Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DAMN-WIDDIE: All Things Spencer | "Mr Game Seven" (30 pts, 11-15 FGs, +29)
#21
(03-08-2022, 01:20 PM)Mavs2021 Wrote: Maybe in that regard it helps with the recruitment of a Damian Lillard that Dinwiddie shows you can win with Luka and multiple ballhandlers.
I've been having this though myself, although I'm not sure where a high usage guy like Dame fits in this offense if both Luka and SD are around.


But it shows the core of the team was not KP-centric and anyone coming in will realize that it's Luka's world. He just makes their job easier.
Like Reply
#22
Yeah, it is a shame we couldn't have pulled off a TDL trade based around THJ for Holmes/Bagley.  I wanted Bagley pretty badly and I knew they were going to give him away.  Would have been a perfect trade for our team now.  I like Bagley's game and think that he will be good in Detroit with some PT.
Like Reply
#23
(03-08-2022, 01:20 PM)Mavs2021 Wrote:
Another rule is always buy into players from bad teams, rather than good teams. Good teams make mediocre players better and good teams don´t let good players go. Bad teams make mediocre players look worse, and they don´t know how to make them better.

Still a hot candidate for both theories the Knicks fall guy: Julius Randle. Tongue Wink

Shame we did not invest the two 2nd round picks into another victim of this: Marvin Bagley. That would have been really nice. 16/7 in Detroit so far, team is 4-2.


That's a good philosophy. The only times good teams let go good players is if the players themselves want out or the good player is about to be no longer good. 

Bagley was a guy I was heavily interested in. His lack of defense made me worry, but I find myself believing that was a product of the Kings environment rather than a Bagley thing.
14x All-Star, 12x all-NBA, 1x MVP, 1x Finals MVP, 1 NBA Championship: Dirk Nowitzki, the man, the myth, the legend.
Like Reply
#24
(03-08-2022, 01:20 PM)Mavs2021 Wrote: Another rule is always buy into players from bad teams, rather than good teams. Good teams make mediocre players better and good teams don´t let good players go. Bad teams make mediocre players look worse, and they don´t know how to make them better.

Problem with this theory is, bad teams are bad because of bad players and bad coaching.

Many players did just become "broken beyond repair" on bad teams or just not any good.

Look at all the talent wasted on tanking teams.
Like Reply
#25
(03-09-2022, 06:29 AM)Mapka Wrote: Problem with this theory is, bad teams are bad because of bad players and bad coaching.

Many players did just become "broken beyond repair" on bad teams or just not any good.

Look at all the talent wasted on tanking teams.

Jerry West says the biggest player-evaluating errors come from trusting the stats of players on bad teams - someone has to score, to rebound, to pass, but it doesn't mean they will be able to do much of it when on a better team with better players, and where winning has to be prioritized over getting mine. I trust West's perception.
[-] The following 4 users Like F Gump's post:
  • burekemde, Jommybone, Mapka, MFFL
Like Reply
#26
(03-09-2022, 11:17 AM)F Gump Wrote: Jerry West says the biggest player-evaluating errors come from trusting the stats of players on bad teams - someone has to score, to rebound, to pass, but it doesn't mean they will be able to do much of it when on a better team with better players, and where winning has to be prioritized over getting mine. I trust West's perception.

Absolutely agree. And it's also about mentality and psychology. On bad teams, players get used to lose for such a long time it's hard to fix, it's like a virus that takes long to heal, and can also in the worst case "contaminate" your own players that do have the win mentality and turn their mentality around in a negative sense.
Like Reply
#27
I’m confused by this thread. Are we agreeing or disagreeing? Don’t trust stats of players on bad teams (West, Gump, Burek). But don’t trade for players on good teams (M2021, MF12, SH). Which, taken together, means . . . ?

And by the way, is San Antonio a good team or a bad team? Obviously they are a well-run organization with a great coach, but they have a pretty poor W-L record on the season. 

Do both schools of thought agree that first-time-all-star Dejounte Murray’s 20.5 points, 8.4 rebounds, and 9.4 assists would not likely follow him to a contender? 

Since this is the Widdie thread, let’s not leave him out. Do both schools of thought agree that the Wiz = the kind of team you want to trade with for guys that seem to be underperforming there?
Like Reply
#28
(03-09-2022, 03:26 PM)Jommybone Wrote: Don’t trust stats of players on bad teams (West, Gump, Burek).

I usually never trust stats alone, and especially not stats for players on bad teams. There are some great players on bad teams as well for sure. It's just that one has to be extra cautious evaluating players on bad teams, and understanding from the games and not stats whether they contribute the negative part to the team success or whether that's due to other players. Its all evident in game tape and not stats, and hard to extrapolate. If a player on bad team makes many rebounds it could be due to his teammates inability to get them and the space more open and with more opportunities. Same with all other stats. I think Dinwiddie is a hell of a player with great skillset. I haven't watched Wizards much so cant tell what happened there. Its great that our team identified him and that his skills would match next to Luka, it's a brilliant move. He is exactly the skill we need next to Luka, both him and Brunson. We dont want to surround pure shooters around Luka. The space Luka creates can be exploited by attacking the paint, passing etc. all of what Brunson and Dinwiddie can do in addition to shooting. We are much much more multidimensional now.
Like Reply
#29
Might bite us in the butt at some point when the shots aren't falling but Dinwiddie really fits that irrational confidence role we needed. I don't see him being scared to go on the attack in a big playoff game when Luka is being smothered.
Love Brunson but he seems to get a little timid at times and no else has the skillset to create on their own

Thought we were getting more of Westbrick but so far he's reminding me much more of Jason Terry who wasn't scared of anything (for better or worse)
[-] The following 2 users Like Jym's post:
  • burekemde, MFFL
Like Reply
#30
I'm not sure I would call it irrational confidence based on his interviews, the opposite actually.  He just seems like an established guy who is comfortable in his abilities and appreciates his role being defined.  I'm not sure he can keep up his current pace and shooting splits, but I'm enjoying the crow he is feeding me so far.
[-] The following 2 users Like cow's post:
  • KillerLeft, MFFL
Like Reply
#31
(03-09-2022, 11:17 AM)F Gump Wrote: Jerry West says the biggest player-evaluating errors come from trusting the stats of players on bad teams - someone has to score, to rebound, to pass, but it doesn't mean they will be able to do much of it when on a better team with better players, and where winning has to be prioritized over getting mine. I trust West's perception.

Seems like it can go lots of different ways.

We used to talk about the "Dirk effect", where players who came to the Mavericks would have significant improvements in their stats, maybe get a big contract elsewhere, and revert to their mean.

On the other hand, perhaps there's a nice complementary player on a bad team who's being asked to carry too much of the load, generate more offense than they are comfortable with, perhaps against the opponent's best defender.  A change of scenery might result in smaller raw numbers, but significantly improved efficiency.  

Or maybe it's just a chemistry issue.  We've noted the clunky fit with Luka and KP.  Maybe KP's numbers improve in Washington?  Maybe it's about the fit, the combination of skill sets.

This is why I reject the philosophy that says "just get talent, and figure out the fit later".
[-] The following 1 user Likes DallasMaverick's post:
  • Mavsfan12
Like Reply
#32
I'm beginning to wonder if some of Dinwiddie's inflated stats in FG% are from the Dallas offensive system where spacing takes up most of the floor. And not just his 3-point percentage, but his two-point percentage as well. 

When Dinwiddie drives to the basket, I rarely see anyone coming over to help in time. It seems he's a step faster, but I think it's because the help-defender has to make up an extra step or two... probably because they've been told to stay home on their man. 

On the other hand, maybe that's just me hoping that's true.
[-] The following 2 users Like Winter's post:
  • DallasMaverick, Mavsfan12
Like Reply
#33
(03-09-2022, 05:50 PM)DallasMaverick Wrote: Seems like it can go lots of different ways.

We used to talk about the "Dirk effect", where players who came to the Mavericks would have significant improvements in their stats, maybe get a big contract elsewhere, and revert to their mean.

On the other hand, perhaps there's a nice complementary player on a bad team who's being asked to carry too much of the load, generate more offense than they are comfortable with, perhaps against the opponent's best defender.  A change of scenery might result in smaller raw numbers, but significantly improved efficiency.  

Or maybe it's just a chemistry issue.  We've noted the clunky fit with Luka and KP.  Maybe KP's numbers improve in Washington?  Maybe it's about the fit, the combination of skill sets.

This is why I reject the philosophy that says "just get talent, and figure out the fit later".

The "Dirk effect is absolutely a real thing.  When we last traded with WAS for Butler/Haywood, Butler came over and became a FAR improved 3pt shooter than he had ever been.  In his time in 10-11 season before he got hurt, he had gone from a 26% 3pt shooter in WAS to 43% that season with the Mavs.  Spacing, fit, coaching, personnel, and focus all play a role.  That is why you have a scouting dept to figure what players not on your team would fit on your team.  Sometimes you hit it perfectly like what has happened with Din.  I still can't believe how high he has spiked in terms of efficiency.  He can't really be this good, right?  Prime Curry percentages seems a bit high to expect to last.  haha.
Like Reply
#34
I vouched for Dinwiddie repeatedly during the off-season. Most on here were against it - including several posting positive thoughts in this thread.

exhibit A
Like Reply
#35
(03-09-2022, 11:39 PM)VintagePejav2 Wrote: I vouched for Dinwiddie repeatedly during the off-season. Most on here were against it - including several posting positive thoughts in this thread.

exhibit A


Hey I said, "Give me Dinwiddie every time over DeRozan." Smile
Like Reply
#36
(03-10-2022, 12:07 AM)Kammrath Wrote: Hey I said, "Give me Dinwiddie every time over DeRozan." Smile

I just wanted one of them.
Et voila.

Everybody knew we needed a creator and scorer. They just didn't like the warts.
Like Reply
#37
I will admit that I was down on Din in FA.  I don't like inefficient chuckers, and that is what he has always been.  Didn't think he could play off ball with Luka efficiently.  So far, he has been a completely different shooter than he has been his entire career.  He will either continue this and prove me wrong, or regress to his mean... which is really bad.  

No one could have predicted that he would come in and hit 45% on 3's  So, even if you vouched for him, it was not this version of Din.
Like Reply
#38
(03-10-2022, 01:07 AM)Mavsfan12 Wrote: I will admit that I was down on Din in FA.  I don't like inefficient chuckers, and that is what he has always been.  Didn't think he could play off ball with Luka efficiently.  So far, he has been a completely different shooter than he has been his entire career.  He will either continue this and prove me wrong, or regress to his mean... which is really bad.  

No one could have predicted that he would come in and hit 45% on 3's  So, even if you vouched for him, it was not this version of Din.

How did he become a "inefficient chucker" in your eyes?
He was pretty good on the Nets and lead them to the POs.

I also think I've read he was kinda ok on C&S 3s.

Advanced Stats are as useless as traditional Stats in measureing impact an a bad team vs a good team.
Like Reply
#39
(03-10-2022, 03:22 AM)Mapka Wrote: How did he become a "inefficient chucker" in your eyes?
He was pretty good on the Nets and lead them to the POs.

I also think I've read he was kinda ok on C&S 3s.

Advanced Stats are as useless as traditional Stats in measureing impact an a bad team vs a good team.

Uh...  by watching him play and looking at his stats.  How was he anything other than that in your eyes?  The guy has barely shot 40% from the field and just over 30% from 3 for most of his career.  He was a poor man's Russell Westbrick without elite athleticism.  One thing I've always appreciated about him was his ability to draw fouls, which he does well for a non-star player.  But he wasn't a plus defender, and was an inefficient shooter.  Why would I have wanted him as Luka's running mate?  Why would anyone?  


Again, the player he has been in his short time here has been a massive shift from the player he has always been, in terms of efficiency.  Good for him... and for the Mavs.  If he continues like this, he is an all-star caliber player.  I just think that it is not realistic that ANYONE could have thought that Din would come here and turn in prime Steph Curry level efficiency shooting the ball.  If he is turning in his normal 40/31 %'s, no one is excited to see more of him shooting, even with his creation skills.  And opposing teams aren't closing out on him as hard at the 3pt line for him to get into the paint as easily.  So let's celebrate his success, and hope that the Mavs effect on him lasts!
Like Reply
#40
https://twitter.com/dallasmavs/status/15...2849916929
Like Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)