RealGM

https://lamarmatic.wordpress.com/2015/0 ... -in-check/

Some stuff on MKG guarding Reggie Jackson and Aaron Brooks.

Nice

Great read my man.

Thanks! Reading it over seems a tad too short, but, hey, maybe in this situation footage is something you need more than me blabbering about.

Hopefully we'll continue to see who the other team's hot hand is for the night and then stick MKG on him. I think it may be even more disruptive (for the other team) to have MKG start out with his natural assignment and then switch to whoever the hot hand is as the game progresses, rather than just starting him out on who we think might be the obvious choice. When you do that, you basically shut down MKG's initial man, and then when the switch is made, you shut down the other team's hot hand (and if they are relying heavily on that player, usually subsequently that team's entire offense), all the while MKG's initial man is probably still out of rhythm. It can be really disruptive for a team, as we saw in the DET and CHI games.

When we use MKG like that, I always think of this scene from one of Kevin Hart's specials:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP4DX3yk7Xs[/youtube]

Outstanding! Enjoyed reading this one!

MKG really seems to do a fantastic job defending PGs and SGs. I don't know the stats, but just going off the eye test I'm kind of wondering if he's better at defending guards than he is forwards (not to take away how good he is at defending forwards).

But seeing how good he is at defending guards, I don't think I would be opposed to bringing in a SF this offseason and sliding MKG to SG if we're having trouble finding the right SG to put next to MKG. It's pretty nice having a guy that defend so many positions. Now if we can just find a sharpshooter with a decent overall game to put next to him.

Benjamin Linus wrote:MKG really seems to do a fantastic job defending PGs and SGs. I don't know the stats, but just going off the eye test I'm kind of wondering if he's better at defending guards than he is forwards (not to take away how good he is at defending forwards).

But seeing how good he is at defending guards, I don't think I would be opposed to bringing in a SF this offseason and sliding MKG to SG if we're having trouble finding the right SG to put next to MKG. It's pretty nice having a guy that defend so many positions. Now if we can just find a sharpshooter with a decent overall game to put next to him.

SG and SF is so interchangeable. We've discussed this possibility for the past 2-3 years but I seriously doubt Rainman Clifford would view MKG as anything but a SF as unadjustable he's been. I'm surprised that he even made the adjustment to put MKG on PGs so there's some hope. We just need a wing that's a legit 3pt threat alongside MKG and the rest will happen. That's why I'm not against drafting Kelly Oubre.

I have said this before and someone always says he can't. My point is he can defend SGs then he could play SGS as long as the other positions can cover for him on offense. If you have a shooter at SF then a slasher at SG is good. Guys do not have to play the same roles on both ends of the court.

MKG saying he wants to be the best defender ever is really exciting. Obviously, there is virtually no chance of that happening, but we at least know that with that kind of attitude he is going to maximize his defensive potential (barring injury). I'll be happy if he ever is the top defender at his position in the league, which doesn't seem out of the question.

jdm3 wrote:I have said this before and someone always says he can't. My point is he can defend SGs then he could play SGS as long as the other positions can cover for him on offense. If you have a shooter at SF then a slasher at SG is good. Guys do not have to play the same roles on both ends of the court.

Positions shouldn't be taken so rigidly, especially on the defensive end, especially between SFs and SGs, which are practically interchangeable these days. MKG can cover any position 1-3 fantastically. He can guard plenty of 4s and even some smallball 5s as well. Offensively, you have to put a shooter next to him, but whether they are labeled as a SG or a SF is inconsequential. Remember when we were talking about drafting Doug McDermott, and people were whining about how we can't have two small forwards playing together? Between the 2 and 3 positions, if you've got a defender, a slasher, a rebounder, a finisher, and a perimeter scorer, you're good. MKG is the first four of those. Any perimeter scoring wing would do the trick.

BizGilwalker wrote:

jdm3 wrote:I have said this before and someone always says he can't. My point is he can defend SGs then he could play SGS as long as the other positions can cover for him on offense. If you have a shooter at SF then a slasher at SG is good. Guys do not have to play the same roles on both ends of the court.

Positions shouldn't be taken so rigidly, especially on the defensive end, especially between SFs and SGs, which are practically interchangeable these days. MKG can cover any position 1-3 fantastically. He can guard plenty of 4s and even some smallball 5s as well. Offensively, you have to put a shooter next to him, but whether they are labeled as a SG or a SF is inconsequential. Remember when we were talking about drafting Doug McDermott, and people were whining about how we can't have two small forwards playing together? Between the 2 and 3 positions, if you've got a defender, a slasher, a rebounder, a finisher, and a perimeter scorer, you're good. MKG is the first four of those. Any perimeter scoring wing would do the trick.

True. Its not much different than it would have been had Hayward been a Hornet. MKG and Hayward would play the 2/3 spots and they would basically be interchangeable on both ends.

fatlever wrote:

BizGilwalker wrote:

jdm3 wrote:I have said this before and someone always says he can't. My point is he can defend SGs then he could play SGS as long as the other positions can cover for him on offense. If you have a shooter at SF then a slasher at SG is good. Guys do not have to play the same roles on both ends of the court.

Positions shouldn't be taken so rigidly, especially on the defensive end, especially between SFs and SGs, which are practically interchangeable these days. MKG can cover any position 1-3 fantastically. He can guard plenty of 4s and even some smallball 5s as well. Offensively, you have to put a shooter next to him, but whether they are labeled as a SG or a SF is inconsequential. Remember when we were talking about drafting Doug McDermott, and people were whining about how we can't have two small forwards playing together? Between the 2 and 3 positions, if you've got a defender, a slasher, a rebounder, a finisher, and a perimeter scorer, you're good. MKG is the first four of those. Any perimeter scoring wing would do the trick.

True. Its not much different than it would have been had Hayward been a Hornet. MKG and Hayward would play the 2/3 spots and they would basically be interchangeable on both ends.

Last offseason when I said MKG could play SG if we got a shooting SF I was killed. People kept saying you can't have a SG who can't hit threes. My point has always been he can guard out there and as long as the shooter is taken care of somewhere else then he can do it.

fatlever wrote:

BizGilwalker wrote:

jdm3 wrote:I have said this before and someone always says he can't. My point is he can defend SGs then he could play SGS as long as the other positions can cover for him on offense. If you have a shooter at SF then a slasher at SG is good. Guys do not have to play the same roles on both ends of the court.

Positions shouldn't be taken so rigidly, especially on the defensive end, especially between SFs and SGs, which are practically interchangeable these days. MKG can cover any position 1-3 fantastically. He can guard plenty of 4s and even some smallball 5s as well. Offensively, you have to put a shooter next to him, but whether they are labeled as a SG or a SF is inconsequential. Remember when we were talking about drafting Doug McDermott, and people were whining about how we can't have two small forwards playing together? Between the 2 and 3 positions, if you've got a defender, a slasher, a rebounder, a finisher, and a perimeter scorer, you're good. MKG is the first four of those. Any perimeter scoring wing would do the trick.

True. Its not much different than it would have been had Hayward been a Hornet. MKG and Hayward would play the 2/3 spots and they would basically be interchangeable on both ends.

Yeah- Hayward actually played the 2 for a long time next to Richard Jefferson last year, who has been more of a 3/4 than a 2/3. Hayward can complement anyone pretty well though

jdm3 wrote:Last offseason when I said MKG could play SG if we got a shooting SF I was killed. People kept saying you can't have a SG who can't hit threes. My point has always been he can guard out there and as long as the shooter is taken care of somewhere else then he can do it.

I legitimately don't know the difference between a SG that can shoot and a SF that can shoot. I completely agree with what you said here.

yosemiteben wrote:

jdm3 wrote:Last offseason when I said MKG could play SG if we got a shooting SF I was killed. People kept saying you can't have a SG who can't hit threes. My point has always been he can guard out there and as long as the shooter is taken care of somewhere else then he can do it.

I legitimately don't know the difference between a SG that can shoot and a SF that can shoot. I completely agree with what you said here.

The only real difference is the SF is usually a little bigger and the SG might have more ball handling skills.