Russell Westbrook Triple Double: Good, Bad, And Meh
Posted May 1, 2014, 6:57 AM UTC
1517
I don't care if he isn't shooting well right now, and open 3 isn't a bad look. I also loved the forcing the fastbreak... look at the clock, there was like 4 second left in the quarter.
3
While Westbrook made a high amount of bad plays (like the playground reacharound or not paying attention to his man on defense), I feel like westbrook would improve significantly with a better coach. Throughout this video you can see that the pick and roll with westbrook is deadly. He has become really good at hitting the roll man and if given the opportunity he can consistently score himself by taking it to the rim or pulling up at mid range. But if you barely run any other offense than just pick and roll, teams will adjust and react accordingly. In addition to playing him 48 out of 53 minutes, forcing him to create on almost every posession will wear westbrook out, which explains his pull up jumpers falling short towards the latter half of the game. If OKC had at least some form of offense and if they had a coach who could teach westbrook more control on offense, he would instantly become a top 3 point guard in the league and the Thunder would have a much better shot at the title. In my opinion Scott Brooks has been exposed often enough to warrant a replacement.
And I don't care how wide open he is, the three is just not a good shot for him right now. He's so wide open because Memphis wants him to take that shot. To put it in perspective, shooting 18% from three equals to shooting 27% from two. Would you really want someone shooting 27% to take more shots?
2
One of Coach Nick's worst videos.
1
why?
1
He's usually a very process oriented guy, but here he's judging a lot by whether a shot goes in, if a steal, etc despite whether or not they are good decisions. I get that he's trying to give Westbrook the benefit but it contradicts all of his other stuff.
On the bright side, it says a lot about the quality of his breakdowns that this is considered one of his worst.
1
he hates westbrook's game.
1
Coach Nick is a classic. He really seems like the type that doesn't have the kind of basketball instinct you achieve from playing high level basketball.
-1
Lol.
So a bunch of WIDE OPEN threes (6m50s, 7m08s, 8m23s, 12m30s) that miss are "bad", but a contested three that goes in (10m10s) is "good".
You have to remember that he's taking other factors into account, like how well he's been shooting from 3 in the series (18%), and the shot clock situation. Taking an early shotclock 3, even if it's open, isn't always a good shot. This isn't NBA2k.
Edit: On the 6:50 shot, he even says that considering how badly he's been shooting, thats's a bad shot. Also, there's still 18 seconds on the shot clock. 7:08, still 12 seconds left. 8:23, 18 seconds on the shot clock. At 12:30, it's open, but the lane is also open to attack and get an even better shot.
But if Westbrook had made those "bad" shots, then Coach Nick would've classified them as "good".
I don't think I've seen an instance where he considered a lucky, fluke shot that goes in to be "bad", when arguably it is. For example, the play at 5m10s is "good" because he gets two free throws, even though it's such a head scratching, out of control play.
I just don't like this type of analysis, which is way too result-oriented. It's just so inconsistent.
From what I can tell, I think he expects the viewer to know that the "headscratching" plays are not something you or Russ should replicate, but he'll give him credit since he got the foul/bucket. Maybe not the best way to evaluate players, but I can think of worse. Plus, he's consistent in his message in many other aspects and videos about holding the "process" over the results.
Can you expand on "holding the process over the results"? Not too sure what the word "holding" implies in this context. Because I've watched a lot of his videos, and I feel that he gives larger weight to results, which isn't always right (but isn't always wrong as well).
As for those three point shots I've mentioned, I agree that it's not as simple as the shot quality measure they use in NBA2K. Shot clock is definitely a factor, and I can't refute you there, all those open looks were fairly early in the shot clock. Either way, I just feel iffy giving that made three a "good" rating. Sure, there wasn't much time on the shot clock left, but he had missed 3 straight threes. Probably just splitting hairs here, but that play is more a "meh" to me. But I still think it highlights Coach Nick's bias for results over process.
I liked the excuse at 8m56s that he needs to drive that ball. Where? right into gasol or to the right where allen is closing on him. Gasol isn't even guarding perkins (because perkins is so bad) most of the time, it aint easy with gasol just waiting for you.
I think the point Coach Nick is trying to get across here is that Russ ought to look to pass instead of launching so many pull-up threes at a detrimentally inefficient rate (18%).
I agree.
But the video's aim is to grade every single play that Russ was involved in that night. It's just wildly inconsistent and of little merit when you're grading plays off the results rather than the process.
I agree that Russ shouldn't be launching so many threes. But if you're gonna label wide open shots as "bad" because he's historically not a good 3 point shooter, then don't label a contested shot as "good" just because it went in. Where's the logic in that?