Thunder 74, Bulls 80.
This is only Vegas Summer league, but if you followed the Thunder last season I have a question: When do you ever remember the Thunder equaling or besting the opponent in three point shots attempted. Ever?
We were by far the lightest 3fga shooting team in the association last year, but maybe things are beginning to change. Tonight we hoisted 19 of them, tying the Bulls, which has to be a first for a the Thunder. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong, but 19 is a lot for the Thunder. We were the only team that attempted less than 1000 of them all season. We averaged a mere 11 or so per game and the league average is over 18, so 19 is a big step up.
But, regardless of that fact, the Thunder still lost to the Bulls largely by turning the ball over at a record pace in the second quarter (9 times) and only putting 14 points on the board. 31 points in the first half is nothing to write home about. Also the Thunder really failed to defend the perimeter. The Bulls seemed like they were just splashing away from deep with little resistance. Anthony Roberson was 9/16 and kept draining big shots.
I thought it interesting that the first two offensive possessions for the Thunder featured Lord Byron Mullins posting up deep in the paint. He scored on the first with a little lefty hook, and he missed on the second little turnaround, but he looked good and comfortable. More on that later.
- Kyle Weaver started at the point and logged 35 minutes, only being spelled by Keith Mcleod for a bit in the absence of Livingston or Westbrook. Weaver was sort of hit and miss tonight; he had 2 blocks, 4 boards and 4 assists to go with his 5 points, but he also had 7 fouls and 4 turns. I thought he handled the occasional trap and press pretty well. Those aren’t where his turns came from. They came from him trying to be tricky with behind the back passes and forcing the issue in traffic. I think he can be our third PG, but he needs to master the safe pass before he gets Pistol Pete fancy.
- As mentioned, Lord Byron was getting touches tonight. He had 7 points (3/9 shooting) and 7 boards, 6 of which were O-rebs. But the best part of the Mullens experience tonight was when he was being interviewed by Antonio Harvey and the other guy (name?) for the NBA broadcast, he mentioned that the team and his trainers already knew that he had a solid post game, and that he was emphasizing his jumpshot now to balance it out…really? Thunder fans are still waiting to see the post game.
- James Harden had another fine night with 20 points, 5 assists and 2 boards to sort of off set his 4 turns. He was 4/9 from deep and is now at 37.5% from trey land in Vegas. He’s also shooting 50% from the field overall in Vegas. He is going to be a nice player for the Thunder.
- D.J. White was his smooth as silk self once again with 15 and 8 in only 25 minutes. He’s looking to be an excellent late first round pickup. He is so money with the pick and pop, ala Joe Smith or David West. He’s now shooting 60% from the field in Vegas, and sitting at about 11 and 5 in just over 19 mpg.
- Darth Vaden had a respectable evening with 14 points on 5/9 shooting. He buried a deep jumper falling down and off balance, and then later airballed a three with a few seconds left in the game. I think he is going to be a very useful streaky shooter for the Thunder. One shot that sticks in my mind was a little head fake and side step to create space for a deep field goal. One second you will get the ESPN highlight game winning shot, the next you’ll wonder why he’s in uniform. But he’s now shooting 50% from the field and 55% from trey land in Vegas, so there is some promise.
- Poor Antonio Harvey commenting about the Thunder roster tonight and talking in depth about some of the sort of lesser known assets mentioned how much he liked Earl Watson and how much he thought Earl brought to the table.
- Ibaka has a lot of energy and a lot of athleticism, but his shots weren’t falling tonight. He did grab 5 boards.
- I think Devon Hardin’s game was worth a mention tonight. Devon had 9 points (7 of which were from the line), 4 boards, an assist and a steal in just under 15 minutes. I like his game. As Antonio Harvey mentioned he is a banger. He likes the contact and will protect the rim and take the charge. I don’t think he’s under any allusions about him being an offensive threat. I think he knows he’s there to patrol the paint and play tough defense. I like his athleticism and I can see him being sort of an Erving Johnson type of player for the Thunder.
What is it with the NBA.Com box score? Every time I check it it never has the Thunder logo, but the opposing team’s is always there…We are being snubbed!
According to the schedule we play tomorrow afternoon in the early game (4 pm Eastern) against the Mavs. Go Thunder!!
0-4? Dang that smarts. Good write-up though Royce I appreciate how you emphasize the positives. I can’t believe we tied them in 3PTFGA. Can’t wait til we bring that during the season. And Kyle Weaver’s line is pretty abysmal. Go Thunde!!
@Gar
I appreciate it. Even though Joe wrote this one. But I’ll take credit. I’m good at doing that.
A nice line from Arnovitz about Harden:
“In eight days, James Harden has yet to take a truly questionable shot. He’s the most measured rookie in his class on the court. Even his turovers are of the “… but it was a good idea” variety.”
If I remember the scouts all said Harden was the most NBA ready, but his ceiling wasn’t the highest. Looks like they were right about NBA-ready. Do you agree with them?
Also I like how you have a nickname for all the players. What’s your nickname for the team?
@Gar
I think he actually has a pretty high ceiling. He is absolutely NBA ready though. He can step on the court and play RIGHT NOW.
Uh… Thunder?
@Gar
They took 19+ 3 attempts only 4 times last season. Once shooting well (12-21 against PHX 12-8), once average, twice poorly. 4 losses but that is a small sample. They only got more attempts than the opponent 12 times going 4-8 but they were worse when they shot less- 18-48. (I guess there were 4 ties.)
Only a few games and it is summer league and so it doesn’t mean hardly anything but Gary Forbes is shooting well.
The Lakers find people others miss. Including Monds of OSU. Is he legit? Portland did well taking Pendergraph and Cunningham late. They look ahead on readiness compared to Mullens.
Thunder did better than normal when they won rebounding, getting to line, turnovers, limited fouls given and got more assists.
Earl Calloway doing alright- for the Hornets.
Livingston shooting below 30% in Vegas, but there are a few guys even colder.
Add steals and blocks per game and Weaver has more than all but about 5 guys in summer league.
Blair signed for something like 4 years 1.6 mil. An absolute steal of a value. Lots of teams will kick themsleves for not getting him a few spots earlier in the second round.
Taj Gibson having a few good games.
I really always liked Blair. I actually hoped and wrote that I would like to see the Thunder move up to get Blair with the pick that we used to take Mullins. I never thought that he would go lower. Crazy.
I think you could say that winning rebounding, getting to the line, limiting turnovers and fouls and getting more assists is a winning strategy if it’s combined with good offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency. When we did those things, we often were clicking and were more efficient.
I also liked Pendergraph. I thought he could do 99 percent of what Jordan Hill could do for a lot less money.
Yeah I know you were for Blair big as were others. I was more on Pendergraph but I know you and others liked him too. Mullens had more limited support. He is a Presti pick.
Blair may have gotten $2.6 million over 4 years with the 4th year partially guaranteed but it is still a bargain.
Summer league reminds that compared to most draft picks below 20 there are lots of guys with equivalent stats out there looking for the minimum. It really takes a fine eye to pick one who makes a difference. Ibaka and Mullens are exotic but they still have to produce. White was more conventional and far more likely to work out.
@Crow There were 5 games where they shot 5+ more than the other team, we lost them all and only one was a close game, DEN 114, OKC 113 on 2/4. In the 16 games where we were equal or better on # of attempts, we shot the higher percentage only 6 times. On the other hand, there were several times, including one of the wins against SAS, where the opponent shot at least twice as many 3s, but we shot a much better percentage. In the home SAS win, we made the same number of threes they did, but they attempted 19 vs. our 7. So more attempts aren’t always better, but with better shooters this year, it can’t hurt.
@Tapdog72
Your absolutely right, there is no perfect thing that if you do this, you will win. It’s a collective for sure. Teams need all 4 of the 4 factors or at least 3, the first being efficiency, to have a winning scenario.
The reason why the whole three ball thing came up is because of a Hollinger article from late in the season (which I applied to the Thunder), where he made very valid points about teams that shoot threes, regardless if they are only mediocre at it, generally win more games. Simple as that. We shot the fewest, and we shot them pretty poorly, and we didn’t win a lot of games. We were the third worst percentage, and far fewest attempts.
It really comes down to efficiency. If a team embraces the judicious use of the three, it likely has better efficiency than a team that shys away from it. For example, the corner three is the best shot in the game because it is the shortest three, really just a bit longer than a long two, and you get 50% higher return on the points. So it behooves a team to put that tool in the tool box and use it when it presents itself because the return is great.
With Hardin they probably increase 3 attempts and improve 3pt FG% but how much they improve is hard to say.
Looking broader than just the 3 pointer this study
http://www.3hoopsfans.com/category/fun-with-numbers/page/3/
says the Thunder took a shot set that had the 5th lowest expected payoff then shot the 5th worst even for an equivalent set of shots. Add poor selectionm to poor shooting and you get last place on effective field goal percentage.
The coaches need to draw up better plays, make them work, enforce the right shots by the right guys and the players have to execute and hit them.
Good stuff Crow. That shows me a few things. I remember reading last year that the way to beat the Spurs is with the midrange game. They are good at defending the three bomb, and they are solid on interior defense, but they were soft in between. What’s interesting is that the Thunder beat them twice, and had a close third game as well, but lost a fourth, so essentially a split. For a 23 win team against a 54 win team, that’s significant.
And what do the Thunder shoot a lot of? Midrange shots….
I thought you might find that study of interest Joe.
One way to beat the Spurs might be to shoot the mid-range because they make shooting the 3 pt shot and inside so difficult (Dean Oliver thought so and advised them to do it in the playoffs for the Sonics against them a few years ago) though the other way is to be good enough to be able to get the shots you want, which are higher value then hit a good percentage. They are playing the percentages and want you give up and take the mid-range and hope you can beat the odds because usually you aren’t going to.
Now I guess the Thunder did for a few games but usually that is just walking right into the spider’s web or the chess master’s trap.
Also OKC shot the midrange the worst in the league and had the 3rd most midrange attempts. So that strategy was disastrous most of the time against most teams.
Some midrange is necessary (probably at leasst 25-30% of shots, Orland at 32%) but most teams take too many. Even some good teams.
It takes discipline but this still seems to be me to be one of the most necessary, easiest changes to improve your offensive efficiency.
The average 3 pointer shooter in the league has a higher scoring efficiency than any midrange shooter in the league. Any, even Jason Terry, Ray Allen and Steve Nash.
It is far easier to be average or better at the 3 pointer than to shoot a mid-range shoot with an efficiency of an average basketball play including turnovers. I don’t think any player in history has shot the midrange on average well enough to enough to equal the average non-midrange shot.
It is sometimes a necessity but to be avoided otherwise unless you are really open and can hit it at at least 50% or more. Players think they can, from what they do in practice, but they rarely do.
Thunder lost by an average of 6 points. About 2 points of that was more turnovers than the opponent. Getting to the line and rebounding a little better basically canceled that out. The remaining 6 point gap from being a .500 team is from shooting and defending the shot. At least 2 points is from taking too many midrange and too few 3 point shots. Small but this a game were small things decide close games. Harden could provide the tipping point back into a better shot distribution.