Atlanta Hawks: Rick Sund Q-and-A
More from my interview yesterday with Hawks GM Rick Sund.
MC: What is your evaluation of the season?
Sund: There are two seasons. Once you become a real playoff team, there are two seasons. I thought we had an unbelievably great first season: 40 wins, key people hurt, the players and Larry [Drew] kept their focus. We ended up having the fourth-best record in the East. I thought with all the adversity it was really a great year with the compressed schedule and all the obstacles a team has to climb, which every team has those obstacles. I thought it was good.
The second part of the season is the playoffs and that’s disappointing. I think a great thing when you go through the [exit] interview process you get to talk to the players, and to a man—I still have a couple to do—but to a man they all think we should still be playing. And that’s a good thing. There’s disappointment in their heart. They look [at the playoffs] and feel they are good enough to be playing at the championship level.
MC: When you evaluate the team, are you able to separate out the effects of all the injuries from where you need to get better?
Sund: Two-and-a-half weeks after the season, you are a little bit more pragmatic. The emotions are out of the focus. When you look at it and you have to say, the last four years this team in the Eastern Conference has had the third-or fourth-best record either by the end of the regular season or by getting through the first round and getting to the second round. We’ve had the third- or fourth-best record in the last four years. Our goal is to get into those top two [in the East], because that’s when you have a legitimate shot to get to the finals. That’s that championship level. That’s the NBA’s version of the Final Four. You want to be one of those top two teams playing at the end of May and into June because you’ve got a legitimate shot to win a championship. We’ve fallen short of that. That’s our goal. Having said that, we have to look at our club and say where are the areas we can improve, what can we do without taking a step back. So we will have to explore all opportunities.
MC: The team’s deficiencies were mostly on offense, which came to fruition against the Celtics, a very good defensive team. From a personnel standpoint, how can the team improve offensively?
Sund: Again, you say separate the injuries, you really can’t, because if your key personnel are core members of your club, you are going to miss the points that that person may bring or the rebounds. I think we were one of the better defensive teams in the league, something last season we really wanted to focus on. I think Larry and the team did a great job. Points-wise it was Chicago one, Boston two, Philly three, Miami four, Memphis five, we are sixth. Defending in certain areas [like] field-goal percentage. In all of that, we really improved. I think that was the strength of our team. Now we have got to focus on, can we score a little more. Having said that, our offensive efficiency—which I know you are a big stat guy—was really good in the fourth quarter, particularly the last five minutes of the game. Joe [Johnson] in particular [was good] in crunch time. We were good in the fourth quarter, we were good in overtime games, close games. You are always looking at how you get better. I think some of that will come, if the team is the same, from [Jeff] Teague. Teague is going to continue to get better. He got a lot of easy shots for us in the playoffs for some of our players. Joe really improved his 3-point shooting. Marvin [Williams] shot the 3-pointer pretty good. You are asking me questions that really Larry should answer but I think, overall, the dialogue from the coaching staff and the management last year was [about] defense. We’ve got to focus on that and we can manufacture and we have enough talent to get shots.
MC: Why do you think things like good offensive efficiency in fourth quarter didn’t translate to the playoffs?
Sund: I haven’t really zeroed in on that. I think with the exception of the blowout game, all of the games—and we pretty much dominated Game 1-you take those two games out and the other four games were pretty close and could have gone either way. It was a missed shot here and a missed shot there.
MC: We saw the tension between Joe’s deliberate style that he likes to play and LD’s motion offense, something that he expressed his frustration about at one point. Can that tension be resolved with this personnel?
Sund: That question should be to Coach.
MC: Do you plan to extend a tender to Ivan [Johnson]?
Sund: I’m not going to comment on that right now.
MC: Will you try to sign Josh Smith to an extension?
Sund: I’m not going to get into contract stuff.
MC: Josh had a great year production-wise but–
Sund: I think it was the best year Josh has had, at least in the four years I’ve been here. I’ve said it for the record and I’ll say it again: Irrespective of how the voting came out, he should have been an All-Star. I thought Josh had an absolutely terrific year. He did a great job of making sure, hey, we lost some huge production with [Al] Horford and he picked it up.
MC: But his offensive efficiency fell off, and a large part of that is because he’s taking more shots away from the basket and not shooting–
Sund: You have to ask those questions to Larry.
MC: But from a personnel standpoint, do you think he fits with what Larry is trying to do offensively?
Sund: Yes.
MC: Does that mean the migration away from the basket–
Sund: Those are questions you have to ask Larry. I think he’s an All-Star player. He played a total All-Star caliber play this year. He’s been exceptional in the post. I thought his defense was great. He’s one of the better passing power forwards in the league. I think he had a very good year.
MC: Is it your perception Josh is still happy being here with the Hawks?
Sund: I’m going to have his exit interview sometime this week. But, yeah, when you read the things of him saying . . . He’s such a competitor. I was talking to his dad the other day, and he mentioned we all think we should be playing, and that’s great. And [Josh] is one of them.
MC: Can you discuss tour team salary situation going forward?
Sund: I don’t like to talk about it until we find out what the taxes are and the league does its audit. We are in a situation where we have six guys under contract and we will have to fill in either via trade, first-round pick, second-round pick. How much room [under the tax level] do we have to use the mid-level, the bi-annual. We have all of those exceptions. Its’ too early to say.
MC: Is it possible you may have to build the same way as last year, when you had to find some value with minimum-salaried guys?
Sund: Many of the good teams are going to have to finesse their way around and look at that as an option. If you don’t want to be a perennial taxpayer, you have to look at those options. . . . I thought our team this year had a legitimate chance to get to the one or two spot [in the East]. We ended up with the fourth-best record in the [East] but we thought we could still be playing. I asked ownership if we think we are going to have a chance to make a run at it, we are going to have to dip our toe into and go into the tax and pay a little bit of tax. And they did it with no problem. We are an official taxpayer this year and I thought that was a good move for us given the injuries.
MC: I know you probably haven’t had much chance to study prospects in detail, but do you have an idea of the quality of depth in the draft?
Sund: I’m a real division of labor guy and that’s Dave Pendergraft and Mike McNeive, they focus on that all the time. I am getting more involved. During the year I go out and see some people but really focusing in on the groupings, where we pick at 23 who is going to be there, who do I really need to look at, who do you like in the combines, who do you not like. Chicago [combine] has become a really good tool because it’s basically all interviews for two or three days. That’s turned out to be really more productive than even in the past, when they just play.
MC: Have you gotten a feel from Dave and Mike on what they think about the draft prospects?
Sund: They’ve handled the draft pretty good the last couple of years. We got a good player in Teague and we got a good player in [Jordan] Crawford, which we parlayed into [Kirk] Hinrich. They feel that we will get a quality player at the 23rd pick, or there are quality people there. There are a few people they like that they might want to move down to get. Who knows. It’s way too early to tell. The lottery is tonight and next week is when it really starts to focus.
MC: How do you think that Crawford trade turned out now that Hinrich’s contract is expiring?
Sund: We felt we could make a run last year. Not quite as good as this year [but] we had to get through Orlando. It was the first time in four years we didn’t have home-court advantage and many people picked Orlando to win the conference. And then we took the best team record-wise [the Bulls] where we won the first game and then won another game. Hinrich didn’t play in that [series]. We like to think if Hinrich did play we would have advanced that round. It’s just unfortunate he came in with the injury this year. But I don’t think there’s any question in my mind that we wouldn’t have advanced to the second round last year without Kirk on our team.
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
535 comments Add your comment
will
June 3rd, 2012
9:31 am
The hawks owners needs to let R. Sund, go on back to Seatte, or wherever he’s from
he has no business being a gm, of any team in the nba. He’s scared to give tv interviews, I
don’t see him at hawks games, he admitts he does not know who in the draft that the team may be
looking at, or who are any of the college player are. he says that’s not my job.
It may not be your job directly, but you are the gm, and all of these people work for you. “you must
have forgotten”.
If any other gm in the nba, are asked what does your team needs out of the up coming draft or free
agency to get to the next level, they could easily explain the type of players they are looking for and
what steps they are taking to achieve these goals. NOT R. SUND
drmaryb.(*_*).
June 3rd, 2012
12:56 pm
Preach!
“If any other gm in the nba, are asked what does your team needs out of the up coming draft or free
agency to get to the next level, they could easily explain the type of players they are looking for and
what steps they are taking to achieve these goals. NOT R. SUND” – will -
_____________
Co-Sign. Will,.
Sund could even give an ambiguous statement to deflect or hide who the draft target, UFA, FA or player whom he wishes to trade pieces for is – if, he wishes to be coy.
But, the total arrogance of saying, “Ask Drew, that’s not my job” is totally unacceptable. Where is the genius in that? Disingenuous is more like it.
Sugar Ray
June 3rd, 2012
1:08 pm
Someone said the Hawks need a pasing PG. I disagree, teams with non-tradition PGs have won the title. What matters is the Hawks need is for their players to PLAY TO THEIR STRENGTHS and their coach to emphasize it every day, in practice and during games. Will it happen? Well you have some people (fans and those who gets paid by ASG) making excuses for certain players who refuse to play to their strengths, so they obviously don’t expect it. Bottom line, it doesn’t matter what you run, if you execute properly, you will be great.
will
June 3rd, 2012
2:03 pm
To be honest, the hawks are not that far away, “IF” they played to their potential, management showed some leadership and traded J. Smith and in return got 2 good coachable players, use their number 23 draft pick wisely, because this is a deep draft.
But unfortunately, I just cannot see something that would be so simple for ownership and management to do, actually do something, because they have the leverage (J. Smith) he has made it clear he does not want to be here!!!!
Ray
June 3rd, 2012
2:06 pm
@ Sugar Ray
Got to agree with that a passing PG won’t do us any good even if we had Rajon Rondo in the lineup I don’t think we would still win a National Championship.
The real question which position is in the greatest need is C now the most needed still because with the way Zaza has played up until that injury say what you want, but he plays his heart out may have stone hands and what not, but you can’t rely on people like Zaza to win you games he’s not the suppose superstars that’s Al Horford, Joe Johnson, and Josh Smith for the team I’m saying.
I say we get a SF or SG the SG is in case Joe Johnson is gone soon and the SF if Josh leaves.
Just Joe
June 3rd, 2012
2:06 pm
Hawks need a PG to set the offense as long as it consists of Joe (declining iso skills), Marvin (jump shooter), Josh (best when facing the basket), and Al (set shot master). Upgrade Josh or Al for a player that can demand a double team in the post, and Teague becomes a good fit (defends, slashes, improving 3 pt shooter).
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
Just Joe, Josh demanded a double team on the post all of last season. How do you think Joe got so many wide open looks for the corner three or weakside wing three.
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
2:21 pm
G’Dad, I have no problems with trading Josh to Houston to get Lowry and their two draft picks. However, I don’t think Houston does that deal if its not Horford. Because the Rockets have no assurance that Josh will sign an extension with them. Seeing Brooklyn lose their draft pick just to rent Wallace for a season will have every team reluctant to trade for Josh without him agreeing to an extension. So the Hawks are left with no choice to either deal Horford or go into next season with the same big three and lack of depth.
Just Joe
June 3rd, 2012
2:21 pm
I disagree that Josh consistently demanded a double team in the post. He did show the ability to beat his man off the dribble and force other defenders to slide over to help. I’m talking more about having to send the extra defender before the first defender is beaten (forcing the offensive player to either give up the ball or try to beat the double team).
Grandad
June 3rd, 2012
2:39 pm
Ra`mon
Josh is the one who wishes to leave,
not Al.
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
2:53 pm
G’dad, maybe so. But Josh’s trade value diminishes without him agreeing to an extension with the new team he would go to. So no team will be willing to give up their draft picks, plus proven talent for a one year rental in Josh.
Just Joe
June 3rd, 2012
2:54 pm
There are probably less than a dozen post guys in the league that can demand a double team (or with fewer teams using the double team, let’s say a player that can consistently win one-on-one matchups in the post).
Howard, Bynum, KG, Love, Aldridge, Gasol, Duncan, Stoudamire, Dirk, Melo, Lebron, ???
Of course some guards like Joe and Kobe are a handful in the post as well.
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
2:54 pm
Just Joe, majority of the times, Josh on the block brought a double team. That’s why Josh’s touches improved half way through the season when Joe got hurt, because he showed the ability to pass out of the double team, better than any one on the team not named McGrady.
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
3:00 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSQxnw50wAk
Ray
June 3rd, 2012
3:02 pm
Josh is only wishing to leave only because he sees how we see ASKG their cheap.
I don’t mean cheap as in they don’t spend money they do but not wisely this past season was probably the best in terms of pickups from Free Agents, but not by much.
When your Center lineup consists of Al Horford(Not a real C, but can play), Zaza, Jason Collins, and Dampier(way past anything).
Basically Zaza is the guy you fall back on when Horford went down and he rose to the occasion this past season, but after Zaza you got Damp and Collins. Those two all they are truthfully right now are just two bodies on the floor they can score, but I’m certain Josh looks at them like just bodies that won’t do much on the floor.
So if Josh does see that then that’s probably why he wishes to leave.
If ASKG wants us the fans to be more fair to them first get rid of Joe Max Johnson he’s Konkack II. dump off Marvin Williams he doesn’t really do much on the court plus he’s in the Top 5 of all time busts. maybe Top 10 at the max.
Get us a Real Coach L.D can be a coach, but I’d rather get someone from a championship contending team not one from the back yard.
Look what happened when Chicago did that they probably would have been contending had not rose gotten hurt and also Noah as well.
High-sider
June 3rd, 2012
3:27 pm
So this blog has a “Ray,” a “Big Ray” and a “Sugar Ray” [SMH]. Is “Ra’mon” pronounced “RAY-mon”?
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
3:30 pm
Lol, nope. It’s Rah’moan
Just Joe
June 3rd, 2012
3:32 pm
Ramon…great game by Josh. I stand by my comment though. The Hawks can’t play inside-out effectively with Josh, or Al for that matter. I think Josh has the ability, but for whatever reasons (poor coaching, hard head, ???), he’s never become that player. Until we get that player, we will have a need for a PG that can create offense for the team.
Ra'mon
June 3rd, 2012
3:58 pm
Just Joe, I respect that.
Tenacious
June 3rd, 2012
4:22 pm
I think if we get rid of Sund, then Get rid of Mike Cunningham, Larry Drew, and Al hoford then wed be on the right track to turning this program around.
Any thing less and we are just kidding ourselves.
Lottery in 2.
Tenacious
June 3rd, 2012
4:45 pm
Ray Josh has made it clear he doesnt want to leave. That rumor is being concocted by the Al houdini supporters like Mike Cunningham.
Here’s what Josh is on record saying :
By Associated Press
DENVER — The Atlanta Hawks have no plans to deal Josh Smith before Thursday’s deadline, according to their co-owner.
“The likelihood of us trading Josh at the trade deadline is as close to zero as you can get,” Bruce Levenson told The Associated Press on Tuesday.
“There were a bunch of guys in the All-Star game that I wouldn’t trade for Josh, given what he brings not only to our team but to the community. He’s from Atlanta. He’s made terrific contributions to the community. It’s really hard, particularly in the middle of the season, to find that caliber player for Josh.”
Numerous reports have stated Smith wants out of Atlanta. But Levenson said those rumors are unfounded and that Smith has told him they aren’t coming from the player.
“I don’t know where the rumors are coming from and neither does Josh,” Levenson said. “Josh said to me, `They’re not coming from me, Bruce. They’re not coming from my agent.”’
Levenson said the Hawks have been contacted by other teams and wouldn’t definitely rule out any deal before Thursday’s 3 p.m. EDT deadline.
“Two days is a long time, at least in the trade world,” Levenson said. “Josh is a very smart guy. He understands the game, he understands the business, and he understands how highly we value him. The likelihood, at this point in the year, of us receiving anywhere remotely close to equal value for Josh Smith is very, very close to zero.
Read more here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2012/03/14/1971223/atlanta-hawks-co-owner-bruce-levenson.html#storylink=cpy
Sugar Ray Robinson
June 3rd, 2012
4:51 pm
It next to impossible to up grade Josh because he is one of the best power forwards in the game. A top 4 at the position easily. Not the case with Al who as a center is mediocre as a scorer and poor as a defender, ranking some where between 12-17 amongst centers and amongst power forward hed rank some where between 28 -35.
Its very funny that Al starts drama about playing Josh position, which wouldnt be funny if he could play the position better than Josh. Clearly hes not in Josh’s league as a power forward and is only average as a center.
Dump the Chump.
Just the Facts Ma'am
June 3rd, 2012
5:17 pm
Al houdini Horford’s career playoff history. 2012 numbers only represent 2 games after he rested the entire season.
Play off average? 11pts agm @42 games and very little impact. In fact his playoff average is worst than his career average. We can get equal or near number from Ivan or Zaza if given the same minutes. Al is a waste of a 16million dollars.
Year Team G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
07-08 ATL 7 7 39.6 0.472 0.000 0.741 3.1 7.3 10.4 3.6 0.4 1.0 2.14 3.71 12.6
08-09 ATL 9 9 28.0 0.424 0.000 0.667 1.3 4.4 5.8 2.0 0.7 0.7 0.44 2.89 6.9
09-10 ATL 11 11 35.3 0.523 1.000 0.839 2.5 6.5 9.0 1.8 0.7 1.7 1.36 3.18 14.6
10-11 ATL 12 12 39.0 0.423 0.000 0.769 2.1 7.5 9.6 3.5 0.4 1.0 1.42 2.75 11.3
11-12 ATL 3 2 36.0 0.588 0.000 0.750 1.7 6.7 8.3 2.7 1.3 1.3 4.00 3.67 15.3
Career – 42 41 35.5 0.474 0.250 0.764 2.2 6.5 8.7 2.7 0.6 1.1 1.50 3.12 11.7
Derek
June 3rd, 2012
5:51 pm
Between Jeff Teague and Al Horford you guys arent going anywhere, but fishing
Derek
June 3rd, 2012
5:55 pm
Ra`mon
I agree, Josh doesnt want to leave, It was Al horford who said ” I think that will be very interesting” when told that he would be moving back to florida if the D12 trade is made to put Howard and Josh together.
O"Brien
June 3rd, 2012
6:00 pm
G’dad,
I agree with Ra’mon. The teams more likely to trade for Josh are the teams that are only concerned about winning now (like the Lakers). Teams thinking long term don’t want to trade for him unless he agrees to an extension (which I don’t think he will). And I don’t blame him.
For that same reason, I don’t want trade Al, because that means by next off-season, we could be w/o Al AND Josh, and possibly Zaza, who will also be a FA.
My first choice would be to find somebody to take JJ off our hands.
O"Brien
June 3rd, 2012
6:04 pm
Derek,
Are you a mind reader? What if Horford meant Josh and Howard together would be interesting? And are you even sure Al said “It will be interesting”, and not “interesting”.
And if that was Al’s exact words, since when does “it will be interesting” means he wants to leave?
Ray
June 3rd, 2012
7:14 pm
@ High-sider
Just letting you know we’re not the same people I can assure you that.
@ Tenacious
That was a article way back at All-star break basically. Josh will leave if something isn’t done the first mistake was re-upping L.D that was a horrid move.
@ O’Brien
I want to get rid of Joe Johnson too, but it’s going to take a lot of effort to do so. I’m really beginning to think our real weak link is Joe Johnson every time in the playoffs he disappears on us and the only two left playing their hearts out Josh and Yes I said it Al Horford.
I was onto Al last year about how he disappeared, but he got way more heart than Joe Choke Johnson anyday.
It would be a mistake to get rid of either Al or Josh keep them both together is what I’d say.
northcyde
June 3rd, 2012
7:37 pm
Sugar Ray Robinson
June 3rd, 2012
4:51 pm
It next to impossible to up grade Josh because he is one of the best power forwards in the game. A top 4 at the position easily. Not the case with Al who as a center is mediocre as a scorer and poor as a defender, ranking some where between 12-17 amongst centers and amongst power forward hed rank some where between 28 -35.
Its very funny that Al starts drama about playing Josh position, which wouldnt be funny if he could play the position better than Josh. Clearly hes not in Josh’s league as a power forward and is only average as a center.
Dump the Chump.
******************
Josh Smith Player 48-minute production by position @ PF in 2012
25.7 ppg ( on 23 shots )
12.7 rebs
5.2 asst
2.2 blks
47% eFG%
20.2 PER
Al Horford Player 48-minuted production by position @ PF in 2011
21.2 ppg ( on 18 shots )
11.5 rebs
4.8 asst
1.0 blks
54% eFG%
19.6 PER
********************
You make it sound like there’s some tremendous dropoff in talent from Smith to Horford. The truth is that Smith is a better rim protector. Other than that, he really doesn’t do anything better than Horford.
Buddy Grizzard
June 3rd, 2012
7:51 pm
Hey Tenacious… put down the ASG Kool-Aid!
By the way, anybody read that John Wall wants the Wizards to draft a 2-guard? I guess Adam Morrison 2.0 a.k.a. Jordan Crawford wasn’t the answer after all.
Astro Joe
June 3rd, 2012
8:24 pm
Funny how expiring contracts usally bring added trade value, except in the case of someone like Josh, huh? I am still of the belief that finding quality bigs with another 3-5 years of prime ball ahead of them is not very easy. So trading Al without locking up Josh could easily mean that you lose 2 such talented and and in-their-prime bigs within 12 months of each other. That would be beyond stupid.
O"Brien
June 3rd, 2012
8:54 pm
Northcyde,
I’m a big Horford fan, but it’s hard to compare his PF numbers (per 48 minutes) from 2011 to Josh’s per 48 numbers at PF from 2012.
For one, Josh’s numbers came without Horford in the game, whereas some of Horford’s numbers came with Josh in the game at SF. Also, whereas Josh was playing 35 minutes at PF every game, Al’s minutes at PF were not as consistent.
For example, using Marvin’s numbers per 48 minutes at SF is not a good indicator of how good (or bad) Marvin really is, if he was to play 35 mpg.
That being said, instead of losing Josh for nothing next offseason, I would prefer to trade him (assuming we cannot trade JJ).
AJ,
That is because the expiring contract allows a team to clear cap space. But in Josh’s case, a team that trades for him would want to lock him up, not clear cap space.
And the Hawks would want better assets in return for Josh than some other teams trading their expiring.
northcyde
June 3rd, 2012
9:19 pm
O’Brien. The point is that people are trying to make like Horford is a complete scrub, and that is far from the case.
I, along with everyone else, was disappointed with how he played in last year’s playoffs, when he played PF a good deal of the time. Those same people, however, act like Josh and his 39% FG shooting in the playoffs was some tremendous upgrade over what Horford could give us at PF.
Give Horford 17 shots a game, and he could average 19 points as well, just like Josh did. He can definitely rebound at the same rate or higher. He just won’t block as many shots.
Josh Smith is an extremely important cog to this team. During those times in which he plays to his strengths, he’s an All-Star talent. It’s just funny how people think Al couldn’t do the same thing that Josh did, if his usage dramatically increased.
If we don’t replace Josh with a similar or greater talent, Horford will forced to take on the role that Josh did last year. People act like if he took 17 shots a game, that he’d score 14 points. That’s BS. He’d be better than Josh offensively, just not as good defensively with weak side defense.
northcyde
June 3rd, 2012
9:23 pm
And Marvin’s numbers are what they are. Give him 35 minutes a game, and he’d be back around where he was from 2006 – 08
A 14 point . . 6 rebound guy
Joe D
June 3rd, 2012
9:32 pm
First order of business, trade Marvin to Cleveland for their 2nd round pick. This is a straight money dump similiar to Miami trading Beasley to the TWolves for a 2nd round pick. Cleveland has a ton of cap space and still for some ungodly reason they convert Marvin. Even if the Hawks have to take back a garbage player for a year; it is salary dump which is the point.
Next, sign Ivan and Zaza (extension)!
If Josh does not resign by the end of the summer, trade hm for the best available 5. If he signs, draft or sign the best available SG or PG.
This is not rocket science. Just draft and sign FAs using COMMON SENSE!
Grandad
June 3rd, 2012
10:14 pm
Ditch~Weed
As always;
I hope you`re doing well.
Grandad
June 3rd, 2012
10:22 pm
0`B
My 1st wish [Right Now] is to obtain [1st round] draft choices.
Josh is the – Best means to obtain those – I do believe.
2nd;
would be a means to trade Joe. [sorry nc]
3rd;
Keep Al
Rod from College Park
June 3rd, 2012
10:27 pm
“Give Horford 17 shots a game, and he could average 19 points as well, just like Josh did. He can definitely rebound at the same rate or higher. He just won’t block as many shots.”
“And Marvin’s numbers are what they are. Give him 35 minutes a game, and he’d be back around where he was from 2006 – 08″
Still playing fantasy basketball huh. Guess what. Horford won’t get 17 shots a game because he has no moves in the post, and he can’t create his own shot. Unless he works on his game, he is not a 17 shot a game player. Why on earth as a coach would you give Marvin 35 minutes a game when you have guys on the bench who are much better players than him, and don’t fall and turn invisible. Drew ain’t a great coach, but he has proved he is smarter than that.
Rod from College Park
June 3rd, 2012
10:30 pm
“Cleveland has a ton of cap space and still for some ungodly reason they convert Marvin.”
No they don’t. No team is going to take Marvin and his 8 mil per year salary with a player option unless they can move another terrible contract. Nobody in Cleveland wants Marvin Williams.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
12:26 am
“You make it sound like there’s some tremendous dropoff in talent from Smith to Horford. The truth is that Smith is a better rim protector. Other than that, he really doesn’t do anything better than Horford.”
Once again, stats only tell part of the story. They don’t say anything about shot creating ability, for one.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
12:26 am
“Still playing fantasy basketball huh. Guess what. Horford won’t get 17 shots a game because he has no moves in the post, and he can’t create his own shot. Unless he works on his game, he is not a 17 shot a game player.”
Co-sign.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
12:27 am
And for the record I do not think Al is a “complete scrub”. He just isn’t going to do what Josh does. He is still a very good complementary player, but he cannot masquerade as a #1 option nearly as well as Josh can.
glw
June 4th, 2012
12:38 am
Rod from c.p,
Man you are so right, I dont know why some of these people keep talking about someone trading Marvin. Aint nobody giving nothing for Marvin unless you take a bad contract in return back or send them a 1st rd draft pick for taking him off your hands. And it still might not happen even then.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
12:39 am
“Funny how expiring contracts usally bring added trade value, except in the case of someone like Josh, huh?”
Expiring contracts add trade value to players like Marvin who are completely unwanted otherwise. They don’t typically add trade value to players that the acquiring team actually wants to re-sign, because they bring with them the risk of the player walking in free agency.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
12:42 am
There is quite a bit of similarity between Joe Johnson’s per-36 numbers and Gerald Henderson’s per-36 numbers, except that Joe takes more shots and shoots better from 3. I’m pretty sure nobody is about to suggest that Henderson would adequately replace most of what Joe does, though, nor should they.
northcyde
June 4th, 2012
1:10 am
Rod from College Park
June 3rd, 2012
10:27 pm
“Give Horford 17 shots a game, and he could average 19 points as well, just like Josh did. He can definitely rebound at the same rate or higher. He just won’t block as many shots.”
“And Marvin’s numbers are what they are. Give him 35 minutes a game, and he’d be back around where he was from 2006 – 08″
Still playing fantasy basketball huh. Guess what. Horford won’t get 17 shots a game because he has no moves in the post, and he can’t create his own shot. Unless he works on his game, he is not a 17 shot a game player. Why on earth as a coach would you give Marvin 35 minutes a game when you have guys on the bench who are much better players than him, and don’t fall and turn invisible. Drew ain’t a great coach, but he has proved he is smarter than that.
********************************
Al Horford all around game
Funny . . it looks a lot like a Josh Smith highlight.
LOL @ AL couldn’t get 17 shots per game. If you feature anybody in an offense, they can get up 17 shots a game. The question is, would he be somewhat efficient if his usage went up like that?
So Josh Smith can take 7 – 8 long range jumpers a game and reach 17 shots a game, but Al couldn’t?
This is how Al could easily get 17 shots:
- 8 mid-range shots via pick and pop or direct passes
- 3 shots via ISO post ups
- 2 shots via face up ISO drives to the basket
- 2 shots via put back offensive rebounds
- 1 shot via assists by cutting to basket
- 1 shot in transition running the break
17 shots
You act like Josh Smith lived in the post this season. He took 1101 shots in the regular season this year. 624 of those shots were considered to be jumpshots. That’s almost 57% of his shots being jumpers.
In 2011, Horford took 921 shots. 599 of them were considered to be jumpshots ( and shot 49% on those jumpers ). That’s 65% of his shots. But you think that because he doesn’t have a good go to move in the post that he couldn’t put up 17 shots a game? LOL.
As for Marvin . . it is what it is. The point isn’t whether he should be playing 35 minutes a game. The point is that when he does get that kind of time, he’s basically a 14 point – 6 to 7 rebound guy.
Those are facts.
Grandad
June 4th, 2012
1:29 am
For those who discuss Al`s lack of presence in the play-offs;
Here are some numbers:
Al shoots 59% from the field during the play-offs
Whereas Josh shoots 39% during the play-offs
Josh in virtually the same amount of games;
Has attempted approx 200 more shots [635]
Compared with Al`s [430]
They rebound at near exactly the same clip – 8.6 (Josh); 8.7 (Al)
As one would guess;
Josh avgs Two blks per – to Al`s one blk per.
*note – reflects career play-off records:
Josh (46) // Al (42)
__________________________________________
The reason I bring this up:
The erroneous perception that Al does not show up
For the post-season.
Also the negative propaganda the young man receives
On this here board.
My aim is not to discredit Josh;
Merely to show that Al is not the bum,
many of you perceive him to be.
`Tis not that if Josh is bad = Al is good;
-or-
If Al is bad Josh is good.
Tit for tat.
It`s okay to have two talented youngsters of near equal ability,
Though completely different in personality and style of play.
_______________________________________________
northcyde
June 4th, 2012
1:30 am
Najeh.. . so Josh lives in the post? He’s taking 8 shots a game via post ups? Is that Josh’s game?
Some of ya’ll are going to the extreme with this Al Horford can’t do this or can’t do that stuff. Al’s game is a mid-range game. You tell that dude that he has to be a featured scorer on this team, and he’s going to make sure that he gets his shots up. If it’s an increase in midrange shots, or by crashing the boards more to grab offensive rebounds, or by posting up more . . that’s what he’s going to do.
Josh Smith’s most significant value to the Hawks is on the defensive end. Now if you want to make an argument on how Al couldn’t do the things that Josh does on defense, that’s one thing. But Josh isn’t this great offensive player, and certainly not a better offensive player than Horford.
But I guess you and Rod going to argue that too . . lol.
Grandad
June 4th, 2012
1:31 am
*note – reflects career play-off records:
Josh (46) // Al (42) … games
** GAMES **
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
1:38 am
“Najeh.. . so Josh lives in the post? He’s taking 8 shots a game via post ups? Is that Josh’s game?”
I never said anything about where Josh gets his shots. What I repeatedly say is that Josh is one of the two best passers on the team by far (T-Mac being the other one), and is one of two players on the team who can consistently create easy looks for teammates when the ball is run through him. You can give me all the percentages you want and none of them will encompass the impact Josh makes by drawing double teams and creating open looks for others. That is something that Al has NEVER shown that he can do.
Al’s inability to do this does not make him a bad player. He is still very good at a bunch of other things. But on this team, with a score-first point guard and a 2-guard who grinds things to a standstill when asked to create for others, Josh’s shot creating ability is crucial to any semblance of offensive success against good defenses. So no, simply sliding Al into Josh’s spot isn’t going to result in the team cruising merrily along offensively, unless Josh is traded for someone else who can create shots for others.