How does everyone feel about the ISO's now?

Roy is averaging 15 shot/per this season after averaging 17 last season. In the last three games, which you seem to be talking about, he shot the ball 16, 16, and 15 times while averaging 5 assists. Basically, Roy has taken .67 more shots per game with Nate "trying to make Roy happy" than he was prior to Nate "not trying to make Roy happy". So, since the stats are a wash, I guess I have to conclude that your criticism is based on nothing more than emotion.

Interestingly, Andre Miller has shot the ball 13, 12, and 10 times over the same three games, yet is only averaging 9 shots per game on the season. He is averaging 3 assists per game compared to Roy's 5 assists per game over the same stretch, and he's shooting right at 40% in those games.

Looking at the stats, I'd have to say that Nate is "trying to make Miller happy". I don't believe that, but looking at the data, it is a more realistic opinion than the one you propose in the post above. I understand that you can't stand Nate, but making up criticisms that fly in the face of the actual stats discredits your opinion on Nate.

 

There were 4 run by the Hawks in the 4th quarter and OT

There were 10 ran by the Blazers in the 4th quarter and OT

 

4? Ok, sure thing.

 

I'll throw this out there. In the past Roy ISO's were successful, because often the guys he threw it to on the perimiter would hit open shots. Right now it's pretty obvious that is not happening, with Blanky and Webster having a hard time hitting anything. The problem isn't so much the ISO's, as the result of the ISO's. If guys would just nut up and hit some shots, this would be moot. Right now though, Roy doesn't have hardly anybody competant to pass to when the ISO attracts the attention. The whole point of running these ISO's is to force a sitaution where they either double Brandon and then he outlets to the open shooter, or if they don't double, let him go do his thing. Our shooters aren't holding up their part of the bargain right now, so its not working too well.

 

"The Season" isn't really a fair sample size because Miller didn't start at the beginning of the season. You have to do it from the SA game, and then stop it after the second Minny game.

Miller in those three games averaged 10 shots per game, while Roy only averaged 10.75 Since the ISO's Millers shots have increased to 11.6, while Roy's shots have increased to 15.6

I am not saying Roy shouldn't shoot. I am saying ISO's are a shitty way of getting him shots because the defnse can rest, and the other players on our team get out of the flow on offense.

 

In the 3 games referenced in this thread, Roy is averaging 19 ppg (1 ppg less than his season average) on 45% shooting (50% from 3pt), 8 rpg, and 5 assists per game. The drop in his production is coming from the FT line, where he is averaging 2 less attempts over the 3 games (5 ftpg) than he is over the season (7 ftpg).

If anything, the stats tell me that Nate needs to run MORE ISOS for Roy and let Brandon attack the rim and get to the line. Every stat I look at discredits the OP's point in creating this thread. We're all arguing a made-up strawman that just doesn't stand up to the light of reality.

 

Clearly Miller's ISO plays need to go to Roy. Roy is a much better offensive player, and Miller's gobbling up of shots is taking the ball out of Roy's and LMA's hands.

I have to conclude that Miller is the problem at this point, if there actually is a problem. He's the variable that wasn't in this spot at the start of the season.

 

It doesn't work that way.

Fine, run ISO's all day long and play without a center so you can spot up 4 guys at the 3 point line. There is absolutely no way any defense could stop it. That 50% from 3 has nothing to do with an actual offense and everything to do with Brandon standing with the ball and jacking up 3's

 

Neither were the ISO's

And you are right. Miller wasn't in the starting line up when the team went 2-3

 

He has shot 6 3pt FGA in the last 3 games. He has made 3 of them, with assists from Blake on one of them and from Miller on 2 of them. Perhaps he should be "standing with the ball and jacking up 3's" more often?

Once again, the stats contradict your opinion on what is actually happening on the court.

 

I think this is because of the emphasis on D. The offense has had to take a back seat to the D. It also is harder to play both D and O for most players. Great conditioning is necessary for the players to do both well.

 

Again I piggy-back off your post. I agree with the "not making shots" aspect.

Last year this team was very good at making 3s time and time again. This year we have been playing Miller a lot and he is being left open and dared to shoot. This is making it harder for Roy when he does drive and I believe he is not getting his just due on foul calls. They seem to be not giving Roy the benefit of the doubt this year. Of course the team has not played many home games yet.

I could see where Nate was coming form last night with Rudy and Roy and Blake. The trouble is Roy is not looking for Rudy enough. He is used to looking for Blake from habit. That line up last night will work if Rudy and Blake start hitting those shots.

Other wise........ ( All games are won by one team making more shots than the other one.)

 

I think one thing we do know is this is not a running team. For whatever reason, but I think the players are more responsible for this than the coach. They just don't want a run. So if Iso's is all we have. I guess that's all we have.

 

MM, a poster who can turn any thread into a Nate sucks thread, is begging posters to stay on topic . . .

 

Agreed

 

But Nate does suck

 

The advanced stats agree with you. Roy is much more of a jump shooter with the ball out of his hands. Our guards still shoot the same percentage up close - but a lot more of those are going to the .489 TS% player (Miller) than to the .573 TS% (last year) or .562 TS% (this year) player (Roy).

 

I saw your post in your 'efficiency' thread. The advance stats make me feel even stronger about my opinions in this thread that I've based on basic stats and my own observations. I'd have repped you, but can't (something about spreading it around), and I thought quoting the lengthy post to simply say "outstanding post/research" cluttered the thread. The part I bolded was what really jumped out at me in your post, so I'm glad you brought it to this thread.

So, with that, outstanding post/research!