buckeye242424

That would mean Smoove would be playing the majority of his minutes at the three. Would we really want that?

I don't think the Hawks should be say "screw" it. I do agree that we should be continuing to build on the last two years. I think the organization is thinking the same by re-signing Bibby. If they thought Teague was ready to play 25-30 minutes a game, Biibby wouldn't be here. There's a way to get both. Teague should get 8-10 minutes a game. I think Woody should be consistent when he is being played as well. His role would be defined, he would know when he would be playing. Make the transition easier to the pro game as well as gaining some experience his first year.

Intrigued is a good word when thinking about that line-up. The offense end would be "intriguing", to say the least. However, you're in the minority. That topic has been debated heavily, I think there was a poll. The main issue would against that would be defense and rebounding, or lackthereof. Specifically, running Bibby at the one, and Craws at the two.

Getting any player from Utah would be concerning to me if I was a GM. Especially one that hasn't played for another team. Often a player's success is tied to the system they run. Sloan knows how to maximaze the talent he has because he knows what what he needs to succeed. Giving Milsap a big chunk of cheese is a gamble IMO.

So, in that theory, a player must score a ton of points, or jack up a boatload of shots to prove he's playing hard? Besides that, the Lakers have talent all over the floor. When you play the Wizards, and win by 20 - like the game you mentioned - he didn't need to score 30. Do you think at game 22 during the regular season, Kobe is thinking to himself, I'm gonna slack on the floor, I need to pace myself for the playoffs in three months? It's Phil's job to make sure Kobe is ready for the playoffs. That's why you have a bench. Consistent Hawk. Meaning that throughout the playoffs he contributed to the games in positive ways to help in the team in some fashion(s). Along with Bibby. They both played well when you look at the 09 playoffs as a whole. JJ, you didn't know what to expect...Marv and Horf, same thing - heck, we didn't even know if they were going to play. Zaza had his moments, game 4 at Miami sticks out to me. Smoove and Bibby were consistent.

Naaw. You're right. That argument wouldn't hold any water! :lol6:

Exactly. It is a long season. It's long because they want to find out who's deserving of making the playoffs, seeding, homecourt advantage. If it wasn't meaningful, they wouldn't play as many games. Of course teams will rest their guys at the end, when their seed is locked up and they want to avoid injury. The Hawks used a similar tactic. Knowing Kobe's work ethic, and him wanting to be the best, Yes, I do think he gives 100% when he's on the floor. Poor example with Kobe. Bibby doesn't do it for ya? Fine. You're entitled to your opinion. My confusion is that Bibby, along with Smoove - the two guys that don't do it for you, we're the two most consistent players during the playoffs for the Hawks. Which, is the only time you supposedly watched them. If you're basing it strictly on the playoffs, my thoughts would be the JJ would be the player you have a problem with. But that's not the case. Probably because you see his numbers and All-Star appearances....during the regular season.

Very unslefish shooting guard. Not many that average more than 6 assists a game over their careers, like Bibby.

I keep reading "true point guard". Seriously, what entails that? Mike Bibby has has a very productive, and long career playing what I though was the point guard position. If he's not a point guard, what the hell is he?

Every SF in the NBA is athletic.

Really? Then I find it hard for you to form any kind of opinion on the Hawks if you missed the 82 games they played prior to the injury plaqued team we had. I've read in other posts that you think Mike Bibby is a waste. If you saw him only in the playoffs, how did you come to that conclusion??

One highlight, on one posession, during one game throughout an entire season is not going to change my perception of Marvin's defense. I watched the Hawks enough to know that Marvin is one of the better defenders on our team.

That would be terrific if he did. If those are your expectations for him, I can see the where the negativity comes from. Those are bloated numbers, wishful thinking.

On paper, they may be. Adding Miller and Foye won't hurt them either. However, sounds like these guys don't factor injuries into the equation. Washington needs to prove they can keep those guys healthy, and win, before I would predict they're an overall better team than we are. Crawford's track record speaks for itself. It's not the best resume in the world as far as winning. The tide will change for him this year. That's why I don't! LOL.

Yes. Doctor touched on it earlier as well....chemistry, leadership, being Woody's coach on the floor. He's worth every penny and them some, in addition to his physical abilities. Look past the stats....

Agreed. I don't think he would accept being a sixth man. Smith doesn't have the highest basketball IQ I've seen in a player, any way you slice it - that it would benefit the team- he would view it as a demotion.

Yes. I think we got a steal at 6 million per. For what he's meant to the Hawks since he's been here, he probably deserves more. Good for Bibby and nice work Sund.

I'm not sure what games you've been watching, but one thing Marv does better than anyone on the Hawks is get to the FT line.

So, guards don't rebound?

It's hard to become a big time scorer when you're not the 1,2 or even 3 option on most nights. Add to the fact that our offense is run through one guy, and one guy alone compunds the issue.

:offtopic2: I know. But.. Bad Example. Rasheed Wallace is an unselfish player. He could have averaged 20 a game if he wanted, but despite his anger issues, he's a team first guy.

Obviously, you're not considering defense and rebounding in that assessment.

Interesting question. What is consider a legit superstar? Stat Stuffers? Rings? Born Leaders + obvious talent? Ability to carry and dominate a game alone? Looking at the All NBA teams, I would consider the entire First Team Superstars. Tim Duncan and ahem...Chris Paul too. On the flip side, I don't consider Yao, Melo, or Gasol SUPERSTARS, if I must choose. What about guys that were superstars in the past, but have tailed off, do they count? Shaq, KG, Nash. Hmmm... All-nba first team Position Player (Team) F LeBron James (Cavs) F Dirk Nowitzki (Mavericks) C Dwight Howard (Magic) G Kobe Bryant (Lakers) G Dwyane Wade (Heat) All-NBA second team Position Player (Team) F Tim Duncan (Spurs) F Paul Pierce (Celtics) C Yao Ming (Rockets) G Brandon Roy (Trail Blazers) G Chris Paul (Hornets) All-NBA Third Team Position Player (Team) F Carmelo Anthony (Nuggets) F Pau Gasol (Lakers) C Shaquille O'Neal (Suns) G Chauncey Billups (Nuggets) G Tony Parker (Spurs)

Doesn't a decision on Chiilz have to happen by July 15th?

He's going to have to prove he can accept a lesser role. Jameer is coming off his first all-star bid, then gets hurt, only to come back in the finals where he was less than spectacular. He'll have something to prove. Rashard and Dwight will want there fair share of touches and shots. I can forsee some chemistry issues unless Carter can accept he's not the "man" anymore.