07-08-2023, 10:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-08-2023, 10:38 PM by Scott41theMavs.)
(07-08-2023, 10:24 PM)SleepingHero Wrote: Absolutely. I agree that this trade makes sense and that the skills Wallace has are at a premium. He looked fantastic. But some thoughts on where I'm coming from.
First, I rarely expect any rookie to be a sure-fire all-star. Especially after 1 game of summer league. The ones I do expect are usually top 5, heralded prospects, or at worse top 10. That's what's expected of guys who go that high after all. I don't think it's likely that Lively nor Omax can be one, as their games aren't necessarily conducive to flashy stats and whatever else goes into getting picked for the all-star game (but Rudy's made it a bunch so who knows?). But I also don't think it's likely for Cason to be one either. The numbers are against him being a top 30 player in the league, and its even less likely he can be a top 15 player at his own position given the talent at guard.
Further, to think that after 1 game we can make any sweeping statements like OKC fleeced the Mavs, I think is a bit nutty. I sure love to make overreactions because its fun, but definitive putdown statements to me kind of takes the air out of the balloon. Cason had a good game and he looked good. But so did Lively AND Omax. Really good in fact. So good that the Mavs were winning the minutes with them on the court. So I think to come away with the thought that the Mavs got fleeced and OKC are kings of the draft yet again is a bit premature. I think both teams got exactly what they wanted.
Finally, if Wallace is better than Hardy is that really a surprise? One was picked 37th, the other 10th. I'm leaning heavily on draft position here, but there is usually a clear gradation between 2nd rounders and lottery picks. What I find funny is you saying Wallace looked better at scoring than Hardy, yet Hardy ended up scoring 24 to Wallace's 20. Wallace had him beat efficiency wise, shooting 46.7% to Hardy's 44.4% (and it took Hardy 3 more shots to get 4 more points).
You're presuming that I'm knee-jerking based on one game with Wallace. If you go back to the draft thread, I was on board with the Mavs taking him at 10 prior to the draft. Presuming that all of the red flags on Whitmore come to fruition, I believe he was the best player available at that pick, with the rest of the top 9 (with Whitmore no longer in consideration) off the board. I understand why the Mavs did what they did, and the broader team-building strategy involved. The best case scenario when you're drafting in the lottery is to be able to take the best player available. But when you need two, as the Mavs did with the roster situation the post-Luka-draft era has put them in, you have to trade down.
In a world where FVV makes more than Kyrie Irving and an 18 and 10 guy is having trouble getting a contract over vet minimum, correctly valuing players is hard - for NBA GMs, and even more so for two dudes typing away on a message board.
(07-08-2023, 10:27 PM)HoosierDaddyKid Wrote: Hardy took all the shots, 18. The next closest players took 9. No balance on shot distribution. Must be a referendum on him to be the primary scorer.
Considering that he's going to have to be able to score at least 18 ppg consistently for this team to compete, that's a good referendum.