我說…
————-3/6補充————-

再次的感謝球迷Janice的協助找到更詳細的說明，關於這篇有兩篇更詳細的說明，我之前有找到其中一篇，後來忘了是在哪裡找到的。
Janice，幫我一口氣幫我補充了這篇還外加另一篇，那篇都有提供詳細數據佐證。
大家可以參考看看~~

http://bbs.hupu.com/5174749.html
http://bbs.hupu.com/5170517.html

————-3/6補充結束————-

很感謝球迷「玫玲」分享了這篇他找到的資料，先前我也曾經看過另一篇有更詳盡補充的文章，可惜當時關閉了視窗後，就再也找不到了！早上有試著去找，可惜我一個人勢單力薄，加上要寫新同學的分析文，因此，先貼出「玫玲」分享的這篇給大家參考，數據上我之前看的那篇有比較多解釋，所以，資料應該是正確的。

再此再一次感謝球迷「玫玲」無私分享~~

補充：
當初沒有貼出來是因為覺得這貼寫道…「林書豪失誤愈多愈容易贏球」這段話怕造成球迷誤解，我也一併解釋一下。
撇開失誤跟勝利有沒有關係，不必要的失誤還是要減少，如果林書豪可以做到失誤少也能贏球，是不是表示林書豪又升級了呢！我覺得這觀念可能比較正確，至於球權交給誰，我認為偶爾交給帕森斯跟哈登是無所謂，我也認同這種做法，不過，除非有特殊情況關鍵第四節球權還是要交給正牌主控林書豪。

***************************************

分享這篇在火箭官網的球迷留言–我不確定他提供數據的正確性–這點有賴版主的專業判斷！
〈這是寫給老麥的—不過作者認為老麥應該不會看〉
–原文很長，以下只做摘要翻譯。如有不正確，尚請 指正–
1.從數據分析哈登、小錢和書豪在場上失誤率和球隊勝率的關係。有趣的是：哈登和小錢失誤越多輸球越多，失誤越少勝利越多；相反的書豪失誤越多，球隊反而勝利越多。–這些數據已經很清楚說明球權應該交給誰了。
2.一個好的控球者〈如：書豪〉，即使發生高失誤也能幫助球隊贏球。傳球本來就有失誤的風險，那不全是傳球者的錯，尤其是當你的隊友經常漏接時… (好像是在說Asik吧？lol )〉
3.麥克海爾老愛把關鍵球的處理交給哈登或帕森斯。但不幸的是，本賽季就這點而言，這個選擇已被證明對火箭隊取勝的用處不大。
4.請別老在輸球後說你的球員需要做更好的防守。我們都知道火箭隊的防守很爛，但團隊防守本來就要長時間才能改善。其實，通常情況下，“真正”失敗的原因無關防守，而是有關執行。教練團的計劃經常猶豫不決，重複又僵化，所以球員也經常無法履行它……。
From：Hao F Chen
To Mr. McHale (j/k, he’s never going to read this),
– The Connection Between Turnovers and Victories –
/*Format:
#.
Last name of the player:
Turnovers / Win-Loss / Winning percentage
Note: For turnovers, “#+” equal to “# or more” and “#-” equal to “# or less”
*/

1.Harden
失誤數  勝-敗  勝率
6+ / 2-7 / 22%
4+ / 13-20 / 39%
3- / 18-7 / 72%
2- / 11-3 / 79%
1- / 8-0 / 100%

2.Parsons
失誤數  勝-敗  勝率
4+ / 2-6 / 25%
2- / 23-16 / 59%

3.Lin
失誤數  勝-敗  勝率
1- / 3-6 / 33%
3- / 18-22 / 45%
4+ / 13-6 / 68%
5+ / 6-2 / 75%
6+ / 4-0 / 100%

In my humbly personal opinion, it is quite clear who should be the main ball-handler.

Please don’t get me wrong. Turnovers are never good (By the way, Lin hasn’t ever turned over 9 or more times this season. I truly have no idea where your “home-run theory of 29-points-and-9-turnovers” came from). However, sharing the ball always has the risk of turning it over. It is not always the passer’s fault – especially when you have a teammate who often lets ball slip away.

A good passer could have high TOs due to his willingness to pass the ball. On the other hand, a bad passer – or a ballhog – could have high TOs due to unwise choices of attacking the rim or passing unwisely near the end of 24 seconds.

Attack-the-rim-wise, Lin remains less consistent -though improving- than Harden and Parsons, Rockets’s the other two main ball handlers, so it is understandable why you (Mr. McHale) frequently chose to iso play Harden or play Parsons as ball handler at critical times. Unfortunately, up to this point of current season, your choices had proven little usefulness to Rockets’s victories.

Last but not least, please be more flexible at player rotation. Now nearly everyone could tell when you would rest and play whom. Shouldn’t player rotation correspond to situations on the court in real time, as well? Please prove me wrong if you could, but it seems that your stiff “rotation policy” frequently causes you to be uncertain of what and whom to play at critical times, including today’s loss against Bucks.

Just my two cents. Though the chance is extremely low, hope my two cents wouldn’t just drop into abyss.

Sincerely,
Hao F. C.

—— Ah, I forgot to add:
Please stop saying players need to do better defense during interviews after losses. We all know Rockets’s defense sucks, but defense as a team takes time to improve – a lot of time, in fact. Often the “true” reason of loss wasn’t about defense. It’s about execution. The plans were frequently indecisive and repetitive, so players frequently failed to carry it out, due to correct counter-moves from opponents’ defenses.