3 Words On McGee: START THE KID
I have to agree with Wise on this one.
Sure he has some awkward drives to the basket. Sure his basketball IQ isn't as high as Etan's.
But there is a reason that EJ had him playing 27 minutes tonight, and Etan only 13. Dude is already better than Kwame was (is?).
However, he will be getting himself into foul trouble often. He can't move his feet as quickly and as rationally as, say Garnett can, but he's a work in progress. And we'll have Etan there to play the 13 minutes that he should.
[Ed. Note: This might be the best article of the week. It supports JaVale McGee starting, JaVale puts an end to the discussion about whether or not he can dunk on a 12 foot rim (with six inches to spare!) and there's a quote from Gheorghe Muresan. This is heaven for a Wizards fan.]
about 1 year ago
se7en
55 comments
1 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I also enjoyed the article but disagree about McGee.
Why all the obsession with who starts? Play him 27 minutes. Play him more. Why start him? I don’t see the plus in that.
I do see some potential minuses:
Could blow up his head too big (although he doesn’t seem the type, but who knows)
Could be a blow to Etan’s recovery to be at least what he was two years ago. Even if he’s no Haywood or even no McGee, we still need him.
If McGee slumps or struggles (easy to imagine that could happen) it makes it harder to cut back/backtrack.
McGee is getting his game together why put undue pressure on him?
by MR on Nov 13, 2008 10:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
it is clear
that their best lineup right now is JaVale, NY, Caron, AJ & Deshawn or Juan. that was the lineup in when they made their run in the 2nd and also the lineup they closed out the game with. I’m sure Eddie knows this.
but..if you change the starters..you immediately make the bench worse. I think as long as we see JaVale & NY with the minutes in the important parts of the game it doesnt matter who actually is out there for the tip off.
section 401 Row H seat 1
by jackpitt on Nov 13, 2008 10:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Good Points
But the problem is that the Wiz always get in a quick hole with their current starting 5. If you change the lineup, that doesn’t happen as often.
I don’t think starting McGee would give him a big head or make him nervous — as you mentioned before, he seems like a level-headed kid with ice water in his veins. He’s already playing a lot more in control than he was the first few games.
by YellaFella on Nov 13, 2008 10:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
i disagree about starting Mcgee
he doing well comin off the bench right now and gave us the energy that we need with nick young. Why change?? If he ply well comin off the bench, dont change it!
by ak47 on Nov 13, 2008 10:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
just ply him more mins, but let him come off the bench so he can be a spark for us
that what i want to say
by ak47 on Nov 13, 2008 10:53 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
agree with the general sentiment here
no need to start him or nick young -
you would lose etan and AD a bit by ticking them off, though both are pros and would deal with it – and who would possibly provide any kind of spark off the bench? not much offense there w/o young or mcgee.
let etan round into his form and AD get a little more healthy.
and think about this:
PG: Arenas
SG: Young
C: McGee
SF: Butler
PF: Jamison/Blatche
outside of jamison, all well under 30 and in or getting into their prime (obvious Arenas ???, but still…) who says this team was crippled by big contracts this offseason.
by little stevie colter on Nov 13, 2008 11:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Another vote for the bench
I had the Utah TV crew last night, and their color guy kept begging the Jazz players to “go after the kid.” Luckily, they didn’t (or couldn’t…lord is this kid nasty or what?), but I would much rather have him come in against tired starters and back-ups as opposed to skilled, first rate, frontline guys who’ll get him in immediate foul trouble. Last night, Javale’s first run came against Milsap (if I’m not mistaken), not Boozer. That being said, Etan should get the first 5-7 minutes of every half and Javale should get everything else (fouls permiting). And if it looks like Etan’s not doing anything and we’re about to fall down 15, bring Javale in earlier.
I know it’s a long ways away, but I’m licking my chops for when Brendan and Javale can be on the floor together (I know they’re both centers, but it’s an experiement I’m willing to try). We may actually field a defense then. A Brendan, Javale, Jamison, Butler, and Arenas line-up would be crazily unguardable.
Sidenote: Something tells me Utah would have won that game if they had Mehmut Okur. None of our bigs (Jamison, Blatche, Thomas, or McGee), would have been able to handle his range.
by jvflail on Nov 13, 2008 11:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
How’d you get the Utah crew? I had Phil & Buck on League Pass for the first time this year. Do they do different broadcasts on LP? Is that awesome old school announcer still working for them?
by MR on Nov 13, 2008 2:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yup
Mehmut often kills the wiz.
by little stevie colter on Nov 13, 2008 11:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm with Wise
Fewer minutes for Etan is a good thing. Starting him gives Etan a guaranteed 5-6 minutes right off the bat, which really isn’t necessary.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 11:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Start the Kid
Here’s why: MCGEE IS BETTER THAN THOMAS! We need JaVale playing against the other team’s starters, and the limited Etan against their backups. I’ve never quite gotten the idea that you need some of your best players coming in off the bench. Your best 5 need to start — they set the tone, they give you your best shot at getting a lead, or at least not getting into a big hole. The subs are supposed to hang on and maintain while the starters get a rest.
Right now, the opening tone we set is: “Hey, we’re going to spot you a 10-15 point lead. Then we’ll bring McGee/Young/Blatche in, go big and athletic and get back in the game.” Makes no sense to me.
by YellaFella on Nov 13, 2008 11:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
but right now
the juice he brings when he comes in is fantastic. cheese happens immediately.
so if they struggle when he starts, they lose that potential momentum altering insertion of him on the court.
i’d be ok with him starting – not like it’s going great record-wise as things are now, but i see no need to do this immediately. i think etan is even less valuable off the bench
by little stevie colter on Nov 13, 2008 12:21 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Where is the Logic?
I think all of the people advocating that we keep McGee on the bench for the bench’s sake are getting the cart before the horse. You only worry about your bench when your starters are all solid and can compete with the other team’s starters right out of the gate. If your starters are sucking, and you can replace some of them with players who don’t suck as much, then you do that to keep the game more competitive so that your bench has an easier task on their hands when they come in. If JaVale is better than Etan, then he needs to start over Etan. It’s that simple.
What good is it to have a great bench if it means your starters suck? Why do you want to consistently give your bench the task of digging the team out of a hole that the starters have created? By this logic, the Celtics ought to start Gabe Pruitt, Tony Allen, Brian Scalabrine, Leon Powe, and Glen Davis. What do you mean that’s ridiculous? Imagine how good their bench would be! Why start KG, that will just make their bench worse!
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:24 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
The Spurs Ought to Send Tony Parker to the Bench
Imagine the spark he’d give coming off of the bench!
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is kind of an interesting example because Manu has been a nominal bench player for the Spurs for a while. Played starter minutes, clearly one of their five best players, and still came off the bench.
Still, a bit of a strawman argument. Almost everyone would agree that you wouldn’t demote a player just to provide a spark to your second unit.
I think its too soon to start McGee for the same reasons MR articulated in the first response (none of which were that we needed a “spark” off the bench.)
by Aldo on Nov 13, 2008 6:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, but
Manu is an interesting example, but a rare one. How many other bench players can you point to around the league that are clearly better than their team’s starter at the position? Besides, I can almost guarantee you that he would not be sitting on the bench to start games if the Spurs did not already have a starting unit fully capable of competing with other teams. They have a starting unit that works well enough for them, so they can afford to leave Manu on the bench. On the other hand…
Still, a bit of a strawman argument. Almost everyone would agree that you wouldn’t demote a player just to provide a spark to your second unit.
No, but what you and others are recommending is essentially the same thing. You would keep the best center the Wizards have healthy right now on the bench while the starting five clearly has problems that need addressing. You are forsaking the starting unit just for the sake of the bench. If the starting unit was not consistently getting hammered by the competition, I’d be more receptive to your position. But the starting unit should take priority over the bench when you are seeking to improve your team.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 14, 2008 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Manu has to come off the bench because the Spurs bench has no offense.
Popovich has tried to start Manu, and Manu has better numbers when he starts, but the bench always lets them down and forces Pop to put Manu back there.
It’s easier to have Manu on the bench than the other two, because of their respective positions.
by NBR on Nov 18, 2008 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well what happens when
We start McGee and have him play his minutes early then bring in Etan? McGee can only play so much so it is better to have him out there in the fourth quarter than the first. The game is won at the end. If you’re down by 10 at the end of the first quarter it doesn’t mean you’re going to lose. However, if you’re down at the end of the fourth quarter then obviously you’ve lost. I’d rather have McGee in there when it really counts (in the fourth) than to have him starting. Besides, what if McGee is off a little one night? You’re going to bring in Etan to pick up the slack for McGee? Don’t think so.
by bigrm18 on Nov 13, 2008 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
The game is won at the end.
That logic is dumb. 10 points is 10 points, if you lose those 10 points in the first quarter, it’s 10 points you still have to make up.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why Do You Assume..
… that McGee wouldn’t be playing at the end of the game? Traditionally, a coach always plays his starters at the end of the game. Why would he do that? Well, it’s usually because his starters are his best players. Gee, imagine that!
McGee is better than Etan. McGee has more upside than Etan. McGee gives the team a better chance to win, whether it’s at the beginning or at the end of the game. Start McGee.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Lakers Ought to Bench Kobe
Their bench would clearly be the best in the league if they did that. Whose second unit could compete? It wouldn’t matter that he wouldn’t be starting, as long as he plays more minutes. Just have Sasha Vujacic give the Lakers a solid 6-7 minutes to start the game, and once the Lakers fall behind by 8, bring Kobe in to spark a big run.
Someone alert Phil Jackson. I think we are on to something here.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Alright, alright
I agree with you, but let’s not stretch a narrow point.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Still Not Sure People Get It
Which is why I’m trying to demonstrate the absurdity of the logic by being absurd. It is meant to turn on those little lightbulbs in people’s heads. But I think it is enough now. I’ll stop.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i see your overall point
but still, every team needs at least 1 or 2 bench sparks.
i think they can wait another week or so and see if the starters as currently constituted get better. if not, then i’m on board with him starting.
just a thought, but what about starting NY before McGee? you’d still have dixon and javale to come in and maybe change the game a bit.
by little stevie colter on Nov 13, 2008 12:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Click reply
I’ve told you this a couple times already.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Another Idea
Start Nick Young AND JaVale McGee, because they are the better players at their positions. Then have Dixon, AD/DeShawn, and Etan Thomas be your spark off the bench. I bet our current starters would be a whole lot more effective against the other team’s second unit. And they wouldn’t be asked to dig the team out of a big hole, but rather just maintain the lead that the starters have given them.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The responses here surprise me
I’m going to have to write a whole post on why JaVale needs to start now. Before, I didn’t think there’d be enough opposition for that post to have a point.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 12:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I'm Also Surprised
I’ve never seen so many people argue the need to boost a team’s second unit at the expense of the first. It just baffles my mind.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 13, 2008 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i think everyone sees the logic of starting him
it’s just a question of when.
my only point is i don’t think the 15 point hole is going to happen every game (knock on formica) – another week and we’ll have a solid sample to judge.
by little stevie colter on Nov 13, 2008 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Understatement of the Entire Franchise History of the Team:
Dude [ JaVale McGee ] is already better than Kwame was (is?).
Amen.
by Pryme on Nov 13, 2008 1:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Better than Blatche
I assume that’s a rhetorical question.
by YellaFella on Nov 13, 2008 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Call me crazy but...
Right now, I’d say he’s better than Greg Oden. The Wiz and Portland were on at the same time last night, so I flipped to the TrailBlazer game during commercials. Maybe he’ll get better once he’s healthy, but Oden right now is slow, robotic, and a bit uncoordinated. McGee is 10 times more active (on O and D), athletic (runs the floor better, has quicker hands, jumps better) and disruptive.
by jvflail on Nov 13, 2008 2:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You're Not Crazy
In fact, you’re entirely correct.
by YellaFella on Nov 13, 2008 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Haha...
I was thinking the same thing today. Especially since Oden is as fragile as a 50 year old man (looks like one too), I just don’t see how Oden is going to be this dominant, amazing player… Injuries are like the plague to a big man.
by se7en on Nov 13, 2008 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Whoa guys, slow down please
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 4:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's only 6 games into the season
The kid’s a rookie. I don’t think we need to rush this.
In addition, I don’t think you can blame 10-15 point deficits on Thomas.
Why does everyone here react so fast in such a knee-jerk reaction to everything?
by MR on Nov 13, 2008 2:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Whoa boy
In addition, I don’t think you can blame 10-15 point deficits on Thomas.
Maybe not exclusively, but these on/off numbers overwhelmingly say otherwise.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 10:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh please
Spare me your anti-stat diatribe.
At the very least, tell me why those numbers lie. They sure as hell support what I’ve been thinking.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 10:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think two words qualify as a diatribe.
Just to scratch the surface, I think the sample is too small and is skewed by 1) quality of opposition 2) what the rest of the team was doing while those numbers were generated. I think numbers are a useful tool, but they can’t explain everything that goes on. It’s a team game. There are personalities, chemistry, attitude, and a lot of things that are done both positive and negative that don’t show up in the numbers. It’s not fantasy basketball, it’s real people.
I think the arguments of the starting C have been well outlined at this point so I won’t go into them again. But to address this tiny point about 10-15 point deficits: if they are all Thomas’ fault then why does everyone think AD and Stevenson are playing so bad too? They’re all out there when these deficits are happening. They’re all playing badly (until last night). I just don’t think you can lay it all on Thomas.
Anyway, you’ve made great arguments for starting the kid, and I hope I’ve explained my own disagreements adequately. As I post more on this board I come to understand the personalities of some of the other posters. I believe you are someone who is willing to make a change early on in the process. You are probably more of a risk taker than me. I am more likely to wait for things to develop. Perhaps that would be to my detriment if I were the coach. Probably I am too patient. This wouldn’t be the first venue in my life in which that trait has gotten me in trouble. In a few weeks one or the other of us (including all of the other people who’ve voiced an opinion) may be vindicated one way or the other. Let’s all hope it’s because we’re winning so many games.
In any case this discussion has been fun, interesting, and rewarding. Thanks for playing.
by MR on Nov 13, 2008 11:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It's just that any pithy "oh, stats stink, numbers don't tell the whole story" comment bugs me
I’m sure you didn’t mean anything by it, but that stuff bothers me. There’s no purpose to them.
I just see no reason to be so dismissive towards more information. If it’s bad information, say and explain so. I’m all ears. But “numbers lie” seems so anti-intellectual to me.
Of course numbers can’t stand on their own, but they shouldn’t be dismissed.
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 13, 2008 11:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think you’re over reacting.
“numbers lie” is a phrase. A saying. I think it explains itself. And if not , I think I explained in the follow up post. Anyway, I don’t think it’s worth arguing about at this stage. The points have been made. Let’s cast our eyes to Miami.
by MR on Nov 13, 2008 11:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
funny
that prada is relying on numbers to justify starting mcgee now when numbers are part of what made prada initially think that mcgee was a TERRIBLE pick. MR is completely right, numbers don’t tell the whole story. MR, don’t back down so easily!
then again, i still agree with prada on this one.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Nov 14, 2008 9:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Refresh My Memory
that prada is relying on numbers to justify starting mcgee now when numbers are part of what made prada initially think that mcgee was a TERRIBLE pick.
I thought that McGee’s numbers were good, but that we all felt that they were inflated because he was playing in the WAC against inferior competition. The biggest gripes I remember being said about him were subjective: he’s too frail, he’s too raw, he has terrible defensive fundamentals, he’s a project, he’s at least two full seasons away, etc. What numbers did Prada bring up? I can’t remember.
"It's OK for the Bullets to trade baskets, as long as they can score on their end." -- Words of wisdom from Phil Chenier
by cuppettcj on Nov 14, 2008 9:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bad rebound rate, poor scoring efficiency
Etc.
This is silly though. The former were individual stats, the latter is how one’s presence relates to the team. Completely different. Why must we group all stats together and bash them over the head?
You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.
by Mike Prada on Nov 14, 2008 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
respect
like ali g, definitely respect prada’s use of numbers, definitely respect that he backed up my point made against him when cuppett questioned it.
but i also respect MR’s general point. numbers don’t always tell the whole story. maybe MR was too flippant in the way he said it, but generally i agree: sometimes there is an overreliance on numbers, especially when you can often spin them any way you like.
plus, MR’s reasons for not wanting to start the kid are more around managing human beings than anything else. that’s fair.
however, in this case, numerically, the start mcgee argument is a slam dunk, and i do believe that accurately reflects what’s happening on the court.
i’m going with prada’s numbers on this one for sure.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Nov 14, 2008 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Careful, calling something a “slam dunk” is perhaps a little less credible a term than it used to be.
by MR on Nov 14, 2008 12:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you mean the iraq thing, right?
point taken.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Nov 14, 2008 12:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not backing down
I’m just ready for the next subject. The lines have been clearly drawn on this one. I still stand by mine.
by MR on Nov 14, 2008 9:57 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Tomorrow, against Miami....
it would make all the sense in the world to start McGee at center. The Heat are using Udonis Haslim (who is a good PF but has given his 4 slot to Beasley) at center by default. JaVale has about 6 inches of height and a yard of reach on him, and could really have a nice offensive game for us.
The other key against the Heat is whether DeShawn can hang in there against DWade.
Oh and I do hope that AJ schools Beasley something fierce.
by khrabb on Nov 13, 2008 3:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
etan's role in the nba
should be as a guy off the bench to come in and bang and yell and block a few shots and try to dunk on everyone for 15 minutes. why not use him in the way he normally should be used?
especially when mcgee’s clearly better. that’s not knee-jerk. it’s not like etan’s established right now. he was out all of last year with open heart surgery and he looks rusty. he’s just as “untested” as mcgee right now.
play mcgee, he’s making a difference. start him.
by DarrellWalkerFan on Nov 13, 2008 9:13 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
