MAVS 103, RAPTORS 95

[mavsluvr]

The O is really bad (O-rating is 27th in the league after two games).  33% and 41% FG% in the first two games...and it felt worse than that.  THJ and Powell have TS%'s of .729 and .627 respectively.  EVERYONE ELSE is .500 or BELOW.  As a group, our starters produced one of the most efficient offenses in history two years ago.  Now, they can't throw it in the ocean.  I tend to agree with Kidd's that we need a more diverse offensive attack in the long run.  But, people are being asked to do some things outside of their comfort zone and Luka is seemingly being asked to do less (until he just got tired of it and took over in the 3rd).  His usage is down about 12% and his TOV% is up about 20% (I know, its just two games).  It will be interesting to see if this approach is a work in progress or a bad idea (or if we just don't have the right personnel to pull it off).

Dan, thanks for gathering and organizing all the stats. Very informative!

Some of the guys over at MMB (normally not a den of hot-takers) are convinced that the new coaching approach does not deserve to be given any more time -- not even one more game. It is, they say, most likely just an outdated and bad system, or at best, it is a scheme that is ill-suited to this group of players and always will be. This roster, as they see it, was not constructed to rely on a mid-range attack, nor to depend on a high level of defensive prowess to win games. If Kidd is hell-bent on using those approaches, then they need to get different players who can at least have a chance of making that system work. 

They believe that the new approach will in fact be given more time -- maybe a lot more, out of respect to Kidd, but that we are watching an effort in futility, and it should be abandoned as soon as they politically can. The offense was already good before Kidd got here, it only looks to get worse with this system, and if the organization wants the team to be more successful, they need better players, not more time. 

One could agree or disagree with these sentiments, but they make an interesting case.