Mack is Back / Update: Nevermind

closg00 · Post #16 » by **closg00** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 7:57 pm

WizardsWorld wrote:This signing is proof that EG reads REALGM.

I believe that they do read this board, I think that is why we gave Almond a try; Pure conjecture on my part

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #17 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:13 pm

I give them credit because they are trying.

I promise you they know WE CARE.

I also am serious that the Wizards can turn things around fairly quickly with a few savvy moves. They just need to listen to collective voices of reason. Guys like Nivek and even an often dissenting critic, Dat, know what they're talking about. All EG has to do to get his job right is to listen to them, nate, and the rest of us. Our consensus of opinions is about as good as it gets.

80sballboy · Post #18 » by **80sballboy** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 10:54 pm

http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

Garrett Temple and Shelvin Mack. Give us the trophy now.

Jimmy Recard · Post #19 » by **Jimmy Recard** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:32 pm

Ernie

/green

TheBigThree · Post #20 » by **TheBigThree** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:41 pm

With all due respect CCJ, I think you're wrong that this is a good sign.

Seriously, cutting a player before the season begins, especially a second year guy like Mack (which, at the time I was vehemently against), indicates that your FO didn't think he's going to grow into a player that can play in your system. I'm sure it's not something they did lightly (based on Cassell's quotes, etc).

Bringing him back is further evidence that EG clearly has no idea what he's doing, and anyone heralding this move (from a competitive standout this is a no brainer, he shouldn't have been cut) is flat out missing the point.

Yeah, admitting your mistake is nice, but it's just another piece of evidence that EG is making things up as he's going along.

kirubel94 · Post #21 » by **kirubel94** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:46 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26hE8ZkU6SY

The link above show's Mack's best game in his stint in the D-league. He looks confident and looks like he has shed some pounds. He can't be worse than anything we have already.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #22 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:54 pm

80sballboy wrote:http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

Garrett Temple and Shelvin Mack. Give us the trophy now.

Temple is a glue guy and another player the Spurs liked a while back out of the D-League. Temple has bounced around the league but not found a team he could stick with. I remember liking something about his game when he was at LSU.

I like to see guys get a chance. Washington has gotten good play out of guys like Othyus Jeffers, Larry Owens, Cartier Martin, and other guys had their shot from the D-League--Edwin Ubiles and Morris Almond.

Why not Garrett Temple? At worst he brings some energy. I bet Coach Newman has a good rapport with Temple from the games Temple played well with the Spurs.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #23 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:54 pm

kirubel94 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26hE8ZkU6SY

The link above show's Mack's best game in his stint in the D-league. He looks confident and looks like he has shed some pounds. He can't be worse than anything we have already.

+1

truwizfan4evr · Post #24 » by **truwizfan4evr** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:15 am

Ernie The G.M of the year!

JWizmentality · Post #25 » by **JWizmentality** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:26 am

JWizmentality · Post #26 » by **JWizmentality** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 12:32 am

How Ernie chooses his next signing.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPyOvxpZ_xE[/youtube]

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #27 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:40 am

TheBigThree wrote:With all due respect CCJ, I think you're wrong that this is a good sign.

Seriously, cutting a player before the season begins, especially a second year guy like Mack (which, at the time I was vehemently against), indicates that your FO didn't think he's going to grow into a player that can play in your system. I'm sure it's not something they did lightly (based on Cassell's quotes, etc).

Bringing him back is further evidence that EG clearly has no idea what he's doing, and anyone heralding this move (from a competitive standout this is a no brainer, he shouldn't have been cut) is flat out missing the point.

Yeah, admitting your mistake is nice, but it's just another piece of evidence that EG is making things up as he's going along.

I never said this before but what makes Cassell's position so secure? Has he been a great mentor to Wall? Has he argued with players like Lewis and been reprimanded? He is the one who used summer league to put Shelvin on blast.

TheBigThree, I can see where you are coming from and I agree that it sure does indicate Wittman and/or the FO didn't want Shelvin. Bottom line as far as I am concerned is the stats from last season. A full year's work showed Mack to be a decent sub. I don't really care that EG has reversed his position. Shelvin was better than Pargo. Could they have used imagination and creativity and gone a different direction? YES. I see your point, TBT, but I happen to be motivated by the do-right principle over getting the best talent at that spot. Mack isn't as much of a player as he is a winner in my book, if that makes any sense at all. On a minimum deal, he's okay IMO.

To me, the Wizards learned a lesson. Other team's veterans are not necessarily better than their own rookie-deal draftees. Last season the problem was not youth.

MJG · Post #28 » by **MJG** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 1:51 am

80sballboy wrote:http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

Garrett Temple and Shelvin Mack. Give us the trophy now.

Nivek · Post #29 » by **Nivek** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:01 am

Neither good nor bad news. Replace Mack? Sure, why not? He was an acceptable reserve, but still was below average overall. But, there was no point attempting to replace him with guys were a) no better, and b) older and clearly not getting any better. Mack was still young enough to think he might get closer to average for a PG with experience.

But, the team drafted him, had him for a full season, a summer and a pre-season, and decided he wasn't good enough. They replaced him Price, Pargo and then Livingston. Has he "destroyed" the D-League? No. He's been above average at that level, but nothing great. Not even top PG for the D-League. So, if they've already deemed him not good enough to help the team, why are they bringing him back? Why not give a shot to Someone Else -- maybe one of those D-League PGs who's been more productive so far this season?

The team's decision-making remains a puzzle.

Post #30 » by **montestewart** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:53 am

^
Sh'Mack knows "the system"

dangermouse · Post #31 » by **dangermouse** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:16 am

Not exactly the exciting blockbuster announcement i was hoping for...

Post #32 » by **montestewart** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:45 am

dangermouse wrote:Not exactly the exciting blockbuster announcement i was hoping for...

Face it, the only likely blockbuster that will make most of us happy is "Grunfeld fired"

TheBigThree · Post #33 » by **TheBigThree** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:14 am

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:TheBigThree, I can see where you are coming from and I agree that it sure does indicate Wittman and/or the FO didn't want Shelvin. Bottom line as far as I am concerned is the stats from last season. A full year's work showed Mack to be a decent sub. I don't really care that EG has reversed his position. Shelvin was better than Pargo. Could they have used imagination and creativity and gone a different direction? YES. I see your point, TBT, but I happen to be motivated by the do-right principle over getting the best talent at that spot. Mack isn't as much of a player as he is a winner in my book, if that makes any sense at all. On a minimum deal, he's okay IMO.

Yeah, I don't disagree with any of that. I think Shelvin deserved to be on the team for sure. Not sure there were any better options out there that didn't want to play for contenders, anyway.

Just saying it disturbs me that these decisions are so backward. I'd honestly rather see them stick to their guns with a decision like this. At least that would suggest having a solid plan going forward.

Here's hoping Mack plays like he's capable of and makes EG look even more foolish for letting him go in the first place.

hands11 · Post #34 » by **hands11** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:46 pm

I'm going to choose to look at this as the glass half full.

The way Mack played last year as the main back up, he showed they needed something more from that slot so I have zero problem that they went looking. His summer ball play didn't do enough to show he was measurably better then what he gave them last year, so they took a chance in another direction.

In that search, they added Price who while not starter ready ( he wasn't added to be that ) he did show improvement and looks to be a decent back up who still has room to improve. He is quicker then Mack and a decent defender who looks to be able to develop a decent 3 ball.

Through injuries, they were forced into playing Crawford at PG. This is a win for the team. Crawford is now starting at PG and growing his game in that role. In the end, Crawford may well be more of a PG then a SG so it was important that he got an extended look at that position. Once the team is more healthy, he can back up both PG and SG or start at either if needed. That has value.

Mack needed to find his groove and he got a chance to do that in the DL. He hasn't been around for this horrible start to this season. He was speared that while he was balln in the DL where it looks like he found his outside shot. While that was happening, they tried Livingston again with most of us wanted. But it didn't work out and they cut him. It was worth a try.

End result. They have Crawford more established at PG and he is likely their best option as the back up PG. They hopefully get a Mack 2.0 with a better outside shot and more confidence and they have Price once his finger heals.

Wall/Crawford with Mack and Price fighting for the third slot. That's not bad for PG options once they are healthy.

So three players got developed while they are tanking for another high pick. This should pay off down the road.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #35 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:37 pm

Nivek wrote:Neither good nor bad news. Replace Mack? Sure, why not? He was an acceptable reserve, but still was below average overall. But, there was no point attempting to replace him with guys were a) no better, and b) older and clearly not getting any better. Mack was still young enough to think he might get closer to average for a PG with experience.

But, the team drafted him, had him for a full season, a summer and a pre-season, and decided he wasn't good enough. They replaced him Price, Pargo and then Livingston. Has he "destroyed" the D-League? No. He's been above average at that level, but nothing great. Not even top PG for the D-League. So, if they've already deemed him not good enough to help the team, why are they bringing him back? Why not give a shot to Someone Else -- maybe one of those D-League PGs who's been more productive so far this season?

The team's decision-making remains a puzzle.

D-league players generally come up on 10-day deals. They are honored and grateful to be called up to the NBA. Shelvin knows the Wizards coaches, their players, and the playbook. He's a positive guy. In this case the coaches don't have to work to phase a newbie in. it will be a smooth transition. What I wonder is would they bring Shelvin back on a 10-day deal?

Also, just because he's back his contract does not become guaranteed for a while. The season is only 25 games in. With over two-thirds of the season left to be played just because Shelvin gets this call up does not mean the Wizards cannot bring "the top PG for the D-League."

To me, bringing back Shelvin was a make good. We'll see how it goes.