MavsBoard

(06-11-2022, 07:40 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Is it a good thing to have such a high number of these as a team?

I think it is a bad thing. 

These are bad shots generally speaking. And defenses WANT to force this kind of shot. 

Luka is basically league average on his eFG% here, so he is basically breaking even in his self-created shots (which is good, but begs the question: is there a way the team together can generate a higher percentage shot?). I would personally say only Poole, Jokic, and Paul might be the ones you WANT doing this based on the %.

(06-11-2022, 07:07 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]

I like where Tobias sits on that chart as a fit with what we have already.  Good efficiency, but volume is more complimentary without being too ball dominant.

(06-11-2022, 07:49 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I think it is a bad thing. 

These are bad shots generally speaking. And defenses WANT to force this kind of shot. 

Luka is basically league average on his eFG% here, so he is basically breaking even in his self-created shots (which is good, but begs the question: is there a way the team together can generate a higher percentage shot?). I would personally say only Poole, Jokic, and Paul might be the ones you WANT doing this based on the %.

Ya, my initial thought was this is why our players are the way they are. Is this a chicken and egg thing where the 3 have so many cause the rest of the players aren’t trustworthy, or are the other players not trustworthy cause they don’t get enough of a chance? We’ve talked a bit about this with the I go, you go type offense we run and how the players seem to not know what to do when Luka is on the court, and things seem to open up a bit more when he sits. 


What is the root issue and can it be weeded out? Does it need to be weeded out?

(06-11-2022, 07:49 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]I like where Tobias sits on that chart as a fit with what we have already.  Good efficiency, but volume is more complimentary without being too ball dominant.

Ya, I don’t get the dislike of Harris’ game when considering the rest of this team. For 1 year, while we try him out, he can show us if he’s worthy of keeping. If he’s a keeper we ride out the last year and resign him to a more appropriate number. If he doesn’t fit, he’s a huge expiring with our full complement of picks. I don’t know why there is such trepidation about a move like what is being proposed.

(06-11-2022, 08:01 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Ya, my initial thought was this is why our players are the way they are. Is this a chicken and egg thing where the 3 have so many cause the rest of the players aren’t trustworthy, or are the other players not trustworthy cause they don’t get enough of a chance? We’ve talked a bit about this with the I go, you go type offense we run and how the players seem to not know what to do when Luka is on the court, and things seem to open up a bit more when he sits. 


What is the root issue and can it be weeded out? Does it need to be weeded out?

It doesn't seem to be hurting the Mavs' offensive efficiency.  I remember being irritated at Allen Iverson's really bad FG%, much of it caused by taking really difficult shots near the end of the shot clock.  Seems like our three shot-creators manage to get decently good eFG%, while still creating good looks for catch-and-shoot teammates.

Would one more shot creator have made the difference against Golden State?  Or a center who was a little better defensively?

Not sure I can find too much fault with the type of offense they ran.

(06-11-2022, 08:19 AM)DallasMaverick Wrote: [ -> ]It doesn't seem to be hurting the Mavs' offensive efficiency.  I remember being irritated at Allen Iverson's really bad FG%, much of it caused by taking really difficult shots near the end of the shot clock.  Seems like our three shot-creators manage to get decently good eFG%, while still creating good looks for catch-and-shoot teammates.

Would one more shot creator have made the difference against Golden State?  Or a center who was a little better defensively?

Not sure I can find too much fault with the type of offense they ran.

I just wonder if that Iverson/Harden type of offense is championship worthy? I guess we might see with this finals if Bos wins, but like I said, they have the players that can play that way on offense while being stifling of defense. I think we have a pretty long way to go to be stifling on defense.

Just a masterful performance by Curry last night.  I really hope he can close this series out....it will be an exclamation point for an all time great.  Although after watching most of the playoffs, I think they are going to have trouble beating Boston two more times.   

I didn't see all of the game last night, but it is interesting how negative Poole and Draymond feel in this series.    Poole, outside of game two, feels like a huge negative.  In the Dallas series he was great and looked like a future all star.   In this series, he looks like a negative.   In our series, he was able to get going by getting a lot of good looks in the lane.  Those are much more difficult against Boston.  With Draymond, him scoring is always not a pretty picture.  But he is able to make impact in other ways.  So far, he has really struggled.   Typically, they can run the offense through him, but it just hasn't happened against Boston.  I think he is going to need to play much better for Golden State to win.

(06-11-2022, 08:14 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Ya, I don’t get the dislike of Harris’ game when considering the rest of this team. For 1 year, while we try him out, he can show us if he’s worthy of keeping. If he’s a keeper we ride out the last year and resign him to a more appropriate number. If he doesn’t fit, he’s a huge expiring with our full complement of picks. I don’t know why there is such trepidation about a move like what is being proposed.

I haven't weighed in on the Tobias Harris stuff, but I am definitely open to it. It is not my favorite possibility/idea for the summer, but I am intrigued by it as a fall back plan. 

If you trade for Tobias you are expecting to have a one year trial with him (22-23) THEN if he fits you have one more year (23-24) but if he doesn't fit then you have a giant expiring contract to deal in a trade. Getting him with two years left on his deal is a good spot to be in relatively speaking. If he had three years left at that price I would not be interested.

(06-11-2022, 04:06 AM)SleepingHero Wrote: [ -> ]Right there with you.

We were exactly 7 wins away from hoisting a trophy. That counts for something. Doubly so when you factor in the Mavs had one of the more difficult paths to the finals and they still shone. 

I do think the West next season is about to get a whole lot more difficult next season. Clippers are back. Nuggets are back. Theoretically Pelicans make a leap with a healthy Zion. Does Portland magically create a competitive team around Dame this summer too?

Out of all the teams that made the playoffs, the only ones I really see dropping out of the race are the Wolves and Pelicans, but they could just as easily build on their success not falter. 

All this to say the Mavs need to get 2-3 more guys like we've all been repeating. If they do that then they can be real contenders next season.

It seems like every year the talk is how much the West is going to be the following year, and many times its not.  Injuries happen every year.  We ran into the top two teams in the west this playoffs and neither is getting any younger.  In fact, given Klay, Draymond and Curry's injury history the last couple of years, its a minor miracle they have stayed healthy throughout these playoffs.  If any one of them is out for our series, we are probably playing in the finals.  We definitely need more depth, and luck will play an important role, but I don't see the road as insurmountable next year.

(06-11-2022, 07:05 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]If we’re mainly running it back by getting a lower end C like Hartenstein, Muscala, et al. and getting a lower end wing that cannot supplant Bullock, then we won’t make the WCF without more major injuries to other teams.

In my mind the goal is not to make the WCF next year, the goal is to win championships in the future.  Any moves we make should be with that goal in mind.  

I think some of the comments that we are way behind these two teams in the finals are a little overstated.  The same was said about the Suns.  I think this team was a little gassed after that series due to lack of depth issues.  Having a center that can get you 20 minutes in a playoff game would have been a big help, and Timmy could have eaten all of the Green and Frank minutes and given Bullock and Dorian a little more breather.  I don't know if that will be enough to get to the WCF again, but we will be a better team than this season, and the following offseason we will be in a much better asset position to improve the team further.

(06-11-2022, 10:43 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]In my mind the goal is not to make the WCF next year, the goal is to win championships in the future.  Any moves we make should be with that goal in mind.  

I think some of the comments that we are way behind these two teams in the finals are a little overstated.  The same was said about the Suns.  I think this team was a little gassed after that series due to lack of depth issues.  Having a center that can get you 20 minutes in a playoff game would have been a big help, and Timmy could have eaten all of the Green and Frank minutes and given Bullock and Dorian a little more breather.  I don't know if that will be enough to get to the WCF again, but we will be a better team than this season, and the following offseason we will be in a much better asset position to improve the team further.

We did beat the Suns, sure, I still think we are behind them in the sense that had they won, they would have given the GSW a better run for their money. Last year Atl and Pho made it far in the playoffs only to come back to earth this year. I think if we, in general keep the same team, we meet the same fate. It’s not gonna take small upgrades to take this team further, the upgrades need to be big (which more than likely isn’t gonna happen this offseason, but, upgrading our talent snd asset base will only make us better next year…for any scenario). I think there is gonna be pretty big disappointment next year if people actually believe this team is built to repeat this year’s success.

(06-11-2022, 07:40 AM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Is it a good thing to have such a high number of these as a team? I see Bos as the only other team with more than us, but they can hang their hat on defense and athleticism. Just not fully sure how to take this?

More shot creators just means a more varied offense. 

Warriors have 4 creators, like Boston, FWIW.

---

(06-11-2022, 07:49 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I think it is a bad thing. 

These are bad shots generally speaking. And defenses WANT to force this kind of shot. 

Luka is basically league average on his eFG% here, so he is basically breaking even in his self-created shots (which is good, but begs the question: is there a way the team together can generate a higher percentage shot?). I would personally say only Poole, Jokic, and Paul might be the ones you WANT doing this based on the %.

Luka is about +1.2 points higher relative to league average eFG% in the playoffs, where scoring is tougher. Account for the volume he's taking and you get a transcendent scorer where defenses just hope he misses/has a cold night.

This is also using the average eFG for ALL shots in the playoffs, not self created ones with <2 seconds of touch time. You have to assume league average for this shot profile is GREATLY lower. The fact Luka is slightly above league average with such a high volume is insane.

(06-11-2022, 10:27 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]It seems like every year the talk is how much the West is going to be the following year, and many times its not.  Injuries happen every year.  We ran into the top two teams in the west this playoffs and neither is getting any younger.  In fact, given Klay, Draymond and Curry's injury history the last couple of years, its a minor miracle they have stayed healthy throughout these playoffs.  If any one of them is out for our series, we are probably playing in the finals.  We definitely need more depth, and luck will play an important role, but I don't see the road as insurmountable next year.

All true. But on the other hand, Mavs were basically healthy (I don't think THJ would make the team better in the role he would play). One injury to DFS or Bullock and it would be totally possible Mavs wouldn't be over first round.

(06-11-2022, 01:19 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]All true. But on the other hand, Mavs were basically healthy (I don't think THJ would make the team better in the role he would play). One injury to DFS or Bullock and it would be totally possible Mavs wouldn't be over first round.

You don't think THJ would have given us more than Green?
You don't think having to play Bullock and DFS less would have helped us against GSW?

Did you see him in the PO against the Clips last year.

(06-11-2022, 01:24 PM)Mapka Wrote: [ -> ]You don't think THJ would have given us more than Green?

There is no question he would have. I personally believe he would've given the team more than Bullock (who I'm not trying to bash - I just think THJ has become ridiculously underrated here).

(06-11-2022, 01:25 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]There is no question he would have. I personally believe he would've given the team more than Bullock (who I'm not trying to bash - I just think THJ has become ridiculously underrated here).

I think he would have punished GSW, if they would left him as open as they left DFS and Bullock.

And that would have helped more than Bullocks/DFS normally better defence. Maybe his ability to draw charges would have been helpfull

I think you have to look at a team, not just individual pieces. THJ as a player can be a solid contributor in the right situation. But I don't think this is Mavs as they are constructed. THJ is bad on defense and there is no way you can have good defense playing him next to two of Dinwiddie, Brunson and Luka. Proven last two offseasons against Clippers. 

THJ would play way more minutes than Green or Frank, which means Mavs defense would be considerably worse. He would provide more on offense, but less on defense. That is why I don't think he would really make a difference.

(06-11-2022, 01:31 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I think you have to look at a team, not just individual pieces. THJ as a player can be a solid contributor in the right situation. But I don't think this is Mavs as they are constructed. THJ is bad on defense and there is no way you can have good defense playing him next to two of Dinwiddie, Brunson and Luka. Proven last two offseasons against Clippers. 

THJ would play way more minutes than Green or Frank, which means Mavs defense would be considerably worse. He would provide more on offense, but less on defense. That is why I don't think he would really make a difference.

But running DFS and Bullock into the ground made us bad on offense and worse on defense.

And sometimes defence just doesn't matter, you have to get something on offense.

I think this THJ can’t play defence thing is more than overrated

(06-11-2022, 01:31 PM)omahen Wrote: [ -> ]I think you have to look at a team, not just individual pieces. THJ as a player can be a solid contributor in the right situation. But I don't think this is Mavs as they are constructed. THJ is bad on defense and there is no way you can have good defense playing him next to two of Dinwiddie, Brunson and Luka. Proven last two offseasons against Clippers. 

THJ would play way more minutes than Green or Frank, which means Mavs defense would be considerably worse. He would provide more on offense, but less on defense. That is why I don't think he would really make a difference.

I respect your opinion and see the point you're making about fit. 

I just have never bought into the whole "THJ sucks at defense" mantra around here. I think he's slightly below Bullock (whose defense is extremely overrated) on the defensive end, but I don't think of THJ as some sort of defensive handicap. He's better than Dinwiddie and Brunson on that end, imo, and much better than Luka (when Luka gets into the headspace of not trying to defend, which still happens too often, if we're being honest). 

I have said many times that I'm OK with the Mavs using THJ in a trade, and now that Brunson and Dinwiddie are here, both ensconced in roles that make sense, I almost expect it. I agree with your point about how THJ isn't THE player we'd pick to add into the team we just saw make it to the WCF. I agree with that. 

However, this notion that he's not a player significant enough to count as a major injury is bonkers. He would've helped them, had he been healthy. Hell, the team thinks so much of him they still had him on the leadership council (or whatever) at the end of the season.

I don't see how you're still on the "Bullock's D is overrated" wagon after these playoffs

He was vital in slowing CP3 and Booker