MavsBoard

Full Version: ARTICLES & PODS: ROSTER OVERHAUL NEEDED
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
I have decided to try summarizing articles and pods in a separate thread, as the deep dives fit somewhat awkwardly into the mega-threads. We’ll see if this helps. 

MMB: THE ROSTER ISN”T GOOD ENOUGH

Joe Hulbert wrote an article, and accompanied it with a podcast, about the team. He re-watched the playoff games in response to a lot of fingers pointed in Rick’s and Luka's direction and came away convinced that the roster needs a major overhaul. He thinks this roster’s ceiling is making the playoffs and MAYBE getting out of the first round if a lot of things go right, but that no coach can take them beyond that. He has some suggestions on how to fix things. 


BIG-PICTURE CONCERNS

The Mavericks have a history of operating on a patchwork basis at a number of levels. They don’t have an overarching philosophy, whether we’re talking about player acquisition, or offensive/defensive systems. They have typically made moves to address particular holes that need filling at the time, and that has led to a cupboard of one-dimensional, ill-fitting pieces. 

Luka can’t be blamed for hogging the ball. The front office needs to get him a second option who actually justifies reducing some of his usage. One-level scorers need to go, in favor of two- or three-level players. (He refers to the three levels of scoring as the ability to get to the rim, reliably complete jump shots inside the arc, and reliably hit threes — if you can do one of those things you’re a one-level scorer, and on up.) You can have a guy who is a one-level scorer if his one level is hitting threes, but you mostly need guys who can score in multiple ways. 

Without a second option, the offense dies when Luka sits, the team is overly dependent on high-variance three-point shooting, and the offense tends to stagnate at the ends of games. 

On the defensive end, the Mavs need a new philosophy and a clear plan. Overhauling the roster will be necessary to effectively improve the defense. Putting different faces in the same roles won’t be good enough. Finding a more versatile center is the first step. But they also have to spend some money/assets on long wings. The other teams who have made headway in the postseason are able to mix up their coverages and attacks, while Dallas cannot.

After putting together a coherent plan, the Mavs’ needs 1A and 1B are a secondary ball handler and a proper center. The one-trick ponies need to be weeded out or limited to smaller roles and replaced with better overall players whose skills and abilities match the way the Mavs want to play.
 

CURRENT PLAYERS

RICHARDSON. The offseason’s marquee move for JRich made sense on paper, but was a disaster in practice.  Josh is an above-average defender for his position. However, he is not just a zero on offense, he actually tanks the O when he is on the floor, hanging on to the ball and dribbling out possessions that too often end in a missed shot or a turnover. He takes more long twos than just about anyone in the league, cannot complete the absurd number of open shots Luka creates for him, can’t get to the rim even against the weaker defenders who end up guarding  him, and he kills the momentum. He has had these same problems — lack of touch around the basket, lack of burst, etc. — at multiple teams, and it’s definitely a problem with him, rather than the coach or the scheme.  It is hard to operate as a playmaker when you can’t shoot, and nobody closes out hard on Josh, no matter how many shots he makes on the night. Not a guy who is suited to the playoffs. Has to go. 

BRUNSON.  Brunson has done far better than we could have expected as an offensive option, but is limited by his size in how much he can get to the basket and finish there. He does have a good touch around the basket, which separates him from JRich. But he doesn’t have a good pull-up jumper or an elite three-point shot. Under the current roster construction, Brunson is asked to do far too much. He doesn’t have the floor vision or the size to take on a bigger role. What he does extremely well is attack mismatches in second units and feast on smaller guards. However, he struggles against bigger players, and carving out a larger role for him only results in dwindling efficiency. He is good enough to keep around, but not to take on a starting role.

HARDAWAY. Tim is another excellent shooter, but cannot consistently get downhill or create for others. He would benefit greatly from a secondary ballhandler, who could get him cleaner looks and take the pressure off him to create. 

BURKE.  A microwave scorer, but doesn’t do much of anything else. 

GREEN. Was not the greatest choice at #18. Think someone at the draft probably thought the team needed defense, so they picked Green. That is not a smart way to draft, since the Mavs were not planning on having to rely on him this season. At that point in the draft, you draft a guy for the next five years, not to fill a short-term need. They should have picked the best player available at that slot, rather than a player who might have been able to play a little defense now. If they need to use a youngster in a trade, may not be much in the way of demand for Josh. 

PORZINGIS. KP is an excellent shooter, but doesn’t add much else offensively. If the Mavs decide to keep him, Joe would back him to have an improved season. However, even if he bounces back, he still doesn’t fill the need for a true center who can roll to the rim. Joe would try using him as a four offensively, and putting a real center next to him. Thinking of guys like Richaun Holmes, Larry Nance, Jr., and Jarrett Allen. 

POWELL. Is a good rim runner, and can offer perimeter defense, but cannot defend traditional centers or protect the rim, and is not a shooter. 

WILLIE.  A slightly better rim protector than Powell, but has no offensive game. Despite his superior athleticism and great looks from Luka, he shoots only 53% at the rim, and only 65% on open dunks. You almost have to try to be that bad. Defensively, he gets some showy blocks, but the reason he has to make those acrobatic plays is usually because he’s out of position in the first place. 

KLEBER.  Maxi adds perimeter shooting and solid defense on the weak side and the perimeter, but does not protect the rim. He is good enough to be in the rotation, but if the Mavs need to trade some guys, he would probably be one of the players in demand.

MELLI. Not an NBA-level player. Might be okay to stand at the three-point line for like six minutes per game. 

BOBAN. It’s okay to keep a one-way specialist like Bobi to come off the end of the bench in the special situations where he can be helpful, but he shouldn’t be a part of the regular rotation. 

BIGS AS A GROUP. This is a collection of specialists. There is no proper center on the roster. The opponent can tell what coverage they are going to run by the big they put on the floor. With KP at center, the Mavs tend to run the increasingly ineffective drop coverage, to account for his lack of mobility. This doesn’t suit the rest of the roster, as none of the guards is effective at defending the point of attack. With Willie and Powell, the Mavs play more aggressive coverages, but they don’t have the personnel to commit to them for very long. Maxi and DFS are the only players long enough and aggressive enough to challenge the other opposition players while the Mavs are doubling up the opponent’s top scorer. They need more long wings if they want to defend aggressively. 


SUMMARY

In addition to better players, the Mavs need a consistent philosophy on which to build a roster, instead of making piecemeal reactionary choices. Drafting Josh Green, a defensive project, doesn’t fit well with trading for JJ Redick, an ultimate win-now piece. This is an extremely talent-starved roster. The very young players aren’t ready to contribute. The veterans aren’t good enough to play the roles they have been assigned. 

We can look at well-constructed rosters like Atlanta, Denver, and the Clippers as examples of how to put together teams that play somewhat like the Mavericks. The Mavs had only two of the best 10 players in the first round — Luka and Tim. On some nights, KP might have squeaked into ninth or tenth place. The conference finalists  have very few one-way players. They can mix up their actions on both ends of the floor. 

The logic of assembling the team made sense on paper. Surround Luka with shooters in a five-out scheme, or run a four-out scheme with an athletic big man. The problem was with the execution in filling out those roles. No one but Luka could create, forcing them to rely on threes. When the shots weren’t falling, they had no way to adjust. In that scheme, you need multiple guys who can consistently get downhill. 

It is not going to be easy to completely overhaul the roster in one offseason, especially since the Mavs have almost no draft capital and a dearth of players that rebuilding teams are likely to covet in exchange for their stars/good players. The new secondary playmaker will probably need to be an older guard, along the lines of Mike Conley. If they spend their free agency money in that direction, they might be able to also get a good big man who doesn’t break the bank, with a little luck. 

Overall, the Mavericks need to develop a consistent and clear philosophy about how to play, and match the players they acquire to the plan. They should stop acquiring rotation players by looking for discount solutions in reaction to specific deficiencies, and should spend some money/assets in acquiring versatile two-way players who have the quality to perform well against top-level competition. This summer may be their last best chance to upgrade to a roster suitable to Luka's talent. 

https://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2021/6/22/...-porzingis
Boooo, I read the title and thought you were gonna answer my plea to put you and Dan together for a podcast!

Great stuff though! Enjoyed reading the cliff’s notes!
Sounds like they would agree with the Collins + Reggie Jackson plan.
The more I read this, the more I think about how cheap MC has become as an owner. I get it, because Donnie wasted a lot of his money trying to figure out how to buy a championship. Just wonder if we will ever get back to a point where he is ok with overspending on players. If he wants to get back to being relevant he’ll need to. He just needs to demand results if he does again. If he doesn’t, we’re in for a bumpy ride yet again, but this time around, we might not have a superstar who is willing to stick that out with him.
I agree with the general notion of the piece, just not with the overall overhaul. It is just about sliding guys into correct roles and most of them are asked to do too much than they are able to. Does it take one or more right guys for everything to slide into correct roles (and how many current guys you lose while trying), that is the question.
(07-01-2021, 04:12 AM)mavsluvr Wrote: [ -> ] 
MMB: THE ROSTER ISN”T GOOD ENOUGH

It is not going to be easy to completely overhaul the roster in one offseason, especially since the Mavs have almost no draft capital and a dearth of players that rebuilding teams are likely to covet in exchange for their stars/good players. The new secondary playmaker will probably need to be an older guard, along the lines of Mike Conley. If they spend their free agency money in that direction, they might be able to also get a good big man who doesn’t break the bank, with a little luck. 


Thank you so much for the time commitment it took to write that up for everyone.  Great job.

Since this is the podcast thread, John Hollinger tied Dallas to Conley yesterday on his pod with Nate Duncan.  No special inside knowledge (though recall John did suggest Rick and the Mav's might part ways when the shakeup in Boston occured).  He simply observed the need and the fact that Dallas went hard after Conley several years back.  The two of them don't think it is a slam dunk that Conley is back in Utah.  They probably maxed out their upside and might have to shed some salary (suggested Favors and Ingles) in order to keep Conley.  They think Conley could go for anywhere from $40mm-$60mm over two years.  If a team doesn't have enough cap room, they could slide some extra money into a partially guaranteed third year (where have I heard that before).  

One other thing as it relates to KP.  As your note indicates, the issue that breaks the camels back with KP isn't where to put him on O or whether Luka looks for him.  It is his D.  He forces you to play a completely different style than when he's not in the game.  Clearly it doesn't work since the team is 6.8 points worse defensively when he plays.  If there was enough force to his offensive game to punish opponents who go small in the playoffs, maybe you could live with that.  But he doesn't.  We are going to generate O with or without him.  But with him, we aren't stopping anyone at the defensive end.
(07-01-2021, 05:26 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]The more I read this, the more I think about how cheap MC has become as an owner. I get it, because Donnie wasted a lot of his money trying to figure out how to buy a championship. Just wonder if we will ever get back to a point where he is ok with overspending on players. If he wants to get back to being relevant he’ll need to. He just needs to demand results if he does again. If he doesn’t, we’re in for a bumpy ride yet again, but this time around, we might not have a superstar who is willing to stick that out with him.

Is it cheapness or an inability to get players to sign on the dotted line.  We've gone after some good names the last two years, but they pick teams that are more clearly contenders or we don't offer the years they want because we are saving up for Sammy Superstar.
These recent Mark Cuban interviews ring with reactionary cries. "We thought we needed defense but it turns out we need a secondary ball handler with size who can score." Mark has to piecemeal things if he is in charge because he doesn't know what he's doing!!

The only hope is whether Nico/Fin/Kidd can come up with an actual plan and philosophy that sepercedes and replaces Mark's reactionary-ism. If they're proactive and expert enough maybe Mark will sit back and watch, and rubber stamp their decisions. If there is a void in vision, planning and action, though, it will be filled by whatever Mark things the need is this particular season.
I feel silly because I've mostly bought into whatever the new plan for each season has been. 

Big question: Are Nico and Fin able to address the need for a consistant roster building philosophy? Are they able to come up with the kind of vision and then plan that are needed?
(07-01-2021, 07:37 AM)fifteenth Wrote: [ -> ]These recent Mark Cuban interviews ring with reactionary cries. "We thought we needed defense but it turns out we need a secondary ball handler with size who can score."


Maybe that is what his ADVISORS were telling him. 

I think it is impossible for us to sort through what RC, Donnie, Voulgaris, and Cuban were responsible for these last few offseasons. If the same problems persist then we can be confident it was Cuban. If things change drastically then it was probably more on his advisors.
@"mavsluvr" thanks for the great summary, these are such a gift to this community!




mavsluvr Wrote:Josh is an above-average defender for his position




To the above quote, it is crazy to me how much this sentiment is just parroted. People just say and assume "Josh is a good/above average defender" when the reality is NOT that. Group think on defensive reputation is one of the hardest things to combat in the NBA IMO.
(07-01-2021, 08:26 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe that is what his ADVISORS were telling him. 

I think it is impossible for us to sort through what RC, Donnie, Voulgaris, and Cuban were responsible for these last few offseasons. If the same problems persist then we can be confident it was Cuban. If things change drastically then it was probably more on his advisors.


My working hypothesis at the moment is, like what you say, that Cuban reflects what his advisors are telling him AND ad-libs (in conversatin and action) when his basketball people aren't acting with robust vision and plan. I'm coming to the conclusion that Donnie and Rick were content to existing with Mark in this way.

What I'd love to see is evidence that Nico/Fin present more of a team building vision/philosophy and plan. If they do this then maybe what spills out of Mark's mouth will begin to reflect this, andmore imporantly, the team buiding moving forward will reflect this.
Problem is Cuban is changing advisors as he goes along. Bob wasn't the first example as far as I know. Even if new guys build a great strategy things can go sour with first obstacle and Cuban moving to another direction because one of his friend advisors convinced him it is better to do so.
BACKGROUND THOUGHTS ON ROSTER NEEDS AND CHOICES

While it doesn't really help to remake the roster at the moment, my belief is that a huge part of the Mavs issues stem from the fact that their franchise's ability in player evaluation and player development has been anemic. And that's probably because Cuban decided early on that he wanted to build a faster way, through trades (players already developed by other teams) rather than by the hard slow work of sifting through prospects, developing an eye for potential, drafting smartly, scouring the GL and end of rosters for overlooked prospects, and then figuring out how to mold that potential into an NBAer.

They found one every so often, but it's been very sporadic. There has been no pipeline regularly feeding the roster and reducing the need for desperate trades and overpriced free agents to fill way too many holes. However, when there was no real spending limit, they could just keep adding salary until something clicked, and eventually reached the top.

But with the 2011 changes, and with Cuban deciding to be frugal, that spending freedom stopped. And the large pool of talent they had gathered was frittered away, eroding rather than being sustained and replaced.

Unfortunately, that didn't come with a pivot to the evaluation-development model. Instead they just took fewer shots at desperate trades and overpriced free agents. And the result has been a real shortage of talent.

Getting some young players in the mix isn't the actual answer - it has to be a combo of being able to get the RIGHT players, and also knowing how to develop them into useful NBA help.

I want to see a path forward now that's promising, but I see nothing in these new hires to suggest a change in approach. I was hoping they would grab a guy with a track record of producing a productive player pipeline, but they instead are going to be trying to develop a GM from raw potential rather than an expert in finding and developing young talent who can fill needs.

SO WHERE DO THEY GO FROM HERE?

With this approach, the only real immediate answer is another star at the top of the roster, who then makes other players better just by the fact that they are asked to do less, and can stay within their strengths. Your #2 guy before is now #3 and competing with 3rd bests, rather than 2nd bests. Take that all the way down the roster, and suddenly everyone is "better" in their role. Getting that 2nd star changes everything; but if they can't get that done, I fear the available options Cuban and friends opt for will be like putting lipstick on a pig.

I'd literally strip the roster and all assets to get that guy. Role players can be replaced. But they have no path to add a star.

Star or no star, I still would hope they will turn to an EMPHASIS on scouting, evaluation, development, drafting, etc to create that desperately-needed pipeline of young and affordable talent. Be the best, not just get by. That would take some time - it's not an instant answer. But if they don't do everything they can to go down that road, we'll be sitting here in 5 years with the same issues and the same lack of answers. Even with another star, you need that pipeline to fill the roster with affordable players, and the knowledge you can trade some of them and then go find and develop more.
Tim Cato had an article on the athletic.   No real intel, but just some speculation and adding some of his thoughts at the moment.  I am not as good as Mavsluvr as summarizing, but here are the brief notes:

-Doesn't see the Mavs trading KP.  Although also doesn't think he is a long term fit here either.  Mostly thinks any trade for him would be such a small return, that it is better to keep him and try to build his value up.

-Most likely targets for Mavs: Derozan, Lowry, Conley, Powell, Collins

Derozan-Not as concerned at his lack of three point range.   With KP, Dallas needs more shot creation beside Luka and Brunson.  Said he is still gathering his thoughts on Derozan though.

Lowry/Conley-  Thinks they could mesh with Luka.  Although Dallas would be gambling on getting several good seasons for aging guards with injury histories while knowing they only fit Luka's timeline for a fine amount of time.  

Powell could be seen as a better fitting piece than Hardaway with similar offense and better defense.  Although he is more limited guarding guards.  Not a dramatic change, but could be subtle improvement.

Collins-   Will probably resign in ATL.   Thinks Collins is more attainable than Ball.  Cato prefers the fit to Ball on this team though.  Has questions how a Collins-KP pairing would work.  

How Kidd will coach-  Says Stotts would be a good lead assistant, but doesn't think he would be interested.   Kidd's team typically have slow tempos and Luka likes to play this way too.   He mentions Richaun Holmes here and think if we play at a slower tempo him and KP could work.
(07-01-2021, 04:12 AM)mavsluvr Wrote: [ -> ]
The Mavs had only two of the best 10 players in the first round — Luka and Tim. On some nights, KP might have squeaked into ninth or tenth place. The conference finalists  have very few one-way players. They can mix up their actions on both ends of the floor. 



https://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2021/6/22/...-porzingis

[Image: RAW4R6k3nJcnJJ]
Huh? Huh

Dorian was probably our 2nd best player in the series, if defense is still considered part of the game.
(07-01-2021, 09:01 AM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]BACKGROUND THOUGHTS ON ROSTER NEEDS AND CHOICES

While it doesn't really help to remake the roster at the moment, my belief is that a huge part of the Mavs issues stem from the fact that their franchise's ability in player evaluation and player development has been anemic. And that's probably because Cuban decided early on that he wanted to build a faster way, through trades (players already developed by other teams) rather than by the hard slow work of sifting through prospects, developing an eye for potential, drafting smartly, scouring the GL and end of rosters for overlooked prospects, and then figuring out how to mold that potential into an NBAer.

They found one every so often, but it's been very sporadic. There has been no pipeline regularly feeding the roster and reducing the need for desperate trades and overpriced free agents to fill way too many holes. However, when there was no real spending limit, they could just keep adding salary until something clicked, and eventually reached the top.

But with the 2011 changes, and with Cuban deciding to be frugal, that spending freedom stopped. And the large pool of talent they had gathered was frittered away, eroding rather than being sustained and replaced.

Unfortunately, that didn't come with a pivot to the evaluation-development model. Instead they just took fewer shots at desperate trades and overpriced free agents. And the result has been a real shortage of talent.

Getting some young players in the mix isn't the actual answer - it has to be a combo of being able to get the RIGHT players, and also knowing how to develop them into useful NBA help.

I want to see a path forward now that's promising, but I see nothing in these new hires to suggest a change in approach. I was hoping they would grab a guy with a track record of producing a productive player pipeline, but they instead are going to be trying to develop a GM from raw potential rather than an expert in finding and developing young talent who can fill needs.

SO WHERE DO THEY GO FROM HERE?

With this approach, the only real immediate answer is another star at the top of the roster, who then makes other players better just by the fact that they are asked to do less, and can stay within their strengths. Your #2 guy before is now #3 and competing with 3rd bests, rather than 2nd bests. Take that all the way down the roster, and suddenly everyone is "better" in their role. Getting that 2nd star changes everything; but if they can't get that done, I fear the available options Cuban and friends opt for will be like putting lipstick on a pig.

I'd literally strip the roster and all assets to get that guy. Role players can be replaced. But they have no path to add a star.

Star or no star, I still would hope they will turn to an EMPHASIS on scouting, evaluation, development, drafting, etc to create that desperately-needed pipeline of young and affordable talent. Be the best, not just get by. That would take some time - it's not an instant answer. But if they don't do everything they can to go down that road, we'll be sitting here in 5 years with the same issues and the same lack of answers. Even with another star, you need that pipeline to fill the roster with affordable players, and the knowledge you can trade some of them and then go find and develop more.

Not going to knock this philosophy too hard...it does make sense to at least try it.  I do think this is an example of leaning on numbers/chasing numbers that can backfire on an Organization.

Seems like this is a strategy that could be more effectively used by Destination City teams.
(07-01-2021, 09:30 AM)Mavs2021 Wrote: [ -> ][Image: RAW4R6k3nJcnJJ]
Huh? Huh

Dorian was probably our 2nd best player in the series, if defense is still considered part of the game.

He had the toughest matchup but gave up 65% from the field against Kawhi. 50% against PG (17/34). Eight 3s and 12 additional FTA. DFS is probably the Mavs best perimeter defender but just like in 2020 bigger and stronger wings bullied him. Sucks that Kleber wasn´t healthy. In 2020 he was getting torched as well but at least forced them to take contested jumpers instead of layups.

Just looking at the matchup data THJ and Luka actually did a better job against the Clippers duo. Especially Luka.

PG against:
DFS 17/34 FG 8/19 3s 11/12 FT, 7tov
THJ 11/20 FG 3/8 3s 4/4FT, 4tov
Doncic 2/8 FG 0/2 3s 4/5 FT, 1tov

Kawhi against:
Kleber 22/36 FG 6/14 3s 15/17 FT, 4tov
DFS 17/26 FG, 4/9 3s 6/7 FT, 6tov
THJ 9/17 FG 2/5 3s 2/2 FT, 3tov
Doncic 7/16 FG 3/7 3s 4/4 FT, 1tov

Conclusion. Sample size to small. Not to mention that it is nearly impossible to evaluate individual defense in the broken Mavs scheme against the Clippers. But I don´t think that DFS deserves special consideration for his attempts to play defense.
The slower and more iso heavy half court offense in the playoffs really helps Luka on defense. Was the same last season. He has the size and strength to keep up with bigger wings. Really hope that the new coaching staff can build on that.
(07-01-2021, 09:49 AM)dynamicalVoid Wrote: [ -> ]Not going to knock this philosophy too hard...it does make sense to at least try it.  I do think this is an example of leaning on numbers/chasing numbers that can backfire on an Organization.

Seems like this is a strategy that could be more effectively used by Destination City teams.

Not sure what "philosophy" and what "strategy" you are speaking of. And whether those terms are referring to the same thing, or something different, that I mentioned. My post was about the fact that Cuban has implemented one approach to roster-building, and I think they would be much better served by another.
(07-01-2021, 04:12 AM)mavsluvr Wrote: [ -> ]I have decided to try summarizing articles and pods in a separate thread, as the deep dives fit somewhat awkwardly into the mega-threads. We’ll see if this helps. 

MMB: THE ROSTER ISN”T GOOD ENOUGH

Joe Hulbert wrote an article, and accompanied it with a podcast, about the team. He re-watched the playoff games in response to a lot of fingers pointed in Rick’s and Luka's direction and came away convinced that the roster needs a major overhaul. He thinks this roster’s ceiling is making the playoffs and MAYBE getting out of the first round if a lot of things go right, but that no coach can take them beyond that. He has some suggestions on how to fix things. 


BIG-PICTURE CONCERNS

The Mavericks have a history of operating on a patchwork basis at a number of levels. They don’t have an overarching philosophy, whether we’re talking about player acquisition, or offensive/defensive systems. They have typically made moves to address particular holes that need filling at the time, and that has led to a cupboard of one-dimensional, ill-fitting pieces. 

Luka can’t be blamed for hogging the ball. The front office needs to get him a second option who actually justifies reducing some of his usage. One-level scorers need to go, in favor of two- or three-level players. (He refers to the three levels of scoring as the ability to get to the rim, reliably complete jump shots inside the arc, and reliably hit threes — if you can do one of those things you’re a one-level scorer, and on up.) You can have a guy who is a one-level scorer if his one level is hitting threes, but you mostly need guys who can score in multiple ways. 

Without a second option, the offense dies when Luka sits, the team is overly dependent on high-variance three-point shooting, and the offense tends to stagnate at the ends of games. 

On the defensive end, the Mavs need a new philosophy and a clear plan. Overhauling the roster will be necessary to effectively improve the defense. Putting different faces in the same roles won’t be good enough. Finding a more versatile center is the first step. But they also have to spend some money/assets on long wings. The other teams who have made headway in the postseason are able to mix up their coverages and attacks, while Dallas cannot.

After putting together a coherent plan, the Mavs’ needs 1A and 1B are a secondary ball handler and a proper center. The one-trick ponies need to be weeded out or limited to smaller roles and replaced with better overall players whose skills and abilities match the way the Mavs want to play.
 

CURRENT PLAYERS

RICHARDSON. The offseason’s marquee move for JRich made sense on paper, but was a disaster in practice.  Josh is an above-average defender for his position. However, he is not just a zero on offense, he actually tanks the O when he is on the floor, hanging on to the ball and dribbling out possessions that too often end in a missed shot or a turnover. He takes more long twos than just about anyone in the league, cannot complete the absurd number of open shots Luka creates for him, can’t get to the rim even against the weaker defenders who end up guarding  him, and he kills the momentum. He has had these same problems — lack of touch around the basket, lack of burst, etc. — at multiple teams, and it’s definitely a problem with him, rather than the coach or the scheme.  It is hard to operate as a playmaker when you can’t shoot, and nobody closes out hard on Josh, no matter how many shots he makes on the night. Not a guy who is suited to the playoffs. Has to go. 

BRUNSON.  Brunson has done far better than we could have expected as an offensive option, but is limited by his size in how much he can get to the basket and finish there. He does have a good touch around the basket, which separates him from JRich. But he doesn’t have a good pull-up jumper or an elite three-point shot. Under the current roster construction, Brunson is asked to do far too much. He doesn’t have the floor vision or the size to take on a bigger role. What he does extremely well is attack mismatches in second units and feast on smaller guards. However, he struggles against bigger players, and carving out a larger role for him only results in dwindling efficiency. He is good enough to keep around, but not to take on a starting role.

HARDAWAY. Tim is another excellent shooter, but cannot consistently get downhill or create for others. He would benefit greatly from a secondary ballhandler, who could get him cleaner looks and take the pressure off him to create. 

BURKE.  A microwave scorer, but doesn’t do much of anything else. 

GREEN. Was not the greatest choice at #18. Think someone at the draft probably thought the team needed defense, so they picked Green. That is not a smart way to draft, since the Mavs were not planning on having to rely on him this season. At that point in the draft, you draft a guy for the next five years, not to fill a short-term need. They should have picked the best player available at that slot, rather than a player who might have been able to play a little defense now. If they need to use a youngster in a trade, may not be much in the way of demand for Josh. 

PORZINGIS. KP is an excellent shooter, but doesn’t add much else offensively. If the Mavs decide to keep him, Joe would back him to have an improved season. However, even if he bounces back, he still doesn’t fill the need for a true center who can roll to the rim. Joe would try using him as a four offensively, and putting a real center next to him. Thinking of guys like Richaun Holmes, Larry Nance, Jr., and Jarrett Allen. 

POWELL. Is a good rim runner, and can offer perimeter defense, but cannot defend traditional centers or protect the rim, and is not a shooter. 

WILLIE.  A slightly better rim protector than Powell, but has no offensive game. Despite his superior athleticism and great looks from Luka, he shoots only 53% at the rim, and only 65% on open dunks. You almost have to try to be that bad. Defensively, he gets some showy blocks, but the reason he has to make those acrobatic plays is usually because he’s out of position in the first place. 

KLEBER.  Maxi adds perimeter shooting and solid defense on the weak side and the perimeter, but does not protect the rim. He is good enough to be in the rotation, but if the Mavs need to trade some guys, he would probably be one of the players in demand.

MELLI. Not an NBA-level player. Might be okay to stand at the three-point line for like six minutes per game. 

BOBAN. It’s okay to keep a one-way specialist like Bobi to come off the end of the bench in the special situations where he can be helpful, but he shouldn’t be a part of the regular rotation. 

BIGS AS A GROUP. This is a collection of specialists. There is no proper center on the roster. The opponent can tell what coverage they are going to run by the big they put on the floor. With KP at center, the Mavs tend to run the increasingly ineffective drop coverage, to account for his lack of mobility. This doesn’t suit the rest of the roster, as none of the guards is effective at defending the point of attack. With Willie and Powell, the Mavs play more aggressive coverages, but they don’t have the personnel to commit to them for very long. Maxi and DFS are the only players long enough and aggressive enough to challenge the other opposition players while the Mavs are doubling up the opponent’s top scorer. They need more long wings if they want to defend aggressively. 


SUMMARY

In addition to better players, the Mavs need a consistent philosophy on which to build a roster, instead of making piecemeal reactionary choices. Drafting Josh Green, a defensive project, doesn’t fit well with trading for JJ Redick, an ultimate win-now piece. This is an extremely talent-starved roster. The very young players aren’t ready to contribute. The veterans aren’t good enough to play the roles they have been assigned. 

We can look at well-constructed rosters like Atlanta, Denver, and the Clippers as examples of how to put together teams that play somewhat like the Mavericks. The Mavs had only two of the best 10 players in the first round — Luka and Tim. On some nights, KP might have squeaked into ninth or tenth place. The conference finalists  have very few one-way players. They can mix up their actions on both ends of the floor. 

The logic of assembling the team made sense on paper. Surround Luka with shooters in a five-out scheme, or run a four-out scheme with an athletic big man. The problem was with the execution in filling out those roles. No one but Luka could create, forcing them to rely on threes. When the shots weren’t falling, they had no way to adjust. In that scheme, you need multiple guys who can consistently get downhill. 

It is not going to be easy to completely overhaul the roster in one offseason, especially since the Mavs have almost no draft capital and a dearth of players that rebuilding teams are likely to covet in exchange for their stars/good players. The new secondary playmaker will probably need to be an older guard, along the lines of Mike Conley. If they spend their free agency money in that direction, they might be able to also get a good big man who doesn’t break the bank, with a little luck. 

Overall, the Mavericks need to develop a consistent and clear philosophy about how to play, and match the players they acquire to the plan. They should stop acquiring rotation players by looking for discount solutions in reaction to specific deficiencies, and should spend some money/assets in acquiring versatile two-way players who have the quality to perform well against top-level competition. This summer may be their last best chance to upgrade to a roster suitable to Luka's talent. 

https://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2021/6/22/...-porzingis

I think people are being naïve here.  Roster building is purely about opportunity.  You cant make a star free agent sign with you or draft a star if you don't have the picks.  Mavs wanted to make certain moves but luck was against them.  Donnie wanted to sign Crowder and he wanted to draft Haliburton, he wanted a shot at Giannis.  None of these things happened due to luck.  The reason why Nico is so popular is not because he is such a cool guy or popular.  The reason is that players would gravitate towards him hoping to get more money from Nike.  Often they make more money on ads than their salaries, so obviously players like Lillard would kiss his a$$ in order to make more money.  Hopefully free agents choose Dallas in hopes that Nico will hook them up with more Nike money.  That's why its possible that someone like Leonard will choose Dallas over LA.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7