WIZ GET MARKIEFF MORRIS...............

[tontoz]

Mkg wasn't available when the wizards picked so it is a moot point anyway. But a lot of the moves EG actually made we're obviously horrible at the time.

I am still in disbelief he gave a 2 year guaranteed deal to maynor on the first day of free agency.

[payitforward]

Mkg wasn't available when the wizards picked so it is a moot point anyway.

I imagine Ernie would have taken whichever of MK-G or BB was there at #3, as I think any other GM would have done. So, this was not some "brainy" move by Ernie.

OTOH, it's not as if MK-G hasn't worked out -- he is terrific. He can't shoot, not a scorer. But look at all the other stuff he does!

[Ruzious]

Mkg wasn't available when the wizards picked so it is a moot point anyway. But a lot of the moves EG actually made we're obviously horrible at the time.

I am still in disbelief he gave a 2 year guaranteed deal to maynor on the first day of free agency.

That's the thing; it wasn't just poor talent evaluation; it was ridiculously bad evaluation of the market. There were a bunch of significantly better versions of Maynor that signed later for significantly less dollars. EG was in a rush to do evil... even worse than his rush to trade for Frazier this year... while GS was in a rush to buy a pick to get Jordan Bell - who could very well end up being being one of the NBA's top defenders at some point. But we're in the East, so people think Grunfeld's smart.

[DCZards]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

[Dat2U]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

[DCZards]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

I find your use of the word "significantly" very interesting. You apply it to the fouls and turnovers but not to the 3pt and FT shooting. Also, I think you forgot to note that Kieff gets more assists and is at least as good on steals, which surprises me given MKG's rep as a defender.

[tontoz]

At the time of the draft i didn't care much for MKG and i still don't. It is hard to be successful with a wing player who has a broken jumper, and i thought he would be an especially bad fit next to Wall. It isn't just the lack of points but also the lack of spacing that really hurts.

His offensive RPM was -1.97 this past season. He was still a net .50 because he is a good defender but his ranking of 23 in RPM isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/RPM/position/5

He reminds me of Stacey Augmon on those 90s Hawks teams, and that isn't a good thing. It is so much easier to guard everyone else when a wing can't shoot.

[nate33]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

To be honest, when I look at the comparison, I would much rather have the guy with the .362 3P%. And when I find out that the poor 3P shooter plays SF and the better 3P shooter plays PF, it clinches it. It's really hard to build a team around a wing who is a complete liability from the arc, and it really makes offense much easier when one of your two bigs can stretch the floor.

[Kanyewest]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

Although Morris has a higher TS%, it looks like MKG is a better player with a higher WS/48. Still, one would expect more out of him since he was the #2 pick.

[Kanyewest]

At the time of the draft i didn't care much for MKG and i still don't. It is hard to be successful with a wing player who has a broken jumper, and i thought he would be an especially bad fit next to Wall. It isn't just the lack of points but also the lack of spacing that really hurts.

His offensive RPM was -1.97 this past season. He was still a net .50 because he is a good defender but his ranking of 23 in RPM isn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/RPM/position/5

He reminds me of Stacey Augmon on those 90s Hawks teams, and that isn't a good thing. It is so much easier to guard everyone else when a wing can't shoot.

Good point. Perhaps the lack of a jump shot is a deal breaker for him becoming a decent NBA starter.

[nate33]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

That means that he's scoring those extra points with a TS% of .585. It's actually quite good if you shoot that well on each marginal attempt after your 8th FGA.

Everyone shoots well on their first 5 or 6 FGA's because those are the easy ones: the putbacks, the fast break layups, the failed defensive rotations, and the wide open catch-and-shoots. But you only get so many of those attempts per game. It's the shot attempts after that that are typically much harder to come by and must be made in the face of better defensive pressure.

[Kanyewest]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

So looking at the raw stats...

MKG has the higher FG%, is the better rebounder despite playing SF, gets more blks, fouls significantly less and turns the ball over significantly less.

Morris' big advantages come in shot attempts, ppg (a terrible way of measuring impact), ft shooting & 3pt shooting. Despite Morris' noted advantages in scoring it takes him 4.1 shots more to score 4.8 pts a game. Not particularly impressive.

That means that he's scoring those extra points with a TS% of .585. It's actually quite good if you shoot that well on each marginal attempt after your 8th FGA.

Everyone shoots well on their first 5 or 6 FGA's because those are the easy ones: the putbacks, the fast break layups, the failed defensive rotations, and the wide open catch-and-shoots. But you only get so many of those attempts per game. It's the shot attempts after that that are typically much harder to come by and must be made in the face of better defensive pressure.

Morris also takes about .9 free throws per game than MKG, so I'm guessing Morris isn't that much more efficient with his extra shots. Using a TS% calculator I found online, that's around 53.5% which is still higher than MKG.

[payitforward]

Here are the 2016-17 stats for two NBA forwards. The first are those of MKG, the second set of stats are those of Markieff Morris. PIF, calls one of them a “terrific” player. He considers the other player one of the worst players in the NBA. Go figure>

I'd like to know what's the "other stuff" that MKG does that makes him so much better than Kieff. I guess he is a better defender than Kieff, and MKG probably plays harder more consistently since Kieff does slack off at times.

GP MIN. FGM-A FG% 3P% FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS.
81 29.0 3.6-7.6 .477 .111 .784 1.9 5.1 7.0 1.4 1.0 1.0 2.3 0.7 9.2

76 31.2 5.3-11.7 .457 .362 .837 1.4 5.1 6.5 1.7 0.6 1.1 3.3 1.7 14.0

MKG was the second pick in the 2012 draft, Kieff was a 13th pick in 2011. MKG was paid $13,000 last season, Morris made $8,000.

Zards -- I don't think I ever said Kieff was one of the worst players in the NBA.

Comparing guys' productivity across positions can be done, but it is slightly complicated. I.e. the norm or average for a PF is certainly to get more rebounds than a SF. Ditto FG%, at least on 2-pt. attempts, the norm is for a PF to have a higher % than a SF, b/c he typically gets more shots right around the basket. OTOH, a 3 usually takes lots more 3-pt. attempts than a PF.

Btw, when I talk about "the norm" in these cases, I mean real numbers -- what really happens. Not common sense & not what my opinion is, but what 3s & 4s actually do in the NBA.

So, lets look at the 2 guys last year, compared to each other & compared to the averages for their two different positions last year. & lets take scoring last; it's what MK-G is worst at, so it should offer an area where Morris would shine over him, right? Lets save that, & look at the rest first.

Defensive rebounding per 48 minutes:
An average 4 got 8.7 DRs. An average 3 got 5.7
Kieff got 7.8. (below average). MK-G got 8.3 (way above average and more than Kieff)

Now... lets stop for a moment. I assume you will agree that fewer rebounds is not as good as more rebounds. & that if Kieff got fewer than average for a PF, that means he was not as good as an average PF at this activity? If not, then there's nothing to talk about & no objective way to assess players. So I'm going to count on you simply to accept facts as they are & to mean what they mean.

Ok, so it's pretty clear that Kieff is a bad defensive rebounder, & MK-G is a good one -- terrific for his position, & better than Kieff straight up as well. How about offensive rebounding?

An average 4 got 3.2 ORs. An average 3 got 1.1
Kieff got 2.2. (below average). MK-G got 3.2 (almost 3 times average! -- and 40%+ more than Kieff)

Nothing ambiguous there, I don't think: for a 4, Kieff is a bad rebounder; it's been true every season. For a 3, MK-G is an outstanding rebounder; that too has been true every season. &, on their careers, MK-G has also been a way better rebounder than Kieff straight up -- & that's unusual for a 3 over a 4.

The story is the same in blocks per 48:
Average 4 = 1.5. Average wing = .6
Kieff = .9. MK-G = 1.5

How about turnovers:
Average 4 = 2.5. Average wing = 2.3
Kieff = 2.6. MK-G = 1.1

Fouls?
Average 4 = 4.5. Average wing = 3.5
Kieff = 5.1. MK-G = 3.8

So far it's pretty one-sided, but there are a couple of areas where it looks a little different. Lets look at steals:
Average 4 = 1.4 Average wing = 1.6
Kieff = 1.7 (above average) MK-G = 1.6 (average)

& here's something that favors Kieff a bit more decisively -- assists
Average 4 = 3.1 Average wing = 4.0
Kieff = 2.6 (above average) MK-G = 2.3 (average)

In all, every 48 minutes Kieff gets .1 more steals & .3 more assists than MK-G -- while committing 1.3 more fouls, turning it over 1.5 more times, blocking .6 fewer shots, grabbing 1 fewer offensive rebound, & netting .5 fewer defensive boards.

Now, finally, scoring -- presumably this is where Kieff should make up ground on MK-G, right?

Well, Kieff did score 6.3 more points per 48 minutes than MK-G last year:
Kieff = 21.5
MK-G = 15.2

& his TS% was a little higher than MK-G's as well:
Kieff = 54.1%
MK-G = 52.9%
In other words, Kieff had 1.2% higher TS%. Unfortunately, an average 4 in the NBA last year posted a 56.1% TS%, so Kieff was still significantly below average.

Put another way: by taking 5.3 more shots & .3 more FTAs, Markieff Morris produced 6.3 more points than Michael Kidd-Gilchrist.
That delta is reasonably efficient. Nothing special, but still....

Now, obviously, that doesn't mean that a team w/ Kieff on the floor gets 6.3 more points in 48 minutes than a team with MK-G -- on the floor! Of course not!

The possessions that Kieff took to attempt those extra shots and FTAs simply go to other players if MK-G's on the floor instead of Kieff. Duh.

Oh, and so do the possessions his team has b/c MK-G didn't turn it over when Kieff did. & so do the possessions the team has via the offensive rebounds & defensive rebounds MK-G got that Kieff didn't. Overall scoring productivity goes up not down if MK-G is one of the guys on the floor instead of Kieff. It's just that MK-G doesn't score those extra points.

Sorry, it's really not even close. Kieff quite bad. MK-G quite good.

[DCZards]

Thanks for the response, pif. But my issue really wasn't Kieff vs. MKG. Your opinion of Kieff is well-known. It's your inflated opinion of MKG as a "terrific" player that I was really responding to.

Is MKG even a top 20 NBA SF? Maybe. But barely.

[Kanyewest]

Mkg wasn't available when the wizards picked so it is a moot point anyway.

I imagine Ernie would have taken whichever of MK-G or BB was there at #3, as I think any other GM would have done. So, this was not some "brainy" move by Ernie.

OTOH, it's not as if MK-G hasn't worked out -- he is terrific. He can't shoot, not a scorer. But look at all the other stuff he does!

I suppose we can be thankful that MJ is not running the Wizards' front office.

[Sluggerface]

I knew I was forgetting to do something in the off-season. Comparing Kieff to last season's rookies. Guys we would have been in the range to get had we punted the season.

Hernangomez, Chriss, Maker, Prince, Skal.

I don't think either of those guys were better than Kieff last season, but I don't think the disparity was that great between a dude we know isn't going to change much at age 27 and a bunch of rookies with developing skill sets. Could have even had two of them if we had traded Dudley to Cleveland for their first from Boston (which ended up being Skal).

Team then would have had a bigger pool of Free Agents to choose from when they lost out on Horford (Luer or Williams would have been alternatives).

[Kanyewest]

Markieff Morris ranked #79 on ESPN's NBARank.

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarank76100/nbarank-players-76-100

[payitforward]

Thanks for the response, pif. But my issue really wasn't Kieff vs. MKG. Your opinion of Kieff is well-known...

1. I don't have an "opinion" of Kieff (or, if I have to have one to make you happy, my opinion is that he's a pretty nice guy).

2. I do have an analysis of Kieff's play based on the numbers he puts up. IOW, when I say Kieff (or MKG, or anyone) is "bad" or "good" or even "terrific," I don't mean the person. I mean the play of that person.

3. I don't imagine you challenge the numbers themselves, i.e. you don't think I'm making them up. Or that I'm making up the numbers I compare them to -- the average numbers of an NBA PF.

4. That means, I think, that for you something other than the numbers a guy puts up determine whether his play is good or bad. I can't think of anything else you might have in mind if you want to maintain that Kieff's play is good despite those numbers.

5. Yet, you yourself quoted numbers to "prove" he's good! You quoted his 3 pt. % & his FT % in particular. & in fact you are right: his 3pt % last year was good, & his FT % was terrific.

6. So... how can the rest of his numbers not count as well? Surely, they must all count! &, if overall those numbers are below the average of an NBA PF, then surely that must mean Kieff's play is below average. How not?

It's your inflated opinion of MKG as a "terrific" player that I was really responding to.... Is MKG even a top 20 NBA SF? Maybe. But barely.

I don't have an opinion of MKG either -- don't even know if he's a nice guy!

But, I just don't get this, Zards. Given that MKG being good wouldn't make Kieff bad -- what could you have against MKG, I wonder? I mean...

1. MKG gets 46% more defensive rebounds than an average 3. & he gets 290% more offensive rebounds than an average 3. Don't those two facts qualify as "terrific" play?

2. MKG blocks 2 & a half times as many shots as an average 3. I'd call that terrific. Are you saying you wouldn't?

3. An average 3 turns the ball over more than twice as often as MKG. Would MKG be better if he turned it over more? No, that would be worse. How about if he turned it over even less? Sure - turnovers are bad, so even less would be even better. So... a low number reflects something good about his play, no?

Now, so far I can't see how it would be fair to withhold the word "terrific" from MKG's play as represented in these numbers. IOW, I can't see anything "inflated" in that description so far.

Of course, there are other things he doesn't do as well. In particular scoring.

1. An average wing posted a 53.7% Total Scoring % last year. MKG posted 52.9% -- that's a little below average.

2. An average wing scored 3.85 more points than MKG per 40 minutes last year.

Now, MKG shot 3.4 times less than an average wing, allowing his teammates to take those shots. If they went only 44% on those shots, they'd reduce the effect of his shooting to .85 points -- less than the positive effect he creates with only 1 of those offensive boards.

In fact, if you treat him as an average shooter in your analysis of him, but you take away one of those offensive boards, his numbers still make him a "terrific" player. Plus, people routinely comment on his excellent defense, which isn't captured in any of this (except maybe in steals).

So, I ask you -- why wouldn't you use the word "terrific" to describe MKG? Or, to put it differently, how does the word "inflated" apply to this analysis of him?

[DCZards]

3. An average 3 turns the ball over more than twice as often as MKG. Would MKG be better if he turned it over more? No, that would be worse. How about if he turned it over even less? Sure - turnovers are bad, so even less would be even better. So... a low number reflects something good about his play, no?

Yes, MKG's low turnover #s reflects something about his play: he doesn't handle the ball nearly as much as the average 3 because he's a mediocre passer and ball handler. That's the primary reason for the low turnover #s.

Shouldn't stuff like that be taken into account when assessing a player's strengths and weaknesses? Or should we rely solely on stats when judging a player?

[queridiculo]

When I saw this thread bumped I figured it was because he may end up doing time. Didn't expect to read about MKG .