04-05-2021, 07:36 AM
Tim Cato’s take from a Q&A last week on Collins vs. Ball:
Randall F. asks, “Let’s say the Mavs could add John Collins or Lonzo Ball (but only 1) next offseason, and that’s their main move. Which makes more sense? Which carries more risk? And which philosophy (strong frontcourt vs. strong backcourt) do you think they’ll ultimately pursue?” (Matt W. asks a similar question.)
If I had to guess, the team pursues Collins. If it were up to me, I’d try to sign Ball. The first option has more future trade value. Collins, although his fit might turn out to be tenuous, is an easy-scoring big man with a skill set that can’t be easily duplicated. The league hasn’t really “gone small” as much as it’s forced big men to have the same skill sets as guards. Collins is an example of this: He could, on consecutive possessions, convert a turnaround jumper from the post, hit a corner 3 and then jam the living hell out of the rim after attacking a closeout off the dribble. Teams want players like this. I’m not positive if he, Doncic and Porzingis could ever play defense at an adequate enough level no matter who’s on the court with them. I’m also not sure Doncic wants to play with a Collins-like player, although you could focus your Collins-centric offense involving isolations and post-ups for the times Doncic is off the floor. But whatever challenges signing him would present, it would be fun. You could certainly deal him later in a move to acquire someone who fits better.
But Ball might just fit better to start. He won’t have the same market value because he’s not a prolific scorer, but it won’t matter if he’s the functional third star the team needs from the moment he steps onto the court with them. He would improve the team in every area it’s light: shooting, perimeter defense and creation. He’s still young enough to fit the timeline well but proven enough through four years in the league that I trust you’re getting the player he’s been the past two seasons in New Orleans. Now, I’m not sure it really makes sense for the Pelicans to let him walk. But I could see the Mavericks being unable to play Porzingis and Collins at the same time in a postseason series. I don’t have these same concerns with Ball. If he’s available — and he simply might not be — I think he’s the obvious better fit.
Dallas might not go after either one. I’m already preparing for an incensed Mavericks Twitter whenever free agency actually comes. But there are reasons to be optimistic too, and the team must know some tangible improvement will be necessary for this roster that once again might not make it past the first round. I hope they deliver in a reasonable manner
Randall F. asks, “Let’s say the Mavs could add John Collins or Lonzo Ball (but only 1) next offseason, and that’s their main move. Which makes more sense? Which carries more risk? And which philosophy (strong frontcourt vs. strong backcourt) do you think they’ll ultimately pursue?” (Matt W. asks a similar question.)
If I had to guess, the team pursues Collins. If it were up to me, I’d try to sign Ball. The first option has more future trade value. Collins, although his fit might turn out to be tenuous, is an easy-scoring big man with a skill set that can’t be easily duplicated. The league hasn’t really “gone small” as much as it’s forced big men to have the same skill sets as guards. Collins is an example of this: He could, on consecutive possessions, convert a turnaround jumper from the post, hit a corner 3 and then jam the living hell out of the rim after attacking a closeout off the dribble. Teams want players like this. I’m not positive if he, Doncic and Porzingis could ever play defense at an adequate enough level no matter who’s on the court with them. I’m also not sure Doncic wants to play with a Collins-like player, although you could focus your Collins-centric offense involving isolations and post-ups for the times Doncic is off the floor. But whatever challenges signing him would present, it would be fun. You could certainly deal him later in a move to acquire someone who fits better.
But Ball might just fit better to start. He won’t have the same market value because he’s not a prolific scorer, but it won’t matter if he’s the functional third star the team needs from the moment he steps onto the court with them. He would improve the team in every area it’s light: shooting, perimeter defense and creation. He’s still young enough to fit the timeline well but proven enough through four years in the league that I trust you’re getting the player he’s been the past two seasons in New Orleans. Now, I’m not sure it really makes sense for the Pelicans to let him walk. But I could see the Mavericks being unable to play Porzingis and Collins at the same time in a postseason series. I don’t have these same concerns with Ball. If he’s available — and he simply might not be — I think he’s the obvious better fit.
Dallas might not go after either one. I’m already preparing for an incensed Mavericks Twitter whenever free agency actually comes. But there are reasons to be optimistic too, and the team must know some tangible improvement will be necessary for this roster that once again might not make it past the first round. I hope they deliver in a reasonable manner