Mavs 99, Kings 111

[mavsluvr]

Sounds like its a good thing I haven't gotten around to watching this game since this would have been bigger than a nit annoyance for me. 

Not sure how you can say all's well that ends well when the scoreboard didn't end well at all.

Yes, it was especially puzzling in the first half, when he was on the court for over six minutes and took only one shot. It seems to me that you don't put Boban on the floor for half a quarter so that he can take one shot. If you're going to press the Bobi button, you need to feed him in the post to take advantage of his ability to score easy baskets. Usually the team gets that, but on this night, they proceeded to ignore him. In the second half, it was a little better, but still head scratching. Go figure.

[mavsluvr]

Oh and Carlisle did it. He brought on Green, but not for the reason above, but because his precious veteran Nicolo Melli thought he was Nikola Jokic and nearly airballed his 4 foot hookshot. Guess what Green was all over the floor. He dove into the stands. He had two steals. He was +7 without doing anything offensively, just because of his physical presence and activity.

The Mavs are so starving for athletism in some match-ups, that Green is a net positive, just because he tries. Doesn´t even mean he has a long-term future in the league, but much like Justin Anderson all those years ago, just the fightingspirit can lift this team.

I get where you are coming from on this, but offer another point of view. 


I agree that Green plays hard. But playing hard is not necessarily the same thing as playing well. Diving into a chair was dramatic, but wasn't a play that helped the team. He was not even an offensive option. His three shot attempts were all grotesque misses. He was replaced by Brunson, who played MUCH  better than he did. 

It seemed to me that Green was taken off because he was not playing well. That's okay, he's a rookie, nights like this are to be expected. I understand the point of view on wanting him to get some developmental minutes. It seems like 8 minutes would be about what a fourth-string guy might hope for. 

I am hopeful that the player development guys can work with Green during the offseason, and that he can get on the court as part of the rotation next season. 

[Mavs2021]

I get where you are coming from on this, but offer another point of view. 


I agree that Green plays hard. But playing hard is not necessarily the same thing as playing well. Diving into a chair was dramatic, but wasn't a play that helped the team. He was not even an offensive option. His three shot attempts were all grotesque misses. He was replaced by Brunson, who played MUCH  better than he did. 

It seemed to me that Green was taken off because he was not playing well. That's okay, he's a rookie, nights like this are to be expected. I understand the point of view on wanting him to get some developmental minutes. It seems like 8 minutes would be about what a fourth-string guy might hope for. 

I am hopeful that the player development guys can work with Green during the offseason, and that he can get on the court as part of the rotation next season. 

Well that is just a poor POV, cause it makes no sense. The team was losing. He came on for Melli. Now the team was winning. The point of the whole thing is still to win the game as a team, right?

First we can´t play Green, because rookies lead to losses. Now we can´t play him, cause despite his presence leading to winning, it might hypothetically LEAD TO LOSING eventually. In a game we were already losing without him. Wow.

So now Green is proactively benched for crimes he hasn´t even committed yet. Well that´s not accurate. He has actually been proven innocent, but Carlisle puts him in jail anyway, cause next time he might be guilty.

[mavsluvr]

Well that is just a poor POV, cause it makes no sense. The team was losing. He came on for Melli. Now the team was winning. The point of the whole thing is still to win the game as a team, right?

First we can´t play Green, because rookies lead to losses. Now we can´t play him, cause despite his presence leading to winning, it might hypothetically LEAD TO LOSING eventually. In a game we were already losing without him. Wow.

So now Green is proactively benched for crimes he hasn´t even committed yet. Well that´s not accurate. He has actually been proven innocent, but Carlisle puts him in jail anyway, cause next time he might be guilty.

I am not really sure what you are saying, Mavs2021.

You correctly observed that Josh was playing hard. 

The team was not winning at any point in the game. They never led, even once. 

If you are referring to the team being +7 during the 8 minutes that Green was on the court, that does not indicate whether Josh was playing well or poorly. You have to watch those minutes to discern that. 

As far as the criminal analogy, I have to admit I don't understand what you're referencing. Would be glad to respond if you have anything specific.

[KillerLeft]

I don't think people focus on the correct things when thinking about who plays when, personally. 

While it's true that Green probably wasn't playing as well as people seem to believe he was, he also wasn't playing badly. 

But, what I don't think people consider is that the players on the floor determine what the team can attempt, because some of the players know/understand/can do more things than others. People act like these are video game players - like they're simply a collection of ratings (jump 95, speed 76, etc). The reality is that they're out there trying to play a system, some of them at multiple positions, with multiple sets of rules and responsibilities. I would imagine most of the work needed at the NBA level to make one a viable rotation player happens between the ears. 

Point being: Green handling the limited portion of the system he knows is a good sign, for sure, but it's very possible that other players were needed in order to access the rest of what Carlisle believed the team needed to attempt in order to be successful. The fact that they ultimately were not successful does not mean that Green knows those things.

Personally, my takeaway from almost every Green opportunity is that he seems more comfortable than he did in the previous one. I take that as a good sign. It's a process, and I imagine it takes time.

[mavsluvr]

I don't think people focus on the correct things when thinking about who plays when, personally. 

While it's true that Green probably wasn't playing as well as people seem to believe he was, he also wasn't playing badly. 

But, what I don't think people consider is that the players on the floor determine what the team can attempt, because some of the players know/understand/can do more things than others. People act like these are video game players - like they're simply a collection of ratings (jump 95, speed 76, etc). The reality is that they're out there trying to play a system, some of them at multiple positions, with multiple sets of rules and responsibilities. I would imagine most of the work needed at the NBA level to make one a viable rotation player happens between the ears. 

Point being: Green handling the limited portion of the system he knows is a good sign, for sure, but it's very possible that other players were needed in order to access the rest of what Carlisle believed the team needed to attempt in order to be successful. The fact that they ultimately were not successful does not mean that Green knows those things.

Personally, my takeaway from almost every Green opportunity is that he seems more comfortable than he did in the previous one. I take that as a good sign. It's a process, and I imagine it takes time.

Excellent observations.

[Mavs2021]

Excellent observations.

He basically said the exact opposite of what you just said. 

You want to bench Green, because his invididual performance wasn´t up to your eyetest standards, but the whole unit functioned (aka THE TEAM) and was outplaying the opposition, while he was on the floor. Is it really that difficult to understand?

Porzingis is probably a better player than Tyson Chandler overall. Does that mean we´d have won the 2011 Championship, if we had replaced Tyson with Porzingis?
We are talking about the context of one game.

When Green entered the game, the team was already losing 25-36.
When Green left the game it was tied 41-41 after 16-5 run. 
At HT they were down 54-61 again.

So you are telling me that GREEN was the problem and his invididual performance and standard in the team construct on THIS NIGHT justified his benching. 

You have decided that the team would have won these six minutes with Green even bigger, if Green wasn´t playing? 

Of course it´s easy to bench Green, when Carlisle didn´t bring him onto the floor, because he believed in Green. He was just upset the team was losing again and looking to punish Melli for his one-on-one move.

Which was pretty stupid to begin with, since it was a wide-open 4 feet hookshot. Funny as it may have looked, I bet Melli has still made more of them than he has three pointers from the corner.

You don´t do it the Carlisle way, it´s wrong. Just ask the floor general of the 2020 NBA champions Rajon Rondo or the defensive anchor of the best team defense in the NBA in 2021: Nerleans Noel.  Might as well ask Delon Wright, too.

[mavsluvr]

LOL, whoa, Nellie. 

He basically said the exact opposite of what you just said. 

I agree with what he said. I believe we were making the same point -- that Carlisle's use of Green was based on reasonable decisions. 

You want to bench Green, because his invididual performance wasn´t up to your eyetest standards, but the whole unit functioned (aka THE TEAM) and was outplaying the opposition, while he was on the floor. Is it really that difficult to understand?

It's not what I want, or my individual standards, that matter. I didn't want anything in particular as far as Green goes. I am just offering the view that his benching was a reasonable exercise of coaching judgment, and not the result of some anti-Green vendetta. 

Porzingis is probably a better player than Tyson Chandler overall. Does that mean we´d have won the 2011 Championship, if we had replaced Tyson with Porzingis?
We are talking about the context of one game.

I don't think Porzingis and Chandler have anything to do with whether Green should have been played more or less in this game. 

When Green entered the game, the team was already losing 25-36.
When Green left the game it was tied 41-41 after 16-5 run. 
At HT they were down 54-61 again.

So you are telling me that GREEN was the problem and his invididual performance and standard in the team construct on THIS NIGHT justified his benching. 

I am not telling you anything of the sort. The whole team's play was subpar. 

You have decided that the team would have won these six minutes with Green even bigger, if Green wasn´t playing? 

I have not decided anything like that. 

Of course it´s easy to bench Green, when Carlisle didn´t bring him onto the floor, because he believed in Green. He was just upset the team was losing again and looking to punish Melli for his one-on-one move.

Which was pretty stupid to begin with, since it was a wide-open 4 feet hookshot. Funny as it may have looked, I bet Melli has still made more of them than he has three pointers from the corner.

Respectfully, you don't know why Carlisle brought Green on in Melli's place, and I would submit it was not in an effort to embarrass Melli by replacing him with a rookie. 

You don´t do it the Carlisle way, it´s wrong. Just ask the floor general of the 2020 NBA champions Rajon Rondo or the defensive anchor of the best team defense in the NBA in 2021: Nerleans Noel.  Might as well ask Delon Wright, too.

Mavs2021, if I have said something that you felt disrespected you, I assure you that was not my intent. 

I am not sure why you are in such a boil about this. You offered an opinion suggesting that Green was brought on and then taken off for bogus reasons. And that Green is a net positive just because he tries. I offered an alternative point of view. 

If you disagree with me, fine. Part of the whole purpose of a message board is to enrich our understanding by exchanging different points of view.

It's not helpful in trying to prove your point to counter a host of crazy positions that I never came anywhere near  taking. 

You think Carlisle is being unfair to Green. I don't agree with that. It's possible that you may be right in some respects, and I may be right in others. Or maybe one of us is completely right or wrong. There is no need to mount personal attacks over seeing things differently. Time should shed more light on the situation.

[mtrot]

DFW is the fifth biggest market in the country.

But does the national sports media treat it as such?

[mavsluvr]

But does the national sports media treat it as such?

Oh, probably not. 

I am still not too convinced that the league would engineer a ref conspiracy for the purpose of steering Luka to a team that the media pays a lot of attention to. 

But, who really knows?

[Scott41theMavs]

But does the national sports media treat it as such?

The sense around the league as a whole is that it's the two LA teams, the two NY teams, Miami, then everyone else might as well be the Spurs, but 24 of them aren't.

[cow]

But does the national sports media treat it as such?

Depends on the sport.

I've always wished Cubes would tap the Joneses on the shoulder to help with recruiting.

[hakeemfaan]

The sense around the league as a whole is that it's the two LA teams, the two NY teams, Miami, then everyone else might as well be the Spurs, but 24 of them aren't.

I am not disagreeing that the NBA has always revolves around a few stars or that lately it seems more and more that type of marketing applies to certain cities too. However if we are truly upset by that, why watch? 

As for Luka, he got shafted in this game. However he goes through every possession where something good doesn’t happen, complaining he got hacked. Frankly it is a total beating. Every superstar gets mauled. There is no league conspiracy.

[Kammrath]

I agree that Green plays hard. But playing hard is not necessarily the same thing as playing well. Diving into a chair was dramatic, but wasn't a play that helped the team. He was not even an offensive option. His three shot attempts were all grotesque misses. He was replaced by Brunson, who played MUCH  better than he did. 

It seemed to me that Green was taken off because he was not playing well.

I just fundamentally disagree that Green was not playing well. He was playing better than most of his teammates at the juncture he was taken off the court from my perspective.

[omahen]

I just fundamentally disagree that Green was not playing well. He was playing better than most of his teammates at the juncture he was taken off the court from my perspective.

Green is like reverse Bobi. Good on defense but totally useless on offense. That's why I think he can only work in short spurts before the opponent adapts.

[meistermatze]

The sense around the league as a whole is that it's the two LA teams, the two NY teams, Miami, then everyone else might as well be the Spurs, but 24 of them aren't.

You forgot Chicago, IMHO.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Green is like reverse Bobi. Good on defense but totally useless on offense. That's why I think he can only work in short spurts before the opponent adapts.

I was thinking the same thing when I went to the game flow to see what worked with Green and what didn't.  If you think about it, one of the worst pairings you could theoretically have with Green is Powell.  Yet, on this night against this (mainly small-ball) opponent, Powell + Green killed it.  

Useless is a strong word.  For someone who rarely touches the ball, he gets a good number of rebounds, steals and assists while playing good D.  What you hope when he's in the game is that Dallas simply holds its own.  In the 14 games where he's gotten 12 minutes or more (arbitrary number set by me), the team has more than held its own.  In all games in April and May the O-Rating/D-Rating has been 116/104 and 112/107 respectively.  It is a stupid small sample, but in recent games and games where he gets some burn, he doesn't hurt the team with his useless offense.  Does that buy him a single minute of playoff experience?  Probably not.

[omahen]

In the 14 games where he's gotten 12 minutes or more (arbitrary number set by me)

Here might be the catch, same as with Bobi and other specialists. If it works, they play. If not, they get benched quick and never see a minute again that game. That's why the stats show only good results when they play more minutes.