01-29-2024, 05:13 PM
(01-29-2024, 04:49 PM)DanSchwartzgan Wrote: My 2-cents on the great THJ debate of 2024. It kind of reminds me of the Wood discussion last season…including the outsized emotion. Wood is an obviously talented offensive player that can’t find a home or any money, yet people here lost their minds when you suggested the obvious.
THJ is also an obviously talented offensive player. But, there are issues and they are mainly around his D and the limits to his game at his size.
1. Defense: He’s the worst defender on the team. Yeah, its cool he takes charges and all, but worst D-Rating and DBPM and if you dig through 82-games, he’s got the biggest On-Off defensive spread on the team (by a mile). He kills the defense of any lineup you run with him…period.
2. Lineup Construction: THJ’s injury was an aspect of the WCF playoff run. It wasn’t because he sucks…he doesn’t. It was because without another guard with limited creation ability, Dallas was able to keep two of their three creators on the court at all times without sacrificing size. Do spot-up and motion shooters have a place in the league? Yes, but they do create issues if they can’t defend and can’t create for themselves and others (outside of ‘creating’ a contested 3 with a defender in his face).
3. Consistency: This has come up today and they spent some time on this on the “Locked-On” podcast today as well. When Dallas shoots 37% or better as a team they are 18-4 (third best for teams when they shoot over 37%). When other teams in the top of the league in this stat shoot under 37% they all have winning records. But, Dallas is 7-17 when they shoot under 37%. The reason is those other good teams have something else to go to. Dallas doesn’t. On nights Tim shoots over 30% the team is 18-10. When Tim shoots under 30% they are 4-8. A bench guy shouldn’t have that kind of impact on the overall record. But if you have him you have to play him. It isn’t the inconsistency as much as it it the limits to his game. Many of the PF’s we seem to be targeting have other tricks in their bag besides what Tim has.
His one-trick-pony-ness and lack of D is what makes it hard to build a lineup around him. You could make it work if your star was Giannis or Jimmy Butler or some other two-way creator. But, on a team where Luka and Kyrie are the stars…it just doesn’t work.
Idk, man. I don't feel like the Wood thing and the Hardaway thing are at all similar, and I reach different conclusions on all three of your talking points. I feel I can say that without accessing outsized emotion.
Especially #3. It's the old "when Emmit Smith gets 22 carries" argument. It's not like you could give him the ball on 22 of the first 25 plays and guarantee a win. When the blocking and situational execution were good, the team was able to keep running the ball, and usually they were able to get a lead, which lent itself even more to running the ball. Easy to get cause and effect backwards with stats.
Of course the Mavs' shooting percentage, especially including Hardaway's, is indicative of wins and losses. There are some streaky misses in there, and I of course agree with you that more variety of offensive approach is needed (that's on Kidd, not any of the players) but when the Mavs (and THJ) shoot a low percentage, it's not because their shot discipline is worse than normal, it's because the defense is doing a better job of limiting the quality of their shots. So far, I doubt I've said anything you disagree with, but here goes: just because Hardaway is the guy who is left attempting those bad shots does NOT mean that him forgoing them would result in better shots for someone else. Don't get me wrong, there are a few "heat check" moments from him I don't love now and again, but in my observation, most of his "bad shots" are in 2-for-1 situations, ends of quarters, situations wherein the play has broken down and they throw him the ball (knowing he's brave enough to try and that he just might make one). Basically, I agree with you that the offense is limited and problematic, but I view Hardaway's average game as an attempt to OVERCOME that, not the cause of it.