The Russell Westbrook Thread (2014/15)

[bondom34]

Please, we are all witnesses .

I didn't watch the game tonight. What did Smith do? Terrible shot selection?

I saw what parts were on NBA TV's cut ins, but Jennings and Smith killed them. Down 2 with about 10 seconds left, Jennings has an open driving layup but kicked to Smith for a 3. Needless to say what happened, the gen board game thread was pretty funny.

Jennings killed them, not Smith.
Jennings could and should have taken that right to the basket for the easy score. General rule, go for OT at home, win on the road.

Yeah, agreed. It still wasn't a good shot, but Jennings should have taken the easy 2.

[bondom34]

Got the Vine:

[E-Balla]

Got the Vine:

To be fair a Brandon Jennings layup isn't very efficient...

[RSCD3_]

Oh man, I'm prepping the fort early this year!

Just want to say thanks to Josh Smith for the win tonight.

As an aside, thanks to you and everyone who participates in this thread, glad it gets decent traffic!

Please, we are all witnesses .

I didn't watch the game tonight. What did Smith do? Terrible shot selection?

I saw what parts were on NBA TV's cut ins, but Jennings and Smith killed them. Down 2 with about 10 seconds left, Jennings has an open driving layup but kicked to Smith for a 3. Needless to say what happened, the gen board game thread was pretty funny.

It was far from open he was being chased by Ibaka. Jennings had to kick it out and josh smith chose not to attack a seven footer closing out at him or make another pass but simply take the shot.

Brent Barry essentially said Jennings made the right choice but why smith was there was the real problem




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[Bravenewworld]

To be fair a Brandon Jennings layup isn't very efficient...

Doesn't matter.
You dont pass up on a high percentage shot, in a situation with two defenders coming at you, where youre at home and will most likely get a foul call no matter what.

[tsherkin]

To be fair a Brandon Jennings layup isn't very efficient...

Doesn't matter.
You dont pass up on a high percentage shot, in a situation with two defenders coming at you, where youre at home and will most likely get a foul call no matter what.

But hat's precisely the point, it isn't high-percentage for Jennings.

[Bravenewworld]

To be fair a Brandon Jennings layup isn't very efficient...

Doesn't matter.
You dont pass up on a high percentage shot, in a situation with two defenders coming at you, where youre at home and will most likely get a foul call no matter what.

But hat's precisely the point, it isn't high-percentage for Jennings.

60% is good enough.
That still has nothing to do with the fact that if he would have been looked at the wrong way he would have caught an and-1.

[tsherkin]

60% is good enough.
That still has nothing to do with the fact that if he would have been looked at the wrong way he would have caught an and-1.

Still no.

1) He might not have reached all the way to the rim. There, he's shooting an atypical 58.5% (0-3 feet), which is unusually high for him. Also keep in mind that his FG% there includes open transition opportunities and such, so it's not a wholly accurate representation of his finishing ability, which has historically been quite poor.

2) His FTR is .333; you're overplaying how likely he is to get the call. He's never been a champion at drawing fouls, and with < 7 seconds to go, a call is actually LESS likely.

3) He probably would have stopped 3-10 feet from the rim for a floater, where he's shooting 16.7%, which is obviously a lot worse. If you look at the video, you can see he's already making the pass from the bottom of the circle.

They break out in transition, but he's already shaded to the left by two defenders cutting off a strong angle to the rim. He can't pull the floater, because he sucks ass at finishing in the middle of the paint (and really everywhere from 3-23 feet), so his choices are pass or pray that he can get all the way to the rim and not get blocked, which is unlikely.

He made the better play. Smith may suck from 3, but he was far more open and far more likely to make that shot than whatever nonsense twisting shot Jennings would have had to uncork in order to try to evade the shot-blocker.

[Bravenewworld]

60% is good enough.
That still has nothing to do with the fact that if he would have been looked at the wrong way he would have caught an and-1.

Still no.

1) He might not have reached all the way to the rim. There, he's shooting an atypical 58.5% (0-3 feet), which is unusually high for him. Also keep in mind that his FG% there includes open transition opportunities and such, so it's not a wholly accurate representation of his finishing ability, which has historically been quite poor.

2) His FTR is .333; you're overplaying how likely he is to get the call. He's never been a champion at drawing fouls, and with < 7 seconds to go, a call is actually LESS likely.

3) He probably would have stopped 3-10 feet from the rim for a floater, where he's shooting 16.7%, which is obviously a lot worse. If you look at the video, you can see he's already making the pass from the bottom of the circle.

They break out in transition, but he's already shaded to the left by two defenders cutting off a strong angle to the rim. He can't pull the floater, because he sucks ass at finishing in the middle of the paint (and really everywhere from 3-23 feet), so his choices are pass or pray that he can get all the way to the rim and not get blocked, which is unlikely.

He made the better play. Smith may suck from 3, but he was far more open and far more likely to make that shot than whatever nonsense twisting shot Jennings would have had to uncork in order to try to evade the shot-blocker.

1.Unusually high or not its what he is shooting and you cant really argue anything different.

2. No, im citing the fact that it would not really matter who was taking that shot. Its Detroit at home in a situation where they can tie or win. Home teams are more likely then not to get this call if being contested and fouled or not fouled. It does not really matter, they will get that call more often then not.

3. What you think he probably would have done is rather irrelevant as people are questioning why he did not take it to the rim.

4. There was never a point where myself at least, i suspect anyone, felt that passing to Smith was the better choice or would have ended up in a W. Anyone who knows Smith, knows that is not a shot you want him to take open or not.

[tsherkin]

1.Unusually high or not its what he is shooting and you cant really argue anything different.

Well, no. Because it's unusually high AND includes situations which are far higher-percentage than the type of shot he was about to take (should he have pressed the issue), it's not at all an accurate reflection of his chance to finish that shot compared to the alternative of an open look for a set shot. And that's not even accounting for the fact that his FG% in that region is still likely to swing downwards again.

That would have been a highly difficult, contested shot requiring a decent level of acrobatic evasion. Those are LOW-percentage shots, not high-percentage.

2. No, im citing the fact that it would not really matter who was taking that shot. Its Detroit at home in a situation where they can tie or win. Home teams are more likely then not to get this call if being contested and fouled or not fouled. It does not really matter, they will get that call more often then not.

That's generally not how that goes down, no. In the final ten seconds, the odds of him getting a bail-out call when he doesn't typically get a lot of calls to begin with (home team or not) isn't very high, nor something on which to bank. If it had been Harden, Durant or Paul, sure, that's something else. Even Kobe, maybe. But those guys have established themselves with certain moves/flops that they use regularly to snare a call. Jennings is not that player. The most likely end result is a clean blocked shot ending the game if he presses towards the rim.

3. What you think he probably would have done is rather irrelevant as people are questioning why he did not take it to the rim.

Well, no, that's not true either and is a conversational non-starter. The point is precisely that he had a limited set of options and that he very likely COULDN'T get all the way to the rim based on the angles and positions of the defenders, and even had he done so, he would have generated a fairly bad shot compared to the open look he produced by passing off. Forcing the shot is macho and all, but it's often stupid, and would have been the wrong decision in this case. That's a Kobe shot, not a smart shot.

4. There was never a point where myself at least, i suspect anyone, felt that passing to Smith was the better choice or would have ended up in a W. Anyone who knows Smith, knows that is not a shot you want him to take open or not.

Smith sucks; this is known. But even as a 27% shooter from 3 this year (26.7%), and accounting for the fact that he shoots better than that on open, assisted shots of that sort, that's still a shot with more confidence than an acrobatic shot with a really high-quality shot-blocker contesting while the wee guard with finishing issues is angled AWAY from the rim. This is pretty much bball 101 right there.

Yeah, it wasn't a GREAT option... but Jennings couldn't do the good thing and pull up or toss in a floater, because he is a wretched waste of skin at mid-range offense. That would have been the ideal play there, apart from passing it. That said, Smith is actually 4/10 on 3-point shots tight to the line this year. Granted, all of those makes came from the left side, but it's not as bad an option as you make it out to be.

What you're failing to acknowledge here is that Jennings was never going into that shot with a legit chance to produce a FG% anywhere near his average from 0-3 feet as presented so far this season. He might have been going to his strong hand, but he was barely in control, angled away from the rim and had a shot blocker bearing down on him and a second defender on his right hip. He had no chance to slither back into the lane, which means the most likely end result if a shot not actually at the rim, but outside of the paint on the left side of the floor somewhere between 4 and 10 feet from the rim, which is just about the worst shot in the world for Jennings to take as a general rule, let alone while closely contested.

He made the right play. Smith actually had a better chance to sink that shot than did Jennings, who was incredibly unlikely to either make the rim or draw a foul, let alone make a shot.

[Bravenewworld]

Okay well, you can keep saying whatever you want but im 99% sure at the very least 29 coaches would have rather him taken it to the rim in that scenario for the reasons i have cited, and i have yet to hear anyone but... you, argue anything different.
So... congratulations.

[DontH8TheBrody]

Bondom and myself would lead Westbrook's Presidential Campaign. #AllAboardTheWestbrookExpress

Lets see him average 25/8/6 this year.

[tsherkin]

Okay well, you can keep saying whatever you want but im 99% sure at the very least 29 coaches would have rather him taken it to the rim in that scenario for the reasons i have cited, and i have yet to hear anyone but... you, argue anything different.
So... congratulations.

What did you expect when you wrote this comment? It isn't an effective rebuttal of anything that I said. Your appeal to coaches is a logical fallacy of no relevance to the conversation. Watch the video; it's pretty clear what's happening. Jennings is fast, but he didn't have the angle or the timing to get where you want him to have gone before he got smoked by the shot blocker. The odds of that turning into a foul call or a made shot are fairly slim, whereas the odds of Smith making an open, uncontested jumper (even from three) are much better. Jennings drew two defenders and opened up a teammate, then made a pass to the open man.

That's precisely what he should have done, and regardless of your level of certainty, there was basically every reason in the book for him not to force the shot.

[PaulieWal]

Bondom and myself would lead Westbrook's Presidential Campaign. #AllAboardTheWestbrookExpress

Lets see him average 25/8/6 this year.

That fact that you call it "TheWestbrookExpress" disqualifies you immediately. It's GOATBrook not Westbrook.

[Bravenewworld]

What did you expect when you wrote this comment? It isn't an effective rebuttal of anything that I said. .

The point is i dont want to keep "rebutting" anything you are saying because you're doing some weird statistical nit pick that would absolutely not be in play in that scenario and is completely void of how we know the game is actually played and how we know coaches and players think and how plays are called.

[DontH8TheBrody]

Bondom and myself would lead Westbrook's Presidential Campaign. #AllAboardTheWestbrookExpress

Lets see him average 25/8/6 this year.

That fact that you call it "TheWestbrookExpress" disqualifies you immediately. It's GOATBrook not Westbrook.

GOATbrookExpress* My mistake!

[tsherkin]

What did you expect when you wrote this comment? It isn't an effective rebuttal of anything that I said. .

The point is i dont want to keep "rebutting" anything you are saying because you're doing some weird statistical nit pick that would absolutely not be in play in that scenario and is completely void of how we know the game is actually played.

It's not a "statistical nit-pick" to point out the facts of the game, and everything I've been discussing is directly relevant to that particular play based on examination of the player and the video evidence available. He had a bad angle, he's not a good finisher, was getting angled AWAY from the rim by two defenders, he had an excellent shot-blocker in prime position to contest his shot and an open teammate waiting for a catch-and-shoot opportunity.

The only thing the notion of going to the rim had going for him is the off-chance of getting a bail-out call with 6.5 seconds to go in the game... for a player who doesn't typically draw a lot of fouls. The odds against that are very high. Refs frequently swallow their whistles at the end of games and Jennings isn't that good at drawing them in the first place. His size is irrelevant to that truth. Far more relevant is his general inadequacy in that area of the floor. It's well and good to say "go to the rim, good things happen," but that's a platitude. It's not universally applicable, not always true and in this case, very likely not all that possible given the arrangement of the defense and the way Jennings was moving as he crossed the foul line.

Keep in mind that he had basically three not-pass options:

1) Try a floater from the top half of the key.

Bad idea, because he's a waste of skin in that area of the floor.

2) Bull his way forward.

This is what you're suggesting, but he doesn't have the upper body strength, didn't have the angle and was closed-out on by two different defenders, one an elite shot-blocker.

3) Try a hesitation move.

This wouldn't have worked wonders because again, he had a guy on his hip and a shot-blocker cutting off his angle. One of them would have had him, but even if they didn't, he'd still have had to finish in an area of the paint where he isn't any good.

As snap decisions go, it was far more correct to go to the open teammate then to flail around like an idiot hoping for a call which was unlikely to come, or to force a shot he had a very slim chance to make. That was the correct basketball play, even if the pass recipient was Josh Smith.

[Bravenewworld]

It's not a "statistical nit-pick" to point out the facts of the game, and everything I've been discussing is directly relevant to that particular play based on examination of the player and the video evidence available. He had a bad angle, he's not a good finisher, was getting angled AWAY from the rim by two defenders, he had an excellent shot-blocker in prime position to contest his shot and an open teammate waiting for a catch-and-shoot opportunity.

Yah dude, it is a statistical nit pick. Just look at how you responded to how he is with lay up percentages. You're proclaiming that we cannot consider his accurate numbers to be accurate because of X additional subjective statistical nonsense. We are already diving deeper into any on court decision making process by looking at his 0-3 feet shooting percentage, but you then want to deny that it says what it says by going even deeper.

Again, this is the type of nonsense arguments that take the humanity out of the game and why i dislike any argument that goes beyond basic statistics. Because we can sit here all night long going in circles with "factual" statistics trying to "prove" one another wrong, all while completely forgetting about the humanity of the scenario. Which would be, coach Van Gundy most likely telling him to take the ball to the rim, take the layup if he can and get fouled if he can. Smith, go into this corner and chuck up a 3 if disaster strikes and we absolutely need that outlet. I can almost guarantee that's how the conversation went, anyone who has played organized basketball for ten minutes knows that how the conversation went.
But fact is, he misread the situation and was not aggressive enough to do what he should have done, its as simple as that. Hopefully he learned from it and i can guarantee if he did, the next time we see him in this situation he will take it to the rim.... that's how basketball works, its very basic.

[tsherkin]

Yah dude, it is a statistical nit pick.

No, it's the scope of the situation and is accuracy.

Just look at how you responded to how he is with lay up percentages. You're proclaiming that we cannot consider his accurate numbers to be accurate because of X additional subjective statistical nonsense.

This is exceptionally bad logic. We know that his 0-3 FG% is based on the totality of the shots he takes at the range over the course of a whole game, and thus padded by uncontested opportunities.

Never mind that you're ignoring the probability that he'd end up taking a shot in the 3-10 range (16.7%, as aforementioned), but while he's shooting just under 59% from 0-3 feet on the season, it starts to drop as you consider everything else. First of all, he shoots a lot worse under clock pressure: He shoots 30.8% in the 7-4 second range and 36.4% from 4-0. He shoots 20.7% with 3-6 dribbles, and he's particularly bad with defenders close.

With defenders 0-2 feet in tight, he shoots 44.4% on 2pt shots, and at 2-4 feet, 32.0%. When his touch time is past 2 seconds, his FG% dives as well.

So you're talking about a coast-to-coast shot under tight pressure from two defenders and you're trying to sell nonsense about his flat zone FG% being a stronger indicator than a more accurate understanding of the situation we're specifically discussing, and that's ridiculous to the point of borderline trolloing.

Again, this is the type of nonsense arguments that take the humanity out of the game and why i dislike any argument that goes beyond basic statistics.

If you're not a fan of accuracy or thorough examination, that's your issue, but you can't just "feel out" this specific situation when there are obvious and significant factors which play into his ability to make the shot you're selling as the better idea.

Because we can sit here all night long going in circles with "factual" statistics trying to "prove" one another wrong, all while completely forgetting about the humanity of the scenario. Which would be, coach Van Gundy most likely telling him to take the ball to the rim, take the layup if he can and get fouled if he can.

Apart from how awful an argument this is ("woe is me, forsooth, the humanity!" *swoon*), basketball isn't something where you can assume that the general plan will work. You need to have a brain, and for once, Jennings did the opposite of his reputation and made an intelligent play because he had two guys on him.

I very much doubt a kick-out was the first thing on the minds of Jennings OR Van Gundy, but that doesn't mean it wasn't the best result based on what actually happened on the court.

But fact is, he misread the situation and was not aggressive enough to do what he should have done, its as simple as that.

This is not correct. It is far from fact that he made the wrong decision here. You can repeat it ad nauseum, but trying to force that shot was a mistake each and every time based on the context of a potential shot. You keep assuming that he could get to the rim, but it looks very much like that wasn't going to happen, which is very likely how Brandon read the situation and why he passed in the first place.

[Bravenewworld]

This is not correct. It is far from fact that he made the wrong decision here.

Did it work? No.
And was it a play where 99 out of 100 coaches would have told the point to get to the rim and try to get an easy layup and get fouled if possible? Yes.
Why? Because its a high percentage shot with a high percentage chance of being fouled (as far as chances of being fouled goes).

Okay, then it was clearly the wrong decision and wrong play. Smith was an option on the play and Jennings unnecessarily took that option. Its really as simple as that. And btw, winning teams and leading PGs who have learned their lessons, you wont see make these mistakes... there is a reason for that.
Now, learn from your own mistakes and understand that it was a bad call by Jennings and it literally cost them the game. Which there is nothing wrong with, but it is what it is.