← Team Metrics
Latest

Houston Rockets

2016-17
2016-172017-182018-192019-202020-212021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26
Latest available releaseEvidence released Aug 22, 2026, 8:30 PM UTCLive database

What were the Houston Rockets in 2016-17, and what needed front-office attention?

HOU 2016-17: the clearest roster problems were Rim protection, Interior finishing. The strongest covered areas were Passing connectivity, Rebounding. The main rotation-player dependency cases were James Harden, Trevor Ariza, Ryan Anderson, Clint Capela, Patrick Beverley. Structural basketball need, injuries, replacement lineups, and financial constraints are reported separately.

CoveragePartial8 supported · 3 withheld
Cap positionUnder cap on selected player charges
Next decision dateNo calendar release at this as-of time

What can be trusted

Supported strengths — production, who carries it, and what money is already committed.
Passing connectivity
81st percentile
James Harden carries 41.7%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Balanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Full reading

HOU 2016-17 Passing connectivity: this was a team strength, but much of it came from James Harden. James Harden supplied 41.7% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. Financial commitment is shown separately and does not determine basketball quality.

Rebounding
81st percentile
James Harden carries 27.9%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Heavy or redundant salary already committed here
Full reading

HOU 2016-17 Rebounding: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 80.8 league percentile. James Harden supplied 27.9% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.

What needs attention

The clearest roster problems the evidence supports.
Rim protection
4th percentile
Clint Capela carries 43.6%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Comparatively little salary committed to a critical need
Full reading

HOU 2016-17 Rim protection: this was one of the team's clearest roster problems; production ranked at the 3.8 league percentile. Clint Capela supplied 43.6% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The cap allocation to this critical need was comparatively low.

Interior finishing
15th percentile
Clint Capela carries 30.3%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Underfunded structural need
Full reading

HOU 2016-17 Interior finishing: this was a real roster weakness; production ranked at the 15.4 league percentile. Clint Capela supplied 30.3% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The cap allocation to this structural need was comparatively low.

Every covered basketball function (11)
FunctionReadingLeague percentileLargest contributorRecent availabilitySalary commitment
CreationSupportedMiddle-tier area with one-player risk69th percentileJames Harden · 44.8%No recent availability layer for this seasonCost concentrated in one provider
Defensive event creationSupportedMiddle of the league69th percentileTrevor Ariza · 29.7%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Interior finishingSupportedStructural team problem15th percentileClint Capela · 30.3%No recent availability layer for this seasonUnderfunded structural need
Passing connectivitySupportedTeam strength concentrated in one player81st percentileJames Harden · 41.7%No recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Point-of-attack defense proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldMontrezl HarrellNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
ReboundingSupportedTeam strength81st percentileJames Harden · 27.9%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Rim pressureSupportedMiddle of the league31st percentileJames Harden · 31.7%No recent availability layer for this seasonCost concentrated in one provider
Rim protectionSupportedCritical team problem4th percentileClint Capela · 43.6%No recent availability layer for this seasonComparatively little salary committed to a critical need
ScreeningWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldMontrezl HarrellNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Shooting and spacingSupportedMiddle of the league54th percentileRyan Anderson · 30.4%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Switch coverage proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldMontrezl HarrellNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment

Who the team depends on

What disappears when a player is removed — and whether an observed replacement five exists.
James Harden
Single-skill dependence

HOU did not have strong functional backup for James Harden in creation; removing him cost about 44.8% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Patrick Beverley.

rotation 75%loses 44.8% of creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without James Harden

Nene Hilario · Corey Brewer · Eric Gordon · Patrick Beverley · Sam Dekker

shrunk net 7.572 over 261 possessions — small sample

on floor 6,315 possessions · off floor 2,113 possessions

Trevor Ariza
Single-skill dependence

HOU did not have strong functional backup for Trevor Ariza in event creation; removing him cost about 29.7% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was James Harden.

rotation 71%loses 29.7% of defensive event creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Trevor Ariza

Nene Hilario · Corey Brewer · Eric Gordon · Patrick Beverley · Sam Dekker

shrunk net 7.572 over 261 possessions — small sample

on floor 5,989 possessions · off floor 2,439 possessions

Ryan Anderson
Single-skill dependence

HOU did not have strong functional backup for Ryan Anderson in shooting; removing him cost about 30.4% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Eric Gordon.

rotation 55%loses 30.4% of shooting and spacing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Ryan Anderson

Nene Hilario · Corey Brewer · Eric Gordon · Patrick Beverley · Sam Dekker

shrunk net 7.572 over 261 possessions — small sample

on floor 4,585 possessions · off floor 3,843 possessions

Clint Capela
Single-skill dependence

HOU did not have strong functional backup for Clint Capela in interior finish; removing him cost about 30.3% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Ryan Anderson.

rotation 41%loses 30.3% of interior finishing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Clint Capela

Nene Hilario · Corey Brewer · Eric Gordon · Patrick Beverley · Sam Dekker

shrunk net 7.572 over 261 possessions — small sample

on floor 3,443 possessions · off floor 4,976 possessions

Patrick Beverley
Lineup performance dependence

HOU lineups performed 4.6 points per 100 possessions better with Patrick Beverley than without him. The best supported alternative was [Nene Hilario, Trevor Ariza, Lou Williams, Eric Gordon, James Harden] over 258 possessions.

rotation 53%loses 23.0% of defensive event creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Patrick Beverley

Nene Hilario · Trevor Ariza · Lou Williams · Eric Gordon · James Harden

shrunk net 6.165 over 258 possessions — small sample

on floor 4,491 possessions · off floor 3,937 possessions

Function loss, lineup performance, and replacement-lineup evidence remain separate; none is causal player value.

What injuries change

Recent absences and the basketball needs they created or worsened.

No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season.

Where money is tied up

Cap position and salary allocation — shown beside the basketball picture, never blended into it.
SupportedSelected player charges appeared below the cap, but holds and incomplete roster charges prevent a clean cap-room claim.
Selected player charges
$91.0M
Share of cap
97%
Tax line
$22.3M under
First apron
$26.3M under
Second apron
No governed line that season

Most salary is mapped to passing connectivity; the highest-need area is rim protection. Salary-to-function mapping covers 89% of charges.

Exact figures
Salary cap: $94,143,000Luxury tax line: $113,287,000First apron: $117,287,000Second apron: Selected player charges: $90,956,067Source-reported payroll: $90,956,067 (source-named payroll total; not relabeled as cash or cap)

Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence.

What the evidence cannot answer

Deliberate abstentions — where the database refuses a conclusion rather than guessing.
PartialTeam picture available; recent availability layer unavailable8 of 11 functions supported
  • Point-of-attack defense proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Screening: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Switch coverage proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld

Exact transaction legality: Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence

Team-season situation report. Structural basketball quality, recent availability, player dependence, replacement lineups, and financial position remain separate. No acquisition recommendation, transaction grade, coaching grade, outcome claim, or causal value is inferred.