share

The high motor arguement

chocboywndr
chocboywndr's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/27/2012
Posts: 204
Points: 376
Offline
The high motor arguement

I was having this argument with one of my boys regarding the difference between a high motor big man and high motor wing player. I was looking for some input from you guys, here are my thoughts.

When you are looking at drafting a player as a big man having that high motor can make up for many failings in your game. Kenneth Faried is a perfect example even though he is far from the most skilled player his relentless attitude going after the ball coupled with exceptional athletic ability makes him a highly productive player. That is like arguement for TR over Drummond, can you imagine if Drummond played with fire that both TR and Fareid do. He would have a huge debate going over who should be number 1 pick him or Davis.

Now I think this totally different when you start talking about the wing position. The thing that makes great a wing is skill, yes they have to play hard but playing hard can't make up for your lack of skills. What makes a great wing player like MJ, Kobe,Durant,and LBJ is the ability to dominate you with their skills from passing to shooting to handling the ball. You never hear great wing players motors discussed. It is always about how they are a match up nightmare, how they were/are going to get their 25-30pts with 5+ rebs, and 5+ ast per game and their nothing you can do about it. Now it is not say these guys don't work hard they obviously they do, but the skill needed to play away from the basket as a wing is far greater than the skill needed to play close to it as a power player.

To me its to why AI or GW have never truly become superstars. Yes some days they can drop 25 on you any night but they are not good enough shooters to punish you every night. So for every 25 point night their is an equal number of 10 point nights to balance them out. To be an elite wing your skill has to match your motor or you will never become special.

That is why I say it is very risky to assume that MKG will be able to become a star. People compare him to Pippen but Pippen without Jordan could have got numbers like 25pts, 7ast 7rebs everynight. That season Jordan was gone he was a beast, I do not seem MKG with that kind of skill.

Whats are your thoughts?


No_Left
No_Left's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/08/2011
Posts: 912
Points: 2368
Offline
You're definitely right that

You're definitely right that a wing cannot just get by on his motor, but that just speaks to the problem that many bigs play with apathy. That being said, a wing with a high motor is still valuable, especially if accompanied with athleticism.

When people use the term 'high motor' they mean that the player is consistently active. And when you're always involved in the game and play you will do things like: tip passes, get garbage buckets, roll to the basket etc. I know it sounds cliche, but these small things are what win games.

I actually don't think MKG will be a star, but he is the type of player that could be on a great team.

mosdef
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2011
Posts: 368
Points: 268
Offline
I dont see MKG as a Pippen

I dont see MKG as a Pippen either. His wing skills still need alot of work. He can be an Iguodala, good defender, athlete, spot up 3pt shooter but isnt an elite wing tho he gets paid like it

NickWayne87
Registered User
Joined: 12/03/2008
Posts: 637
Points: 607
Offline
dont you ever

call Andre Iguodala A.I. ever again......there is only ONE ANSWER to the question! lol

r377
r377's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/28/2010
Posts: 1660
Points: 4667
Offline
MKG

I love high motor guys: Gerald Wallce, Faried, MKG, Laimbeer - all my favourites.

The thing about bball is the intangibles that make up winning. Just look at Amare and Melo - sure they can score and stats wise look good but there is so much more to the game than just that....

I am a fan of MKG and would take him with the 2nd or 3rd pick. Will he ever be an all-star ? Maybe not but who is that guy who will dive on that loose ball, take that charge, set that important pick or make that extra pass ? Thats MKG and if I going to war I want him on my team....

I think he may only be a 14-16ppg 6/7reb 3/4 assist but basketball isn't about stats. MKG is a great teammate to have on your team both on and off the court...

From a biased point of view I would love to see him in a pistons jersey with fellow Wildcats Prince and Knight. I think he would learn alot from Tayshaun Prince - Prince would be a great mentor to MKG and a trio of Monroe, Knight and MKG would be a force in the years to come....

3-6 Mafia
Registered User
Joined: 11/29/2011
Posts: 2576
Points: -2206
Offline
with all this criticism about

with all this criticism about mkg lately i'd like to point out his much underrated(nowadays) potential. i see a possible 17-8-4 w/ top notch defense, he's the youngest player in the draft and already one of the best wing defenders in cbb.

it's a common thing people tagging players for having no skills when they are hustle, hi-motor players.

chocboywndr
chocboywndr's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/27/2012
Posts: 204
Points: 376
Offline
@f_s

I am not say mkg has no skills, he does but number 2 in the draft skills thats a tough one for me to swallow. He will surely be a great guy to have on your team . But if you have seen the video on this site of him shooting that hitch in his shot is real and won't be easy to fix. To me he is a player that makes ok team good and a good team great. That is why he was so instrumental on Kentucky he was surrounded by a Davis, Jones, Lamb, Teague, and Miller he was great he was that glue that made them special. MKG needs skilled players around him to succeed.If you plunk him on a bad team with poor supporting cast where he will be a primary offensive option you are looking for trouble. He is not a guy you can run shooting plays for and if you watched how the heat played Rondo tonight it will be very similar to the way coaches will defend him. They will dare him to beat them shooting jumpers and right now he can't and their is a good chance he never will unless they completely break down his shot and rebuild it.That hitch stops his momentum on his shot which is why he struggles to shoot out to a deep range.

dolla130
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 515
Points: 427
Offline
The same way you feel about

The same way you feel about Gilchrist I feel about Shabazz Muhhamad who to me is very overrated but the differece is mkg brings more to the table then some engery guys his ability to play defence, rebound, push the ball and slash to the basket and his confidence in his game makes him a great nba prospect if he's able to refine his jumper he could be scary

surve
surve's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/19/2010
Posts: 2890
Points: 4502
Offline
pippen's development

This is something I always like to debate when people as how great Pip wouldve been without Jordan. Dont get me wrong, Pip is one of my all time favs and I NEVER liked MKG being compared to him. At the same time, we dont know what Pippen wouldve been like had he went to another team and didnt have the luxury of developing along side MJ. Yes, he was a beast when MJ went out, but as I said, his early stage development was critical I believe in the player he became.

With that being said, the game is different today on so many levels and its hard to keep players together. The IQ is lower because of all the guys that came straight out of HS and the one and dones. MKG wont be afforded the luxury to fall to a team like Pip did with the Bulls. That is one reason why I think MKG will have a hard climb.

However, the guy has tremendous work ethic and just wants to play basketball and not lose. He never looks at the box score. I think way too much is made about his jumper being broke....I have seen a lot worse and he is not really a bad shooter, its just asthetics. He has been shooting like that all his life, to try and change the mechanics could be detrimental. He has a man's body already and that will only get better.

I agree that he needs good players around him. I think we have a misconception about players you can build around. He is a building block. He is a guy that can do a lot of things, just because a guy is not a primary scoring option, or shotblocking center doesnt mean you cant build around them. Get MKG in place, that will answer a lot of problems that most teams have, THEN you go out and find you some scorers to place around him....which scorers come a dime a dozen. I happen to think he would be a perfect fit with the Wizards.

JoeWolf1
JoeWolf1's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/28/2009
Posts: 8327
Points: 16968
Offline
I think it isn't discussed as

I think it isn't discussed as much for wings because they don't get the majority of their points 5 feet away from the bucket like a PF or C would. A wing "should" be able to shoot a 15, 20, and 25 footer if need be and since the man he's guarding isn't as likely to be under the rim...his impact as a rebounder who needs to constantly be fighting his man for position isn't needed quite as much.

Of course you need to block off your man 20 feet from the rim, but it's not as grueling or constant task as it is for a big man.

I just think it's due to the different positions.

rwd5035
Registered User
Joined: 07/04/2011
Posts: 325
Points: 405
Offline
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist has a

Michael Kidd-Gilchrist has a high motor, and works so hard, that I believe the rest of his game will come to him. He can get to the rim, he can defend, and he can rebound. He needs to work on his jumper, but he's not solely a "high motor" guy like Faried. I'm a huge fan of MKG, I think he'll be one of the three best players in this draft when we look back on it ten years from now.

BothTeamsPlayedHard
BothTeamsPlayedHard's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 3432
Points: 4698
Offline
"That is like arguement for

"That is like arguement for TR over Drummond, can you imagine if Drummond played with fire that both TR and Fareid do. He would have a huge debate going over who should be number 1 pick him or Davis."

The "low motor" Andre Drummond pulled in 1 more offensive rebound per game in Big East play than the "high motor" Thomas Robinson while playing 3 fewer minutes per in the Big XII. They finished at a similar clip from the field, got steals at the same clip, and Drummond blocked more shots while committing fewer fouls. If you want to make the argument that Thomas Robinson is a better prospect than Andre Drummond, it is not about this imaginary motor problem. Thomas Robinson is almost three years older and spent two more years on a college campus than Drummond and is therefore more polished (though neither is overly polished). When Robinson was a freshman, he was a good sized athlete who could not really be used. Drummond was a phenomenally size athlete who was able to get on the court and be reasonably productive as a freshman despite the fact he showed the touch of someone who never played basketball before in his life.

"When you are looking at drafting a player as a big man having that high motor can make up for many failings in your game"

That or you can pick up a 300 lbs. Boris Diaw off the scrap heap and when teamed with a roster full of size, skill, and intelligence just start rolling teams with "high motor" big men in the playoffs.

JunkYardDog
JunkYardDog's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/03/2008
Posts: 1249
Points: 3491
Offline
very agree BTPH...and the

very agree BTPH...

and the "300 lbs. boris diaw" arguement was perfect.

That's why machado should get drafted in the first round... if there is a smart GM. And draymond green should find a home... and be successfull.

Malik-Universal
Malik-Universal's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/08/2010
Posts: 3424
Points: 3176
Offline
I'm torn on his ability to

I'm torn on his ability to ever be an all star player or just being a great role player

He reminds me a lot of Gerald Wallace which is a good thing

I think he may be better tho

Dude is special

mosdef
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2011
Posts: 368
Points: 268
Offline
I think the comparison is

I think the comparison is fair to Gerald Wallace but everyone has to remember, Gerald Wallace took years to develop into Geral Wallace. I know GW was a later 1st round pick but it took him leaving SAC to finally show since he dide have Stojakovic and Turkoglu in fron of him

RSS: Syndicate content