Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why the Mavs are Potentially Much Better Already...
#21
I think we’re pretty much the same team. Maybe slightly better fit-wise but you also have to factor in a new system/coach that will take time for everybody to get adjusted to. We’ll see.

Signing Bullock looks good to me, but personally I was hoping for a lot more this offseason. I dont think the results of the last years deserve that high of a level of continuity. But hey maybe it’s gonna work this time with once again Timmy being our second best/consistent player. 

This was the last summer for a while where we had a clear path to some upgrades via caproom. Now we’re looking at the trade-avenue almost exclusively with a once again limited/non existent asset base. OTOH the team’s best bench player (Brunson) and wing defender (DFS) will be up for extensions in 12 months as UFAs. If they get raises you quickly will reach the next big roster building question mark (will Cuban ever pay luxury tax again? He hasn’t for a decade).

I really don’t think we did enough. Just like 2019 and 2020. I don’t want to be so negative all the time, but Imo I the big picture outlook of the organization is pretty terrible. I would not fault Luka one bit for bolting the first opportunity he gets. 

Will he ever get to play with a second Allstar (or better: all Nba guy) during his time in DAL? Right now none of our guys are close and we’re also not close to having the trade ammunition for someone of that caliber.
Like Reply
#22
The Mavs are pretty much the same team as last year with JRich’s rotation spot replaced by Bullock.  That’s a definite upgrade. If you also factor in that during the second half of the season the Mavs were a top four or five team, we should see a return to 50+ wins.  Arguably, in Moses Brown, who had some massive games and showed great improvement last year, the Mavs also have a legit developmental project now.  So, we do have positives.  I just don’t think any of this really works until a legit second all star caliber player is on the roster, and I don’t see a path to that right now. Best case scenario appears to be something like Lebron’s first run with Cleveland where the team was very good, even making a finals, with good roster construction, but where the lack of any true complimentary stars did them in. That’s the best case.
Like Reply
#23
The Mavs have one world class player. All-NBA+. How much of a 2nd star is necessary? Not going to get one as good, at least not easily, so that 2nd star is going to be a lesser-star. I think part of KP's issue, other than injury, is the measuring-up to Luka. KP doesn't measure up to Luka. He went from co-star to 2nd banana in the eyes of the paying customers. How does KP deal with that? He's the Unicorn, but he's not playing like the Unicorn. Is the injured KP the permanent KP? KP is that 2nd star if he gets back to what he was, if he can subjugate himself to fit into the Luka Show and not insist on "his touches" and that sort of thing. Take sort of an, I'm 7'3", if I want the ball, I'll go and get it off the glass, sort of attitude. I don't see a trade for a 2nd star coming. It had better be KP, if he'll take the role.
Like Reply
#24
(08-05-2021, 11:12 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: @"Kammrath" this is a great thread. Great stuff, and I think you're absolutely correct about the thesis. 

I'm happy as a clam that Richardson is gone as I'm sure you know. And, I'm happy to have added some 3&D guys who actually shoot 3's and play D. About the best ones available this summer, imo, if we're being honest. I really think that's going to be a nice deodorant in a lot of areas, and I absolutely think they (along with retained THJ) were moves made with "playing well off of Luka" in mind. Zero complaints. 

But, I also think you really believe that the Morey/Harden Houston model will work better with Luka than it did for them, and I just don't.

I feel pretty strongly that over the course of the season and especially in the playoffs, multiple sources of creation, hopefully having played together enough to form a really synergetic play style, are an absolute necessity. I don't have any cool charts or graphs to post that prove it, but that is what I take away from the playoffs every single year. 


Here ya go, pal



[Image: A-KILLER-GRAPH.jpg]
[-] The following 3 users Like fifteenth's post:
  • Hypermav, ItsGoTime, KillerLeft
Like Reply
#25
Reasons the Mavs will be better:

1. Kidd. Honestly I can see a guy like JKidd planning to just give Luka the ball and let him be a point guard. I mean no one complains about Embiid's usage rate. No one wanted to take the ball out of prime Lebron's hands, or MJ, Magic, Kidd himself. Just put some better shooters around Luka and go win an MVP.

2. KP. He's clearly this team's second best player. Assuming he can stay healthy, and I think most people on this board expect a bounce back year. Let's not forget he was pretty good offensively last year.

3. Brunson. He often played like the team's second best player last year. Unfortunately he loses out in the cat & mouse matchups game vs the Clippers. Look at Brunson's splits. He averaged fewer minutes against LAC than any other team. Why? Matchups. When Brunson plays, the Clippers can put a tough vet defender on the floor like Beverely or Rondo. When Brunson sits and Beverly matches up with Luka the result is "You're too f'ing small". Luka forced the Clippers to play Jackson - and also sit Zubacs. That should be favorable for Dallas, but unfortunately Jackson played out of his mind. 

4. The subject of this thread is spot on. Simply replacing JRich with shooters should help. Prediction: Bullock starts, averages 30 MIN and 14 PPG. He will have a career year.
[-] The following 2 users Like vfromlmf's post:
  • fifteenth, Kammrath
Like Reply
#26
(08-06-2021, 09:29 AM)fifteenth Wrote: Here ya go, pal



[Image: A-KILLER-GRAPH.jpg]
[Image: giphy.gif]
[-] The following 4 users Like Hypermav's post:
  • ClutchDirk, fifteenth, Kammrath, KillerLeft
Like Reply
#27
I think it was clear SG position is a position of need. Mavs acknowledged this months ago. First by speaking of secondary facilitator and later targeting Lowry. However, what they did so far really doesn't impress me, to put it mildly. Based on salary it is actually THJ who is replacing JRich. We already had THJ last year and it is pretty clear Luka-THJ-KP is not good enough. Only Luka can create and none really proved to be a great defender. The remaining two spots will be filled with 2 of DFS, Bullock and Maxi. So when speaking about Bullock, we are probably really questioning, if he is replacing Maxi in the starting five. 

Bullock is fine as a player, but I don't think it is enough. It is just more of the same we saw last two offseasons. In addition, I am really concerned how our rookies will get any minutes. Even if we push Burke to the end of rotation, Green has likely all of Luka, Brunson, THJ, Brown, Bullock and DFS ahead of him on positions 1-3. So one wonders - is it really so valuable to keep Green? I would love to keep him, but if you do you have to commit to him. 

After third year in a row, Mavs still have a bunch of role players while severly lacking top end talent. I trully hope we are not done this summer.
[-] The following 1 user Likes omahen's post:
  • ItsGoTime
Like Reply
#28
https://media.giphy.com/media/KGHQE3GurG.../giphy.gif
Josh Green is a top 5 Mavs player...
Like Reply
#29
Bottom line, the success of this season rides on the skinny shoulders of KP.
[-] The following 1 user Likes HoosierDaddyKid's post:
  • cow
Like Reply
#30
(08-06-2021, 11:14 AM)HoosierDaddyKid Wrote: Bottom line, the success of this season rides on the skinny shoulders of KP.

Easily.  I sprinkle in some Kidd being more creative with how KP is used and Kidd/Luka ironing out that on court chemistry.  If the team is going to take steps forward, this will be why.
Like Reply
#31
(08-06-2021, 11:25 AM)cow Wrote: If the team is going to take steps forward, this will be why.


Additonal 3pt shooting and defense from the wings and growth from Luka will be big I think. Find that secondary playmaker could make a big difference as well. But I agree that KP being more mobile, able to play defense like he has before, staying healthy and Coach figuring out how to use him are huge. It's huge for the team's level of play and huge for potential trade deadline deals.
[-] The following 2 users Like fifteenth's post:
  • Jmaciscool, Kammrath
Like Reply
#32
I am still feeling really good about what Nico has done this offseason, but think the grade is "incomplete" until we see October 1 roll around. 


I think I would grade it a B if nothing else happens. In large part because the Mavs in no way did anything HURTFUL to themselves while upgrading the biggest issue (IMO) in JR.

I think Dragic and/or Markkanen would bump the grade to B+ or A-. 


KP is still the elephant in the room, but I don't fault the Mavs for giving it a run with a new coach and better health before bailing.
Like Reply
#33
(08-05-2021, 09:11 PM)Kammrath Wrote: I think two charts might explain:

1) The priority for Nico this offseason.

2) Why there is hope that the Mavs are already much better even with seemingly little movement. 



[Image: Screenshot-2021-08-05-8.35.17-PM.png]

In this first chart you see that DAL was -0.2 in the 1760 minutes that Josh Richardson played this year. That would rank the Mavs 18th in the NBA in net rating. You also see that DAL was +6.1 in the 1671 minutes JR didn't play. That would rank the Mavs 2nd in the whole NBA, only behind UTA (and virtually tied with LAC). JR's -6.3 on/off was the worst on the Mavs last year, by far.



[Image: Screenshot-2021-08-05-8.34.41-PM.png]

In this second chart you see how Luka and the Mavs were +7.6 when there was no JR on the court and then +0.3 when JR was with Luka on the court.


The Mavs were an ELITE level team, destroying their opponents when JR was not playing last year. When JR played the Mavs essentially performed like a non-playoff team. Also, Luka's impact on the game was massively better when JR was not with him on the court (the team was much better offensively AND defensively in that scenario). 


It would not surprise me if Nico and the analytics team saw these kind of numbers and realized that the single biggest off season move needed to be upgrading JR. The fact of the matter is that all of their moves to this point (other than getting back their own players: WCS, THJ, Boban) were centered on this goal: upgrading JR. They traded JR for a TPE and then they went out and signed TWO replacement players: Reggie Bullock and Sterling Brown. 


So are Reggie Bullock and Sterling Brown actual upgrades to JR? Well only time will tell, but the numbers are very promising. 

Reggie Bullock was a go-to defender on one of the four elite defenses last year in NYK, often taking the hardest matchup on the court. The Knicks were 1.1 pts better defensively without Bullock, but when you take into account matchups with a stat like DRPM, he was +3.74 defensively (good for 7th best in the whole NBA...!). He also was elite in defending the perimeter, allowing only 30% shooting from outside from the guys he defended (JR allowed 40% shooting from outside). Bullock was also +1.4 offensively for the Knicks, shooting 41% from three (42.5% on catch and shoot). JR on the other hand shot 33% from three (32.5% on catch and shoot). 

Sterling Brown also shows great promise on both ends in a more limited sample size. He shot 42.2% from three (41.4% on catch and shoot and an astonishing 46.9% on pull-up threes). The Rockets were also +4.0 defensively when Sterling played. Sterling is younger than Bullock and shows a lot of promise as an emerging 3&D player in this league.


I believe Nico went into this offseason with one goal that HAD to be accomplished above all others: address the team's biggest weakness last year by upgrading JR. I think Nico quickly accomplished that. 

Is that enough? No. But it is a hell of a start. Fixing KP's impact is the next objective (whether through trade, scheme, coaching, mental therapy, etc) as well as getting Luka a better pick and roll partner (could that be KP with a new coach and scheme?) and a secondary ball-handler/creator (is Dragic the short term answer here?). I really like Nico's start as GM, even if it looks underwhelming on the surface. It may not be flashy, but it is getting to the core of what ailed this team last year.

Not trying to be an a…but would that not be true ONLY if the system did not change? 

…just saying that with a new coach and supposedly a new system, these kind of comparisons are not valid….
[-] The following 1 user Likes Glegi's post:
  • ItsGoTime
Like Reply
#34
(08-25-2021, 04:39 AM)Glegi Wrote: …just saying that with a new coach and supposedly a new system, these kind of comparisons are not valid….


That is not a true statement. 

A new coach and system MAY make these kind of comparisons invalid, but there is probably a stronger likelihood that the data is of a large enough sample that its general trend would continue even with a new coach and system.

BUT either way the main point still holds. JR in his role last year in that system with RC as head coach was a huge detriment to team success. The Mavs CHANGED that by removing both possible issues: 1) JR as a player and fit and 2) the system and coaching around that.

NOTE: My strong opinion from observing the situation with my eyes all year and looking at the data is that RC and his system was NOT the problem with JR's fit and performance.
Like Reply
#35
(08-25-2021, 04:39 AM)Glegi Wrote: Not trying to be an a…but would that not be true ONLY if the system did not change? 

…just saying that with a new coach and supposedly a new system, these kind of comparisons are not valid….

A few points...

1. Do we know that the offensive system is going to change that much?  Seems to me maximizing Luka calls for a huge percentage of the offense to look just like it has looked the last two seasons (and the Olympics).  I think change will come only around the fringes offensively.  I do suspect the defensive system will change more than the offensive system.

2.  People assume offensive fit was the issue with JRich.  But, the O was basically the same with JRich On or Off.  It was the D that improved by 4.6 points when JRich sat.  It wasn't like he was being replaced by some defensive savant.  Typically it was Hardaway or Brunson who took his place.

3. Lineups are fragile ecosystems.  Change one element and everything blows up (or improves dramatically).  


Both Wright and JRich came here with a history of positive on-off and had horrendous numbers here (ironically, -4.7 for Wright and -4.7 for JRich).  JRich was part of some wildly successful lineups.  The most used was Luka, JRich, DFS, Maxi and KP at +12.  The second was largely as teams were transitioning to their bench and included Brunson, JRich, THJ, DFS and KP at +14.   You can't be that good in the most used lineups and that bad overall without some really bad lineups using other combinations.  

As I said before, JRich's issue was defense.  Luka's worst defensive pairing was KP at a D-Rating of 117.7.  Second worst was JRich at 114.5.  If a guard can't hit 3's and can't protect Luka defensively, why exactly is he here?  What can Bullock (and Sterling) do that JRich couldn't?  Hit 3's and play D.  The more of that you can add next to Luka, the less fragile the ecosystem will be.  So far we've seen the primary guard next to Luka be Smith Jr., THJ/Curry (the Wright minutes with Luka were pretty limited) and Richardson.  The three jobs for that position are secondary creator, hit 3's and play good D against the other team's primary guard creator.  None of those guys were great creators (neither is Bullock) and none checked both of the other two boxes (3's AND D).  At the very least Bullock hits 3's and is arguably the best defender of the bunch also.
[-] The following 3 users Like DanSchwartzgan's post:
  • Kammrath, KillerLeft, Tyler
Like Reply
#36
JRich's issue is that he turns over the ball almost all the time. when he tries to dribble the ball into the lane and it is usually a live-ball turnover which results to easy buckets for the opposing team. That is why the defensive numbers suffers when he is on the floor.
Like Reply
#37
(08-25-2021, 07:34 AM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: 2.  People assume offensive fit was the issue with JRich.  But, the O was basically the same with JRich On or Off.  It was the D that improved by 4.6 points when JRich sat.  It wasn't like he was being replaced by some defensive savant.  Typically it was Hardaway or Brunson who took his place.


I wish more people would get their heads wrapped around this. 

Richardson was not a good defender last year.
[-] The following 3 users Like KillerLeft's post:
  • ClutchDirk, Kammrath, Scott41theMavs
Like Reply
#38
I think trading JRich was the thing to do -- among other things, believe he affirmatively wanted to be traded. So, good for the front office. 

However, I have to strongly disagree that the presence of Richardson was this team's biggest problem, and that we should credit Cubes for transforming the team by turning him into a trade exception. 

One could argue about just how good or bad Richardson was. I did not think he was a good fit, but I didn't think he was the roster's worst player, by any means. The Mavs had already demoted him to the bench. If their biggest issue was removing him from the court altogether, all they had to do was not play him, which was never even considered, as far as I am aware. By dumping him, they removed an unhappy player, and acquired a trade exception that they may or may not end up using. Cool. 

But I would submit that move, without more, was just more tinkering around the edges. The enormous issue for the Mavs, it seems to me, was turning KP into a player who is productive on both ends and fits into the system. Either through rehabilitating him, using him in a different fashion, or trading him for good value. WAY more important than taking JR off the court. 

They have addressed this, so far, by replacing the coach, although that was Carlisle's decision, rather than something they had planned to do. A new coaching system may help the situation, may not. It seems to me that the main issues with KP are defensive, and his own physical limitations are likely to be much more determinative than any change in the defensive system. 

They still need to address secondary playmaking (which turning JR into a TE didn't do), rim protection (which a 3&D guy doesn't directly address), and wing defense, which at least has a chance to be a little improved with Bullock. 

Imho, Cuban hasn't addressed any of the club's primary problems. Maybe he still will, who knows?
[-] The following 2 users Like mavsluvr's post:
  • HAguiar95, omahen
Like Reply
#39
(08-25-2021, 10:33 AM)mavsluvr Wrote: I have to strongly disagree that the presence of Richardson was this team's biggest problem


You may be right, but there is a LOT of data that says otherwise and points to JR as the single largest on-court issue over the course of the entire season and thousands of minutes.


(08-25-2021, 10:33 AM)mavsluvr Wrote: The enormous issue for the Mavs, it seems to me, was turning KP into a player who is productive on both ends and fits into the system.
 

Yes, as I stated, KP is the elephant in the room because of his salary and how he has not lived into the expectation of being the second star. For whatever reasons, the Mavs seem to be currently choosing to see if coaching and system change and improved health is enough to change the dynamics with him. 


And back to the data: There is much more data that suggests there is more hope with a future KP fit than there was with JR. JR had a few good lineups, but the overall data screamed that he was not a good fit on this team and with Luka. 

Over the course of 3,461 minutes JR was a team worst -6.3 on/off (next closest was -3.4). In the last 15 regular season games with a reduced role in place he was still -5.2 on/off. In the playoffs for anyone who played more than 50 minutes, he was a team worst -33.6 on/off. Large role, small role, regular season, playoffs...it didn't matter, JR playing was consistent with the team's performance being at its worst.
Like Reply
#40
(08-25-2021, 10:47 AM)Kammrath Wrote: You may be right, but there is a LOT of data that says otherwise and points to JR as the single largest on-court issue over the course of the entire season and thousands of minutes.


 

Yes, as I stated, KP is the elephant in the room because of his salary and how he has not lived into the expectation of being the second star. For whatever reasons, the Mavs seem to be currently choosing to see if coaching and system change and improved health is enough to change the dynamics with him. 


And back to the data: There is much more data that suggests there is more hope with a future KP fit than there was with JR. JR had a few good lineups, but the overall data screamed that he was not a good fit on this team and with Luka. 

Over the course of 3,461 minutes JR was a team worst -6.3 on/off (next closest was -3.4). In the last 15 regular season games with a reduced role in place he was still -5.2 on/off. In the playoffs for anyone who played more than 50 minutes, he was a team worst -33.6 on/off. Large role, small role, regular season, playoffs...it didn't matter, JR playing was consistent with the team's performance being at its worst.
We agree that JR was not a good fit with the team. 

You can't judge whether a player was his team's "worst problem" by on-off numbers. The fact that JR was a part of some very successful lineups for a large number of minutes would seem to be an indication that he was also required to play in some horrible lineups that had very poor defensive performances as a group. If the coaching/analytics staff had thought he was 100% negative and the team's worst problem, they would have just taken him off the floor altogether. 

On-off numbers also do not result in a ranking of what the team's worst problems are -- a player could play ten minutes the whole season and have the roster's worst on-off number in those ten minutes. That doesn't mean that guy is the team's worst problem. 

I submit that JRich should have been traded, but that he wasn't close to important enough to be the team's worst problem. Also, that turning him into a trade exception didn't solve anything, or make the team at all better at this point. It may turn out to have been a step in the direction of acquiring better talent, and I hope it is, but so far, as far as an on-court difference, we're still waiting. 

I don't have a problem with the Bullock signing, but don't view him as a replacement for Richardson's position at all. They didn't have to trade JR to get him, and the playmaking they had hoped to get from Richardson is not a feature of Bullock's game, as far as I know. 

If the front office gets credit for the Richardson trade, I think it is that they accomplished it without attaching an asset. Actually, the on-court team isn't any better for the trade, at this point. They could have taken him off the floor as a coaching decision.
[-] The following 3 users Like mavsluvr's post:
  • jesusshuttlesworth82, KillerLeft, omahen
Like Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)