[Sheridan Hoops] Bobcats Shopping Michael Kidd-Gilchrist

He probably only saw Brooklyn Wallace.

 

You're both missing the point.

MKG's ceiling appears to be similar to Wallace's at his peak, and what I'm saying is MKG is probably a few years away from being at that level.

 

This is a good point.

And for all the talk about how shooting can be taught, it took Wallace six seasons to get his 3PT shooting above 30%.

 

I don't buy that MKG's ceiling is Gerald Wallace in 2010 but if so, you're saying his ceiling is that of an All Star (and one that didn't give a rat's ass about playing in the ASG to boot). MKG's projection from what I see (and I am a Cats STH) would be a couple steps above Crash but even if not, that Wallace achieved his personal high watermark and only maintained it for one year is not indicative of how long MKG (who is only 19 still for three more months) can maintain that level. Maybe that's implied in your statement but I think it bears noting.

Now if the Cats were to start playing MKG a lot of minutes at the 4 rather than the 3, then all bets are off and I doubt he reaches as high as GW in terms of performance. If however he continues to play the 3 and the Cats continue to work his jumper, then I think he could make multiple trips to the All Star game.

 

That's a bizarre data point to care about. Crash took maybe 1 three point attempt per week for his first few years in the league? I don't recall him even seeming to try shooting them until Larry Brown came to the team and honestly, we botched so many 24 second shot clocks that I'd bet 25% of his total Larry Brown-era three's were jacked up w/ no time on the clock.

Not that we were any better last year with what seemed like a SC violation per half on average.

 

Have you even been following the conversation?

Literally all of my posts in this thread have been related to the likelihood of Kidd-Gilchrist becoming an acceptable outside shooter when he showed no jumper in college and last year shot under 30% from outside of 3 feet. It stands to reason that if one is going to argue that he could eventually become a decent shooter, we'd look at other players who were similarly inept shooting the basketball when they entered the league.

Wallace seems to be the best-case scenario, and even he took six years to become even an acceptable outside shooter. Wallace shot 31.1% from beyond the arc on an average of 1.7 3PA/G with Charlotte pre-Larry Brown, by the way.

If MKG turns out like Rondo, the odds of him becoming an All-Star calibre player (short of being a Rodman-like menace on defense) are likely miniscule.

 

If the Rockets are trying to "win now" by spending big this summer, why would they want to take a step back towards rebuilding by giving up Parsons for an undeveloped MKG?

 

I have seen your reference to MKG's inability to shoot from outside 3' for the duration of the thread. Therefore, I could discount immediately that you haven't been watching the player in question. That you are talking about GW's 3pt shooting percentage in his first five years makes me think you know less about him and his role on the Kings/Cats than you watched MKG.

I am a Charlottean, I am a STH to the Cats, I also had a dog I named Crash and I typically miss less that 5 games a year for the last six years. I trust my eyes over your use of statistics. MKG was clearly a better shooter by the end of the season than he started and I don't know a sole that was at our games that would argue that.

But if stats work better (and I loved GW and I was gutted when we traded him): MKG in his first season is 1% below GW's lifetime FG% (45.8% to 46.8%). MKG out stats GW in every category for his one year compared to GW's first three years in the league. MKG played approx. 2230 minutes in his only NBA year; GW played 1330 in three years at SAC. MKG is roughly by the end of year one where GW was in his first full year with Charlotte (e.g. his fourth year in the association), i.e. 19 years old to 24 years old for GW.

Regarding shooting; MKG has a hitch that noone would deny but compared to GW, he's shooting FTs at a percentage greater than GW would reach in his first seven years in the pros and logic tells me, if you can shoot FTs, you can learn to shoot a jumper. So statistically, MKG is four years ahead of GW. Despite his playing 26mpg last year, there is even heavier focus on the new coaching staff to develop the young guys. Gerald said he never was coached until LB came to the Cats. So provided Cho doesn't deal him and he doesn't suddenly find himself playing PF, I stand very firm in my belief that his ceiling is a fair bit higher than GWs.

So in short, I think I read alright and I don't buy your comparatives.

 

Decent ft shooter means he can probably develop a reasonable mid range jumper, but extending out beyond the arc is a whole different story, one that Kidd-Gil will likely never come to. Which is why he doesn't really fit into the TDA (he lacks T) model that we need from a 3. He has his place on some teams sure, not ours, or someone like the Spurs either.

In order to be a star, you need to have incredibly elite shot creation ability to survive as a non big with only mid range jumpers, and your mid range needs to be really really good, the days of volume mid range shooters being the leagues star players are at an end (and I for one welcome the end of the iverson style era).

 

What's an 'STH'?

 

That's how I feel. It isn't that I don't think the guy has the potential to be a star in this league, and I'd love to get him, as I've said here a couple of times, but not for the fellow that's named Chandler Parsons. He's doing what we need at his spot right now, and should be capable of playing that spot at a high level for years. Heck, quite likely at a higher level than he is now, which is pretty damn high, if you ask me.

 

Well IMHO "winning now" isnt' really all that possible with LBJ at the top of his game. Even if you added Howard to our current team and didn't lose anyone else I don't think it's still enough to beat Miami as is.

I'd do this trade because MKG is a real franchise guy, same as Harden. He may not be as talented but his intangibles and leadership qualities make up for it, his stats aren't that bad for a 19 year old.

 

All-Star game appearances mean very little to me and are overrated.

In his prime, you were basically getting a guaranteed 15-7 from Wallace. Are those superstar numbers? Are those All-Star numbers? No, not really...but the point is Wallace was very good for many years. There's absolutely no shame whatsoever in being compared to him.

Kind of the same case with MKG to me. I don't really see a future superstar when I watch him play. I see a guy of the Marion/Wallace/Leonard mold that are good at a lot of things, bring a ton of energy, play hard defense and basically play the role of garbageman.

 

Makes sense, from the games I saw him in college he was nothing special and I don't know how he went #2 overall in the first place.

 

Motor, maturity and giving 100% each game. I feel you though, think you should go talent first.

 

MKG shoots a lot of long 2s. I think a couple year's experience will help his scoring efficiency.

 

True, he did work hard!

 

Your are severely reaching if your main point is "He may not be as talented but his intangibles and leadership qualities make up for it". Nonsense.

If the Rockets get Dwight, they don't have time to wait 3-4 years on MKG. They need to pull out all the stops to make a championship run. If you believe the Heat's mere presence means the Rockets don't have a chance, your defeatist attitude is sad.

 

Yeah, it doesn't seem that he'll ever be a big time scorer but the guy definitely justifies his playing time in every other facet of the game.

 

While it seems a little early to unload MKG, I almost have to give some applause to the Bobcats for considering it.

Look, if Oladipo or Porter were to fall to them, and they really thought, hey, either of these guys has MKG v2.0 written all over them, and we can make the argument MKG as the #2 pick in last year's draft should be better than anything at the top of this crappy draft and we can flip MKG for a solid package in return...

... well, that's not horrible thinking really now is it?

I think it's less an indictment of what you think about MKG as a whole, but more their view of their assets, and how they could build a team best.