FA: Spencer Dinwiddie Heads to DAL | 1 yr/vet min

[KillerLeft]

I wonder if Klay gets moved to the PJ role to close games, and PJ gets sit for another guy like Marshall or Grimes.

Very possible, especially in some matchups. 

I don't love that defenisve lineup, either, or the rebounding, but it scares me less than Thompson being on-ball, defensively.

[F Gump]

Is there a solution where Kyrie comes off the bench? If so, you can stagger Luka-Klay-Kyrie in pairs, and then use the 3 as your point of attack defender. That could be Naji, Grimes, or Exum, whichever is most effective against the player in question while also hopefully contributing to the offense as well.

[Knutsen]

Is there a solution where Kyrie comes off the bench? If so, you can stagger Luka-Klay-Kyrie in pairs, and then use the 3 as your point of attack defender. That could be Naji, Grimes, or Exum, whichever is most effective against the player in question while also hopefully contributing to the offense as well.

I don’t think that’s going to happen. My guess is Kyrie will turn it up a notch on defense and apply pressure on the guys handling the ball for the other team. Energywise he should easily be able to handle that role for the 10 to 15 minutes that Luka, Kyrie and Klay play together, because he can save energy on offense with our team being much stronger offensively.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

I'm guessing Din/Exum (offense/defense) will be the primary backups to Luka/Kyrie (with the ideal of keeping two creators on the floor).  Both Naji and Grimes can backup Klay trading offense for defense.  

Why do we need to backup PJ with a center?  Last season we used DJJ at backup 4 (especially when Maxi was out).  Naji is more suited to defend the 4 than DJJ is.  Who is these backup 4s we are worried about?

I think the defensive matchups would better dictate the first guard off the bench.  I really like Grimes in that role, even with only one distributor on the floor.

Z.Collins plays way more PF than C.  He's a good defender and a really good 3pt shooter.  He's not a switching defender, but other than that a great stretch big in the rotation.  This wouldn't be replacing DJJ, it'd be replacing Maxi.

[DallasMaverick]

I'm guessing Din/Exum (offense/defense) will be the primary backups to Luka/Kyrie (with the ideal of keeping two creators on the floor).  Both Naji and Grimes can backup Klay trading offense for defense.  

Why do we need to backup PJ with a center?  Last season we used DJJ at backup 4 (especially when Maxi was out).  Naji is more suited to defend the 4 than DJJ is.  Who is these backup 4s we are worried about?

I just want to say how much I appreciate you mentioning Spencer Dinwiddie in this thread.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

I just want to say how much I appreciate you mentioning Spencer Dinwiddie in this thread.

So is he, lol.

[mvossman]

Is there a solution where Kyrie comes off the bench? If so, you can stagger Luka-Klay-Kyrie in pairs, and then use the 3 as your point of attack defender. That could be Naji, Grimes, or Exum, whichever is most effective against the player in question while also hopefully contributing to the offense as well.

Hard to see that because Kyrie is a much better player than those guys.  I can see the move from Klay to one of those guys because the drop off is not as much (especially when taking into account potential age decline) and the fit makes more sense, but nobody brings a top 30 player off the bench.

[mvossman]

I think the defensive matchups would better dictate the first guard off the bench.  I really like Grimes in that role, even with only one distributor on the floor.

Z.Collins plays way more PF than C.  He's a good defender and a really good 3pt shooter.  He's not a switching defender, but other than that a great stretch big in the rotation.  This wouldn't be replacing DJJ, it'd be replacing Maxi.

I don't want to get in a drawn out discussion about Zach Collins, but he is a low volume 3 point shooter who just shot 32% and is 33.6% for his career.  That is not a really good three point shooter.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Hard to see that because Kyrie is a much better player than those guys.  I can see the move from Klay to one of those guys because the drop off is not as much (especially when taking into account potential age decline) and the fit makes more sense, but nobody brings a top 30 player off the bench.

I can see Naji or Grimes starting over Klay, Klay being the 6th man.  I hope not, but that's the one spot in the starting lineup where I can see more defense is definitely needed.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

I don't want to get in a drawn out discussion about Zach Collins, but he is a low volume 3 point shooter who just shot 32% and is 33.6% for his career.  That is not a really good three point shooter.

He's averaged the league average of 37% twice.  Yes, 32% last year, but that's without ANY PG play.  He's a catch and shoot shooter, not a creator of his own shot.  Put him on this team and he'll average well over Maxi's 34% last year.

I'm proposing ZCollins as a Maxi replacement.  I'd take his slightly less 3pt volume and efficiency Z.Collins' average of 1,485 minutes the last two years (37% of minutes available for a position), versus Maxi's 907 minutes (23%).  That's over 50% more availability.

[Dundalis]

He's averaged the league average of 37% twice.  Yes, 32% last year, but that's without ANY PG play.  He's a catch and shoot shooter, not a creator of his own shot.  Put him on this team and he'll average well over Maxi's 34% last year.

I'm proposing ZCollins as a Maxi replacement.  I'd take his slightly less 3pt volume and efficiency Z.Collins' average of 1,485 minutes the last two years (37% of minutes available for a position), versus Maxi's 907 minutes (23%).  That's over 50% more availability.

Did Collins learn how to defend?

[BigDirk41]

I can see Naji or Grimes starting over Klay, Klay being the 6th man.  I hope not, but that's the one spot in the starting lineup where I can see more defense is definitely needed.

Klay is absolutely going to start. That's 100% been guaranteed to him. He didn't come here to be a 6th man.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Did Collins learn how to defend?

Always has been a good defender.  Had a defensive rating last year right there with Gafford.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

Klay is absolutely going to start. That's 100% been guaranteed to him. He didn't come here to be a 6th man.

He came off the bench 14 games last year.  I hope I'm wrong, because I want Klay to ball out, but if he hits a rough patch, he'll be coming off the bench.

[SleepingHero]

He came off the bench 14 games last year.  I hope I'm wrong, because I want Klay to ball out, but if he hits a rough patch, he'll be coming off the bench.

He came off the bench less because of Klay's ability and more because of the limitations on the Warriors roster as a whole and Kerr was trying things out. 

Their team had 1 guy over 6'9 (and it was Saric who is a perimeter big) and they suffered because of it. They basically had 6 combo guards and 6 tweener wings with Kevon Looney+Jackson-Davis+Saric manning the middle. That ain't going to cut it. Their bench lacked any consistent shooting and whenever Steph went to the bench the Warriors line-ups collapsed. Kerr tried tinkering the entire year to find any sort of consistent combination that had the starting lineup and bench happy while managing the egos. 


So if you were Kerr, who would you replace out of Steph/Klay/Wiggins/Dray/Looney ? Saric doesn't really fix their issues. Wiggins was replaced for Kuminga in December and it didn't really work. Draymond was suspended from December till January (during which Kuminga+Wiggins started and the Warriors went 7-8). 

In February the ONLY combination that Kerr had never tried was messing with the big 3 and Klay was the most expendable given they had a young rookie that could replicate some of what Klay can provide (but not nearly the same, hence why bench lineups collapsed). So Kerr tried it and what happened? Well the Warriors went 5-1 to start (3 of those wins came against CHA, WAS, and LAL). Then went 4-4 in the rest of those games Klay didn't start. Total of 8-6 with Klay off the bench vs. 33-30 in games he started. Not a huge difference at all. 


Point is, Klay has taken a step back, but he hasn't fallen off a cliff. Kerr tried to bring him off the bench to save a tumultuous season and it didn't have any meaningful impact. Their roster was flawed and couldn't survive Draymond Green being suspended a month and a half from his own ineptitude.

[mvossman]

He came off the bench less because of Klay's ability and more because of the limitations on the Warriors roster as a whole and Kerr was trying things out. 

Their team had 1 guy over 6'9 (and it was Saric who is a perimeter big) and they suffered because of it. They basically had 6 combo guards and 6 tweener wings with Kevon Looney+Jackson-Davis+Saric manning the middle. That ain't going to cut it. Their bench lacked any consistent shooting and whenever Steph went to the bench the Warriors line-ups collapsed. Kerr tried tinkering the entire year to find any sort of consistent combination that had the starting lineup and bench happy while managing the egos. 


So if you were Kerr, who would you replace out of Steph/Klay/Wiggins/Dray/Looney ? Saric doesn't really fix their issues. Wiggins was replaced for Kuminga in December and it didn't really work. Draymond was suspended from December till January (during which Kuminga+Wiggins started and the Warriors went 7-8). 

In February the ONLY combination that Kerr had never tried was messing with the big 3 and Klay was the most expendable given they had a young rookie that could replicate some of what Klay can provide (but not nearly the same, hence why bench lineups collapsed). So Kerr tried it and what happened? Well the Warriors went 5-1 to start (3 of those wins came against CHA, WAS, and LAL). Then went 4-4 in the rest of those games Klay didn't start. Total of 8-6 with Klay off the bench vs. 33-30 in games he started. Not a huge difference at all. 


Point is, Klay has taken a step back, but he hasn't fallen off a cliff. Kerr tried to bring him off the bench to save a tumultuous season and it didn't have any meaningful impact. Their roster was flawed and couldn't survive Draymond Green being suspended a month and a half from his own ineptitude.

I don't think Klay has fallen off a cliff and I think he is easily a top 5 player on this roster, but I can see the fit argument that it might make sense to bring him off the bench.  But I don't see that playing out in the regular season.  This is a much better, deeper team than GS and can probably withstand a minor fit issue in the starting lineup for 5 or 10 minutes a game.  It will potentially be another conversation come playoff time, but we have a long time before we need to worry about that.

[Smitty]

I don't think Klay has fallen off a cliff and I think he is easily a top 5 player on this roster, but I can see the fit argument that it might make sense to bring him off the bench.  But I don't see that playing out in the regular season.  This is a much better, deeper team than GS and can probably withstand a minor fit issue in the starting lineup for 5 or 10 minutes a game.  It will potentially be another conversation come playoff time, but we have a long time before we need to worry about that.

Exactly.. I've pointed out a number of times already that Kidd only plays the starters ~10 mpg together. It's been my biggest complaint the last three years, because the lineup data is great and other teams like the Nuggets play their best 5 (starters) nearly 20 mpg together in the regular season and even more-so in the playoffs. But, there are ~38 minutes where those 5 for the Mavs aren't on the floor together and Kidd favors bigger rotations, sometimes being forced to, due to injuries. He's proven to be successful, so I won't complain about it anymore - but I'll keep bringing it up when people seem to think that the starters will make or break this team. Yes, they'll play the most minutes together season-long, but game to game its 10 mpg vs 38 mpg. Rotations matter, so we shouldn't get to worked up if/when Gafford starts over Lively or Klay starts over a better defender in Grimes/Naji/Exum.

Starters MPG:

21-22 regular season: 9.1 mpg
21-22 post-season: 9.4 mpg

22-23 regular season: 11.8 mpg

23-24 regular season pre-TDL: 8.2 mpg
23-24 regular season post-TDL: 10.3 mpg
23-24 regular season avg: 9.4 mpg
23-24 post-season: 10.7 mpg

[Chicagojk]

I think Din will need to beat out Exum. He will need to prove he can still be the '21 player. If he does, I expect he plays more minutes than we expect. He was not good last year. The Nets fans thought he quit on the team and was not good anyway. He also wasn't good with the Lakers and failed to find a productive role. Buyout players fits can be tricky in a tight window to end the season but there was probably a bigger role for him there but he failed to capitalize on it. Then this summer it appears there were not many suitors, if any, above the minimum. Other players got caught in this as well where money dried up, but regardless is it not a good place for a guy who still should be near his prime years.

The mavs finished the year so hot last year. Having Kyrie healthy during this stretch was one of the big reasons for this hot stretch. Mavs really had to grind during this stretch and found ways to keep on winning games. Looking at Kyrie history, you probably need to factor in 50-55 games from him. If you get more....great, but he seems to get things that makes him miss games during the season. I think the Mavs did a good job looking to protect themselves when Kyrie is out. The West is brutal. You need to find ways to keep your head above water when one of your better player missing 10 games in a row.

It is now up to Din to prove he can beat out Exum and also show he can still get to the level that he was with at the Mavs. He time before the Mavs and after Mavs have not been very promising.

[Ghost of Podkolzin]

I think Din will need to beat out Exum.  He will need to prove he can still be the '21 player.  If he does, I expect he plays more minutes than we expect.  He was not good last year.  The Nets fans thought he quit on the team and was not good anyway.  He also wasn't good with the Lakers and failed to find a productive role.  Buyout players fits can be tricky in a tight window to end the season but there was probably a bigger role for him there but he failed to capitalize on it.    Then this summer it appears there were not many suitors, if any, above the minimum.  Other players got caught in this as well where money dried up, but regardless is it not a good place for a guy who still should be near his prime years. 

The mavs finished the year so hot last year.  Having Kyrie healthy during this stretch was one of the big reasons for this hot stretch.  Mavs really had to grind during this stretch and found ways to keep on winning games.  Looking at Kyrie history, you probably need to factor in 50-55 games from him.    If you get more....great, but he seems to get things that makes him miss games during the season.  I think the Mavs did a good job looking to protect themselves when Kyrie is out.  The West is brutal.  You need to find ways to keep your head above water when one of your better player missing 10 games in a row.

It is now up to Din to prove he can beat out Exum and also show he can still get to the level that he was with at the Mavs.  He time before the Mavs and after Mavs have not been very promising.

I agree.  I think with Din now on the roster, Exum will get more minutes at SF.  I have him getting 594 minutes at PG and 396 minutes at SF.

[WillE]

I agree.  I think with Din now on the roster, Exum will get more minutes at SF.  I have him getting 594 minutes at PG and 396 minutes at SF.

With or without potential injuries?