- If Maggette is willing to accept his role, he can be a [dang] effective player for us, and an overall upgrade from last year.
How are you sure about this? Is Maggette that better than Posey as a weakside player who sets screens? I can't see him being the next Dell Curry, so I have serious doubts that he'd make up for the amount we'd lose defensively: directly and indirectly, because we'd have to force Allen/Pierce to defend the best opp. player all the time and they'd be less productive on the offensive side.
Listen man, I think most would agree that the 6th man is one of the key players on the team (or could be one of the better players on the team, perhaps not starting due to position, re: Manu), but I don't know where this "the 6th man's job has to be only setting screens, etc." to be effective comes from. Of course that doesn't mean a 6th man couldn't be effective doing that, but I digress.
The logical argument as I see it here is basically: Posey was effective by doing x, y and z (i.e., setting screens, whatever else). Maggette is not Posey. Maggette does not do x, y and z. Therefore, Maggette would not be effective.
I understand the differences between Maggette and Posey, the offense vs. defense tradeoff, and I believe signing one or the other changes how we would want to fill out the remainder of the roster. But the argument above, that Maggette wouldn't help irrespective of other considerations, to me, is complete crap (no offense).
This has nothing to do with the "6th man role". Nothing at all. It's a matter of offensive system, rotations and the players we already have. And I'm not even talking about the offensive/defensive trade off. When you said "If Maggette is willing to accept his role", what exactly do you mean by role?
His role as a backup. His role as a "role player," not the star, not the first option, be a cog in the machine, however you want to put it.
Maggette accepts his role if he:
- Accepts he comes off the bench.
- Accepts the fact that he will have reduced minutes, reduced stats, etc.
- Commits to 100% effort on defense.
- Commits to making the best play for the team on every offensive trip (i.e., to play unselfish ball).
- In general, does whatever the coach asks of him.
Well, that's extremely vague, I'd assume that Maggette or every other player accepts that. I was speaking from a coaching perspective. For starters, what role will Maggette have on our offensive system? Will he play primarily on the strongside?
He'll hit shots, attack the basket, draw fouls and force the defense to collapse. I'm sure you could cookie cut a role for him that would render him ineffective. I'd like to think the coaches would use him in a way that maximizes his contributions to the team. I could see him sitting on the weak side and hitting an open three (or beating his man to the hole on a close out) if he's out there with GPA, or I could just as well see him attacking the basket if he's out there with KG and Allen, opening up threes and 18 footers for those two guys.
Yeps, I'm pretty sure he can be effective playing along Allen and KG, taking care of Pierce's role. But Pierce is a far better player, so when it counts, during the playoffs, you want Pierce there for 40 minutes (and you'd be wasting Ray Allen for the entire game). My problem is what he can do beyond those 8 minutes or so. Perhaps you are focusing too much on the shooting and the scoring.
I've summed up my doubts here:
"An offense is not only about scoring. It's a large part of it, but if you have 5 players whose primary skill is scoring, there's a high chance you won't score much, unless they are all very good all-around players. You need guys to set screens - is Maggette a better screener than Posey?; you need players to fake cuts - is Maggette better?; you need facilitators, distributors, who can play safe; you need fixers and creatives; you need guys that provide space. Posey being a better spot-up 3pt jumper than Maggette when his shot is not contested (I don't know for sure if he is, we don't have that kind of advanced stats available), even though the later is better in anything else scoring related, may be enough to make our overall offense worse, as odd as this may seem. But meshing and balance are the secrets for a potent offense, not outstanding scorers, in spite of how efficient they may be.
I understand, from my readings here, that many are assuming that Maggette can be as effective as a scorer despite of playing in a different offensive role, but I see that as a leap. The problem is not only Maggette taking shots from Pierce and Posey, or even Ray Allen. It's the kind of shots, what he and Pierce or Ray (as the three of them can't play together) will have to do while off the ball, and last, but not least, it's not having many plays prepared and called for him. And Maggette is a good player, but he's not Ray Allen or Paul Pierce; so what's the point of making our worst wing scorer the primary on-the-ball offensive winger?
I think it's consensual that our off. eff. would improve with Maggette, and not Posey, coming off the bench to replace Pierce, with the other starters on the floor. But how many minutes you want Pierce benched during the playoffs? Seven, eight? Other than that (and again, one would be hurting the D, it would be strictly an offensive improvement), I really don't know - Pierce's role is the only one that clearly fits Maggette. I'm still to figure out what kind of rotations we could use. He's not a PG, he's not a post player. I don't know if Maggette-Pierce facilitates our offense more than Posey-Pierce, and this tandem creates huge problems defensively - do you really want to see one of them fighting screens to chase Rip around the floor or trying to stop Wade on the perimeter? I mean, I can imagine plays, one could run 2-2s with them, but then you'd need shooters, so Rondo's backup presence would be required; Pierce can play in the weakside, but IMO, that would be a total waste - it would be like Phil using Kobe as the 1 in the triangle... And we can't play any of them at the 4 for extended minutes because none can defend the post and we'd need to change our all game philosophy (increase the tempo, Garnett as a center, another defensive system, a 4 out 1 in offense - probably it would be a "doughnut offense", considering Garnett's tendency to play outside).
If people really believe that Maggette's offense would make up for what we'd lose on defense, I'd like to see some more substantial arguments. The fact that he is a scorer and a good player is not enough for me. The idea that if a player is effective doing much, therefore he must be effective doing less is a total misconception: Dantley and Iverson are two names that come to mind. The Payton-Fisher example previously used is also relevant, because it shows the importance of the offensive system: sometimes you prefer to play the worse player because he has better skills for a specific role."
And I can't figure out how we can play a lineup of Maggette+GPA for extended minutes. Also, the point is not maximizing Maggette's contributions to the team. That's quite easy to do. The issue is how to maximize the team production with Maggette replacing Posey.
Look, see this from a UsgR perspective: we'd probably need Maggette to be an efficient offensive player with a +/- 13% Usg. Can he do it? I think an educated guess can be done with proper scouting and using very advanced stats. But I find hard to believe a fan can assure that, for the simple reason that Maggette never played that kind of role since he joined the NBA. And this still lefts unanswered the "defensive side" part of the question.
Topic: Maggette says he could be willing to take pay cut to come to Boston (Read 84724 times)