Rerisen wrote:mysticbb wrote:the key element for winning is better overall talent, not "2nd ball handler".
I agree with overall talent argument. But we have to get deeper at the real disagreement here.
I'll try to use a generic question to achieve this. Assuming Derrick Rose is our only credible on-ball player beside what Love can do as a scorer, for our main minute units, do you necessarily think that let's say a +2 offensive player, regardless of pure shooter or more versatile scorer, but same end result on their previous team, would impact the Bulls offense the same?
Because I think proper offensive balance means some skills are more valuable to some teams than others.
And I can't see in the playing level of the respective teams (if accounted for the opponents strength) changed much from RS to PS. It is a perceived difference, because most times the level of the opponents is not accurately accounted for in the playoffs.
My impression is you have stronger trust than me in season numbers carryover. But you yourself in pointing out the strategies and matchups of say Dallas vs Miami, recognize that certain weaknesses or personnel can be exploited in a long series to perhaps throw a wrench into what those numbers expect, right? That is what I'm saying. Don't create a team that might remain vulnerable to such a matchup failure if we can help it.
Really, you ignoring the fact that Love can create for himself and for his teammates, and at a pretty high usage while being more efficient than Anthony with that
I think you are taking my posts to be far more about Love vs Anthony than they are. Don't know where the impression came from. My angle is not "Team is flawed with Love, but fixed with Anthony."
I just want to improve overall talent and either guy can do it, but Melo might be more immediately available, cost less to get, and fit initially easier due to not being redundant with Gibson or Mirotic. We obviously have a hole at SF from just losing Deng.
But if at the draft, Minny says we'll take Mirotic and picks for Love, of course do it before even checking about Melo.
(I'm shortening your quotes for sake of length and other readers)
Yeah, Anthony can beat a team more likely than Love when starting from the perimeter, but with Love you get an more efficient inside-out game too. So, while you see an issue in one specific area, you ignore the advantages in an other area, which should at least give a similar positive impact on the offense.
So as above, if a big part of your emphasis in the thread is simply Love > Anthony. I'm not going to argue. It's certainly backed up by stats, and even if Love is a big unknown in the playoffs so far, or is not himself, that 2nd ball handler for the team, I still take him gladly if he's first up available and look to fill that need in another way. Again, I don't think this missing player has to be anyone great.
But say a PnR player or dribbler more capable than MDJ.
You don't beat the Heat with "a 2nd ball handler able to break down the defense", you beat their defense with effective inside&out, midpost game, player and ball movement. That's how the Mavericks did it, that's how the Spurs were able to put themselves into a position to possible win in 2013 while being able to play sufficient defense
I agree with all this. I'm not talking about desiring some 1v1 iso wonder. But part of the Mavs and Spurs success within those concepts was indeed moving the ball via the hand, not just passing. But diving into lanes on the Heat's multiple rotating defense, and then kicking out to the next guy. If the guy hit with the first pass from out of the mid-post, or wherever the breakdown was initially caused, you are at a disadvantage if that first open man isn't good at attacking or passing off an attack. I trust a Jason Kidd, Barea, Diaw, Marco, do make a better play in these cases than Mike or Jimmy. And in Jimmy's case, for those players to shoot better too when the shot doesn't get run off.
The fact is, even if we add either Love or Anthony to the current squad while assuming Rose is reasonable healthy, the team would have weaknesses.
Never said different. I don't think Anthony completes the perfect team at all. Desiring another ball handler doesn't mean putting that ability on a pedestal above all else.
Given the history of both players and the fact that the one is younger and more efficient anyway, why do you assume that the other would be the better option?
Yet again, I don't think he is in the sense of just better as a player. But only a preference if he wants to come here first, and I don't want to risk gambling on getting lucky with Love at the deadline, if he's not potentially available to then.
You may be confusing my Melo love with some of the other posters. I'm one that shot down Melo to the Bulls last time he was in discussions a few years back. But we are in a weaker position now, unable to be so choosy.
Because I though you are honest enough to assume I did adjust, given the fact that we talked about numbers multiple times and I wrote multiple times that the numbers depend on the respective role of the player within the team as well as the overall situation. The numbers are produced in a context, not a vacuum, and I said so multiple times in past conversation. I didn't see the need to explain that again, especially when I talk to you, who should be pretty aware of that. That's why I felt offended by your comments, because the only way to write that in fashion you did was by believing I would simply be a moron only relying on numbers and nothing else.
This wasn't at all very clear though with just stating a number. If you added initially, "This is with Love at 80% impact or Rose less for this and that", as some helpful context, would have saved a lot of space for both of us. Even if you think I should make that assumption by now, it would be useful for anyone else reading to have it.
I think you underestimate Dunleavy, if you believe an upgrade would be needed. Reduced minutes for him should be sufficient, he doesn't need to spread his energy in the same fashion with 24 mpg instead of 32 mpg. Getting a more sufficient backup player for the wing than Snell is doing the trick here and that was a key part of my scenario given the fact that I completely excluded Snell from that lineup.
I don't like Dunleavy that much. His age, his defense, his limitations on offense. Plus even if he can do alright for a year, he's only got one more season here on contract, and if not declining next year noticeably, its coming soon. Just not a part of the long term picture, so maybe you look to consolidate him early.
Again, watch James against the Mavericks try to attack that defense and ultimately turn it over or end up with a bad shot. Do you believe that James wanted to turn that over or that the bad shot is something he wanted to take?
I don't know how much more of 11 Finals stuff I can do. But the issue is not when James tried to attack, but all the times he didn't!
You don't stop attacking because a team is going to double or triple if you do, and then give up, you attack to force that, and then make the play to the open man.
It was a lot of the same thing last year vs the Spurs, at some point he just shut down and refused wide open shots that would normally be super high % for him.
This guy is the best player in the game, and on his team, it would just be shocking to me, great gampelan or not, that anyone would feel he played to his max capability in that series. And the games were close too. They lost one by 3, one by 2, and one was within 2 under 2 minutes. So it would not take that much improvement to potentially turn them.
I don't know if there is a compromise where we can say part this and part that, but we just won't agree on the percentages. Whether his performance was 90% Mavs / 10% Poor play, decision making, vs 60/40 or whatever.
But great players have a lot more elasticity than poor ones. Carlos Boozer against Serge or Anthony Davis, really doesn't matter what choices he makes, his ability to change his impact is going to be minimal. A LeBron has many more avenues.
Sidenote: We also got away from the original mention of Jet Tery. Who scored 18 PPG on .605 TS% in the series, including some huge buckets and offense when Dirk was on the bench. His season scoring was just 15.8 PPG on .548 TS%, so a huge step up from expected contribution.
And for me, the ultimate story was the Mavericks being able to get around the defensive strength of the Heat, because they did not try to attack from the perimeter, but rather used their abilties to run staggered p&r with Terry/Nowitzki/Chandler as well as exploiting the Heat weakness in terms of help defense against midpost players. The Heat simply couldn't defend that at a necessary level. And it looks weird from the outside perspective, because the Mavericks ran their most efficient plays more in the 4th quarter, using the previous 3 quarter to not let the opponent get away too much while preserving energy for those 4th quarter runs. They've done so the whole season before (and in previous seasons as well). Watch the Mavericks and see them not running plays for Nowitzki in the same fashion in the first 3 quarters whenever the opponents is close ahead or they lead themselves, but once the 4th quarter arrives you will see how they ran that two-man game with Terry/Nowitzki to the death.
Even Barea was effective with it! As he had been all playoffs. But yeah, I give you good points on bringing up this stuff.
Anyway, Mavs deserved to win, no one is taking that from them. They played better, coached better, their superstar stepped up more.
Is what they did imminently repeatable, copyable, for a team like the Bulls. I'm less comfortable going there. Rose as our PG sets up a much different dynamic to begin with vs Kidd.
Love is a better passer than Nowitzki. Nowitzki is better as p&r/p partner and in terms of creating that tough shot in the midpost, that is a huge thing for the overall impact, but in general that difference between Love and Nowitzki is about 2 to 3 pts per 100 possession. So, we are talking about 1.5 to 2 points per game. But that makes Love still MUCH better than Boozer, which he would replace in my scenario. And if Mirotic would likely produce a similar thing right away, I would be choosing him over Love. But that is HIGHLY unlikely. Mirotic has the potential to become as impactful, but that is his ceiling, not the realistic scenario. And the Bulls need that level of play now, not in 2 or 3 years, while Love has the age to be still as good in 2 or 3 years as he is now.
No argument about Love being amazingly better than Boozer, and a great fit for Rose.
One thing worth mentioning. Expectation of Love's first ever playoff performances. Do you assume he just comes in and kills at 100% effectiveness off the bat. IDK, but seems a lot of players need some learning years under the crucible of playoff pressure to play up to their best.
Wow, I much rather have Gibson for 28mpg behind Noah/Love (each with 34) than getting 36 min from Afflalo.
I think people greatly overestimate how easy it is, and how restrictive to a rotation, to actually try and give a 3rd big every single minute of backup center and PF. It gets screwed up so easily with fouls, and forces super tight strict rotations where its harder to make changes for matchups.
Seriously, given the overall situation, that is not even something which should be considered. Getting a Noah/Love/Gibson big rotation is much more valuable than having Afflalo.
It depends to me who is the wing. Again I don't like Dunleavy and would consdier Afflalo a much bigger asset over him for 35 a night, than Gibson over a hustle big. Sure, you can play Noah/Love only 34 mpg in the playoffs as an excuse to get Gibson more minutes, but have to wonder if you are simply making yourself worse sitting better players longer than necessary, vs most playoff rotations.
If you argue honestly without logical fallicies, that is an easy task for me. ;) Other than that I don't care how you feel about it.
That part wasn't a debate. Much of it was straight baiting and is actionable here. PM me if it needs further clarification.
