Magic Vs. Knicks - Wednesday, Oct. 30th at 7:00 P.M.

[Just a regular Magic fan 38]

3 hours ago, Odin said:

I think he is more than a 3 and D player- good at bringing the ball up the court and doing secondary facilitating, but not a #1 option.

I guess my definition of 3 and D is incorrect. I am not saying that AG shouldn't be involved, I am just saying that his best shot is behind the 3 so that is where he should focus his offense. That and hustle plays where he cleans up other players' misses. 

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

4 minutes ago, Just a regular Magic fan said:

I get what you mean and obviously, you know more about basketball than I do. I am not saying that he has to just camp out behind the 3, but we have others who are better at facilitating than he is and until he can show more consistency when he is asked to create it might be better if he played toward his strengths. I am not saying he won't get there. I just don't think it should be a priority. What's better for our team? AG (the glove) who becomes a lockdown defender and solid 3 point shooter, or a good defender who is inconsistent on offense because he is too tired to finish at the rim? 

You don't need to defer to me. Your points are just as valid as mine. 

 

I don't really see why Gordon can't play good defense and contribute on offense. Resting on defense is why we brought in aminu and should be looking for a good defense SG

[3rd Quarter Collapse 50]

4 minutes ago, Fultz4thewin said:

You don't need to defer to me. Your points are just as valid as mine. 

 

I don't really see why Gordon can't play good defense and contribute on offense. Resting on defense is why we brought in aminu and should be looking for a good defense SG

I don’t know his career averages on these shots, but early on this tendency, Gordon has had a tendency to take inefficient shots like long pull up twos, and has been ineffective driving and finishing layups. 

Gordon has the potential to be a really good two way player, but the offense isn’t there through 3 and a half games. When he’s slumping, it might be smarter to shoot threes, drive on kick outs, crash the boards and play good defense rather than disrupting the offensive flow

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

Just now, 3rd Quarter Collapse said:

I don’t know his career averages on these shots, but early on this tendency, Gordon has had a tendency to take inefficient shots like long pull up twos, and has been ineffective driving and finishing layups. 

Gordon has the potential to be a really good two way player, but the offense isn’t there through 3 and a half games. When he’s slumping, it might be smarter to shoot threes, drive on kick outs, crash the boards and play good defense rather than disrupting the offensive flow

It's always smarter for him to shoot threes, drive against unbalanced defenses, crash the boards (though we don't do this by design) and play good defense. 

 

Through 4 games he's only shot 5 twos outside of the paint. That's not a lot. 

[Magicpassion 4]

AG sure looks much better when he doesn’t play hero ball. I agree with 3rd quarter on his analysis. If you’re reading this AG, please play within yourself; it makes all the difference in the world for our team.

[JJZFL 619]

14 hours ago, Fultz4thewin said:

Last night was a pretty good benchmark for what we should expect from our offense every night. 106.7 offensive rating. 12/32 on threes. 7 turnovers. 

I'd like to get the pace back up but as long as Gordon and Ross are struggling (and Gordon was struggling big-time until his 10 4th quarter points) we need to cater to Vucevic. That means slower basketball. 

 

Defense is still fantastic. Isaac is pretty close to leading the league in blocks per game. Second to Davis and Davis has played 20 more minutes. 

No question about our defense. As far as the game being a benchmark for our offense, I hope that’s right, but we need to remember that our opponent was one of the worst teams in the league.  I’m not sure we can benchmark our offense based on a game against the Knicks.  

So far we’ve beaten two of the very bottom teams, lost to a mediocre Atlanta team, and lost on the road to a strong veteran Toronto team.  Our defense has been excellent in all the games.  On offense we have yet to break 100.  We need to see continued improvement there, especially against better teams.  

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

4 hours ago, JJZFL said:

No question about our defense. As far as the game being a benchmark for our offense, I hope that’s right, but we need to remember that our opponent was one of the worst teams in the league.  I’m not sure we can benchmark our offense based on a game against the Knicks.  

So far we’ve beaten two of the very bottom teams, lost to a mediocre Atlanta team, and lost on the road to a strong veteran Toronto team.  Our defense has been excellent in all the games.  On offense we have yet to break 100.  We need to see continued improvement there, especially against better teams.  

Last year we averaged a 108.2 offensive rating, 11.4/32.1 shooting threes per game and 13 turnovers per game. 

It's pointless to view offense through total points because it doesn't account for pace. We slowed the game down against the Knicks and only got 89 possessions. If we played a game with a similar pace to Minnesota and Philly from the other night and kept the same play to play scoring efficiency we would have scored 117 points. 

[JJZFL 619]

1 hour ago, Fultz4thewin said:

Last year we averaged a 108.2 offensive rating, 11.4/32.1 shooting threes per game and 13 turnovers per game. 

It's pointless to view offense through total points because it doesn't account for pace. We slowed the game down against the Knicks and only got 89 possessions. If we played a game with a similar pace to Minnesota and Philly from the other night and kept the same play to play scoring efficiency we would have scored 117 points. 

In today's NBA I don't think you can win consistently if you score below 100 on a regular basis.

I agree that we should be shooting for the kind of offensive efficiency numbers you mention above.  I just don't know that achieving those numbers against a very bad team like the Knicks should give us confidence that we can have similar performances against better teams.  I agree that we need to get there, though.

[Just a regular Magic fan 38]

2 hours ago, Fultz4thewin said:

Last year we averaged a 108.2 offensive rating, 11.4/32.1 shooting threes per game and 13 turnovers per game. 

It's pointless to view offense through total points because it doesn't account for pace. We slowed the game down against the Knicks and only got 89 possessions. If we played a game with a similar pace to Minnesota and Philly from the other night and kept the same play to play scoring efficiency we would have scored 117 points. 

 

Good point! Clifford talks about PACE all the time and I had forgotten about that. I can't wait to see how we play against the big dogs who are averaging 115+ points a game. Will their PACE win out or ours? LOL

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

1 hour ago, JJZFL said:

In today's NBA I don't think you can win consistently if you score below 100 on a regular basis.

I agree that we should be shooting for the kind of offensive efficiency numbers you mention above.  I just don't know that achieving those numbers against a very bad team like the Knicks should give us confidence that we can have similar performances against better teams.  I agree that we need to get there, though.

I never said anything about opponent or expected success going forward. I was just saying that's what the expectations of the team should be for an acceptable offensive game. Like this was the C- offensive game. We need to reach this or better every game. This should be the minimum expectation every night. 

 

Also it's still dependent on pace. We can win a lot of games with a 107 offensive rating if we keep the defensive rating around 100 because a net rating of +5 to +7 gets you wins in the high 50s. Scoring 95 points in a 89 possession game is good. Scoring 95 points in a 95 possession game is terrible. Most teams play much faster than that. 

[JJZFL 619]

57 minutes ago, Fultz4thewin said:

I never said anything about opponent or expected success going forward. I was just saying that's what the expectations of the team should be for an acceptable offensive game. Like this was the C- offensive game. We need to reach this or better every game. This should be the minimum expectation every night. 

And basically I agree with you, even if I didn’t express myself very clearly.  My only point was that this benchmark was achieved against a very bad team, and while we can try to hold them to the same (or better) standard against everybody, there’s not yet evidence that they can meet that expectation against better teams.  

[Fultz4thewin 2,464]

54 minutes ago, JJZFL said:

And basically I agree with you, even if I didn’t express myself very clearly.  My only point was that this benchmark was achieved against a very bad team, and while we can try to hold them to the same (or better) standard against everybody, there’s not yet evidence that they can meet that expectation against better teams.  

The evidence is last year's team where they averaged marginally better than those numbers over 82 games.