mrpoetryNmotion wrote:I feel like I lost track, yet again, as to how the Wiseman vs Mitch argument started.
I actually tend to agree with some of the folks that say Mitch is and perhaps will be nothing more than a rim runner and is thus could represent an overpayment risk. I'm not sold on the functionality of his jump shooting, to be honest, and wonder about his overall BBIQ, but he is currently great value, and I'm sure he will get a bit better.
I think the league is trending towards all 5 players being versatile and knowing how to read/react, and make plays for others to maximize the offensive set. This has been demonstrated to great effect in the East (Miami, Boston, Toronto) these playoffs, whereas I feel like the West has relied more on starpower (I mean, Lebron and AD are too good). Mitch is a finisher and has shown no flashes of creating or making good reads with the ball because he really hasn't been in that situation. That being said, unreasonable to expect that we're going to attain this mythical 5 person lineup of skilled ball players playing good team ball anytime soon. Mitch is quite effective in his role, currently, given his usage. I don't really have any qualms with him at this time.
I guess I'm confused why we think Mitch and his role is on his way towards being phased out but Wiseman somehow will not be phased out or that there aren't concerns there? My questions here pertain to BBIQ/awareness/passing and his lack of lateral quickness. He should be a good rim protector, but he will likely get exploited in the pick and roll and in space, in general. So he is not very switchable. He has decent tools, but he is far from offensively polished; could get there someday, though, and I think he will certainly improve. However, he has shown little to no ability of making good plays for others.That is another big limitation if you're talking about featuring him or him being a high usage player in this day and age, or at least I think so. If he was Amar'e level explosive and quick at his size, then I'd be willing to overlook that with the quickness, but he's not that quick and his moves take a bit of time to load, which means the defense will have more time to react. I guess I have a concern that he'd be getting efficient looks if not in a rim running/finishing role, himself.
My initial judgement, is no; sure, it is nice that he is willing to take a fadeaway mid-range jumper, but that is not an efficient shot, especially if it's your big taking it who hasn't consistently shown he can make those shots. Doubly so if he's a predictable player that can be gameplanned for due to the lack of ability to make good halfcourt reads with the ball in certain spots. The outside shot is also a question mark. I don't think he needs to be a 3-point shooter, and I think much has been made of that because spacing is king, but he at least needs to hit long twos from time to time. Honestly, what role are we envisioning that he fill? Maybe I'm down on the big center in today's NBA. I think there are a few cheaper guys who can be serviceable here and contribute to winning/more efficient shots being generated elsewhere in the offense. If he fell to 8, I wouldn't be upset with taking him, but I wouldn't be enamored with him because I think the NBA has found ways to figure players like him out. Doesn't mean he will be a bad player, but I am at least struggling to project him as a superstar big. I don't know, maybe my take on the current NBA landscape is off.
tl;dr:
- Mitch is limited, but is good value for now and isn't high usage...agree that he represents an overpayment risk in the future
- Wiseman has flaws that can be exposed (switchability, not quick, not a good passer, etc.) so how do we envision him being an efficient high usage player moving forward, with the way the NBA landscape is progressing?
This is a good post, however I don't understand how people can worry about Wiseman's defense, especially after we just watched the Nuggets get to the WCF with arguably one of the worst defensive bigs in the NBA. There are very few guys who can expose bigs on switches, and the direction the NBA is moving in you're going to see more teams running zone in the future because it has proven to be effective. On one hand people question his shot despite his solid mechanics because he only played 3 games, yet they have no problem with using those 3 games to say he won't be a good defender. If Joel Embiid were in this draft and had only played 3 games most people here wouldn't even want him with the 27th pick as his first 3 games he was picking up fouls like crazy.
We don't need 5 guys that can score, but having more guys that can attack a closeout is ideal, and having a big man that can punish the switching is where the game is going. My fundamental problem with Mitch is that people act like what he does cannot be stopped, as though coaches haven't spent the better part of the last 15 years dealing with rim rollers. Everyone says Mitch can switch onto wings, that isn't the point, the point is that you need to be able to punish the wings on the other side of the floor. You need to force them to send help for being small, and you force them to play their own limited defensive rim roller which hurts them on offense. The Celtics have Robert Williams but barely played him against the Heat because the zone made his negative impact on offense outweigh whatever positives he brought on defense. Committing to Mitch with a contract is committing to a very clear path that has failed the majority of the decade, drafting Wiseman allows us to reset the timer on when we need to make a decision on C and mold James into an offensive player. Everyone says Mitch is young & raw, he's 3 years older than James, yet less skilled, but James is talked about like he's the finished product, it's weird to me.
not every player needs to drop 30 a game
