What's up with Mitch? [McGary]
I'm a casual NBA fan -- I don't follow everything going on. So was a bit surprised to not see Mitch on the bench in these playoffs.
Looking into it, I see he took a leave of absence in April for undisclosed reasons -- he's not listed as injured. I'm not looking for baseless speculation as to what the leave was all about. Family, most likely.
I see from his Twitter feed that he is now traveling with the team and in his usual Big Puppy mode, smiling and bouncing around. So I guess the break from the game left him a little bit out of the kind of shape these guys need to be in for the playoffs? Or is it tactical?
NBA people -- any thoughts on why he isn't back on the Thunder's bench?
If you can't block shots or hit 3s, it's tough to be a big man in the modern NBA. But there are examples out there (e.g., Tristan Thompson, Mason Plumlee, Enes Kanter, Ed Davis) - those are the kind of players McGary has to look to.
His defense needs to get a lot better to earn time, as you noted. There just aren't that many 6'8/6'9ish traditional PFs anymore.
I think Varejao's the best (successful) comparison. Similar size, similar energy, Varejao maybe has (well, had) quicker feet though.
Varajao is taller, longer, and weighs 20 pounds more but yeah, that's another hustle guy that McGary can look to. The issue I think is that McGary isn't big enough to be a C and Varajao is.
They're the same height, aren't they?
To me the critical difference is that Varejao's both heavier and quicker. It'll be hard for McGary to find both--if he puts on the weight he needs to function as a 5, how will he maintain or improve his lateral quickness?
And Varejao made the leap at 22--he didn't look like much at Barcelona and never really carved out a role there and he was only a 2nd round pick, but he was firmly in the rotation as an NBA rookie
Depends on the source, but Verajao is generally considered to be 6'10-6'11 and a C while McGary is generally 6'9-6'10 and a PF.
The difference is immaterial once you factor in reach, athleticism, weight, etc. differences.
Draymond is undersized and makes it work. Mitch has a similar "motor"/energy so I think he can have an impact, minus the 3 point shooting. I think Mitch just needs some more time, he'll be fine.
Green was a nominal SF who has thrived at the 4 and 5. He's not really undersized for a 4 when you account for wingspan and he has the skills of a guard. His skills for his size are far more important than his motor.
The only comparable might be the McGary could have the most success in sliding down a position (to the 5) - but he'd have to be paired with somebody who can space the floor and block shots. Fortunately for him, Ibaka fits that profile as well as anyone.
Draymond is undersized, that's cut and dry, and so is McGary for his position. McGary's strength is Draymond's strength, they just go non-stop. Dray can shoot the 3 and he's a great passer, but McGary is also a great passer and has always been a great finisher at the rim.
McGary needs more work, that's it. The problem is will he put in the work or not, the NBA isn't very patient.
McGary is not undersized for a 4. He's not long, but he's tall and big. He's undersized only if you compare him to 5s.
Dray is big for a SF and average for a PF in today's NBA. His strength is having guard skills in a forwards body. He's a more motivated Boris Diaw, a less talented Magic Johnson.
McGary is not a great passer. He's also not a great finisher. The NBA is being quite patient with him. Consider comparable 23 year olds out there who are doing so much more.
I still wish the Raptors drafted him over Caboclo
More to the drugs thing than usual Michigan Fan crying?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
but Dray's 2 inches in wingspan all but negate that before you get into the athleticism and skill advantage.
Draymond Green: 6'7.5", 236lbs, 7'1" wingspan.
McGary: 6'10.5", 266lbs, 6'11.5" wingspan.
Green is one of the best players in the leage. Saying McGary isn't as skilled as him isn't a great way to say he can't hack it. That's like criticizing Caris Levert for not being as skilled as Kawhi Leonard.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
He should have left for the NBA after his freshman year.
Every basketball or football player should leave college when their pro value is at its peak. The money is too great to pass up....and yes, money is vital to life.
And it turns out that Michigan basketball probably would have been a lot better off too.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
At that time he was a big man with incredible nimbleness. He had dominated the tournament leading Michigan to the finals. He was a projected lottery pick. His draft status would never have been higher.
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2013/04/espns_chad_ford_puzzl…
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
you're confusing college production with NBA potential.
The draft he went into was far stronger than the one before it.
So I'm pretty sure college production can be a significant factor in assessing NBA potential.
Some teams do continue to ignore analytics, measureables, and historical evidence and let college production dictate their draft choices. Buddy Hield might not even be worth a 1st round pick but will probably go somewhere in the lottery. There's no question that Burke and Stauskas and many more (Jimmer Fredette) were drafted higher than they ought to have been because they produced in college. The NBA consistently looks past production and focuses on talent, but production does hold weight with some teams...
So I'll flip this around and ask if McGary would be better off having gone in say Julius Randle's spot (#7 to the Lakers) or the year before in say Kelly Olynk's #13 spot to the Celtics? Or would it have mattered that he is one year closer to free agency at all. Is he what he was going to be regardless of draft position/team?
McGary can find a role in the NBA. He just doesn't seem like he's been in great shape this year, and the other young bigs in OKC have improved greatly. He probably needs a fresh start somewhere else where he can be the first big man off the bench. He seems perfect for a role like that.