. It was someone on the Bulls because I was pissed off he kept shooting.

It was explained to me...that he was supposed to shoot. Even when it misses...

I was taught to look at the game not the ball. To see plays being run. Get to know what is being run and when.

At that point...it stopped being a question of why ___ was shooting. Hes supposed to.

And here I am a quarter century later I still see people watch Korver run a lap and clear out his man...Rose get the ball Bogans wait to shoot if his man doubles off him to prevent Roses drive....

Rose shoots.

I go to the game topic and people call it selfish or post emoticons making fun as if...he wasnt supposed to shoot.

You can pretty much tell if Rose is supposed to go one on one by where Noah and Korver are if the yare both in. They run very simple plays. rose can be seen clear as day look to the sideline and recieve a play..run it. And shoot.

End of the game how many shots he took is posted as if each shot attempt kills a kitten and gets a teammates mom molested.

And I just wonder...are these people stuck mentally where I was watching the NBA on CBS in 1986? Or am I just lucky I had a former NBA player and some real ball guys to explain the basics?

Nobody looking at the sets the Bulls play out of could wonder why Rose shoots so much.

Is...seeing a play develop really not something fans do these days?

Or do people think coaches dont have gameplans? They think its playground ball where he just decides on the offense?

He plays the offense hes given. Its often intended to get him to shoot. So he shoots.

Then hes called selfish for it.

And people wonder why I am infatuated with "why"?

Why is everything.....

[Kblaze8855]

Might not say anything about all that till tomorrow. Just saying so nobody thinks im ignoring them when they took the time to explain what they think.

Im going to go get something to eat. Its 2:30...came right home after work. Just noticed ive not eaten. I think i want chicken fingers....

You...cant get good chicken fingers at 2:30 in many places. But im gonna try....

[DMAVS41]

Heres the thing...

When someone says "He took 26 shots!" and acts like hes a ballhog just looking to shoot all the time because of it...how do they not acknowledge the situations in which these shots come?

Who does he help by not shooting that halfcourt shot end of the first?

Nobody. But in the end...its not said he took 25 shots...its 26...and the nature of the shots is irrelevant. Its another case of the simple meaning more than the why...

Im more interested in why he took whatever number of shots. And when you look into it....a huge number are often shots he had no choice but to take...or shots the team WANTS him to take...

And as a result of taking shots his teammates and coaching staff ask him to take...hes called all kinds of childish names.

And it just baffles me. How someone can watch the same game as me....and then come list how many shots he took as if he went one on one for 11 seconds 30 times.

Its really as if the final number gives more information than watching the game did and I will never understand it.

And I've been watching the NBA longer than you. John Wooden said the most important stat in basketball is fg%. Phil Jackson looks at fg% the first thing after every game.

Its a self fulfilling prophecy with Rose. He's not a good playmaker. He can't make simple passes. He's a sg, not a pg.

We all know the reasons why he shot like crap in this series. He got locked down late in games and he settled for way too many jumpers. His decision making and actual play was very poor.

You've been talking all year about how fg% just really doesn't matter all that much. And I could not disagree more. John Wooden could not disagree more.