What to do with Klay Thompson?

[dirkdiggler4177]

Last season, many Warriors fans complained that Klay Thompson wasn’t the same player he used to be, while those who didn’t watch the Warriors regularly argued otherwise. Now, he’s averaging 14 points per game on 41% shooting from the field and 38% from three. He struggles to create his own shot because he can’t consistently get past defenders, so when he does try to create, he often settles for a contested mid-range jumper.

On defense, he no longer seems to have the foot speed to keep up with elite wings. Opponents actually shoot 2% better against him than their usual averages. Meanwhile, Luka and Kyrie, who each defend more shots, hold opponents to -0.7% and -0.3% below their typical averages, respectively. Quentin Grimes, on the other hand, forces opponents to shoot 7% worse when he’s defending them, while also scoring 10 points per game on 46% from the field and 39% from three.

Some might argue that Klay would excel alongside Luka (and that Luka’s injuries play a role), but what if Quentin Grimes were the one starting? He could benefit from the same wide-open three-pointers and also handle tougher defensive assignments against players like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Anthony Edwards, Ja Morant, James Harden, and others.

Now, I’m wondering whether Klay is at fault or if Jason Kidd just isn’t able to utilize shooters like him effectively. Last season, Tim Hardaway Jr. had a terrible year, but this season he’s playing solid basketball. It seemed like Kidd used to let Hardaway pull up for questionable jumpers in the spirit of a free-flowing offense.

I’m not sure. What do you all think?

[taikibansei]

Last season, many Warriors fans complained that Klay Thompson wasn’t the same player he used to be, while those who didn’t watch the Warriors regularly argued otherwise.

Disagree strongly with the bit in bold. At least on here, I think Dallas was the only fan base that felt Klay could still contribute consistently and significantly as a starter on a true contender. Everyone else argued that it was not a good idea. I sure didn't think he could contribute in such a role for an entire season, and the analysis in your OP (can no longer create his own shot, can't stay in front of his man, no longer mobile enough to guard out to the 3-point-line, etc., etc.) summarizes the reasons why.

1st or 2nd guy off the bench? Sure, great pickup. As one of your core starters? Not so good.....

[sashaturiaf]

Klays been role player fodder for years upon years now, not sure what Mavs fans expected. Even in his prime he was just a 6'6 guy who had a great spotup jumper as long as you didn't close out on him too hard. That is kind of a limited player.

Klay got no bag just a J. He's closer to Danny Green than he is to a Zach Lavine.

[deepeeenn]

If anything, Klay still gives the Mavs legit championship experience. Some that’s more valuable in the playoffs and not something you see in an individual box score.

[GSWFan1994]

It's been like that for the past 3 seasons now. Warriors fans who regularly watched the games know about it, there was a thread on the Warriors forum about it as well, currently with 67 pages, here's the link.

Klay has lost a lot of mobility due to both his age and his injuries. That, along with his huge ego in adjusting his game, role and expectations as he gets older, really puts a cap on his reliability relative to the team.

Klay had a great run, will surely get his jersey retired by the Warriors, and I'd say he'll eventually be voted in the Hall of Fame as well. He's not that player anymore, but for some reason he can't accept that and adjust in order to contribute to a team.

If you think the current situation is bad, wait and see how he reacts and behaves if his minutes are decreased as the season goes on.

[dirkdiggler4177]

If anything, Klay still gives the Mavs legit championship experience. Some that’s more valuable in the playoffs and not something you see in an individual box score.

I would usually disagree with this, but he seems very emotional on the court when things are not going his way. For example, if he is open and does not get the ball he is visibly upset. There was an article in which he barked at Jaden Hardy when he took a bad shot while he was open. Meanwhile, you see Kyrie reacting totally differently to this situation. If he gets a really bad pass and he does not catch he raises his hand like my fault and also points at the passer letting him know he liked the idea of the pass, and keep doing it.

You see here it in this quote too

... along with his huge ego in adjusting his game, role and expectations as he gets older, really puts a cap on his reliability relative to the team.

I don't think he will ever get it.

[Statlanta]

The Mavs do nothing. They wouldn't have got Klay Thompson if he wasn't washed.

Klay was drafted by the Warriors, he got like almost his whole career in Kerr's system. Moving him to another system with different players when he's already washed will make him look even more washed.

He's much better than his replacement in Hield because he actually plays against starters.

[PD28]

Mavs picked up a heavily used broken toy at a yard sale for 5 dollars and want it to perform like right out of the box? If it were right out of the box, you couldn't have afforded it.

[shi-woo]

I think anyone disappointing with the Klay signing were just being unrealistic. Most posters on here were level headed, and knew he was getting paid for experience, respect, and 3pnt volume. Anything other than that would just be gravy. So far, he is providing exactly that.

Mavs still have a Top offense which is better than lasts years even with Luka missing half the season, and KI missing a lot of time too. I don't think we'll see the full impact of Klay until the team can get its two stars on the court together. Klay was brought in to simply punish teams for doubling so recklessly, or to keep a man glued to the perimeter. Mavs just couldn't keep up with anything the Celtics did last year, and OKC is another team that likes to shoot and trap.

Of course you would want a true 2 way player that is bombing 8 threes a game at near 40%, but that wasn't in the cards. Klay at this point isn't going to be Celtics Ray Allen, but you all should be terrified of him in the role that Heat Ray Alen, Mike Miller, Duncan Rob type of role. Having a role player that can win you a quarter can win you a series, and that's what they are banking on

I hate to say it, but we aren't going to know if the Klay experiment was worth it until the playoffs. PJ Washinton went off in that OKC series, all they need is for Klay to have a few moments like that

[Sane]

I suspected in the offseason Grimes would beat him out quickly. The gap in their shooting is closing and the gap in their defense is widening. Grimes is a good 3&D SG who will surprise you. Klay without defense is just a shooter unfortunately.

Of course the logical thing to do is start Grimes and make Klay your 6th man who has the green light to go big with scoring and close games with fresh legs sometimes. That would give them a better bench and the starters would be more balanced.

I don't think they can do it though I'm sure starting was a condition of wherever he signed. At least for a year is my guess.

[UglyBugBall]

Last season, many Warriors fans complained that Klay Thompson wasn’t the same player he used to be, while those who didn’t watch the Warriors regularly argued otherwise. Now, he’s averaging 14 points per game on 41% shooting from the field and 38% from three. He struggles to create his own shot because he can’t consistently get past defenders, so when he does try to create, he often settles for a contested mid-range jumper.

On defense, he no longer seems to have the foot speed to keep up with elite wings. Opponents actually shoot 2% better against him than their usual averages. Meanwhile, Luka and Kyrie, who each defend more shots, hold opponents to -0.7% and -0.3% below their typical averages, respectively. Quentin Grimes, on the other hand, forces opponents to shoot 7% worse when he’s defending them, while also scoring 10 points per game on 46% from the field and 39% from three.

Some might argue that Klay would excel alongside Luka (and that Luka’s injuries play a role), but what if Quentin Grimes were the one starting? He could benefit from the same wide-open three-pointers and also handle tougher defensive assignments against players like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Anthony Edwards, Ja Morant, James Harden, and others.

Now, I’m wondering whether Klay is at fault or if Jason Kidd just isn’t able to utilize shooters like him effectively. Last season, Tim Hardaway Jr. had a terrible year, but this season he’s playing solid basketball. It seemed like Kidd used to let Hardaway pull up for questionable jumpers in the spirit of a free-flowing offense.

I’m not sure. What do you all think?

The best lineup in the NBA by net rating is the Mavs starting lineup that includes Klay. They have a +25 Net Rating. In fact all of the Mavs best lineups include Klay. In a vacuum Grimes looks like a better player, but the fact the team is simply better with Klay on the court. I don't think you mess that up. Grimes should get his minutes, but you don't need to break an elite lineup that works to give him those. He can easily play the 2 along side Klay at the 3 on some bench units.

[SlimShady83]

If you guys don't want Klay, Lakers happy to take him, he can teach Knecht a thing or two?

[TB]

I suspected in the offseason Grimes would beat him out quickly. The gap in their shooting is closing and the gap in their defense is widening. Grimes is a good 3&D SG who will surprise you. Klay without defense is just a shooter unfortunately.

Of course the logical thing to do is start Grimes and make Klay your 6th man who has the green light to go big with scoring and close games with fresh legs sometimes. That would give them a better bench and the starters would be more balanced.

I don't think they can do it though I'm sure starting was a condition of wherever he signed. At least for a year is my guess.

This was pretty much my exact prediction I put on the Warriors board last year. Basically guessing that after a month or so Dallas fans would be souring on Klay and wanting Grimes to start over him. Only reason I think it took this long is that Grimes and the rest of the Dallas bench started this season pretty terrible there wasn't much of an alternative to Klay. But it seems clearer and clearer as Grimes has gotten back to who he is capable of being.

If Kyrie and Luka were big time defenders Klay would be fine, but those 3 together is just awful for defense. Same thing happened with Steph last year... just couldn't have those two guys out there trying to hide both of them on defense (why Melton was the perfect partner for Steph.. that injury single handedly ruined this season but thats another topic lol ).

[Onlytimewilltel]

Klays been role player fodder for years upon years now, not sure what Mavs fans expected. Even in his prime he was just a 6'6 guy who had a great spotup jumper as long as you didn't close out on him too hard. That is kind of a limited player.

Klay got no bag just a J. He's closer to Danny Green than he is to a Zach Lavine.

You’re kind of selling him short. In his prime he was probably the best possible supporting star ever. Amazing defender and maybe the second best shooter of all time lol.

[sashaturiaf]

Klays been role player fodder for years upon years now, not sure what Mavs fans expected. Even in his prime he was just a 6'6 guy who had a great spotup jumper as long as you didn't close out on him too hard. That is kind of a limited player.

Klay got no bag just a J. He's closer to Danny Green than he is to a Zach Lavine.

You’re kind of selling him short. In his prime he was probably the best possible supporting star ever. Amazing defender and maybe the second best shooter of all time lol.

Hes not a supporting star. Best 3 and D ever? That's a discussion

[dirkdiggler4177]

Last season, many Warriors fans complained that Klay Thompson wasn’t the same player he used to be, while those who didn’t watch the Warriors regularly argued otherwise. Now, he’s averaging 14 points per game on 41% shooting from the field and 38% from three. He struggles to create his own shot because he can’t consistently get past defenders, so when he does try to create, he often settles for a contested mid-range jumper.

On defense, he no longer seems to have the foot speed to keep up with elite wings. Opponents actually shoot 2% better against him than their usual averages. Meanwhile, Luka and Kyrie, who each defend more shots, hold opponents to -0.7% and -0.3% below their typical averages, respectively. Quentin Grimes, on the other hand, forces opponents to shoot 7% worse when he’s defending them, while also scoring 10 points per game on 46% from the field and 39% from three.

Some might argue that Klay would excel alongside Luka (and that Luka’s injuries play a role), but what if Quentin Grimes were the one starting? He could benefit from the same wide-open three-pointers and also handle tougher defensive assignments against players like Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Anthony Edwards, Ja Morant, James Harden, and others.

Now, I’m wondering whether Klay is at fault or if Jason Kidd just isn’t able to utilize shooters like him effectively. Last season, Tim Hardaway Jr. had a terrible year, but this season he’s playing solid basketball. It seemed like Kidd used to let Hardaway pull up for questionable jumpers in the spirit of a free-flowing offense.

I’m not sure. What do you all think?

The best lineup in the NBA by net rating is the Mavs starting lineup that includes Klay. They have a +25 Net Rating. In fact all of the Mavs best lineups include Klay. In a vacuum Grimes looks like a better player, but the fact the team is simply better with Klay on the court. I don't think you mess that up. Grimes should get his minutes, but you don't need to break an elite lineup that works to give him those. He can easily play the 2 along side Klay at the 3 on some bench units.

First of all, there is no evidence that this is because of Klay, especially considering he is the 5th best player in that lineup. If you were to switch out one player, he is the first one you select.
Second of all, they have played very few minutes and because of that, those numbers are skewed. 119 minutes together is not enough. The Celtics' starting lineup last season played 623 minutes together and had a +11 rating, the Nuggets had 13, and the OKC starting had 10. There is no way the Mavs are going to average +25 because of Klay.

Just to put in perspective how dumb the 25+ net rating numbers are, the lineup who has played the second most minutes (89 minutes) for the Mavs is this: K. Irving - K. Thompson - P. Washington - L. Dončić - D. Gafford. What do you think their +net rating is?

It's minus 8.8.


Did you watch last night's game?

[juanc]

The Mavs starting 5 Luka - Kyrie - Klay - PJ Washington - Lively has an off rating of 127,9 and def rating 104.4(23,5 Net rtg), one of the best lineups in the NBA, the only problem is that the Mavs are riddled with injuries and there is no lineup consistency.

[dirkdiggler4177]

The Mavs starting 5 Luka - Kyrie - Klay - PJ Washington - Lively has an off rating of 127,9 and def rating 104.4(23,5 Net rtg), one of the best lineups in the NBA, the only problem is that the Mavs are riddled with injuries and there is no lineup consistency.

Did you see my post before this?

They played 119 minutes together and have a net rating of 23.5, the second-most played lineup has played 89 minutes together and got a net rating of -8.8.

The difference between those lineups is Gafford is playing instead of Lively. So how can you use that stat to defend Thompson should be starting when it is very clear that the stat is skewed because of the few minutes?

[Archx]

The Mavs starting 5 Luka - Kyrie - Klay - PJ Washington - Lively has an off rating of 127,9 and def rating 104.4(23,5 Net rtg), one of the best lineups in the NBA, the only problem is that the Mavs are riddled with injuries and there is no lineup consistency.

Did you see my post before this?

They played 119 minutes together and have a net rating of 23.5, the second-most played lineup has played 89 minutes together and got a net rating of -8.8.

The difference between those lineups is Gafford is playing instead of Lively. So how can you use that stat to defend Thompson should be starting when it is very clear that the stat is skewed because of the few minutes?

You literally answered yourself here. The reason why the 2nd lineup had negative NET is because you switched out Lively for Gafford. Gafford (until this point) hasn't been good, that's something every Mavs fan noticed. He was bad at defending the space and fell for every single pump fake, which then put him out of position. Lively is a much more mobile and versatile defensive center that can also grab more rebounds.

So all in all, Klay played amazing with Luka, he shoots over 41% from 3 when he's playing with Luka and 32% without him. (That was before injury).
Klay also receives the most passes from Luka because he's the only guy who can create shots for him and doesn't ignore him when he's open. There was literally a huge topic on Mavs reddit about this few days ago with video material. I suggest you check it out.

Long story short, Klay plays fine but he does need a coach or a player, who is capable of creating open space for him. Kidd is not a serious coach and we see this now more than ever, but having the real coach coming back from calf injury will also help out Klay a lot.

At the end of the day it doesn't even matter if he starts or not, Grimes often finishes games ahead of him anyway....

[dirkdiggler4177]

The Mavs starting 5 Luka - Kyrie - Klay - PJ Washington - Lively has an off rating of 127,9 and def rating 104.4(23,5 Net rtg), one of the best lineups in the NBA, the only problem is that the Mavs are riddled with injuries and there is no lineup consistency.

Did you see my post before this?

They played 119 minutes together and have a net rating of 23.5, the second-most played lineup has played 89 minutes together and got a net rating of -8.8.

The difference between those lineups is Gafford is playing instead of Lively. So how can you use that stat to defend Thompson should be starting when it is very clear that the stat is skewed because of the few minutes?

You literally answered yourself here. The reason why the 2nd lineup had negative NET is because you switched out Lively for Gafford. Gafford (until this point) hasn't been good, that's something every Mavs fan noticed. He was bad at defending the space and fell for every single pump fake, which then put him out of position. Lively is a much more mobile and versatile defensive center that can also grab more rebounds.

So all in all, Klay played amazing with Luka, he shoots over 41% from 3 when he's playing with Luka and 32% without him. (That was before injury).
Klay also receives the most passes from Luka because he's the only guy who can create shots for him and doesn't ignore him when he's open. There was literally a huge topic on Mavs reddit about this few days ago with video material. I suggest you check it out.

Long story short, Klay plays fine but he does need a coach or a player, who is capable of creating open space for him. Kidd is not a serious coach and we see this now more than ever, but having the real coach coming back from calf injury will also help out Klay a lot.

At the end of the day it doesn't even matter if he starts or not, Grimes often finishes games ahead of him anyway....

I don't think you understand how the numbers work,

Here’s a simple way to picture why a lineup that’s only played around 13 games (or ~100–120 minutes) is far more “fragile” than, say, a team like the Timberwolves that has a much bigger sample of minutes played together:

Small Sample = Small Total Point Gap

If a five‐man unit racks up a nice +25 net rating over just 13 games (maybe ~120 minutes together), they might only be, say, +30 or +40 total points above their opponents in those minutes.
One or two bad games (20+ point losses) can wipe out that entire +30 or +40‐point cushion. Suddenly, the net rating (points per 100 possessions) drops all the way down to zero or even negative.
Large Sample = Larger Cushion

A team like the Timberwolves, playing hundreds more minutes together, builds up or loses far more total points over time. If they have a strong net rating over several hundred minutes, they might be, for example, +200 or +300 total points in the big picture.
It would take many consecutive bad games (20+ point blowouts) to burn through that larger cushion. Their net rating is more “stable” because it isn’t as easily flipped by a few outlier nights.


For example, last season when Gafford joined the Mavs they played together for 19 games and had a defensive rating of 99. That is better than Lively has ever done. Now this season with Gafford it is suddenly 127 or something.


You just can't argue with those numbers.