TheNorthCydeRises

A long way from what?

My reasoning for bringing in Jefferson had everything to do with team needs and fit, and not a slap in the face against Paul Millsap. But here's a news flash Miss JayBird: We possibly could've had BOTH Millsap and Jefferson. Ever thought about that? We had 30+ million in cap space. Why not swing for the fence and get 2 high level ( non-superstar ) players? Yes, that would mean that guys like Brand and maybe even ( gasp ) Pero Antić might not be here. Yes, that may mean that our rookies last year ( Nogueira and Schröder ) might have to be kept here and may have to possibly be in the rotation. And yes ( double gasp ) our precious "flexibiity" would be gone for a year or two. But how does this lineup look? Starters: PG - Teague G - Korver F - Millsap PF - Horford C - Jefferson Bench: G - Lou ( 6th man ) G - Mack F - Carroll F- Scott Benchwarmers: G - Schröder F - Martin G - Jenkins C - Bebe C - cheap vet min contract With Millsap's ability to play PF, but also SF, we could go with a big lineup to start games, to really put the heat on teams. As good as I think that a Jefferson - Horford frontline could've been, what would a Jefferson - Horford - Millsap frontline look like? With that frontline, you could literally take your pick as to whom you would pull out of the game early, and run them with the 2nd team and have them as the feature scorer ( preferably either Horford or Jefferson ). And at the end of games, if you do need perimeter defense, pull one of the 3 and insert DeMarre into the game. All I know is that with that frontline, it would enable us to play just about any way we wanted. It would put a ton of pressure on Millsap to guard quicker SFs, but he could turn around and offensively punish those SF's on the other end. There were just too many directions the GM could've gone in, than the direction he did decide to go in. Heck, some even wanted the team completely torn down and rebuilt. Even that option may have been better for the team than how our GM is currently constructing this team. I just don't want to hear any more excuses for the GM, as far as his inability to attract high level talent. If he really wanted to, he could do it. He'll just have to go after players he may not possibly think is the perfect fit.

The Clippers are at least in the conversation though. You could say that they're maybe one more player away from getting to the Finals. We're nowhere near the conversation.

How about target the guys that people may overlook . . . or may have doubts about. If we can't attract superstars, that's one thing. But we can bring good players in here. You simply have to target the right ones. I'm sorry folks, and I know some of you are tired of hearing it, but Al Jefferson and Lance Stephenson could BOTH be Hawks right now. Jefferson said himself that the only team really showing him love, was Charlotte. And with Lance, no one was even going after the guy, until Charlotte stepped up and wooed him in 24 hours. At some point, the blame can't be placed on players not wanting to come here. It has to be placed on the GM, and the type of players that he's targeting . . .or not targeting.

If we bring in Martin, it would have to be Korver that goes to the bench . . . or have Martin be the 6th man. Martin is like an open door, when it comes to defense.

We won 38 games last year. The team may need overhauling. The Hawks are banking on a bunch of 8th man type role players to improve us.

Sports are always less enjoyable . . . when the teams you root for don't win. When your team doesn't win, you're forced to either become a fan of the league, or stop watching at all until next season. Had we'd been in the running for Lebron, I'm sure your outlook on sports would change.

Here's last year's predictions by the way http://hawksquawk.net/community/topic/383390-time-to-go-on-the-recordhawks-wins-for-next-season/page-7?hl=predictions

1) Chicago 2) Cleveland 3) Brooklyn 4) Charlotte 5) Toronto 6) Washington 7) Atlanta 8) NY Knicks

They couldn't get the job done? After starting season with a 9 - 8 record, Miami won 49 of their next 65 games and went 12 - 3 in the East playoffs to reach the Finals. So even though they lost to Dallas, they pretty much owned the East in Year 1.

Who in the East do you think fears us? Does the addition of Kent Bazemore strike fear in our Southeast Division rivals?

- Missed on Dwight . . . . no surprising - Hit on Millsap . . . . . . . . very good contract - Missed on Deng . . . . . couldn't secure him - Missed on Gasol . . . . . went after him way too late, probably a long shot Not only does he not have an ability to hit on star players, he bypasses other talented players that do not fit his image of what a ball player should be. The test for our GM will be if he can re-sign Millsap. But as of right now, our current GM is nothing more than a Billy Knight/Rick Sund hybrid.

Oh wow. This is the Post of the Year. This is the truth . . . the whole truth . . . and nothing but the truth. Brings a tear to my eye.

((( DING !! ))) You win $10,000

No ma'am. To me, the debate is for the Hawks to not be afraid to add a very good player to the team, even if he doesn't seem to fit "the system". If they fill a need or multiple things that the team needs, you find a way to maximize what he does well, and mesh that within the framework of "the system". Too many times, we may see how a player plays somewhere else, and refuse to believe that he can be an asset to us ... even if we know that he fills glaring needs that the team needs. It's like the Carmelo Anthony debate some were having on here. If people believe that Bud is an excellent coach ( which most of us do ), then you have to believe that he could maximize the talent of a Carmelo Anthony. And in my mind, the same thing goes for Jefferson ... or even a guy like Stephenson. It is what it is though.

Miss JayBird . . . but the question remains again . . . do you think that Bud could get the most out of a Jefferson - Horford duo, if he had Jefferson? The problem with the Hawks offense is that with all of the options that we do have offensively, the one thing we really can't do, is dump it in the post. Horford is a very good post scorer, if he's not facing anyone with length. But that's not his game. He'll rather shoot a face up jumper. So as Diesel said . . - if the Hawks had a PG who could slash to the hole - plus a PF/C who could literally kill a team with 18 foot jumpers - plus a G/F who is the best spot up 3 point shooter in the game - plus a C who is an elite post scorer . . . you don't think that Bud could develop an offensive system that could coach the hell out of that? During this entire 7 year playoff run, we have NEVER been a balanced offensive team. We can only play one way . . . shoot a lot of jumpers. The reason why bigger frontlines have beaten us in the playoffs, is because we don't make them work on the defensive end. We're too easy to guard.

No sir. Being mediocre doesn't work for me. I'm just saying that when Jefferson and Millsap were the leaders in Utah, it was NOT their fault that the team couldn't get out of the 36 to 44 win zone. Those guys played their hearts out in Utah. Keep in mind that in Jefferson's 1st year in Utah, the Deron Williams trade happened, along with Sloan quitting on the team. When Sloan quit, the Jazz was 31 - 23. But when you lose your All-Star PG, and a Hall of Fame coach and they never get replaced in the next two years, you get what you get in Utah. So fast forward to Atlanta. People keep talking about "Bud's system". Bud actually changed his system a little, when Horford went down. He and the GM felt that they needed to go to a "5-Out" offensive attack. And the reason for that is because they really didn't have anyone on the team who could work in the paint and get them easy looks in the post. That's when the Hawks got 3-ball happy. I don't think Bud wanted to coach the team like that, but he felt that was the only way we could compete. We lost a lot of games playing that way too. I think people tend to forget that. Being able to score from anywhere on the floor is a good thing. Being able to give it to a guy who can score 60% of the time from 10 feet and in . . and take 60% of his shots from that area . . is a great thing. Let the guards and wings gun away from the outside. Let the big men actually play like big men.

You didn't answer the question. Your statement still focuses on Jefferson, and not why the duo of Jefferson + Horford wouldn't work. The funny thing is that the duo of Jefferson + Millsap DID work in Utah. They were the main reasons why Utah was mediocre, and not terrible. So why wouldnt a Jefferson + Horford duo work, with better fringe pieces around them in Atlanta, than what Millsap and Jefferson had around them in Utah? Plus FAR better coaching in Atlanta.

Still can't ( or won't ) answer the question huh? Why don't you believe that Bud couldn't turn a Jefferson - Horford duo into one of the most potent and balanced frontlines in the league?

You couldn't destroy my arguments on this topic if you had all of HAMAS' rockets and all of Kim Jong Un's nukes. You haven't proven one single thing to prove why Jefferson didn't have a PROFOUND effect on that team. You simply went on one of your wild tangents ( using Carlos Boozer of all people ) to try to poke holes at Jefferson. It's sad really. Especially after YOU YOURSEF admitted that Jefferson was worth the 13.5 million that Charlotte paid for him last year. I've gone line by line in past posts, using stats OTHER than Defensive Rating, to prove how he helped transformed that team on defense. And I've given Clifford a ton of credit for implementing a system that turned him from a pick and roll liability, to a pick and roll strength. But let you tell it, Charlotte would still be a top 10 defense if they had Byron Mullens starting at center. You may can fool some of these high school and college kids on Hawksquawk with your tangents, but you can't fool people who actually WATCH basketball. So I'll ask the question again: Why don't you believe that Bud couldn't turn a Jefferson - Horford duo into one of the most potent and balanced frontlines in the league? It's a reason why you're avoiding answering that question.

Great article. So now, the trick for Bud is to find even more opportunities for Korver to shoot the ball. Despite playing 34 minutes a game, he got up less than 9 shots a game. That's less than 13 points per 36 minutes and less than 18 points per 100 possessions . . . ranking 9th on the team in both categories. Kyle being such a potent outside threat does open up the floor for others. The problem, is that streaky, mediocre shooters are probably taking a few shots that should be going to Kyle. That plays right into the defense's hands. It'll be like a defense forcing a QB to check down to his RB for a 5 yard completion, instead of the QB hitting his star WR for a 20 yard completion. For example, Pero Antić, despite being far less efficient of a shooter than Korver, scored 13.7 points per 36 minutes and 19.3 points per 100 possessions . . ranking 7th on the team. That may sound good, but it isn't. Pero was taking 2 more shots than Korver on a Per 36 minutes basis . . and a full 3 shots more on a per 100 possession basis . . but only getting about a point or two more production. If you give those 2 shots to Korver, his scoring on a Per 36 minute basis jumps up close to 15 ppg. If you give him those 3 shots per 100 possessions, his scoring jumps up to over 21 points per 100 possessions. Korver would then essentially give you close to Lou Williams scoring production, with much more efficiency, and you make the offense better. The big thing is that it would force Korver's defender to focus even more on him, which may take away from some of his offense. And that would give Korver the opportunity to outproduce his opponent. It would be lovely if we could get Kyle's shot attempts up over 10 to 11 shots per game. That way, he can really put up numbers that would strike fear in opponents.

Well . . . we haven't gotten to an Eastern Conference Finals since the franchise has been in Atlanta. 11 of the 15 teams in the East have gone to the Eastern Conference Finals since 1999. So if you want to call the GM, coaches, and ownership idiots since 1999 . . . then so be it. Going with essentially 2 good PFs has gotten us into the mediocre Twilight Zone that we're now in. Why keep repeating the same mode of NBA insanity, when it obviously hasn't worked for us? It's always been my assessment that Horford's true potential is being held back, because he's being forced to play against bigger guys, instead of against guys his size or smaller.

Here have been our centers since 2007 . . . outside of Horford - Zaza Pachulia - Lorenzen Wright ( RIP ) - Solomon Jones - Randolph Morris - Jason Collins - Hilton Armstrong - Etan Thomas - Erick Dampier - Ivan Johnson ( when Horford was hurt ) - Johan Petro - Gustavo Ayón - Elton Brand - Mike Muscala - Pero Antić ( when Horford was hurt ) Look at that list of players. Look at it. I mean, seriously? The fact that Zaza is by far and away the best center on that list, should scare the hell out of everybody . . . and let everyone know just how little of a priority acquiring a decent big man has been for this team. And if this trend continues, we're going to lose Horford in 2 seasons, unless he and Millsap can really become a special frontcourt tandem.

He got exposed by Bud in the playoffs. And he's lucky that we just didn't have the talent to take them out. He'd be out of a job right now. Without Stephenson covering up some of their offensive and defensive deficiencies, I think that team is going to take a big tumble this year . . . with help from Chicago and Cleveland of course.

I agree . . . 45 - 37