MKG

[Kammrath]

If a line-up is positive offensively it doesn't mean that another line-up wouldn't be even better.

So this is my point:

In those three seasons EVERY lineup combined that had MKG in it for CHA was better than EVERY lineup combined without him from an offensive perspective. Of course, there will be individual lineups that might be better offensively, but overall the lineups with MKG outperformed offensively those that didn't have him. That says something about his ability to not be a liability to team offense. 

He may never achieve that in DAL (and because of the potency of the DAL offense it is probably unlikely that he does), but his offensive ability may not be a hindrance to him getting on the floor and logging solid minutes. There is hope.

[Scott41theMavs]

Same crap as Scott is having with WCS.

Oh, so now it's becoming a board thing to attack me? (laughing smiley)

Look, WCS doesn't need to change as a player at all for him to have a place in the Mavericks' rotation. He's already shown that on the court in a Mavs uni.

Once again, I could be wrong, and maybe WCS is a reincarnation of Sanders and will be out of the league soon. I just want guys who are jumping on me for what I consider to be a rather self-evident opinion (such things exist, cf. the drafters of the US Declaration of Independence) to be willing to eat crow if the Mavs trash WCS, he goes elsewhere, and he contributes significantly to a winning team - you know, like guys like Nerlens Noel and Javale McGee were treated like dogcrap on the bottom of their shoes by the Mavs and then contributed to the Thunder, Warriors, and Lakers.

[omahen]

LOL, you are quite confusing. It's not a problem for me. I don't really understand what you're trying to say.

Might be, but it is you who is constantly repeating we have different opinions. This for me is an indicator, that you have a problem with it. If you don't, I don't understand why you keep bringing it up, because it has no value in any specific topic.

I think we may have a language barrier in play here.

Might be, English is obviously not my first language. Also written communication is difficult as you can't see the tone in which it was "said" (written), quickly leading to missunderstanding. It also seams we are taking different parts or words of the argument as most important (eg. your focus of the argument is different from where I see it when reading and the other way around). 

I seem to have these exact some kinds of exchanges with Psych

Scott and I are colerics. Colerics quickly form an opinion and everything is very clear to us, so we have a hard time understanding why others don't understand our it. When it is so obvious, come on!!!

[fifteenth]

This for me is an indicator, that you have a problem with it.

For me it is not an indicator that have a problem with it.

Scott and I are colerics. Colerics quickly form an opinion and everything is very clear to us, so we have a hard time understanding why others don't understand our it. When it is so obvious, come on!!!

Yeah, this makes sense. I'm pretty sure I can't resist firing back at folks who present themselves in this way.

[SleepingHero]

Kam says that on/off suggests MKG can at least be a part of positive offensive lineups.

Right.  However, my assertion was and always has been that MKG is a bad offensive player. Singular. Individually. And MKG IS a bad offensive player. Kamm then brought up yet again those On/Off numbers to say that "well no MKG can be apart of positive offensive lineups! He's not a bad team offensive player!" 


To which I reply, why does it matter that lineups with him do well on offense, if he himself has no effect on the offense? If MKG stood on one end of the floor, and never touched the ball on the offensive end, and yet the Mavs still score well even without him, then his On/Off etc. will all show him as a positive offensive team player, but does that mean MKG did anything to deserve that reputation? No. MKG did almost nothing to effect that outcome! And the stat that Kamm is citing isn't able to tell us exactly how MKG can/has effected the offense so we can't draw anything from it about how valuable MKG, as an individual, is on the offensive side on the floor. 

So far, what we've seen of MKG on the court is that he either stands in the corner and does much of nothing or he has set screens that haven't amounted to anything. And it's not a surprise that this has happened because looking at his career, we have seen that MKG has no discernible offensive skill that allows him to excel on that side of the floor. He's inconsistent, with a broken shot and below average handles. But he does hustle for everything, and generates opportunities that way, which isn't a negative thing. 

I feel like I'm a broken record at this point because I feel bad chiding MKG like this. I am on team MKG and want him to succeed here. I'm hopeful that he can actually become a complete (emphasis on complete) player here. And I really hope he proves me wrong for drawing conclusions on this minute sample size. But based on everything we've seen at Charlotte, and how the game is trending to a more pace-space era, it's valid to question how well he can succeed.

Either way, I've still liked and enjoyed what I've seen of MKG on his time on the floor due to his tenacious D. But it's a fair point to illuminate the potential struggles the Mavs will face come playoff time where teams can plan against specific lineups, and the limitations MKG on the offensive side will undoubtedly affect how the Mavs are played. And it's even more fair to point out the bizarre notion that MKG is a good "anything" offensive player.

---

That says something about his ability to not be a liability to team offense. 

Sorry catching up on the thread and posted my reply before I got to read this.

But what do you mean by this statement here?

[Benskix2]

Hopefully MKG can just be really good at defense and play in lineups where he doesn't have to do anything on offense.   I'm not sure we should be really worried about how he does against specific lineups in the playoffs.  Just don't play him against those lineups, we have other guys, problem solved.

[Kammrath]

Looks like MKG has already endeared himself to RC. He has surpassed Delon on the depth chart and not only that was the first man off the bench tonight versus Miami.

[Kammrath]

And then never played again....

[omahen]

And then never played again....

He is unplayable with the bench, which is already struggling offensively. I guess RC will have to tweak rotations before playoffs. Brunson will replace Barea which should make bench more reliable on the defensive side

[Kammrath]

He is unplayable with the bench, which is already struggling offensively. I guess RC will have to tweak rotations before playoffs.

DFS was awful tonight....would have wished to see MKG in his place some.

[Reunion Mav Old]

This for me is an indicator, that you have a problem with it.

For me it is not an indicator that have a problem with it.

Scott and I are colerics. Colerics quickly form an opinion and everything is very clear to us, so we have a hard time understanding why others don't understand our it. When it is so obvious, come on!!!

Yeah, this makes sense. I'm pretty sure I can't resist firing back at folks who present themselves in this way.

I have noticed Scott does not always respond befitting of the above description of Colerics. It is when he avoids quick and exclusive opinions that he makes the best posts. He succeeds at this quite often and then he doesn't find himself having to be defensive about his opinions. 
Those of us who have learned to use critical thinking skills know quickly forming an opinion is very susceptible to giving excessive credence to one source of evidence without the necessary step of considering other evidence and variables. Critical thinkers can become frustrated when "Colerics" quickly form an opinion to the exclusion of or discounting of other evidence that we have concluded is important. The obvious answer is easy to arrive at only if one sticks to one's preferred source of evidence and then shouts down valid evidence that is preferred by others.

Of course all Mavs fans are entitled to their opinion and it will always be fun to take shots at the opinions of others.

[Mavs2019]

So he sucks and we move on.

Mavs still think he doesn´t suck, he´ll get the minimum next year with his current play, so no problem there either.

Unless they throw away the 18th or 31st pick for nothing, just so they can make room for his roster spot.

You think Cuban will pass up on the Next Giannis at #18, so he can save 300k in 2021 caproom to make a run at the Real Giannis.

[Baller AI]

MKG is not a "bad offensive player". He can't shoot. That does not make him a bad offensive player. He can pass pretty well, rebound. Hes not really a scorer, atleast not right now, but to think that means hes bad at offense shows a lack of understanding of basketball.

---

This for me is an indicator, that you have a problem with it.

For me it is not an indicator that have a problem with it.

Scott and I are colerics. Colerics quickly form an opinion and everything is very clear to us, so we have a hard time understanding why others don't understand our it. When it is so obvious, come on!!!

Yeah, this makes sense. I'm pretty sure I can't resist firing back at folks who present themselves in this way.

I have noticed Scott does not always respond befitting of the above description of Colerics. It is when he avoids quick and exclusive opinions that he makes the best posts. He succeeds at this quite often and then he doesn't find himself having to be defensive about his opinions. 
Those of us who have learned to use critical thinking skills know quickly forming an opinion is very susceptible to giving excessive credence to one source of evidence without the necessary step of considering other evidence and variables. Critical thinkers can become frustrated when "Colerics" quickly form an opinion to the exclusion of or discounting of other evidence that we have concluded is important. The obvious answer is easy to arrive at only if one sticks to one's preferred source of evidence and then shouts down valid evidence that is preferred by others.

Of course all Mavs fans are entitled to their opinion and it will always be fun to take shots at the opinions of others.

In regards to the the discussions leading up to the TDL, and immediately following it, Scott was one of the few people thinking critically in this forum. He was willing to be objective and give the Mavs criticism where it was deserved, unlike many of the fanboys that can never say anything negative about the team

[StepBackJay]

MKG is looking pretty rough