Klomp wrote:old school 34 wrote:I'd like to see JMac back for sure, but definitely don't want us to bring him back & say...good, set, & nothing else @ PG done. I don't see the 3rd PG on this team being A. Brooks season with Thibs....with DLo & out wings being relatively limited currently....i envision a lot of 2 PG lineups...Napier was the 3rd PG with Nets that year with DLo & Dinwiddie, but was still a significant piece of the rotation. JMac doesn't need something handed to him...if he's to become the next FVV...even if he gets the 3rd PG...he'll earn his minutes.
The other thing that is part of the evaluation with him that I consider (but don't want to take anything away from where he's come from)...is the serious factor of the NBA players themselves? My son's an undersized pg soph in HS working up thru varsity program....been doing well in workouts to the point that finally senior pg guards him in pickup to put clamps down on him....good thing right & real prove yourself moment cause now they're taking you serious and that's the true evaluation of where you're at? Has JMac gotten there yet? Could anyone have gotten to that point last year that late in the year with where we were at? Again, not to take anything away....cause he did everything he could've hoped for with the minutes he earned....but fair to say...he might still have work to do to 100% establish what he's started.
I've thought about this too.....not just the undersized thing, but even being an undrafted two-way player too. Opponents defend with a little different sense of urgency depending on a player's reputation. It might not be right to do, but it does happen quite often. Even just looking at who a defense asks to guard a player can change based on that player's reputation.
I thought it was interesting at the deadline though, we traded away vets in front of both McLaughlin and Reid. I think they wanted to see how the young guys would respond, and they responded well. They did nothing that would cause them to lose their backup roles, that's for sure. If they lose the role, it's not because of anything they did or didn't do.
As far as traded players, they seemed to be getting rid of of the high cost deals. Of course they did move Napier earlier. So maybe that was a choice to get more look at Jmac.
I'm reading an excuse given in these posts that appears to now be a possibility that the teams he was playing in the NBA possibly weren't taking him or his reputation seriously enough yet to defend him, bother preparing for him, and or weren't putting their best players on him to stop him. So this is to I guess explain why their imaginary limits on him fell away this season.
I want to poke some holes in the theory.
A. All rookie players are unkowns to existing teams. How they are defended and how they play is open ended on either side. That's why they are usually only compared to other rookies in their first playing year. But nobody looks at high performances of drafted rookies and claims they only did that as a rookie because nobody prepared for them or that top defenders weren't put on them yet.
B. He's already proved it at each level and drawn the best defenders at each level. He stayed in college and was a good player. You don't think as a USC senior he was drawing opponents's best defenders at his position? Should the time he put in at highschool and college already and what he proved there really be compared to what another HS sophomore trying to make varsity is seeing right now? Not to totally dispell your point here old school, but do you really think McLaughlin has proved nothing so far? He's not a one and done joke. He's proved a lot already and already had 16 games of solid NBA minutes before getting that first start in February. As soon as that first NBA start begins there is no more excuses for an opponent to overlook them. It's their job to stop him. He played well over 30 minutes in those starts and the playoff level starters on those teams had the job to stop him. They don't have the luxury of avoiding him for over 30 minutes. The Clippers didn't pull their third string PGs off the bench to defend him. I don't even know if they have any. Denver didn't start all their Gleague PGs because McLaughlin was playing in his next start.
The Clippers didn't put Amir Coffey or Terence Mann on the floor for anything over 10-15 minutes to defend Mclaughlin. They used Lou Williams (26mins), Landry Shamet(28 mins), Paul George(26 mins), Kawhi Leonard (27 mins) and the only reason any of them were under 30 minutes is because the Wolves had turned this into a blowout already up 81-59 after two quarters.
Should we look at what top6 pick Culver did in that game to compare? Rookie to Rookie
JMac Off rating: 180, def rating: 115, usage% 16.9, TOV%: 0%, Asst%, 37.8%, eFG%: .800, TRB%: 5.8
Culver Off rating: 71, def rating: 109, usage% 16.3, TOV%: 22%, Asst%, 4.4%, eFG%: .357, TRB%: 4.7
Are you going to make the argument that the Clippers only prepared more for Culver? Would that explain the difference between effectiveness for these two players in other games?
Is anyone willing to admit that JMac, having gone undrafted and being forced the Gleague route, was just fully prepared to bring the wood and take advantage of this starting shot? Through each of his career levels, and earning top defenders at each level, he's showing the same abilities to get it done at a high level.
That's not to say your argument has zero relation to any rookies play. It's just really never used to downplay a rookies performance. Losers on the other team might try to say they didn't know what they were in for. But this wasn't his first game and playoff level teams and defenders like they have can't be using excuses like that to explain one rookie destroying them at will.
C. Team hiearchy: I think the excuse about drawing the opponents best positon player (now in NBA) to defend him shouldn't apply at all anyway since we are talking about allowing him to retain the first backup role at PG. We haven't been talking about replacing Dlo. The team isn't in a position to offer him that role. So JMac's role next season would not really be to take on the positions best players, but other backup PGs. Given his proven play however, the backup role should be his to lose or excel further with. It's a team gift that leapfrogs the teams development and depth before the next draft. To waste such a gift might not be excusable.
