TheNorthCydeRises

Quote: Our starting frontcourt actually does fine in defensive rebounding, by rebound rate (% of defensive rebounds collected), Smith is a better than avg. D rebounder for a PF and Al is a better than avg. D rebounder for a C. The problem is that our backup big men (post trade) were Zaza and Marv who are near the bottom in terms of D rebounding for PFs and Cs resepectively. Also, Childress plays 30 minutes a night and is bottom 5 in terms of defensive rebounding for SFs and top 5 for offensive rebounding which is a big reason why we are a great offensive rebounding team and poor defensive one. This is all true. What you left out, was thar Smith is one of the worst offensive rebounding starting PFs in the game. Why? Because he loves to hang out on the perimeter. With his athleticism, he could easily be a 10 - 12 rpg guy. Easily. But because he's on the outside all the time, and rarely crashes the boards unless he's already in the paint, his rebounding fluctuates wildly depending on the strength of our opponent's frontline. The same goes for Marvin. That's why the bigger frontlines seem to bully us around a bit. Those two guys have to get tougher and become scrappers, like Horford. Quick . . . when is the last time you've seen Smith catch a rebound off the rim in mid air, and slam it back home? Not that he has to do this, but I've NEVER seen him do that. Ever. But even Nate Robinson has pulled this off. ( His dunk in his rookie year @ summer league was amazing ). It's rare to see an elite level athlete like Smith not pull off something like that. But when he's 23 feet away from the goal, you see why. If we're going to continue to play Horford at the 5, Smith can't keep playing like a Rasheed Wallace/Rashard Lewis hybrid. He has to get tougher, much tougher. Play like a Shawn Kemp or a Shawn Marion. That's why that Boston series was so beneficial for these young guys. They now have an idea of the level they need to play at on a nightly basis.

Quote: Quote: Since SF is the easiest position to play, Marvin would easily take 8 or 9 a year and no team will overpay for an SF since basically every team has a serviceable SF right now. People need to re-evaulate this statement. Not that Marvin wouldn't take 9 mill a year, but that SF is the easiest position to play in the NBA. The hell it is! Just in this conference alone, a SF may have to go up against: - Lebron - Pierce - Carter - Prince - Iggy - Butler - Turkoglu - G. Wallace - R. Jefferson You go out West, and it's just as bad: - Melo - Dirk - sometimes Kobe - Peja - sometimes T-Mac - S. Jackson - Maggette - Gay ( and I know that I'm forgetting one or two obvious people ) . . . . like Lamar Odom when he plays the 3, or Shawn Marion . . or Bruce Bowen, when he's guarding you. I be damned if SF is the easiest position to play.

Quote: do i have to do the calling out of the posters wanting smoove out? dont make me do it I dare you to do it, because I don't think you will. No . . . I Double Dog Dare you to do it. Matter of fact . . . I TRIPLE DOG DARE you to do it!!!!

Quote: Since SF is the easiest position to play, Marvin would easily take 8 or 9 a year and no team will overpay for an SF since basically every team has a serviceable SF right now. People need to re-evaulate this statement. Not that Marvin wouldn't take 9 mill a year, but that SF is the easiest position to play in the NBA. The hell it is! Just in this conference alone, a SF may have to go up against: - Lebron - Pierce - Carter - Prince - Iggy - Butler - Turkoglu - G. Wallace - R. Jefferson You go out West, and it's just as bad: - Melo - Dirk - sometimes Kobe - Peja - sometimes T-Mac - S. Jackson - Maggette - Gay ( and I know that I'm forgetting one or two obvious people ) SF is the one position that sees some of the most athletic and most potent scorers in the league. You just can't throw anybody at that position, and expect decent results. An NBA small forward is under the gun just about every single night. If he's not ready to play, he could get eaten alive. Easy my azz.

Quote: The guy had his career year without Elton Brand down low to take any rbs away and he didn't even finish the entire year and now he is comparable to Smoove? You speak of those stats as if they were his career numbers. One year, my bad 3/4 a year wonder is fooling you people on this board. When you talk about Kaman, it's not necessarily an issue of which is the better player. The issue is which player would be a better fit on the Hawks. The people that support Kaman, sees a guy that actually plays like a center with a legit back to the basket game. He doesn't have a problem with shooting FTs and he's not a liability defensively. He'd instantly be the best center the Hawks have had since Dikembe. Give LeBron Kaman, instead of Big Z, and LeBron and the Cavs have a good shot at beating Boston Give Detroit Kaman instead of McDyess, and you have the same scenario. Kaman last year, benefitted from the same thing that Smith benefitted from when JJ went down in 06 - 07. Until that point, Smith was a highly erratic offensive player that almost refused to drive the bal at times. JJ goes down, and you immeadiately see the kid drive the ball more an be very effective at it. Just like people can't discount the 20 and 10 Smith put up without JJ, you can't discount the 16 and 13 Kaman put up without Brand. Being a primary offensive focus helped Smith's offensive game in 07 - 08. The same will hold true for Kaman next year, even if his overall numbers slip. Both guys will be more efficient offensive players Smith is not a scrub. Kaman isn't either. Both are more talented all-around than Dalembert and Biendrins.

Quote: A "true" Hawks fan knows that Smith is vital to this teams success. I was just watching highlights on youtube from Game 6 and Josh Smith's highlights dude is just straight sick. There is no other player I favor more than Smoove. Game 6? Game 6 was one of his most inconsistent games of that series. Now Game 3, he played like an elite level superstar. He was so under control that game and made all the right plays. But Game 6, he was erratic as hell and turned the ball over 6 times and shot an airball 3-pointer. But that's what we get with Smith.

Smith is the new Michael Vick. Either you love him to death, regardless of how he plays . . . or he drives you crazy because he can make a superstar play and an idiotic play on back to back possessions. I'm definitely in the latter half. I do get mad though, when people try to trade him for guys far less talented than him. That makes no sense at all. The Kaman talk isn't one of those instances though. I'd definitely trade Smith for Kaman. But I wouldn't do it for Dalembert or Biendrins. As far as paying him, he deserves at least a 5/55 contract. 5/60 is the max I'd give him, personally. I won't have a fit though if he got a 5/65 or a 6/75 deal. Anything over that, and Sund/ASG must consider alternative options. The move the Clips made yesterday was a damn good move in my opinion. Instead of acquiring an up and coming talent that would cost them a ton of money, they sat back, evaulated their roster, and simply acquired a vet guy that could make them better defensively, while allowing the talent they currently have on the roster to pick up the slack offensively. Camby won't demand the ball, and that will allow guys like Kaman, Thorton, Mobley and Eric Gordon to help out Baron on the offensive end. And they not only have 2 shot blockers in the middle, they also still have room to add another scorer if need be. No sense in taking a huge gamble on Smith or Okafor, when you could possibly get 2 quality players for the price of one, that will make your team even better. I'm definitely not "all-in" when it comes to Smith. But as long as he's a Hawk, I'll continue to root for the kid, even if he drives me crazy at times.

Quote: Acie is going to blow up this year and he may be the starting point guard before the all star break. As for Woody I'm glad he's actually taking some heat for not playing Acie more and I expect he is going to play the bench more this season. Woody said it right though. He should've played him more, but he had to assess what was the #1 priority for the team. And that was making the playoffs, not developing Acie during a critical point in the season. It's nice to see that kind of honesty from Woody. It's also nice to see Acie being honest about how he should've gave the coach trust enough to play him more. When people talk about reducing JJ's minutes to around 36 a game, Acie playing well may go a long way in seeing that happen.

All Horford needs to do is find his niche offensively as a player, and put on some more muscle. At 6'10", he's big enough to play center, if he plays big, which he does.

Quote: And if we do, do we finish any higher than 8th? I honestly don't know. Boston and Detroit will win 50. Boston, yes. Detroit, I don't know. It'll all depend on what they do in regards of making over their team. If they try to shake things up, I could see them falling back to the pack a little. They're not improving, unless Stuckey and Maxiell are really ready to replace some of their aging vets ( namely Billups and Rasheed ). Quote: Philly and Toronto are essentially guaranteed to finish higher than us next season, barring injuries. I don't know about that either. It all hinges on whether O'Neal will play like a big man or a small forward. That situation could easily turn into a SAR/Big Dog situation for them, in which both guys put up good numbers, but didn't compliment each other well. Philly looks to be a major threat though. Brand is the one guy that I would've loved to replace Smith with. Philly may be the team that replaces Detroit in that #2 spot in the East. Quote: Cleveland will be around. Washington will have Arenas for the entire season, they will be improved. Orlando is a returning 50 win team. Orlando looks solid and they shouldn't fall. Don't get me started on Arenas. I still say if the Wiz had an Andre Miller, they would be better than if they had Arenas. Miller would make Jamison and Butler look like legit all-star players. Arenas tries to get his numbers first, then try to make other people better. When he's on, he's a top 5 player. When he's off, he's complete garbage because he won't stop shooting. And Cleveland? It's obvious that LeBron needs help, but he's not getting it. If they lose Gibson, LeBron is gonna be pizzed. They've surrounded him with shooters, but they still need a legit #2 guy to pair with LeBron. Quote: The Bucks have improved. Miami added Beasley, but was MUCH better than their record last year, that was some of the most blatent tanking I've seen. I think Chicago will get their act together, and they added Rose, so they will be a dangerous team in the future. The Bucks, in my opinion, are in for a rude awakening. They haven't addressed the one issue that prevented them from winning games, and that's defense. They ere dead last in the league in defensive efficiency. Even with Jefferson, don't be surprised if that team doesn't improve much at all Miami may improve, but I don't see them being a .500 team next year. Beasley is not just going to step in and dominate the league. He'll probably struggle for the first 2 months of the season, before becoming a more consistent player. He'll initially come off the bench, unless Miami gets radical, and starts Haslem at center and either Beasley/Marion at PF, with the other playing the 3. And they better find a defensive PG somewhere, unless they're going to try to go with a Wade/James Jones backcourt, and essentially have Wade play the point. Chicago is still going to be a team that lives and dies by the jumpshot. I think everyone underestimated the loss of Big Ben and PJ Brown to that team. Even though Ben fell off, he was still a decent positional defender down low. And PJ was always known for that. They lost those two guys, and people just had their way with Chicago on the inside. And they still don't have a reliable post scorer down on the block. If they don't want to keep Gordon, they have to sign and trade him for help on the interior. Quote: The East is quickly turning into a good, deep conference. This may be the first year in a while that no team under .500 makes the playoffs. The Hawks will have their work cut out. If I'm the Hawks, I'm dialing teams about an S&T with Childress for a legit backup player who can shoot the three. We need it. I'm sure there are plenty of teams over the cap who are willing to pay Childress what he wants. Atlas, let me tell you something man. A one-dimensional 3-point shooter is not more valuable to us than Childress. There's no way I'd want James Jones here over Childress. Chill's slashing ability, his garbage man mentality, and his ability to get to the FT line, are all important to this team. With Bibby and JJ shooting the 3, and Marvin shooting from 18 - 22 feet out, we have enough shooting from distance to free up the paint. Scoring was NOT a problem for this team once we acquired Bibby. And the Celtics made everybody look sh-tty on offense during the playoffs. Now if you want to add a shooter, while keeping Chill, I have no problem with that. But every team needs a guy like Chill on their team, who can impact a game without plays being called for him. As for how we'll fare next year, we all have to remember that just about all of our core, with the exception of Bibby and Zaza, are all improving as players. If we retain Smith and Chill, we're still the most athletic team in the conference and a team that has the ability to either run or play halfcourt offense. ( remember, this is the post-Bibby offense that averaged 103.5 ppg, shot 47%FG AND 38%3FG. ) I think ultimately, how good we are next year will depend on how much Horford and Law have improved. Especially Law, who could be our version of Calderon to Bibby next year, if he plays smarter and more under control. If Horford becomes more efficient offensively, the entire East better watch out for us. In essence, WE'RE the wildcard in the East, if we retain everybody. They better worry about us, not us about them.

Quote: Quote: Bogut performs well in all areas of the game except for foul shooting. Its not like you could go outside and find a 7 foot center with the same skillset, there are probably only a handful of players in the league with the same skillset as Bogut. I think what he is saying is that Bogut is a mismatch for a scoring team that is weak defensively over all. A better center for them would be a Mutombo type center that could protect the paint a little better. Bogut is a good center but he doesn't score enough to make up for his defensive deficiencies! Exactly. Plus, with all of those gunners on the team, he's not going to touch the ball enough to really be a force scoring the ball anyway. That team was absolutely horrible defensively last year. And they've done nothing to address that. Unless they get rid of Mo Williams, and get a pass-first PG there who could get Redd, RJ, and Bogut the ball, that team is going nowhere fast. They're still going to be the same bad defensive team. And when Bogut is making all that money, but scoring 13 ppg and grabbing 10 boards, and they still aren't making the playoffs, he'll get the blame.

Quote: If Stats were the end all and be all, you might have a point, but his value isn't determined by stats, it's determined by team need. You notice that Richard Jefferson and Micheal Redd and Mo Williams will do must of the scoring. IN fact, top to bottom, Milwaukee has a very solid team if Charlie V. can turn the corner. They may have been paying for that stability... especially at the C position. And that's the exact reason Bogut's extension reminds me so much of the deal Troy Murphy signed ( He averaged 15 pts and 11 rebs in year 4 ). You can't pay a guy that much money strictly for the sake of stability. You have to give him a chance to be a true impact player. It's the same logic that saw guys like Murphy, Dampier, and Curry get grossly overpaid for what they bring to the table. If you're Milwaukee, with offensive weapons all over the place, the emphasis should be to try to get some defense in the middle. Bogut is a decent player and he isn't a scrub. But at the price they re-signed him for, they maybe could've gotten 2 guys who can play defense for them either on thr inside or out on the perimeter. What's the use of having a legit center that can provide offense, when he might see the ball even less now? When you talk about the 3 most overpaid positions in professional sports, the list probably goes: 1) MLB middle relief pitcher 2) NBA center 3) NFL wide receiver

Quote: 5 yrs $70 million is what they were offering Brand. Somehow i doubt they will offer the same deal to Smith. Now that Philly is out of the picture i think the Hawks have Smith by the short hairs. Just look at all the quality restricted free agents available right now. So far they have gotten a grand total of zero offers from other teams. They have to offer enough to make the ASG blink though. I thin we match 5/60 without hesitation. 5/70 is a different story. We might blink at that. Great point you make though about thr other RFA's. If I'm a guy like Ben Gordon, I'm definitely concerned that I may be offered less money than a year ago.

If we're offering a 5/60 deal as our final offer, and the Clippers are offering a 5/70 deal . . . Smith will be on a plane to the West Coast. People don't turn down a chance to make 10 extra million dollars.

I won't list the restricted free agents. Just the unrestricted guys and the guys who could opt out of their contract. UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENTS Stephon Marbury Andre Miller Rasheed Wallace Antonio McDyess Shawn Marion Lamar Odom Grant Hill Ron Artest Jason Kidd Mike Bibby Allen Iverson PLAYER OPTION IN SUMMER 2009: Jamal Crawford Eddy Curry ( note: both would be crazy to exercise their player option, especially Curry, who will be due another cool 20 million in 2 years, if he stays. ) Zydrunas Ilgauskas Hedi Turkoglu Mement Okur Carlos Boozer Kobe Bryant

Interesting that they referenced the Bogut deal. That's exactly what I thought when I saw how much money Bogut got. Both Smith's and Okafor's agent have to be talking along those lines, even if they know that they won't get that much. I think somebody said yesterday on this board that Smith might take a contract that see him having a player option going into year 4, and the Hawks having a team option going into year 5. If Smith gets a 5/60 deal, and he believes that he'll be an all-star caliber player in 4 years, he may demand that he get that player option in year 4, just in case he develops into that kind of a player. Hawks may be better off offering a 6/75 deal, but we'll see.

Quote: That is more than fair in my opinion. Look, sports are entertainment. Enjoying a basketball team takes commitment - it takes a lot of time and a lot of money. Its fine that the Chi fans are so loyal to their team even when its terrible but I don't see why I should waste my time and money watching a game if I don't find the play or the players entertaining. I'm happy people didn't show up during the JET/SAR era, it probably made that era come to an end quicker. People shouldn't be bashed because they don't want to waste their money going to see a team that can't put out a good product. You wouldn't go see a movie if it sucked just because one of the actors was from your home town, you wouldn't buy a CD just because the studio was in your city, I'm not going to blow $50 to watch a boring-ass team lose. I agree crimedog. People don't want to go see a bad product. But there are rammifications if you don't go support the team during bad times. Ask the Memphis Grizzlies. These owners just aren't going to spend top dollar to put a great product on the floor, if they're not sure if the majority of fans care in the first place. The fact is that with the Hawks, they won over 60% of their home games last year, regardless of what their overall record was. At home, they definitely played like a playoff caliber team. That should be enough for them to have tremendous support going into this season. This year, if everybody is brought back, there should be no excuse for Philips to be sold out all of November, and part of December . . . if . . . Hawks fans show up and support the team. People can spin this all they want, but that is the real issue here. Will you support the team by being there, or won't you? Will you sacrifice some of the money that we all waste in a particular week, to pay $50 to see the Hawks? IF it means not eating out for a week, just to have extra cash for tickets, are you willing to do that to support the Hawks? It's about passion people. Passion for your team.

Coach, it definitely can be done. I park for $5 or $10 everytime i go to Philips. If people don't mind a little walking, you can always park down by the Aquarium for $5. And you're exactly right about the CNN center food. Same prices as the drive-thru. The fact is that if people REALLY want to go and see the Hawks, it can be done at a relatively decent price. This is the same issue that the Nashville Predators have. People want to see a top notch product out on the floor . . . for the absolute cheapest price possible. Sorry folks, it just doesn't work like that. Everybody can't get the best deal. If paying $10 - $20 for parking is going to be the dealbreaker in whether to watch The Hawks or not, you really have to question if watching the Hawks was that big of a priority in the first place. But if you get creative, you can maximize costs like coach does. But a fans #1 motivation should be to go watch the team . . period.

Quote: Nobody is making excuses to not support the team. I'm pointing out reasons why people aren't supporting the team consistently. You need to get off your high horse. What I'm saying is that there are teams in different cities with the same problems, higher prices, and sometimes not as good a teams and they still can fill the arena. The Hawks need to find the model of what others have done. My question is what are some of the things that other teams are doing to get fan involvement that we aren't. Now if you want to quit your pissing contest I think that the conversation would be a little more fruitful. F--- a "high horse" Diesel. The answer is staring you right in the face, but a lot of you don't want to see it or admit to it. It has NOTHING to do with the marketing of the team. It has EVERYTHING to do with fans being passionate about the team, NO MATTER WHAT. Wrigley Field isn't the most luxurious place in the world. And God knows that the Cubs are good maybe once every 10 years. Yet, people still pack that place, regardless of what the Cubs do on the field. The crowds you speak of will only come in Atlanta, if this team becomes a top 5 team and exciting to watch . . because that's the only way A-Town gets excited about a sports team. You not only have to win, you have to win with some flash. Even though the 90s version of JJ, Mitch Richmond, played on all of those sorry Kings teams, Arco Arena almost ALWAYS sold out .. . because they supported the Kings unconditionally. I mean, what can the Hawks marketing team do, that they're not doing already? - they have in-game promotions tha let the fans win prizes and money - they have post-game concerts ranging from rap to gospel - they do all the little entertainment gimmicks that every other arena does ( news flash Hawks fans: EVERYBODY does the "Kiss Cam" ) - they discount ticket prices all the time - the owners come to THIS SITE and offer ticket deals us die-hards about 2 - 3 times a year. - they aggressively go after anybody that purchase a ticket online, and try to sell them season ticket packages or partial packs - they pretty much give tickets away to corporations and youth groups - they've even REFUNDED season tickets to people after a team that was a supposed "lock" to make the playoffs, didn't So tell me Diesel, WTF are the marketing people supposed to do to gain fan interest? The only thing management can do is try to put a winning product out on the floor. But the fans want management to spend the money first, before they support the team. And all the team can do, is win . . . especially at home. Diesel, the problem are the fans themselves, that don't care enough about the Hawks to make it a point to show up as much as they can. It has to start with the die-hards first . . . then it might trickle down to the fans that care, but don't spend the money to watch the team live. From there, it might go to the casual fan that used to only show up to watch whenever there was a big name player in town. It's the fans who give a damn, that have to try to make Philips a very difficult place to play on a nightly basis. We won over 60% of our home games last year. I guess we need to do like Utah did lst year, and win 85+% of our home games, in order for Philips to be a big time home court advantage for the Hawks.

Quote: Yeah... But before, there was the OMNI... The crime element of downtown. The raggedy orange seats. No luxury boxes. The poor food vendors . Etc. Now, there's the Phil. The Phil is a step up... However, we have not put a winning team in the Phil yet. Moreover, the prices are sky high. I'm saying that if the Hawks were marketed better. If the fans were treated better. If there were some deals. If the Marketing took advantage of some of our stars... Then this is a great time to take over this city. But if they come back to the same team. Same trip to the same phil... then probably not. This is what gets me. It's always an excuse to NOT support the team. The Hawks won 28 out of 44 regular season and playoff home games. Fans in ATL left Philips HAPPY more times than not. Oh . . you forgot all of the transplants from different cities, as to why people don't support the Hawks. Might as well get all of the excuses out the way.

I'm glad you typed this, and not me. ATL fans know what's up. If Hawk fans don't support the team at home, they cannot complain when we have 5,000 empty seats in the arena, or 5,000 "star-watching" fans that root for the other team's superstar. The question is . . . are people going to wait until December, and see if the Hawks are winning or not, to support the team? I guess november will be like last year, where Hawks fans showed up for just the big name teams, while the lesser name teams didn't have to worry about a distinct home court advantage against them.

Quote: Quote: 1)Horford is a superior rebounder. 2) Horford is a better shooter beyond dunks and layups. Period. Horford shot 44% on shots from 3-15 ft and 36% on shots beyond 15 feet but inside the 3 pt line. Smoove shot 27% on shots from 3-15 ft and 30% on shots beyond 15 feet but inside the 3 pt line. But that doesn't even tell the whole story regarding how much better of a shooter that Horford is. According to the "Hotspots" data at nba.com, Horford shot 44% or better from 5 of the 8 hotspots inside the 3pt line (excluding dunks and layups). Conversely, 37% was the HIGHEST percentage that Smoove shot from ANY of the 8 hot spots. 3) Horford doesn't turn the ball over as much as Smoove. Al turned it over too much but he still only averaged 1.7 TOs per game AS A ROOKIE versus Smoove's 3 TOs per game as a 4th year player. In the playoffs, when the pressure and the spotlight were on, he played 40 mpg and averaged only 2 TOs per game while averaging nearly 4 apg. Conversely, Smoove played 34 mpg in the playoffs and averaged nearly 4 TOs per game and only 3 apg. All that said, some things are not quantifiable but they are pretty obvious and they have value. Things like "BB IQ", "boneheadedness," attitude and "proven winner" fit into that category. I think ex' summed it up pretty well. Smith is on the perimeter in certain sets but you make it seem like the guy shoots below 40%, most of the time when Chil is in the game, Smith stands on the perimeter because there isn't really another way of doing it. Horford is a better jump shooter which is great for him but as you point out, he isn't as good of an inside scorer. On TOs: Smith's turnovers have increased with his offensive responsibility. He makes too many stupid mistakes but Al hasn't been asked to do much on offense so assuming he would be any better is folly when he is also turnover prone given the lack of defensive attention he recieves. Look, the only reason I want to point this out is that there are people on this board who seem to take the approach that "Smith can leave because we have Al and he is going to be better anyway". I tend to think they complement eachother fairly well but if we lost Smith, we'd be losing a big chunk of production that wouldn't be replaced by Al or any other player very easily. People must have me on "ignore", because I constantly give a breakdown of Smith's shooting to illustrate why he should almost exclusively play on the inside. I think I saw on 82games.com where Smith committed almost 120 bad pass turnovers, which easily led the Hawks. As much as JJ turns the ball over trying to pass out of a double team, he still had less than a 100 bad pass turnovers. It's Horford's toughness that has people believing that if it came down to it, they'd rather have Horford. And frankly, it's not Smith's offense that we'd miss, because I think multiple people on this team could make up for the offense. Smith's value to the Hawks is defensively, and that's where we'd miss him the most. His shot blocking and even the mere threat of the shot block, scares the hell out of some players, especially the guards. That's why people talk about getting a defensive center so much. If we were to lose Smith, we'd definitely need an intimidator in the paint.

Quote: Take it this way- If you have to win a game RIGHT NOW, and have to choose, do you put in Smoove or Big Al? Case closed. (Its obvious, right? ) Hell no it isn't obvious. If we're playing Golden St or Phoenix, I want Smith. If we're playing Detroit or Boston, I want Horford.

Quote: Perhaps you need to do more research. We were 17th in the league for Home 3pt% and 14th in the league away from home. Who deemed midranged shooting as not important, you ? Kobe Bryant, Allen Iverson, Dwayne Wade, Joe Johnson, Rip Hamilton, Mike Redd, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Martin etc. all use the midrange game heavily. Like I said, all big time scorers barring bigs use the midrange game, because in today's game defenders are much better. Which means they can't always shoot the 3 or take the ball to the hoop. Enter the pull-up jumpshot. LeBron James is the only player I can think of who doesn't use the midrange game to score, and that's because hes an athletic freak of nature. And look this about LeBron. When you look at the breakdown of his shooting, he shot a 39.9% eFG% on his jumpshot. All of those 3s he took and made, and he shot a lesser % on his jumper than Marvin did. What's the one thing that Jackson nd VanGundy always begged LeBron to do on those NBA broadcasts? TAKE THE BALL TO THE HOLE. Yet, LeBron would settle, and miss jumpers, and cause his team to lose playoff games. As a player, you MUST play to your strengths. If Smith did that, he'd surely have a max contract already in his hands right now. Like I said. If Marvin becomes a better finisher on the inside, while continuing to be money with that 18 - 22 foot jumper, he'll be a very efficient offensive player for this team. The last thing we need is for Marvin to start jacking up 4 threes a game, just to get 1 make. Because players who are sub 35% shooters from 3, tend to be very streaky. They'll shoot 35%, but they'll go 1 - 4, 4 - 5, 0 - 3, 2 - 6, and 0 - 2 in the process.

Quote: Quote: Who's going to guide this offense where each player averages 14-20 ppg? Woody? Hahahahahaha.... But, for real, what's going on with our coaching staff? Who's going to be the X and O offensive coach that will lead our team to accomplish this "lofty" goal? 7 Um ... we scored 106 ppg over the last 10 games of the season. Math is pretty cool sometimes. Some people on this board continue to have the pre-Bibby vision of the offense, and not the post-Bibby one. The Bibby-led version of the Hawks were a pretty good scoring team, and a team that shot 38% from 3. Only the good defensive teams slowed us down. That, and Bibby's cold shooting at times. Defensively is where the Bibby-led Hawks need to get better.