MavsBoard

I´ll add this about the Thunder. OPPORTUNITY. They have already literally salary/roster spot-dumped Maledon (34th pick) and Jerome (24th pick). Between Bazley, Holmgren, the Williams "twins" and their own (Wembanyama?) + Heat pick in the upcoming draft, I say hello Pokusevski. Here is the crazy part. He´s only six months older than Hardy. He´s a full year younger than Josh Green despite being from the same draft class.

(10-06-2022, 09:29 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I understand that Dinwiddie has earned a starting spot, but I really hope most of the minutes in those first/third lineups have Dinwiddie and Timmy swapped.

Absolutely. It's not about deciding who the 5 best are and starting them, imho. It's about synergy and system. 

If they're starting McGee there is almost no choice but to use him as a screener to start off games. If you don't do that, he's literally not getting guarded. Since you're locked into 1-5 pick and roll as your starting offensive approach most nights, it makes all the sense in the world to have a catch-and-shoot guy spacing for that action, giving it a chance to be successful, and not running your second (out of two) creator into the ground when he's not the offensive focus.

(10-06-2022, 09:37 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Absolutely. It's not about deciding who the 5 best are and starting them, imho. It's about synergy and system. 

If they're starting McGee there is almost no choice but to use him as a screener to start off games. If you don't do that, he's literally not getting guarded. Since you're locked into 1-5 pick and roll as your starting offensive approach most nights, it makes all the sense in the world to have a catch-and-shoot guy spacing for that action, giving it a chance to be successful, and not running your second (out of two) creator into the ground when he's not the offensive focus.

I was ho-hum on the McGee signing.  I was fine with it but to be honest I was expecting someone younger or with more upside as our FA signing.   I liked what I saw in the scrimmage though.  I know it was only an intra-squad scrimmage though.   He just feels much bigger when he is in the paint.  Maybe he won't be as connected to Luka as Powell is, but my hope his added size creates even more defense scrambling when he roles.  Both on rim running and offensive rebounds.   If that is the case, it will open up even more open looks from the perimeter.   I will be anxious to see how he impacts the team defensively as well.   After the KP trade, we were really short handed but our front court really battled and at least kept up respectable on defense.   Does having a bigger body in the lane help things out?

(10-06-2022, 09:28 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I'm in lockstep with you on all of the logic as applied to what they're doing. The difference is that you seem to like it and see it as a step in the right direction while I see it as a willful turning of the back on what made their defense as good as it was last season.

You say Wood can't anchor a defense as the lone big. I think there's a lot of validity to that claim. But that doesn't mean he's automatically going to have the foot speed, direction-change agility or high motor to be a switchable forward as he plays with a center, either. That scares me so much more, personally. 

I don’t know if it is “like” as much as it is an attempt to be predictive based on what they’ve done in the past. But, as preferences go:

1. If Powell is going to be on the roster, I ‘like’ him getting some time and think he will.  He has tended to contribute to winning basketball.  Him and Luka working the PnR against bench players with 3 shooters on the floor.  I suspect that is a plus lineup.  It would be different if McGee was a 24-28 minute guy.  I wouldn’t be making this argument.  But, McGee isn’t that guy.

2. If Wood is on your team, I ‘like’ him better with another big better than I do as a lone big…especially on defense.  

The evidence is clear that Wood with another big is a better defensive lineup than Wood as a lone big despite the concern over switchability.  If a guard blows by him on a switch, would you rather have Maxi waiting at the rim or DFS?  Maxi, right?  Especially since his inclusion doesn’t exclude DFS from playing.  If Jokic overpowers Wood, who do you want waiting at the rim?  Again, Maxi.  Especially if it is possible to also have DFS in the game doubling from the perimeter (or Bullock or Green).  There just isn’t a scenario - defensively - where the best answer to the question is Wood and DFS as the two tallest players on the court.

But, but, but, what about 5-out?  You still get that to the extent Wood and Maxi are in the game together.

I get that there are concerns about switching.  But, that isn’t the only way to make Wood look bad.  Go back and dig through the lineup data Wood’s last year in Detroit (with Sweeney on staff) and his first year in Houston.  The defensive numbers when Wood was with a center were MUCH better than they were when he wasn’t.

Random prediction since gamethreads disappear the fastest:  DFS will shockingly not improve upon his 39.5 3pt% this year, ending the year at 39.44%.  Apologies.

(10-06-2022, 09:28 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I'm in lockstep with you on all of the logic as applied to what they're doing. The difference is that you seem to like it and see it as a step in the right direction while I see it as a willful turning of the back on what made their defense as good as it was last season. To me, one of the main reasons for the post-season success last season was the interchangeable nature of basically all the defenders in the playoff rotation. All of a sudden we're back to thinking about "specialists" which, imo, is not where a good team wants to be. 

So I understand that you and Dirkfan are very pro switchable defense, but I am not sure this statement above is accurate.  Some numbers:

Pre all-star break this team had DEFRTG of 107.2 (5th)

Post all-star break this team had DEFRTG 113.9 (14th)

In playoffs this team had DEFRTG 113.3 (9th)

I don't do a lot of on/off research, but my understanding is that the team DEFRTG was better with KP on the court than off.

The numbers really suggest that rim protection and defensive rebounding may be more important than switchability, at least as this team is currently constructed.  

Add to this that Wood has historically been a much better defender at the 4 than at the 5.  The reality is this team is probably going to be at its best defensively with either McGee or Maxi on the court at center.

I get the desire to be as switchable a team as possible, but that requires unique talents to make it work and beggars can't be choosers with the limited assets we had.  We got Wood for almost nothing.  You could make the argument that his lack of lateral agility in being able to guard the point of attack is a tradeoff with Brunson's lack of size in being able to guard bigger players.

(10-06-2022, 10:36 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]2. If Wood is on your team, I ‘like’ him better with another big better than I do as a lone big…especially on defense.  

It's not my intention to assign meaning to your words that isn't there, so apologies if it came across that way. 

My use of "like" comes from my sense of your meaning in 1,000 conversations, including those from last year and even before. You were one of the last to give up on the idea of Powell/Porzingis playing together, for example (if you ever did). That combo did work well in some ways, but only with Porzingis playing "corner spacer" exclusively on offense, and really not very well at all (imo) on defense. I think the team going away from it justifies my opinions and can be viewed as a valuable predictor with this whole Wood experiment. Wood is closer to the athletic package that we thought Porzingis would be, but imo he cancels that out with a suspect motor and an apparent lack of interest in defense (we'll see). 

And again (I almost feel like you're moving the goal posts away from this purposefully), this is NOT about "5 out." I simply disagree aggressively with the quoted statement above. We're all free to disagree, but the defensive end is where I believe the two big system gets scary in today's game. 

Think of all the teams ahead of the Mavs in the West (the ones who are positioned between our Mavs and "the next step," whatever you think that is): Who is the second biggest player in their best lineup? Is that someone Wood can hang with, in terms of foot speed? Worse yet, how many of those "second biggest" guys are so good that DFS will be matched up with them, forcing Wood even further down the list? Lebron, Kawhi, etc, etc. 

You'll say: that's when you play him with Kleber, and Wood guards the center, and I agree, that will work in many situations. What I flatly don't believe will work in many situations at all (again, on the defensive end, not offense) is Wood/McGee or Wood/Powell. 

It's the defensive end that has me worried to see the roster balance.

(10-06-2022, 10:54 AM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I don't do a lot of on/off research, but my understanding is that the team DEFRTG was better with KP on the court than off.

I don't expect this to sway you, and I type this knowing you'll roll your eyes and call me a dinosaur as you read it, but after watching this team try to make Porzingis a viable piece of the puzzle for a couple of seasons, my position is that any stat claiming the Mavs were a better team with him than without is a stat I probably won't be giving much weight to in the future. 

Again, that's not intended to be aggressive towards you or analytics at all. I just HATED the way the team played with him on the floor, with the exception of a few stretches during which he manned the 5 by himself competently. @"DanSchwartzgan" would probably still tell you that Powell/Porzingis together was their best option, and he'll have data to support it, too. While I actually like Powell more than anyone here other than him and there were things about that approach that worked, I just turned the page on that plan for a variety of reasons and sorry, I'm just not excited about trying it again, even with a different player. 

McGee or Powell with DFS or Kleber, sure. 

Wood with DFS or Kleber, fine. 

McGee or Powell with Wood is something I am just not excited about trying. I hope they get it out of their system early and aren't too stubborn about it.

(10-06-2022, 10:36 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]I get that there are concerns about switching.  But, that isn’t the only way to make Wood look bad.

Just to show you that I'm reading carefully, I think this is right on the money. And, I'm not claiming that my way is going to work right out of the box, either. 

Wood, defensively, is going to be a project any way you slice it.

(10-06-2022, 10:52 AM)BoredAssistant Wrote: [ -> ]Random prediction since gamethreads disappear the fastest:  DFS will shockingly not improve upon his 39.5 3pt% this year, ending the year at 39.44%.  Apologies.

(10-06-2022, 11:28 AM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I don't expect this to sway you, and I type this knowing you'll roll your eyes and call me a dinosaur as you read it, but after watching this team try to make Porzingis a viable piece of the puzzle for a couple of seasons, my position is that any stat claiming the Mavs were a better team with him than without is a stat I probably won't be giving much weight to in the future. 

Again, that's not intended to be aggressive towards you or analytics at all. I just HATED the way the team played with him on the floor, with the exception of a few stretches during which he manned the 5 by himself competently. @"DanSchwartzgan" would probably still tell you that Powell/Porzingis together was their best option, and he'll have data to support it, too. While I actually like Powell more than anyone here other than him and there were things about that approach that worked, I just turned the page on that plan for a variety of reasons and sorry, I'm just not excited about trying it again, even with a different player. 

McGee or Powell with DFS or Kleber, sure. 

Wood with DFS or Kleber, fine. 

McGee or Powell with Wood is something I am just not excited about trying. I hope they get it out of their system early and aren't too stubborn about it.

So this is a different argument more based on aesthetics than effectiveness.  To be honest, I don't disagree to some extent.  Its definitely a factor to me at roster level when building a team.  But I feel like you kind of have to go with what works best.  In that regard, I think there is a big difference between Powell/Wood and McGee/Wood.  

Powell and Wood make no sense on the court together.  Powell stunts Wood's offensive options and neither can protect the rim.  If you don't have a rim protector on the court (something we were forced to do for long stretches after the TDL last year) then you might as well go with your most mobile lineup that can switch everything.  I'm really curious who is better defensively in that role between Wood and Powell, but the answer is definitely not both.

McGee and Wood on the court together is a different animal.  McGee may limit Wood somewhat offensively, but he can help protect Wood's limitations defensively.  I have no interest in seeing those two on the court for 20 minutes on a regular basis, but you could get away with 5 minutes a game if necessary.

I think the overall success of switch heavy defense schemes is undeniable. The individual skill level of players is getting better and better and it is nearly impossible to hide bad defenders or in this case slow bigs on defense.
If we are looking at last years playoffs I would argue that the CFs featured the top 3 switching teams (Celtics, Heat, Warriors) and the Mavs (also playing small with Kleber/Powell). Doesn´t mean that it isn´t possible to beat them with superior talent or unique players that allow teams to play more traditional bigs (for example Giannis covering a lot of space for the Bucks) but given the choice it just feels like it is easier to build around a modern switching scheme.

Last year it looked like the Mavs were on the right trajectory. At least to me potential McGee/Wood or Powell/Wood lineups would be a step in the wrong direction. Watching the Suns I wasn´t concerned about McGee´s or Biyombo´s great rim protection. Because I knew that a good team will simply scheme them out of the game and force them to defend the perimeter. And I don´t think that there is anyway to prevent that from happening. Even the best rim protectors in the league are getting exploited.

Would take a special talent for me to be on board with an "oldschool" big. And I don´t think any of the guys that are worth the defensive struggles are available right now (I am talking about Embiid, Jokic...maybe Towns).

(10-06-2022, 01:09 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]McGee and Wood on the court together is a different animal.  McGee may limit Wood somewhat offensively, but he can help protect Wood's limitations defensively.  I have no interest in seeing those two on the court for 20 minutes on a regular basis, but you could get away with 5 minutes a game if necessary.

Fair enough. 

I have read several suggestions about needing the second big to help the first one when he gets beat off of the dribble. In the "nuclear NBA" era, my assertion is that whomever that second guy is probably needs to keep his ass planted in the corner and NOT help in the paint because a few blow-by easy layups are actually kind of preferable to nonstop open corner 3's. Just ask Utah. 

But, sure. Our team is on this path, for better or worse. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

(10-06-2022, 01:35 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]I think the overall success of switch heavy defense schemes is undeniable. The individual skill level of players is getting better and better and it is nearly impossible to hide bad defenders or in this case slow bigs on defense.
If we are looking at last years playoffs I would argue that the CFs featured the top 3 switching teams (Celtics, Heat, Warriors) and the Mavs (also playing small with Kleber/Powell). Doesn´t mean that it isn´t possible to beat them with superior talent or unique players that allow teams to play more traditional bigs (for example Giannis covering a lot of space for the Bucks) but given the choice it just feels like it is easier to build around a modern switching scheme.

Last year it looked like the Mavs were on the right trajectory. At least to me potential McGee/Wood or Powell/Wood lineups would be a step in the wrong direction. Watching the Suns I wasn´t concerned about McGee´s or Biyombo´s great rim protection. Because I knew that a good team will simply scheme them out of the game and force them to defend the perimeter. And I don´t think that there is anyway to prevent that from happening. Even the best rim protectors in the league are getting exploited.

Would take a special talent for me to be on board with an "oldschool" big. And I don´t think any of the guys that are worth the defensive struggles are available right now (I am talking about Embiid, Jokic...maybe Towns).

I think its really important to point out that those three teams you are mentioning have elite mobile bigs that allow you to play a switch heavy defense (Green, Bam, Horford/Williams although I thought they play drop coverage with Williams).  The closest thing we have to that is Maxi.  Come playoff time we will probably be throwing Maxi/Wood out there 30 minutes a game in a switch heavy defense.  The other 18 minutes will be a scramble to see what works, but I would rather have the option of McGee than not.  Its not like Powell didn't get played off the court in the playoffs either.

(10-06-2022, 02:43 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Fair enough. 

I have read several suggestions about needing the second big to help the first one when he gets beat off of the dribble. In the "nuclear NBA" era, my assertion is that whomever that second guy is probably needs to keep his ass planted in the corner and NOT help in the paint because a few blow-by easy layups are actually kind of preferable to nonstop open corner 3's. Just ask Utah. 

But, sure. Our team is on this path, for better or worse. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

You could make that argument the other way when we prioritized protecting the 3 against the Warriors and got slaughtered at the rim.  The math says you need to protect the rim first.  A wide open 3 is probably a little over 40% average in the NBA.  That is maybe 1.3 points per possession.  A blow-by layup is probably closer to 90%, which is 1.8 points per possession (I know its not this simple).

I'm not really sure what path this team is on.  We needed to upgrade the frontcourt and we had very limited assets.  If you planned on pairing Wood with Maxi, we still needed an upgrade over Powell.

(10-06-2022, 03:05 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I think its really important to point out that those three teams you are mentioning have elite mobile bigs that allow you to play a switch heavy defense (Green, Bam, Horford/Williams although I thought they play drop coverage with Williams).  The closest thing we have to that is Maxi.  Come playoff time we will probably be throwing Maxi/Wood out there 30 minutes a game in a switch heavy defense.  The other 18 minutes will be a scramble to see what works, but I would rather have the option of McGee than not.  Its not like Powell didn't get played off the court in the playoffs either.

That´s why I said that I thought the Mavs were heading into the right direction last season. I get that they needed to upgrade Powell but I would have prefered a different direction. A more mobile big or a wing instead of a player like McGee.
Feels like they are going away from one of the key strengths that lead to a deep playoff run. Even if they only plan to use McGee for 15 minutes per game.

(10-06-2022, 03:05 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]I think its really important to point out that those three teams you are mentioning have elite mobile bigs that allow you to play a switch heavy defense (Green, Bam, Horford/Williams although I thought they play drop coverage with Williams).  The closest thing we have to that is Maxi.  Come playoff time we will probably be throwing Maxi/Wood out there 30 minutes a game in a switch heavy defense.  The other 18 minutes will be a scramble to see what works, but I would rather have the option of McGee than not.  Its not like Powell didn't get played off the court in the playoffs either.

Been agreeing with you on everything you’re saying. Also lost in this discussion is all of those teams have the ability to go big when the situation warrants it. Looney and Green destroyed our bigs in the playoffs. Zubac destroyed our bigs in the playoffs. Maybe McGee isn’t the answer to that, but there were few guys available that are. 

There’s probably 2 other guys available right now that are also possible to stop the bullies of the NBA. Poeltl and Turner. We chose our path with McGee, and moving to either of those two would warrant even more time for bigs on the court (their cost will require we make them a more integral part of the overall scheme). McGee’s pay allows us so much more flexibility in what we can do/counter. That’s why I liked the inclusion.

(10-06-2022, 05:52 PM)ItsGoTime Wrote: [ -> ]Looney and Green destroyed our bigs in the playoffs. Zubac destroyed our bigs in the playoffs.

Two totally different examples here. 

Looney destroyed our bigs AND held up in space REALLY well. Much better than Gobert, for example. Snagging a player like him is the dream. Most of them can't maintain that level of movement very long, only a few years, but if you get one, you're in GREAT shape. 

Zubac...maybe he destroyed our bigs. Not sure I can co-sign that or not, but it's irrelevant because Dallas/Luka KILLS him while he's on the floor. 

Zubac is a specialist, like McGee. Good at some stuff, terrible at other stuff. What you want is at the 5, as I see things, is a 6'11" version of DFS with about 35 more pounds on his frame. But, the key (at least to me) is: CAN HE MOVE HIS FEET?

(10-06-2022, 04:14 PM)dirkfansince1998 Wrote: [ -> ]That´s why I said that I thought the Mavs were heading into the right direction last season. I get that they needed to upgrade Powell but I would have prefered a different direction. A more mobile big or a wing instead of a player like McGee.
Feels like they are going away from one of the key strengths that lead to a deep playoff run. Even if they only plan to use McGee for 15 minutes per game.

Like Killer, you mention this switchable defense being a strength that lead to a deep playoff run, but the numbers don't really support that, either for the regular season or the playoffs.  If anything it was the offense on the backs of Luka and Brunson that carried this team in the second half of the season and playoffs.

I was not a huge fan of the McGee signing, but I'm trying to remember what mobile defensive anchor center was available for the tax MLE?  Was there a legitimate option in a different direction?

(10-06-2022, 07:56 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]Two totally different examples here. 

Looney destroyed our bigs AND held up in space REALLY well. Much better than Gobert, for example. Snagging a player like him is the dream. Most of them can't maintain that level of movement very long, only a few years, but if you get one, you're in GREAT shape. 

Zubac...maybe he destroyed our bigs. Not sure I can co-sign that or not, but it's irrelevant because Dallas/Luka KILLS him while he's on the floor. 

Zubac is a specialist, like McGee. Good at some stuff, terrible at other stuff. What you want is at the 5, as I see things, is a 6'11" version of DFS with about 35 more pounds on his frame. But, the key (at least to me) is: CAN HE MOVE HIS FEET?

I don't think they are, both teams got who they want for that role and developed them and play them appropriately. Looney was not all that great in the playoffs til he got to play us and that is because other teams have the big bodies to keep him from doing what he did to us. That's what the point is, none of them are paid an amount that requires them to be on the court. When they go big, we go big. If not, we don't have to. You have to employ those guys esp for the regular season and for the most part, the first and/or second round. After that, those guys disappear.

On your side of the argument, who was/is available that is a 6'11" DFS with 35 more lbs on his frame and can move his feet? I want the name of that guy we missed on. If he wasn't there, I think McGee fits in quite nicely until that guy is identified and acquired. Bringing in more wings isn't gonna help with the bigger guys.