Atlanta Hawks: On Josh Smith’s future
Before Josh Smith started his summer vacation, he was asked about the possibility of signing a contract extension with the Hawks.
“I can’t get extended,” Smith said. “They didn’t give me the money; I had to go get it. That’s something I have to play it out and see how it goes from there.”
Two things stand out about that statement. The first is that Smith, who presumably got the info from his agent, is wrong about his contract not being eligible for an extension.
I looked at Larry Coon’s CBA FAQ and could see no reason why Smith is not eligible for an extension. It’s been at least three years since he signed the deal, it’s never been renegotiated and it doesn’t include an opt-in. I checked with Coon and he confirmed the Hawks can extend Smith’s deal (they actually have been able to do so since August).
But the more interesting aspect of Smith’s statement is his allusion to having to “go get” his contract. He’s referring, of course, to the offer sheet he signed with Memphis in 2008, which Atlanta subsequently matched. (The Hawks can thank the Grizzlies for being able to keep Smith with a reasonable deal.)
It bothers Smith he had to create a market for himself to get a satisfactory contract from the Hawks (though at least he didn’t have to leave the country like Josh Childress). Smith’s feelings were amplified when Al Horford got an extension before becoming a restricted free agent. So add that 2008 contract dance to Smith’s list of grievances with the Hawks.
The question now is whether Smith can be persuaded to sign an extension with the Hawks. My educated guess is Smith won’t do it. The Hawks may be able to make Smith feel more appreciated with their public comments, but what can can do about Smith’s main gripe, that they aren’t committed to winning a championship?
It seems unlikely the Hawks will even spend the full mid-level on a free agent. Remember what happened after Smith, Horford and Joe Johnson called on the Hawks to make some major moves during training camp? The Hawks ended up signing an assortment of minimum-salaried free agents, with two of those players on non-guaranteed deals.
Nor do trades look like a very promising way to placate Smith. Any deal that involves sending away Horford could leave as many holes as it covers. If trading Johnson is possible, it almost certainly means taking back another burdensome contract.
Zaza Pachulia and Jeff Teague are assets because they are productive players with reasonable contracts. But those are also good reasons to keep them. As for Marvin Williams, there hasn’t been a market for him for going on three years now.
The irony is that one of the best ways for the Hawks to bring in a major piece is to trade Smith. His production, experience and expiring contract make him an attractive target. So does the sense that he’s still yet to fully reach his potential, though that’s a reality that cuts both ways for the Hawks.
Are the Hawks beyond hoping Smith can become a superstar for them? How much is he worth? If the Hawks don’t think they can persuade Smith to commit beyond next season, do they aggressively try to trade him before the deadline or risk losing him for nothing next summer?
I’m genuinely interested to see how all that plays out. The Hawks have a recent history of overvaluing their own players. Michael Gearon Jr. does have a deep appreciation for Smith, even if Smith doesn’t think Gearon or his partners have done enough to show it.
For his part, Smith deflected questions about his standing trade request, noting that he could be fined for talking about it. But he didn’t sound as if he expects to be traded in the offseason.
“All I know is I have one more year on my contract so I will definitely be here,” he said. “I just have to go into the offseason to better myself and do whatever I have to do to help this ballclub. I was an Atlanta Hawk after the trade deadline and I’m one now, so I have to look at some of the things I can do to help my basketball team win ballgames, especially in the postseason.”
Michael Cunningham, Hawks beat
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,015 comments Add your comment
High-sider
May 30th, 2012
2:00 am
@Slimjr
“News Flash: There’s only one race.. Its called the Human race…
High-sider men that believe they belong to a different race have been deceived by the prince of this world..So that’s why you see them act accordingly around this big blue marble…Nothing new under the Sun Sir.. Solomon, the wisest man that ever lived spoke on the vanity of man..In the grand scheme its just a waste of time….
FYI, check out the book of ecclesiastics 1st chapter and you will be surprised how he describes himself…Hmmmmmmm” – Slimjr
Are you referring to the following passage:
“I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.” – Song of Solomon, Chapter 1, verse 5 [King James Bible]
http://scripturetext.com/songs/1-5.htm
High-sider
May 30th, 2012
2:13 am
@Buddy Grizzard
“Slimjr that’s why I don’t want Tony Wroten. He can’t shoot so he’s not a two guard, and he turns the ball over against college defense so he’s not a point guard. He’s one of those hybrid, no-position players.”
Are you sure you don’t want Tony Wroten, Jr., because he is Jamal Crawford’s homeboy from Seattle and he [Wroten] plays in Jamal Crawford’s summer [basketball] league?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9w8BOO7ZT4
Sugar Ray
May 30th, 2012
2:16 am
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/eye-on-basketball/19197494
“You can be process-oriented or results-oriented. And in the macho, “win at all costs” psychosis that pervades the NBA, results are what gets talked about, measured, analyzed, and prioritized at all costs.
And to be sure, had the Spurs not produced results, had Popovich not produces results, there would be no chance at developing the process. But they did win, because of the process. Having Tim Duncan was essential. But plenty of teams have blown having a franchise player. The Spurs have built a system, built a culture, built a process on accountability and the idea that all of the little things, the way that players execute the details matter. Scoring 30 points is great and will be rewarded with trust and respect. But it does not exempt you from everything else.
Score 40 points, you’re still going to get yelled at for making mistakes which cost the team.
Because those little plays act up, and containing them, guiding them to correction, driving for perfection which will never be attained is still the best way to to build consistency, to build a model which excels “star A plus star B plus roleplayers X and Y= championship.” The Spurs are winning with Danny Green and Boris Diaw and Gary Neal and Matt Bonnner. They are winning with an aging Tim Duncan who didn’t have a good night on Tuesday in Game 2 and with a second-year center in Tiago Splitter.
And it’s because to a man, from Popovich on down to Neal, they respect the proces. Hammer the rock, maintain the process, execute, and win.
The Spurs lead 2-0, not because their talent is better, or their depth. They’re not ahead because of hot shooting (well, not completely) or because of their matchups (well, not completely). They’re ahead 2-0 becaue of their execution, which is the product of every moment in practice, in meetings, on the floor, in games, with the same expectations, the same tenets, the same ideas. Consistency. It’s what happens when you care more about the process than the results.
It’s how you get the results you want, for 13 years and counting.”
Buddy Grizzard
May 30th, 2012
2:19 am
“It has already been discussed how he, Hinrich, failed to stop [Rajon] Rondo.”
LMFAO failed to stop Rondo? Did you read my above two posts? In Game three, Rondo didn’t score a single basket on Hinrich. With Teague or Pargo guarding him, it was a layup drill. Are you literate?
“Here’s another [classic] example/instance of a blogger trying to have it “both ways.” What’s up with that?”
Not a valid argument. In 5 out of 6 games, Hinrich played well enough to give his team a chance to win. The Hawks only had to win 4 of those games. They only won 2 because LD played guys like Green who was -40 for the series. If Kirk had played MORE and Pargo and Green LESS, the Hawks might have won the series. Kirk didn’t hurt the Hawks on the court in this series, he hurt the Hawks when he was on the bench watching Pargo and Green play terrible basketball.
Meanwhile, JC1 played terrible in more than one out of the six games against Chicago. He hurt the Hawks with his play on the court. If JC1 and Collins played LESS in that series, and Zaza Pachulia (with the best +/- for the Hawks for the series) had played MORE, the Hawks might have won that series.
Ra'mon
May 30th, 2012
2:43 am
Buddy, I’m not in this argument, and while I see Kirk clearly didn’t play up to the standards of his price tag last season, I could see re-signing him for a $3 mil salary. However, you mentioned Rondo had a lay up drill in game three against Teague and Pargo. Please keep in mind the Hawks had no inside defensive presence in that game with Josh, Horford, and Zaza missing that game.
High-sider
May 30th, 2012
2:45 am
@Buddy Grizzard
“Not a valid argument. In 5 out of 6 games, Hinrich played well enough to give his team a chance to win. The Hawks only had to win 4 of those games. They only won 2 because LD played guys like Green who was -40 for the series. If Kirk had played MORE and Pargo and Green LESS, the Hawks might have won the series. Kirk didn’t hurt the Hawks on the court in this series, he hurt the Hawks when he was on the bench watching Pargo and Green play terrible basketball.
Meanwhile, JC1 played terrible in more than one out of the six games against Chicago. He hurt the Hawks with his play on the court. If JC1 and Collins played LESS in that series, and Zaza Pachulia (with the best +/- for the Hawks for the series) had played MORE, the Hawks might have won that series.” – Buddy Grizzard
Kirk Hinrich, as a starter, scored a total of two [2] points in Games 3 and 4 of the playoffs vs the Celtics in 48 minutes [of playing time]. Do you consider Hinrich’s performances those two games as “playing well”? Do you realize that, from the beginning of the 3rd quarter of Game 2 vs the Celtics to the end of the 4th quarter of Game 4 vs the Celtics, Hinrich only scored a total of two points; that’s two points over six quarters [72 minutes] of playoff basketball? Does that sound like he, Hinrich, “played well”? Do you realize that Hinrich scored in double figures in only one [out of] of six playoffs games this 2012 postseason? Do you consider that as “playing well”? [LOL and LMAO]
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/kirk_hinrich/game_by_game_stats.html
Buddy Grizzard
May 30th, 2012
3:02 am
“Please keep in mind the Hawks had no inside defensive presence in that game with Josh, Horford, and Zaza missing that game.”
And yet Rondo didn’t make a single layup with Kirk guarding him. Listen, the difference between me and High-Sider is that I’m not biased in favor of Kirk. He’s not one of my favorite players, I don’t anticipate him being back with the team and I’m not worried about it. He’s old, injury prone and washed up. But even in his current condition, he helped the Hawks more than JC1. Kirk doesn’t score alot, but he shoots for a good percentage and plays good defense. JC1 plays zero defense and his shot comes and goes. So in games like Game 5 & 6 against CHI where his shot was off, he doesn’t help you in other areas. So his presence on the floor hurts your team, causing them to lose a playoff series and go fishing.
Kirk is an average player on the tail end of his career and I won’t miss him. But he was a better player for the Hawks than Jamal Crawford.
Buddy Grizzard
May 30th, 2012
3:17 am
“Kirk Hinrich, as a starter, scored a total of two [2] points in Games 3 and 4 of the playoffs vs the Celtics in 48 minutes [of playing time]. Do you consider Hinrich’s performances those two games as “playing well”?”
High-Sider, are you reading my posts? HELLO? MCFLY???
This is your problem. You see a guy hit a few shots and you think “that’s a good player?” You don’t pay attention to what the guy he is guarding is doing. Dominique may have averaged 25 ppg. But if the guy he was playing terrible defense against every night averaged 26ppg, that’s not winning basketball.
So Kirk only scored 2 points in all of Games 3 & 4? I’ve already commented that none of the starters played well in Game 4. They were all -16 or worse, including Kirk. Do you think if Kirk had scored 15 points in that game they win? No.
So let’s talk about Game 3. Do I think Kirk played well in Game 3? Are you reading my posts? Did you read the one about how Rondo didn’t score a single basket with Kirk guarding him? Did you realize that Kirk, although he went scoreless in 26 minutes, had the best +/- (0) of any starter? Did you know that Pargo played 11 minutes and the Hawks were outscored by 11 as he gave up layup after layup to Rondo? Do you know that the Hawks lost that game by 6 points?
So If Kirk had played Pargo’s 11 minutes (37 total instead of 26) and not scored a single basket, but played the same defense on Rondo that he played during his 26 minutes, the Hawks could have won the game. Do I think Hinrich played well in those 26 minutes? No. I think he played BRILLIANTLY in those 26 minutes, and if he played more, the Hawks probably win that game.
But all you can talk about is PPG. Scoring is the only part of the game you are capable of analyzing. So keep on defending JC1. He’s your favorite player.
Grandad
May 30th, 2012
3:51 am
High-Sider … & … Slimjr
H-S seems to have confused Ecclesiastes with Song of Solomon.
Easy mistake since they both have the same protagonist.
Ecclesiastes Ch.12 verse 13 seem to sum up the entire chapter:
‘`Love God and keep his commandments`’
-Solomon- King of Jerusalem
No the verses to which HS was referring:
Song of Solomon Ch. 1 verse 5 & 6
`twas a young woman, singing / speaking to King Solomon
[in a love song]
where she sang / spake phrases referring to herself being black or dark.
Also; referring to the fact,
she was darkened by the sun as she tended the family vineyards.
King Solomon was known to indulge himself with slave girls.
[Egypt perhaps]
So;
if your intent is that King Solomon mixed races between Jews
and lovely ladies of non-Jewish culture?;
I certainly do not have a problem with that.
It appears I will have a cross cultural, legacy of grand-children.
The more, the better.
____________________________________________
Song of Songs 1 verses 2 – 6… (NIV)
*[She]
2 Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—
for your love is more delightful than wine.
3 Pleasing is the fragrance of your perfumes;
your name is like perfume poured out.
No wonder the young women love you!
4 Take me away with you—let us hurry!
Let the king bring me into his chambers.
*[Friends]
(We rejoice and delight in you) …
(we will praise your love more than wine)
[She]
(How right they are to adore you)
5 Dark am I, yet lovely,
daughters of Jerusalem,
dark like the tents of Kedar,
like the tent curtains of Solomon.
6 Do not stare at me because I am dark,
because I am darkened by the sun.
My mother’s sons were angry with me
and made me take care of the vineyards;
my own vineyard I had to neglect.
Grandad
May 30th, 2012
4:02 am
Sugar Ray;
I do not know who you are,
but I am intrigued.
You sound as if you are one of my ex-players …
replaying my mantra mostly during pre-practice.
I tolerated the games in order
to have the opportunity to practice again.
I loved practice more than the games
as 8.5 is to 1.
Someday maybe we can have us a talk.
High-sider
May 30th, 2012
6:07 am
“…Kirk doesn’t score alot, but he shoots for a good percentage and plays good defense. JC1 plays zero defense and his shot comes and goes. So in games like Game 5 & 6 against CHI where his shot was off, he doesn’t help you in other areas. So his presence on the floor hurts your team, causing them to lose a playoff series and go fishing.
Kirk is an average player on the tail end of his career and I won’t miss him. But he was a better player for the Hawks than Jamal Crawford…” – Buddy Grizzard
If Jamal Crawford caused the Hawks to lose the 2011 EC Semis playoff series vs. the Bulls, did he [Crawford] cause the Hawks to win the 2011 first round playoff series vs. the Magic by averaging a team high 20.5ppg as a reserve off the bench? According to you, BG, Kirk Hinrich at 31 years of age is “on the tail end of his career.” What is Jamal Crawford at 32 years of age “on” in his career? As a team member with the Hawks, Jamal Crawford averaged 18.0ppg and 14.2ppg, respectively, during the regular seasons of 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. On the other hand, Kirk Hinrich, as a team member with the Hawks, averaged 8.6ppg and 6.6ppg, respectively, during the regular seasons of 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Jamal Crawford as a Hawks player was named 2009-2010 Sixth Man of the Year while Kirk Hinrich as a Hawks player received no individual award from the NBA. In the postseason, Jamal Crawford as a Hawks player averaged 16.3ppg and 15.4ppg, respectively, during the postseasons of 2010 and 2011 and scored 20+ points in 10 of 23 postseason games played for the Hawks. Jamal Crawford scored 20+ points [23+ points actually] off the bench in four consecutive postseason games; that had not been accomplished since Kevin McHale performed this feat back in the 1991 playoffs for the Celtics. In the postseason, Kirk Hinrich as a Hawks player averaged 10.2ppg and 5.7ppg, respectively, during the postseasons of 2011 and 2012 and never scored 20+ points in 12 postseason games played for the Hawks. Jamal Crawford as a Hawks player helped the Hawks win 10 postseason games while Kirk Hinrich as a Hawks player helped the Hawks win six postseason games. With Jamal Crawford, the Hawks advanced to the EC Semis two consecutive years while Kirk Hinrich, as a Hawks team member, did not play in one EC Semifinals game for the Hawks. With Jamal Crawford, the Hawks won 53 games during the 2009-2010; the Hawks had not won 50+ games since, I believe, the 1997-1998 regular season. The Hawks with Jamal Crawford won their first EC Semifinals playoff game when the Hawks defeated the Bulls in Game 1 of the 2011 EC Semis since, I believe, 1997; Jamal Crawford scored 22 points in that Game 1. But you, BG, say Kirk Hinrich was a better player for the Hawks than Jamal Crawford [was]?
“…So Kirk only scored 2 points in all of Games 3 & 4? I’ve already commented that none of the starters played well in Game 4. They were all -16 or worse, including Kirk. Do you think if Kirk had scored 15 points in that game they win? No.
So let’s talk about Game 3. Do I think Kirk played well in Game 3? Are you reading my posts? Did you read the one about how Rondo didn’t score a single basket with Kirk guarding him? Did you realize that Kirk, although he went scoreless in 26 minutes, had the best +/- (0) of any starter? Did you know that Pargo played 11 minutes and the Hawks were outscored by 11 as he gave up layup after layup to Rondo? Do you know that the Hawks lost that game by 6 points?…” – Buddy Grizzard
Do you realize that a player’s +/- statistic is a function of that player’s and his four teammates’ [team] performance vs a particular group of five opposing players of the opposing team? Do you realize an individual player’s +/- statistic[s] show[s] team performance while that particular player was on the floor/court? When was the last time you heard an NBA analyst, announcer, coach, executive or owner refer to an individual player’s +/- statistic[s]? I can’t recall watching an NBA basketball game with an announcer or analyst [constantly] referring to a player’s +/- statistics during the game. I don’t think I’ve ever heard any announcer or analyst refer to a player’s +/- statistic during a game. Do you realize how foolish you look and sound when you keep referring to and emphasizing players’ +/- statistics? Do you realize [that] the only +/- statistics that matter are the final scores of games played – wins and losses? If Team A defeats Team B, 100-97, Team A has a +/- statistic of +3 while Team B has a +/- statistic of -3; that’s really the only +/- statistic that matters. Do you realize that players are primarily judged and evaluated by/on individual statistics such as points per game averages, rebounds per game averages, assists per game averages, steals per games averages, blocks per game averages, turnovers per game averages, field goal percentages, free throw percentages, 3pt. field goal percentages, etc.?
High-sider
May 30th, 2012
6:10 am
Buddy Grizzard, the post @6:07am dated 5/30/2012 was directed primarily to you.
KevinM
May 30th, 2012
9:28 am
“Just Joe
May 29th, 2012
10:16 pm
KevinM…those are the same reasons why I like Dion Waiters. He can play the point, but he’s strong enough to attack the rim. He plays defense and his jump shot is improving.
If the Hawks are looking at shooters like Shved and Gladyr, then a shooter like Jenkins may not be far off from what they’re thinking. Can he defend better than Willie Green?”
I think Jenkins fits the offense that LD is employing with not a lot of emphasis on driving the ball. A very good spot up shooter, but not big on involving others with his passing.
He is my backup option to Doron Lamb, who I think will be very good after 2 consistent years at UK and handling some of the PG duties. Neither may be available however since we have to wait until 23. For the result we got in the playoffs, 23 is a bad slot to build on. Every other team chasing you has selected a better choice and you’re playing catch up.
So say Jenkins and Lamb are gone, I guarantee you Sund won’t pull the trigger on another Teague, even if he ends up being the best option. He probably does go get a forward so if Josh walks next year, it won’t be as painful in Sund’s eyes.
And yes, with no noise, I think Sund is coming back. There is no way in HAIL that another team would bring him in this late in his career.
ATLANTA – known for last stops in the NBA……
O"Brien
May 30th, 2012
10:01 am
High-sider,
As I stated in an earlier post, GM Rick Sund should have “moved” or perhaps traded Hinrich for picks immediately after the 2011 postseason in order to “free up money [salary]” for Crawford. Teague showed what he could do in the 2011 EC Semis vs. the Bulls..
The ASG was not going to amnesty Kirk and his expiring salary, so the only option would have been to trade him. However, I doubt anybody would have traded for Hinrich after the 2011 post season, because 1) He got injured in the playoffs, so how healthy was he? And 2) there was the threat of a lockout, and possibly no 2012 NBA season.
And then by the time the lockout was over, it was reported that Hinrich had shoulder surgery, so that was the end of that.
If they wanted to keep Jamal, the move would have been to amnesty Marvin and his $7.5 mil yearly salary, then use that money to get Jamal (who eventually signed for ~$5 mil).
O"Brien
May 30th, 2012
10:13 am
Najeh,
I don’t necessarily agree that Jamal is the scorer who would have made the difference, but the Hawks did need another scorer..
Agreed. But we also needed more from JJ. 25% from 3, 37% from the field is not good enough.
vava74
May 30th, 2012
10:23 am
High-sider,
There isn’t a single gunner playing at this stage of the playoffs.
Not even one.
And mini-rod, don’t come with the same sh*t that Rod brought up about Ginobili.
Gino has proven time and time again that:
He plays within a system;
He contributes in far more ways that the gunners you both like;
He has had always better shooting % which is a clear indication of much better shot selection.
Winning basketball is made with a fabric that JC1 doesn’t know how to weave in spite of his immense individual (offensive) talent.
Najeh Davenpoop
May 30th, 2012
10:31 am
“There isn’t a single gunner playing at this stage of the playoffs.
Not even one.”
True, but Jason Terry did win a championship last year.
As you have said before yourself, a gunner is useful if used correctly, Jamal included. The Hawks’ problem was that they overused Jamal at the expense of Teague.
vava74
May 30th, 2012
10:31 am
All this chatter about players A, B or C.
Trade A for D, draft E and F.
All CRAP.
With LD at the helm, its pointless.
The performance of the Hawks in the playoffs this year had 2 good points (same during the season):
- Good Intensity (only one stinker – but an important one nevertheless);
- Good D (which comes with the higher intensity).
All the rest:
Poor offensive execution to close games, poor shot selection, poor definition of roles when things got tough are a direct consequence of having an ENABLER on the bench rather than a coach.
One final note:
That trade that I proposed back in FEB of Marvin for “Man-Boobs Diaw” does not look that bad now*… in the worst case scenario it would have been a very good “Marvin+his salary” dump move and in the best case scenario it would have given us another front-court player to plug the hole left with Zaza and Josh’s injuries which could have been a facilitator from the high-post allowing us to have new and more varied offensive sets.
* Although we would have still needed a real coach to get him to produce and use him correctly.
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
10:37 am
So any Coach who can turn a starting lineup of:
Tony Parker – 30 years old
Tim Duncan – 36 years old
Boris Diaw
Kawhi Leonard
Daniel Green
Into a juggernaut, has got to be the Coach of the millenium.
Nothing against these guys, but they’re not like murderer’s row, except for Parker. Duncan is great, but man, he’s getting old.
Bench is good also, but still
Pops reminds me of what they used to say about Bear Bryant: He could take his’n and beat your’n, or he could take your’n and beat his’n. – Old Alabama colloquail.
Mr. Contradiction
May 30th, 2012
10:39 am
LMFAO at High-Sider spending all night, and no telling how many posts to try and deflect the fact that his hero got beaten out by a slow white boy. And here’s the irony: He should be building up Hinrich, instead of trying to bring him down, because if Hinrich is as bad as he says…what does that say about Jamal, who couldn’t beat Hinrich out? The worse Hinrich is…the worse JC1 must be.
Oops, if he acknowledged that, he’d lose his theory on Sund’s racism. OK, my bad. LMFAO.
High-Sider you are so transparent, it’s not even funny. Wait, it is too funny. My boy got beat, so there must be a reason, I know, it had to be…racist. Too Funny. No accountability.
vava74
May 30th, 2012
10:41 am
Najeh Davenpoop
May 30th, 2012
10:31 am
No question, but Jet last year was playing at a very very high level:
Excellent intensity, good shot selection, did not break plays, did not play D particularly well but never took plays off on D either.
I have no doubt that Jet is not as resourceful offensively than Jamal but is a far more complete and accomplished player.
Everyone spoke about him as a leader in the locker room which is something that you never heard about Jamal.
Also, Jet was RETAINED by the Mavs along these years whilst Jamal has been DUMPED over and over.
Not that ALL front office moves by the Mavs (or other teams) are justifiable as good and an absolute proof of a players’ worth but the tendency is there.
Jet was fairly successful with us (a dysfunctional ball club) and went to the finals twice with the Mavs.
Obviously, offensively talent players are important, just like other utility players, but when a player is one dimensional you cannot play them more than the number of minutes which their skill set and the situation warrants.
The bottom line is the “pure gunners” like Jamal, Nick Young, et al can’t play starter minutes in winning ball clubs.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
10:45 am
“And mini-rod, don’t come with the same sh*t that Rod brought up about Ginobili.”
Why would he not come with that. Greg Popovich said himself that Ginobli is a scorer. That’s what he does. The difference is the Popovich knows how to use him correctly. This year in the playoffs in the first round Manu shot 39%FG, second round 40% in the semi’s. In 06-07 he shot 40%FG in the playoffs, 07-08 42% in the playoffs, 09-10 41%FG in the playoffs. Maunu is the very definition of a gunner. He serves really no other purpose for the Spurs, but to come in the game off the bench, and provide an offensive spark. The one thing he does better than Jamal is get to the rim, but he is much bigger, and hell Manu attacks the rim better than anyone on this team. The guy is a classic gunner. Don’t blame Jamal for not playing within a system. What system do we run? ISO. He did that very well for the Hawks. That is the only system Iv’e seen.
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
10:48 am
Now one could argue that Stephen Jackson and Mike Miller are, or have been gunners. They just do a few other things – and a good Coach like Pops has Jackson playing D also – but also using Jackson as a decoy/floor spacer to keep the other team honest, since he is known as a gunner.
Same with Miller.
And even though he’s in another dimension than the other guys, you could make the case that James Harden plays the role of “gunner” for OKC.
Now we can nitpick the roles and responsibilities, but these guys are kind of playing that role, even though they’re doing other things as well.
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
10:52 am
Jet should have never been traded by the Hawks in the first place – old beef, sorry.
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
10:59 am
I can’t stand Miami, for whatever reasons we won’t get into right now.
But every time Mike Miller shoots a 3, I say “uh-oh” – because you never know if this is going to be the game he hits 2 or 3 (or more) in a row, and changes the complexion of the game.
I think people’s definition of gunner is different. Most gunners can at least do something else on the court also. Even Jamal could drop an assist now and again.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:04 am
“As you have said before yourself, a gunner is useful if used correctly, Jamal included. The Hawks’ problem was that they overused Jamal at the expense of Teague.”
Exactly. Jason Terry, Manu Ginobli, Sam Cassell, Vernon Maxwell, Vinnie Johnson, Andrew Toney…. All guys who were strictly scorers and most of whom came off the bench and won championships.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:08 am
“Same with Miller.
And even though he’s in another dimension than the other guys, you could make the case that James Harden plays the role of “gunner” for OKC.”
You are exactly right Steve W. Vava has no clue. Jamal’s job here was to score. I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand about that. He took bad shots sometimes because that was what his job was. The coach (Drew and Woodson) expected him to shoot the ball when he came in the game. Where they messed up was when they tried to make him the point guard instead of using Teague. That is a coaching issue, not a Jamal issue.
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
11:09 am
It is difficult to believe over a year after Jamal has left, we still are discussing him so vehemently on this forum. I think everybody agrees:
LD used him wrong many times at the point, and by hurting Teague’s development.
The rest we arguing cannot be empirically verified. So it’s just argument. My eye test tells me Jamal properly utilized, wins the Boston series for us. He had to be a little better than Pargo and Green in certain situations. And the respect Doc would have had to give him, may have opened up a couple of more buckets.
And we are only talking about a couple of buckets. An OT game. Losing by 3 in game 6. My personal opinion is that Jamal gives us that small margin, if properly utilized, and we win the series.
Others will say maybe we lose worse, and Rondo destroys us worse than he did.
It’s really all just opinion at this point since it didn’t happen.
And I don’t think the whiteguy factor played into keeping Hinrich over Jamal. It’s basically what OB said above.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:13 am
“I have no doubt that Jet is not as resourceful offensively than Jamal but is a far more complete and accomplished player.
Everyone spoke about him as a leader in the locker room which is something that you never heard about Jamal.”
You do understand that Jamal was not brought here to be a leader right. We have 3 captians whom I assume should take that role on. We have a 100 million dollar man whom I assume should take the role of being a leader.
Funny I never heard anyone on the Hawks team speak one bad word about Jamal. I also remember prior to the season starting, Joe, Al, and Josh all stating that the front office needed to resign Jamal ,and also stating that they needed help in the front court. Think they knew what they were talking about?
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
11:14 am
3rd paragraph above – should read, “The rest we ‘are’ arguing…
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
11:16 am
Rod – And Jamal could probably hit more bad shots than any other guy in the League. I think he deliberately made some shots harder – kinda looked like he was on the playground – but then they’d drop and the crowd would go wild – if it was at home.
northcyde
May 30th, 2012
11:18 am
vava74
May 30th, 2012
10:23 am
High-sider,
There isn’t a single gunner playing at this stage of the playoffs.
Not even one.
And mini-rod, don’t come with the same sh*t that Rod brought up about Ginobili.
Gino has proven time and time again that:
He plays within a system;
He contributes in far more ways that the gunners you both like;
He has had always better shooting % which is a clear indication of much better shot selection.
Winning basketball is made with a fabric that JC1 doesn’t know how to weave in spite of his immense individual (offensive) talent.
**********************
(( gasp ))
You mean Lou Williams . . and his 35% FG shooting in the playoffs ( 18% 3FG in the Boston series ) . . isn’t still playing?
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:22 am
SteveW,
Rondo had his way with anybody on our team. He got wherever he wanted to get on the floor with no resistence from Teague, Hinrich or Joe. Rondo’s value is not measured in points, we all know that. Jamal would have made a huge difference in that series, and anybody who has any basketball knowledge knows that. The series came down to us not being able to score in the half court, and that is one thing Jamal can do. Plus him being on the floor would have opened everybody else up. Last year when we played Chicago, Teague was an unknown, Josh was not the same player offensively, Horford was playing scared, and Joe was doing the normal Joe Johnson thing. Chicago simply focused on shutting down Jamal, because they determined he was the one who could hurt them the most offensively, Let Joe be Joe, closed out on Horford jumpers, and let Josh shoot long jumpers. Great coaching, plus they were a better team.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:29 am
“This is your problem. You see a guy hit a few shots and you think “that’s a good player?” You don’t pay attention to what the guy he is guarding is doing. Dominique may have averaged 25 ppg. But if the guy he was playing terrible defense against every night averaged 26ppg, that’s not winning basketball.”
Please help me understand who Dominique played against that put up 26 ppg against him everytime they played, except for some of the greats of the game. Larry Bird, Adrian Dantley, Bernard King, Michael Jordan. Guess what, I never saw anyone shut those guys down. Nique in know way was a great defender, but he won his individual matchup 95% of the time he stepped on the floor.
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:31 am
“Any more questions, Rod?”
Yeah. What type of weed do you smoke. Must be the same kind Grandad uses. Hinrich shut down Rondo. SMH
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:35 am
“You mean Lou Williams . . and his 35% FG shooting in the playoffs ( 18% 3FG in the Boston series ) . . isn’t still playing?”
No. But James Harden and his 35%FG shooting in the conference semi’s (25%3 FG in the conference semi’s) is.
northcyde
May 30th, 2012
11:36 am
SteveW
May 30th, 2012
11:16 am
Rod – And Jamal could probably hit more bad shots than any other guy in the League. I think he deliberately made some shots harder – kinda looked like he was on the playground – but then they’d drop and the crowd would go wild – if it was at home.
******************
And that’s the problem with that dude. He takes a lot . . A LOT . . of bad shots. Just because 25% of those shots go in, doesn’t mean that he should keep shooting them.
I was at Game 3 of the Orlando series in 2011. And the shot Jamal made to seal that game, in my opinion, was one of the most dramatic playoff shots in Atlanta Hawk history.
A shot in which he did his ISO hot sauce routine, and BANKED in a 3 pointer.
In the end, the only thing that matters is that the shot went in. But because shots like that of his goes in on rare occasions, he keeps jacking up ill advised 3’s like that 40% of the time. That’s why instead of being known as a deadly mid-range shooter that made timely 3s . . he’s known as a loose cannon gunner with poor shot selection, that is either red hot or ice cold.
Jamal making a shot like that, is the equivalent of Josh making 3 jumpers in a row. It creates the perception in both of those guys minds, that they can take and make long range shots at any time . . regardless of the game situation.
And that’s why most good teams don’t want that dude.
I could see Jordan offering that dude a 2 year – 16 million dollar deal, and have Jamal and Kemba Walker jack up all the shots they want.
vava74
May 30th, 2012
11:42 am
Rod,
NONE of the guys you mentioned was or is as one dimensional as Jamal and ALL played with a lot more grit.
NONE.
Check Ginobili’s rebounding and assists stats.
Heck, I have already told and proved you that Vinnie Johnson was much much more complete.
Cassell was, apart from a scorer, a play-maker which played the PG slot proficiently.
You bring Ginobili’s stats in the playoffs saying that his fg% was in the low .400. No doubt, but Jamal has career numbers on that same percentages in the REGULAR season.
Only against a MORIBUND franchise like ORL he was effective. Against CHI stingy D Jamal has 1 good and 1 acceptable shooting game in 6 whilst being burned on D by anyone with a pulse.
Jamal is strictly 15 minutes per game material.
Hell, Lou Williams is twice the player Jamal is from an intensity point of view.
Jamal plays like an autistic guy, on his own and for himself.
Ginobili is a team player, he does not score at the expense of others.
As a SG he has career averages of 3.9 in assists and 4.0 rebounds in 27 minutes per game.
Najeh Davenpoop
May 30th, 2012
11:46 am
“You mean Lou Williams . . and his 35% FG shooting in the playoffs ( 18% 3FG in the Boston series ) . . isn’t still playing?”
35% FG shooting in the playoffs (18% 3FG) is pretty bad, huh?
Now imagine if he was getting paid $18 million to put up 37% FG shooting and 25% 3FG in the playoffs.
Would be pretty hard to improve the team with a player like that on the roster, don’t you think?
Dawg
May 30th, 2012
11:47 am
Jamal Crawford does not play for the Hawks. He will not play for the Hawks next year. Perhaps we should create a Jamal blog so that the people infatuated with JC can discuss his game over and over and over and over.
What are the hawks going to do to improve?
Najeh Davenpoop
May 30th, 2012
11:47 am
“And even though he’s in another dimension than the other guys, you could make the case that James Harden plays the role of “gunner” for OKC.”
Don’t necessarily agree with this part, since Harden also plays the role of primary ball-handler and facilitator for much of the game and sets up teammates better than Jamal does.
northcyde
May 30th, 2012
11:58 am
Rod from College Park
May 30th, 2012
11:35 am
“You mean Lou Williams . . and his 35% FG shooting in the playoffs ( 18% 3FG in the Boston series ) . . isn’t still playing?”
No. But James Harden and his 35%FG shooting in the conference semi’s (25%3 FG in the conference semi’s) is.
*******************************
And once again, you miss the point about scoring efficiency. If you’re going to shoot that poor from the field ( actually 36% for Harden in the Laker series ), you better do something else to compensate for shooting that poorly.
And what did Harden do?
He shot 92.5% FT in that series.
And it wasn’t a “hollow” 92.5%, in which he only took about 3 FTs per game like Lou in the Boston series. It was a legit 92.5% in which he shot 8 FTs per game and made 7.4 of them
From an efficiency standpoint, that’s 10.3 shots per game, while averaging 16 points per game.
Lou Williams?
Not only did he shoot 34% in the Boston series, he only averaged 2.9 FTs per game.
Efficiency? He took 11 shots per game, but only scored 10.3 points
When you shoot poorly, you must get to the FT line . . a lot . . to compensate for the poor FG%. And this lack of being able to get to the FT line is the major flaw in Joe Johnson’s game. If he goes 6 – 16 FG in a game, he’s normally going to end up with around 17 points . . instead of 23 points . . because he’s not getting to the FT line enough.
It’s the flaw in Jamal’s game as well, simply because he’d rather jack up an off-balance 25 footer, than consistently blow by people and draw fouls closer to the rim. When you draw fouls at less than a 10% rate in this league, it simply means that you’re not being aggressive enough going to the hole, or you’re taking too many jumpshots to begin with.
Rusty
May 30th, 2012
11:58 am
Buddy G. I’m not saying that KH isn’t better than Pargo. I think LD used Pargo to much when his shooting was off. I’m just saying I don’t like KH at PG as he doesn’t penetrate to the basket & over dribbles the ball without really doing anything,sort of like a washed up MB.
Grandpa I don’t have anything against dribbling as long as it has a purpose but not like JJ looking like he is putting on a dribbling show.pops knows how to play. I have said before on this blog that we need to play like the old Knicks,ball movement player movements & who ever has the best shot,take it. The hawks under LD offense will stagnant with to much one on one play & almost results in people taking contested jump shots,how often to we see easy shots, not often.
Mr. Contradiction
May 30th, 2012
12:05 pm
LOL @ those who can’t see with their own eyes that Jamal Crawford, as good as he is on offense, gives up MORE POINTS than he can possibly score. Somebody said something about an eye test. If you watched the Hawks for the two years Jamal was here and couldn’t see that, then, it’s not your eyes, it’s your brain. In denial.
Seems like there’s a lot of that going on with this blog.
northcyde
May 30th, 2012
12:06 pm
Najeh Davenpoop
May 30th, 2012
11:46 am
“You mean Lou Williams . . and his 35% FG shooting in the playoffs ( 18% 3FG in the Boston series ) . . isn’t still playing?”
35% FG shooting in the playoffs (18% 3FG) is pretty bad, huh?
Now imagine if he was getting paid $18 million to put up 37% FG shooting and 25% 3FG in the playoffs.
Would be pretty hard to improve the team with a player like that on the roster, don’t you think?
*********************
And that’s why his team isn’t playing either. That, and the fact that the #1 option on the team at PF shot 39% FG as well.
Increase the talent overall, or get a more talented “core player”, and the team will improve.
Most of you guys though, would rather blow the entire thing up, instead of switching out a part. Blow the thing up, and half of these posters wouldn’t even watch the Hawks anymore, let alone go to the games.
Rusty
May 30th, 2012
12:08 pm
One thing I loved about JC1 ,when he went to the basket he went not like JJ.
DawgNole
May 30th, 2012
12:13 pm
Buddy Grizzard
May 29th, 2012
11:31 pm
“Don’t forget about Dan Dickau, Dennis Nutt, Steve Alford, Craig “Noodle” Neal, Jay Burson [undrafted - Ohio St. Univ.], Brooks “Bubba” Jennings [undrafted - TX Tech. Univ.], Jim Les, Kyle Macy, Jon Sundvold, Brent Price, Scott Brooks, Bryce Drew, Jerry Sichting, and others.”
LMAO. Yes I’m sure the teams drafting these players spent millions trying to market them as the next great white star. I wonder why it didn’t work for them but the white hype machine worked for Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki?
______________________
Because Nash and Nowitzki had superstar talent; the others did not.
As an aside, Nash and Nowitzki are not U.S.-born. And it is this category–U.S.-born white superstars in the NBA–that is virtually nonexistent anymore. For what it’s worth.
Just Joe
May 30th, 2012
12:17 pm
Washington Post reporting the the Wiz want to trade Lewis and Blatche rather than paying them to walk away (buyout and amnesty).
Joe for Lewis and #32 is taking shape. Saves us $6M, so the net trade is Joe for #32 and an MLE shooting guard.
I’ve covered Washington’s benefits before (timing of contracts, reduced cost of Joe this year, trade exception, etc…).
Make it happen!!!
DawgNole
May 30th, 2012
12:20 pm
High-sider
May 29th, 2012
11:00 pm
(To Grandad)
FYI
Try posting your comment/response in pieces [or increments] – like four to six sentences at a time. [Put Part I, Part II, Part III, etc. after each (incremental) post.] That method worked for me when I had trouble posting a particular comment.
__________________
Not saying this won’t work, but it’s a pain in the tail and puts the burden on the reader when it is the AJC’s IT dept that should accept that burden and address the issue(s) with its filters.
Maybe if we all just stopped posting they’d get the message. Of course, they know that will never happen, so they continue to do nothing about the problem.
vava74
May 30th, 2012
12:22 pm
JJ and Josh’s production or lack of are a direct result of poor/absent coaching.
Lack of role definition, too much ISO-Joe instead of JJ shooting when open, the vaunted “motion offense” being ditched every single 4th quarter…
If JJ had been shooting the rock whenever he had open looks, that would have opened the game for Josh to work inside more and improve his production.
Also, Josh greatly missed having Zaza on the floor along side him to help him with the rebounding.
Collins played very decent minutes but quickly Doc adjusted to his presence on the floor and we were playing most of the series with only 3 offensive players on the floor (Collins and Marvin don’t count) making ISO-JJ a complete lunacy and an injured Josh an easy prey.
A lot of factors contributed to our loss and the absence of a gunner/scorer was not in the top 5.
Lack of coaching, Zaza and Josh’s injuries and the refs played a huge factor too.