When we traded JJ for Wesley it gave a new SG that had some "D" and left us with no SF to speakof. So, JVG in his infinite wisdom moved TMac to SF and put in Wesley at the SG. But, if TMac moves back to the position he usually plays that changes the whole "new guys" paradigm. He is good at SF, but gives us a huge mismatch at the SG position, on both 'O' and 'D'. We have been talking about perimeter defense, and TMac is about as good as it gets. Could we get a new SF easier than a SG? Everyone seems to be assuming we'll look for a SG, but we have those and we really lack a SF who is 6'9" - 6'11", 215 - 230, can drop a 3 like a layup, dive to the rack, become the 3rd scoring option, fast, qick, agile and come with great hops. Who can we get like that? Think outside the box. http://www.nba.com/playerfile/vladimir_radmanovic/index.html I am sure there are others.
I think it actually puts us at a disadvantage on defense, and that's why JVG had him guarding 3's. Tmac would be chasing around smaller guards like a Ray Allen for example, which would tire him a lot more than Dirk ever did. Keep him at the 3, please.
then pigs will fly. It won't happen - he doesn't want to be there, JVG doesn't want him there, for various reasons stated before and above and that will be stated again.
The purpose of getting Wesley was so that JVG could move TMac to the 3. He's better suited for the 3. He's expending less energy chasing most 3's than he is chasing 2's around picks all over the court. I honestly don't think JVG wants TMac at the 2.
I think Van Gundy would prefer to keep Mcgrady at the 3, but if the Rockets have a chance at getting a really great small forward, I don't think he would be that close minded to the idea of moving him back to the 2.
Could you cite some evidence to that effect. I am not saying you're wrong and I'm right, it's just that I haven't heard anything from TMac or JVG to the effect that he doesn't like playing the 2. If it's true it's true, I just don't recall any discourse on the subject from the parties involved. BTW, he excelled at SG before he excelled at SF. I reckon he could play 1 - 5, if he wanted to. Magic did.
Think about it this way though...T-Mac playing the 3 means he doesnt have to "chase" 2 guards all over the court, therefor making it "easier" for him to stay up to par physically. He wont get near as tired guarding SF then he would if he was guarding SGs. Also, if he moved back to a 2 guard that doesnt necessarily mean he will have a mismatch. There is NO "rule" that says a SG must guard the other teams SG. If T-Mac was moved to a 2, Im sure most teams would guard him with their tallest/most athletic 2 or 3.
It was stated multiple times in tv interviews and in the Chronicle, I believe, around December/January/February, here is one example, that I dug up, though I did not by any means search everything: Search the article archives yourself to find more. http://www.clutchfans.net/archives.cfm?archive=articles Regardless of whether you do so... it ain't going to happen.
"I know where guys are going to be," McGrady said. "I know where the new guys like the ball, where their spots are. I can count on that if I penetrate and kick it out. I trust that they'll be in their right spots. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/bk/bkn/3012968 This is January 28, from the Chronicle. The new guys are Wesley and Barry. It sounds like he is still playing the '2' to me, if he is penetrating and kicking; and knowing where the spot-up players want the ball. I know the positions are starting to meld together, sort of. But a big, mobile 3 would sure help our rebounding, and if they could pass and shoot we traded a 6'2" SG for a 6'10" SF. We get a lot younger and a lot longer at the same time. It could buy us another year until all our PF contracts runout. I've never seen TMac have trouble guarding anyone. Except that he seemed to run out of gas after 7 games chasing Dirk and being top scorer both.
You can call it whatever you want, but when he's out there, pretty much every single moment since December of this year, and for the foreseeable future, there are two other guards in the lineup, and there will be for the foreseeable future, as long as the current regime is here. Your plan may have merit - but JVG doesn't think so, apparently neither TMC.
The 2 and 3 are the two most interchangable positions offensively. They are both "wing" players. It will certaily depend on who we pick up in the offseason as to whether T-mac will switch back. I think he will be just as effective either way. And it is not a rule that you have to mach up defensively with whoever is guarding you on offesnse, so that is a moot point. T-mac will guard whoever JVG wants him to.
T-Mac played great D vs Dirk, but it's not like he's the ultimate 2-guard stopper. He went for a lot of pump fakes this last year and wasn't great at defending the quick perimeter guys. David Wesley is no defensive superstar, but JVG made him real good at Ding up perimeter guys. I am convinced it is JVG's doing because Cat was very productive defensively last year in the same manner. When Cat went to Orl, then Sactown, I watched a lot of his games and noticed when he tried, his D was still there, but Johnny Davis and Adelman were not very D oriented, and thus, I don't think Cat was at the top of his D game all year. Orlando's and Sactown's backcourt D was mediocre to bad. For all the athletecism and length that T-Mac possesses, he wasn't able to consistently keep quick guards in front of him. I love T-Mac and i'd keep him at the 3. JVG likes him at the 3. Now if we get Darius Miles, technically, T-Mac would be the 2 guard, but I'm tellin ya, D-Miles would pick up the best wing player on the other team in terms of quickness, and I'm talkin even the PG.
Well, I have to say, I agree. And he played the part of "Point Forward", at least in the playoffs. Since he can do that from anywhere on the perimeter we could add the length and youth in a SF as easily as a SG. It's a lot harder to find a 6'8" SG than a 6'8" SF. I guess we could argue about this ad nauseum since it is a matter of opinion and not fact, it seems.
I don't see why T-Mac has to stay at SF. T-mac can always get time as a SF with a small lineup on the floor. "Spread the floor" does no mean T-Mac and 2 more guards have to be on the floor. There are SF's including the one mentioned in this thread who can spread the floor. Also, I don't think Wesley was brought here so T-Mac could slide to small forward. T-Mac HAD to slide to small forward after Wesley got here. We needed more speed and defense, and Wesley provided that. "More speed" does not mean that T-Mac and 2 guards have to be on the floor either. One other thing, is that a big small forward can give us infinitely more flexibility on defense. Ideally, you always want a lineup where everyone is playing their natural position so it reduces potential mismatches. AND it is always much easier to go smaller to handle mismatches than it is to go larger to handle mismatches.
The biggest issue with TMac was that when he was doing ball handling duty, there wasn't enough time for him to also get set up for a play designed for him. They wanted to get some of the ball handling responsibilities out of his hands so this could be done. David Wesley gave us a good ball handler (arguably another PG at times) and also gave us good defense. So now you have a guy who can be or help the point guard and be a defender allowing us to make a huge upgrade at SF by putting TMac there. We upgraded the defense at 2 positions and upgraded the offense at arguably 2, if not 1 position with that move, if you ask me. Sounds good to me.
Correct. We upgraded at several positions, and it worked for 9 out of 10 teams. In the end (which is all that really matters) is where we found out we had mismatches that killed us. Those mismatches could have been alleviated by any one of many ways.... but having more defensive flexibility would have been a major plus.
This is the type of dialog I am looking for. DMiles might be just the ticket. Wesley had a hard time 'D-ing' up a number of his men also. That is the nature of the game. Fortunately, there aren't too many SG's that can guard TMac and keep their mind on their "O" also.
