(01-03-2023, 10:14 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Scroll down to the splits for starter vs. bench
Here is a summary of how things have been when Wood has been on the floor. All data is from NBA.com
Dallas Full Season. 115.3/113.1 (net is 2.2)
Wood Full Season. 116.1/112.5 (net is 3.6)
For the full season, the team is better when Wood is on the floor both offensively and defensively. Not surprising really.
Wood as Starter. 118.4/118.7 (net is -0.2)
Wood from Bench. 114.9/109.6 (net is 5.3)
This is a little surprising to me. Again, this is what actually happens when Wood has been on the floor. It isn’t a direct link to him as four others are on the floor also. But, if we are trying to decide between extending or trading Wood, what happens when he is On The Floor is what matters. I know you like to net players against the players who are on the floor when the player in question is off. That answers a different question. It is especially misleading in this sample size as we are talking about players like Bertans, Frank and McKinley Wright. I think it is just flat wrong to try to paint a picture based on Off-Court when the players who are on when Wood is off are barely NBA players. The question is what happens when Wood is on the court, not how bad are we when he’s not. Down three important players, we know that is going to be bad.
If I’m being intellectually honest, I don’t think the Starter vs. Bench On-Court numbers above are particularly fair either. When Wood came off the bench, the team had the benefit of Maxi, DFS and Green. Since he’s been a starter, the team hasn’t had that benefit. So, O is up and D has gotten bad since Wood began starting…fairly predictable, but not necessarily attributable. We’d need to hold the Maxi/DFS/Green variable steady to have some idea what the straight swap of Wood Bench to Wood Starter really means and it would need to be more than a few games.
Note there is a fairly big difference between the last 10 games and the 10 games as a starter that skews our numbers a bit. I quoted the 10 games as a starter which include a 29 point loss. You quoted the last 10 games which replaces that big loss with a 20 point win. Wood wasn’t a starter in that game (but did play almost 30 minutes and contributed significantly). You can see from just that substitution of one game for another that there are significant flaws to both the methodology and sample sizes of both approaches.
Here is what I think is fair to say…in the nine games in a row sample where Wood has started and we’ve missed significant players (so removing the Chicago loss that Luka missed), the team is 7-2 and we’ve outscored opponents by a total of 35 points. (About 3 points a game). 25 of those 35 points of spread have occurred while Wood has been on the floor and the other 10 occurred when he wasn’t on the floor.
DS, it's also possibly relevant to observe that this looks similar to what was seen when Wood was in DET. There Wood started about 1/5 of the games, and his plus/minus was quite a bit better as a sub, rather than as a starter. That may speak to his ability (or perhaps a lack thereof) to be as impactful in a unit matched up against the other team's starters, rather than against their bench players.
That would just seem to be logical, of course, that less-challenging competition should tend to make you look better, but it also reminds that the high number of variables that impact plus/minus results (who you play with, and who you play against, versus the same for others you are being compared to) creates an incredibly large amount of noise in plus/minus based numbers.
Alls I know is him getting that block on Green when he went 1 on 1 against him last night later in the 4th had to give himself confidence in his ability to do it more often.
TimMcM is apparently advancing the idea that a 2-year extension is on the table now for Wood.
Story is behind ESPN paywall, but generalities summarized at Real GM say:
"The Dallas Mavericks have interest in signing Christian Wood to a two-year, $36 million extension, sources tell Tim MacMahon of ESPN.
The Mavericks can sign Wood for up to $72 million over four years currently. The $36 million represents the most the Mavericks can sign Wood to on a two-year deal.
The Mavericks could have significant salary cap space in 2025 and a short-term deal with Wood would preserve that.
"I can't answer that," said Wood when asked if he needs a four-year commitment.
MacMahon appears to suggest the Mavericks could explore Wood's trade market if he doesn't commit to an extension."
The prior story was nuanced that the Mavs might be open to a 2-year ext. Now he asserts they do have interest. It's hard to tell if he is working with the exact same info as before, and just giving it a slight twist (from prior experience, this is his style, where the story gets buffed up to satisfy what he wants to say), or whether the info has changed with the Mavs now expressing an actual willingness to commit.
One new piece here is that it includes $36M which would be the full amount allowed over 2 years, and would not leave the door open to a subsequent trade. From what I saw, there was no such number in the prior note, leaving open the idea that the Mavs willingness to go to 2 years was based on the ability to include him if the Big Deal came along.
Another new nuance now being added says the Mavs "could be" working on an either-or basis -- if he won't extend, they try to trade him.
One other point - this article was by Windthorst, so it's his impression of what TM said, rather than TM writing it. IOW, the advancement from "might be open" to "they have interest" and the inclusion of specific numbers and of Mavs trade interest may be just Windy's spin and addition to what TM actually heard a week ago more or less.
But if we do have multiple stories with changing terms, who is feeding this info to the media, and negotiating through the media?
(01-03-2023, 02:08 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]TimMcM is apparently advancing the idea that a 2-year extension is on the table now for Wood.
Story is behind ESPN paywall, but generalities summarized at Real GM say:
"The Dallas Mavericks have interest in signing Christian Wood to a two-year, $36 million extension, sources tell Tim MacMahon of ESPN.
The Mavericks can sign Wood for up to $72 million over four years currently. The $36 million represents the most the Mavericks can sign Wood to on a two-year deal.
The Mavericks could have significant salary cap space in 2025 and a short-term deal with Wood would preserve that.
"I can't answer that," said Wood when asked if he needs a four-year commitment.
MacMahon appears to suggest the Mavericks could explore Wood's trade market if he doesn't commit to an extension."
The prior story was nuanced that the Mavs might be open to a 2-year ext. Now he asserts they do have interest. It's hard to tell if he is working with the exact same info as before, and just giving it a slight twist (from prior experience, this is his style, where the story gets buffed up to satisfy what he wants to say), or whether the info has changed with the Mavs now expressing an actual willingness to commit.
One new piece here is that it includes $36M which would be the full amount allowed over 2 years, and would not leave the door open to a subsequent trade. From what I saw, there was no such number in the prior note, leaving open the idea that the Mavs willingness to go to 2 years was based on the ability to include him if the Big Deal came along.
Another new nuance now being added says the Mavs "could be" working on an either-or basis -- if he won't extend, they try to trade him.
One other point - this article was by Windthorst, so it's his impression of what TM said, rather than TM writing it. IOW, the advancement from "might be open" to "they have interest" and the inclusion of specific numbers and of Mavs trade interest may be just Windy's spin and addition to what TM actually heard a week ago more or less.
But if we do have multiple stories with changing terms, who is feeding this info to the media, and negotiating through the media?
Thanks for bringing attention to this. I think it is just a regurgitation rather than a change of stance. You are right that the story now says “are interested”. It feels like sloppy writing as there is no mention of a change in stance. The entire piece is a historical retrospective and when they get to the important line about intent they use the past tense…Sources have “told ESPN”.
The mention of the dollar amount says “for a maximum of $36mm”. Sounds more like data than a quote. Plus, I’ve heard TM put it this way on a podcast. When I’ve heard him live, it was clear that part was opinion. He then went on to say that if they try to “get cute” with the years, they won’t be able to do anything less than the full allowed amount.
One other note from the story. Here is the data quoted when Wood plays solo-big alongside Luka…
“Those concerns still exist, and there are doubts about how Wood will fare as a defensive anchor in the playoffs. Dallas has allowed 119.8 points per 100 possessions when Wood plays as the lone big man in lineups with Doncic, according to data from pbpstats. The flip side: Those lineups have lit it up, scoring 121.9 points per 100 possessions.”
(01-03-2023, 02:39 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for bringing attention to this. I think it is just a regurgitation rather than a change of stance. You are right that the story now says “are interested”. It feels like sloppy writing as there is no mention of a change in stance. The entire piece is a historical retrospective and when they get to the important line about intent they use the past tense…Sources have “told ESPN”.
The mention of the dollar amount says “for a maximum of $36mm”. Sounds more like data than a quote. Plus, I’ve heard TM put it this way on a podcast. When I’ve heard him live, it was clear that part was opinion. He then went on to say that if they try to “get cute” with the years, they won’t be able to do anything less than the full allowed amount.
One other note from the story. Here is the data quoted when Wood plays solo-big alongside Luka…
“Those concerns still exist, and there are doubts about how Wood will fare as a defensive anchor in the playoffs. Dallas has allowed 119.8 points per 100 possessions when Wood plays as the lone big man in lineups with Doncic, according to data from pbpstats. The flip side: Those lineups have lit it up, scoring 121.9 points per 100 possessions.”
I do have concerns with Wood anchoring the defense in the playoffs, but as you mentioned earlier we don't really have any sample with Wood starting in a defense functional lineup. He has no chance playing with Luka/Dinwiddie/Timmy and we don't even have a Dorian or Maxi or Green to help out. The numbers have been bad against bad teams. I'm afraid its going to get worse when the schedule toughens up until we get some of those guys back.
Green is coming against the Celtics! I feel it!
The Mavs are open to a two year extension for $32 million? LOL! Of course they are. That’s just a lowball offer, not to be taken seriously. Wood may be open to two years in the off-season when presumably the Mavs could pay $50 million or something like that with bird rights. Or, maybe he’d take a full four year extension now, but he’s not taking $32 million. And his trade value as a not even half year rental will be pretty lousy. This sounds like a repeat of last summer’s roster management mistakes in the making. Pay him for longer now, pay him more later, get a nickels on the dollar fire sale return in a deadline trade that also damages your credibility as a franchise that can hang with the big boys, or have him walk. Those are basically the Mavs choices. It’s deja vu all over. Right now, the Mavs need to worry about doing everything they can to win the title this season. It’s wide open. They have the best player and as good a chance as anyone if they can make the right trade deadline moves.
Who knows what is true, but if true the Mavs appear to be slow on the trigger again. It probably wasn't likely but Wood would have been more likely to accept a two year deal early in the season. I don't think he would accept now.
I don't want to be too hard on the Mavs because I wanted to take a wait and see with Wood anyway and who knows what is true. But their slow to the draw with Jalen last year doesn't inspire much confidence.
(01-03-2023, 12:26 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]Here is a summary of how things have been when Wood has been on the floor. All data is from NBA.com
Dallas Full Season. 115.3/113.1 (net is 2.2)
Wood Full Season. 116.1/112.5 (net is 3.6)
For the full season, the team is better when Wood is on the floor both offensively and defensively. Not surprising really.
Wood as Starter. 118.4/118.7 (net is -0.2)
Wood from Bench. 114.9/109.6 (net is 5.3)
This is a little surprising to me. Again, this is what actually happens when Wood has been on the floor. It isn’t a direct link to him as four others are on the floor also. But, if we are trying to decide between extending or trading Wood, what happens when he is On The Floor is what matters. I know you like to net players against the players who are on the floor when the player in question is off. That answers a different question. It is especially misleading in this sample size as we are talking about players like Bertans, Frank and McKinley Wright. I think it is just flat wrong to try to paint a picture based on Off-Court when the players who are on when Wood is off are barely NBA players. The question is what happens when Wood is on the court, not how bad are we when he’s not. Down three important players, we know that is going to be bad.
If I’m being intellectually honest, I don’t think the Starter vs. Bench On-Court numbers above are particularly fair either. When Wood came off the bench, the team had the benefit of Maxi, DFS and Green. Since he’s been a starter, the team hasn’t had that benefit. So, O is up and D has gotten bad since Wood began starting…fairly predictable, but not necessarily attributable. We’d need to hold the Maxi/DFS/Green variable steady to have some idea what the straight swap of Wood Bench to Wood Starter really means and it would need to be more than a few games.
Note there is a fairly big difference between the last 10 games and the 10 games as a starter that skews our numbers a bit. I quoted the 10 games as a starter which include a 29 point loss. You quoted the last 10 games which replaces that big loss with a 20 point win. Wood wasn’t a starter in that game (but did play almost 30 minutes and contributed significantly). You can see from just that substitution of one game for another that there are significant flaws to both the methodology and sample sizes of both approaches.
Here is what I think is fair to say…in the nine games in a row sample where Wood has started and we’ve missed significant players (so removing the Chicago loss that Luka missed), the team is 7-2 and we’ve outscored opponents by a total of 35 points. (About 3 points a game). 25 of those 35 points of spread have occurred while Wood has been on the floor and the other 10 occurred when he wasn’t on the floor.
The sample sizes are too small to draw conclusions. Sure, Wood as a starter is missing other usual starters due to injury, but Wood as a starter has also played against the softest part of our schedule.
The 2/36 offer is insulting if true and will likely drive him out of town and we wasted that first round pick to get him for nothing. Wood would have to have the worst agent ever to accept that.
Sounds like Plan Powder is still on. Then in two years when we have max cap space we'll miss out on our desired free agent again a few days after free agency opens and throw out some bad contracts in a panic just like we've done before
For Wood it is also the key to get great stats the next two seasons, in order to secure the next great contract. So that has to play a huge factor for going with Dallas. He is a great if not a fantastic fit next to Luka. Obviously team needs an additional piece to make things explode. But this potential extention might be in interest of both Dallas and Wood, no matter if its a low offer.
(01-03-2023, 04:44 PM)MrGoat Wrote: [ -> ]The 2/36 offer is insulting if true and will likely drive him out of town and we wasted that first round pick to get him for nothing.
A year of Wood to kick the tires and dumping four JAGs is a pretty good use of a late FRP. We should also save the bemoaning of Wood being gone once he's gone, if he is gone.
(01-03-2023, 02:39 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: [ -> ]“Those concerns still exist, and there are doubts about how Wood will fare as a defensive anchor in the playoffs. Dallas has allowed 119.8 points per 100 possessions when Wood plays as the lone big man in lineups with Doncic, according to data from pbpstats. The flip side: Those lineups have lit it up, scoring 121.9 points per 100 possessions.”
Now the data without Spencer next to Luka. pbstats has the defense as follows:
Luka + SD +
Wood =
122.64 DefRtg
Luka + Wood (no SD) = 109.16 DefRtg
Now this:
Luka + SD +
Kleber =
121.20 DefRtg 
Imo those numbers (and at the bottom) point out who are causing the defensive problems. I am not seeing how it will be feasible to start
Luka + SD + THJ + Wood + X. Unless Josh Green is so good that he can carry that lineup on D. I guess you need at least 2 "defenders" in that starting and finishing lineup. Green/DFS i guess.
I would rather see SD going back to the bench. And start Luka/Green as a combo, and SD/Frank as backups. Because SD/Frank/Powell might be a trio that can have success from the bench.
SD/Frank +20 net in 122 min
Frank/Powell +50 net in 54 min
If Kidd still wants to start SD, i think THJ is the odd man out here by default. But do you really want to bench THJ again?
People can talk all they want about Green and DFS coming back, but if they are sitting on the bench during crucial minutes, nothing will improve on defense i am afraid.
Wood on 113.1 DefRtg
Wood off 111.0 DefRtg
Powell on 110.9 DefRtg
Powell off 113.0 DefRtg
THJ on 113.5 DefRtg
THJ off 112.8 DefRtg
Bullock on 115.3 DefRtg
Bullock off 110.7 DefRtg
Frank on 104.1 DefRtg
Frank off 117.3 DefRtg
Luka on 118.0 DefRtg
Luka off 103.4 DefRtg
SD on 117.5 DefRtg
SD off 104.2 DefRtg
To the people that think that 2/36 is insulting and that Wood could get more in the offseason, who do you think will have cap space and actually want to use it on Wood? From what I've read it seems like most of the teams that will have cap space are rebuilding teams. Are the Rockets, Pacers, Spurs, Pistons, Magic, or Thunder going to drop 25 million a year on Wood? I don't think Wood has any value to those teams. Is there another team that will pull a Knicks and dump a bunch of contracts to clear cap space for Wood? Seems unlikely to me as I don't think Wood’s father is currently employed by any NBA team.
I think Wood is more open to the extension than many think, and I think it will come down to haggling over the 3rd year.
(01-03-2023, 05:55 PM)sterlingmallory Wrote: [ -> ]To the people that think that 2/36 is insulting and that Wood could get more in the offseason, who do you think will have cap space and actually want to use it on Wood? From what I've read it seems like most of the teams that will have cap space are rebuilding teams. Are the Rockets, Pacers, Spurs, Pistons, Magic, or Thunder going to drop 25 million a year on Wood? I don't think Wood has any value to those teams. Is there another team that will pull a Knicks and dump a bunch of contracts to clear cap space for Wood? Seems unlikely to me as I don't think Wood’s father is currently employed by any NBA team.
I think Wood is more open to the extension than many think, and I think it will come down to haggling over the 3rd year.
When are we gonna learn that teams don't need cap space? I'm not arguing for or against Wood in this post, but this form of rebuttal really needs to stop.
2/$36 is hilarious. Plan powder 2025 baby.