thecampster

East Center: Bynum Hibbert Lopez Vikuvic Hawes and a list of "others" bigger than Al. We need a true center. East PFs that out muscle Al = ....... That is why we need a true center.

This was my biggest beef with the off-season. I wanted to see us get a true big. We could have easily traded peanuts for Bogut, made a run at Pek or other option. I really wanted a C, Horf, Smith front line. Now I'll probably have none of the 3 in a few years.

That is a statement I can get behind. The reality of the Millsap contract is it allows 4.5 more million dollars for other contracts. Ferry wasted an opportunity this year to put that money to use. It is much harder to get to the LT than to get away from it and unfortunately we are now over 10 million away form the LT. This limits our incoming trade potential. That said, the Millsap deal really can't be a Josh to Sap comparison. It can be a Josh +player x to Millsap + 4.5million dollar better player x. For a comparison, let's use Ivan Johnson. Josh + Lou would have cost about $18.5 million this year. With Sap getting 9 million, that leaves 9.5 million for another player in the apples to apples comparison. So is Josh + Lou > Sap + a 9.5 million player? Depending on the player, yes, given that player has some offensive game or is a defensive center (like Asik) to replace what we are missing. I can get behind the concept Josh at $14mil a year would hold us back given Ferry uses those resources wisely. Currently, Ferry has only used that money to save the ASG 12 million annually.

I really didn't want to be drawn into another Josh discussion but I wanted to share some advanced stats that show the kind of impact I'm talking about. In the case of Josh Smith we have 2 important stats for team play. eFG% ON and OFF court for the team as compared with Sap. eFG% On 52.6% Off 49.8% (Josh effect = +2.8%) eFG% allowed. On 49.5% Off 49.7% (Josh effect = +.2%) So using this measure of efficiency we see that total FG% of the team differential with the opponent is 3% better with Josh on the floor as opposed to off. Now using Sap. eFG% On 50.0% Off 48.0% (Sap effect = +2.0%) eFG% allowed. On 51.1% Off 48.7% (Sap effect = -2.4%). So using this same measure of efficiency we actually see Utah being .4% better eFG% compared to allowed with Sap off the floor. Now this is not perfect but it does pose some interesting questions. The data over the course of a year would state the Hawks are better with Smith on the floor and Utah was same or slightly worse with Sap on the floor. This a total team metric. Now there are many factors, the least of which is not Coaching style. The effect Coach Bud will have means something. In JTB's case he's using a very flawed eyeball test where his view is skewed (mine as well). I will again be interested to see how the offense functions this year and the defense without Smith. Who will it run through in the half court? Who will be the go to?

Good article on touches, dribbling. http://www.82games.com/dribbles.htm

I love that we got Sap cheap compared to Smith, but unless we get a go to (no Horford is not a go to), Sap does nothing worth commenting about. One of the interesting things about Smith is how often he touched the ball but didn't take a shot. He had a very high touch ratio for someone not considered a star offensively. JTB's point is not only rife with hyperbole but compartmentalizes offense down to shot selection. On paper, Josh is once again only 1 point per 50 shots worse than Sap but having Josh on the floor does many, many more things offensively. Passing being one, players having to cheat to stop the cut, etc. Its a very deep basketball discussion that goes far beyond FG% or based single player stats. I will be interested to see how Millsap's presence helps or hinders sets and I will also be interested to see how the announces spin it.

Just turned in my last assignment for my bachelor degree and had to take a second to publicly sigh and brag a bit. Summa *** Laude baby....3 years of school + knocked out in 2 years and will finish with highest honors.

Bleeding Hawk colors I will root relentlessly for Horford, Teague, Sap and my current favorite Hawk Mike Scott (though Schröder will probably steal that mantle this year). However as rose colored as my glasses are for Smith, I think yours are smoky black. Defense is arguably as important a part of the game as offense and I would argue Smith made more of successful possession impact % on defense as his shot selection on offense.

The article has a 2 game disparity between their 6, 7,. 8 and 9 seeds all finishing below .500. This is no reason for joy in Hawkland.

I did laugh a bit when he made the Celtics comparison. Josh = Larry Legend? I think not. Defensively they may be in rare company but I think Joe was "indulging" a bit when he made that comparison.

No names, just heights. (Muscala and Nogueira not included as they'll likely be overseas). 6'1" 6'1" 6'2" 6'3" 6'4" 6'4" 6'7" 6'8" 6'8" 6'8" 6'9" 6'10" 6'10" 6'11" Gulp...we're small. 7 players 6'7" or smaller. 4 players under 200lbs. Our biggest player is 260lbs.

I think you missed this quote People on this board trashed Smith's IQ but around the league people covet his passing ability. In Atlanta we cringe when he runs past the point guard on the break but many other team's execs talk openly about Smith's ability to run the break. I think we all got so used to seeing the bad we forgot the overwhelming impact he had. Dumars obviously watched. Alluding to the chemistry Smith/Horford had as big men means he did his homework. I'll be very interested to see if Al takes a step forward or back without Smith and the same for Monroe.

A minor reality check. The Hawks started out 20-10 last year but went 24-28 over their next 52 games. This team is not as good as last year's squad on paper. But going by the pace of the last 52 games we were a 37 win squad. Now factor in a number of new players, a new system to learn, and that the east is improved overall. 45 wins is going to be tough to come by.

This is the first signing that I am 100% complete behind. Stevenson's defense took a huge dive because of mobility issues. Carroll fits a huge hole right now.

Again showing the Hawks and the playoffs are in question right now. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/10-man-rotation-starring-dwight-howard-going-houston-210049239.html The entire article...."0" Hawk mentions.

Hey I'm 6' tall...I'm an NBA point guard...woo hoo.

And with their trade today, did Detroit get better or worse?

Then again media reports these days are little more reliable than the National Enquirer

No no no...quite the opposite. I believe we will be significantly worse and just barely miss the playoffs (we are one Horford torn bicep away from 20 wins max). However we have LT flexibility (though no real cap flexibility). In my sick little world, I can see Ferry flipping Teague/Korver/Brand/Millsap/Williams (anyone but Horford and his draft picks) at the deadline for more picks/cap flexibility and build. I see what Ferry is doing as a 5 year plan (obviously in the minority here). I see 30 ish wins this year. If no significant moves are made 30-40 next year. Then the draft picks begin to pay off. Schröder/Noguira start to gain weight, etc and we bump back to 45-50 by year 3 and with luck, a signing, etc we're making a push for the ECF in year 4 or 5. Do I think it will work? I don't know but we greatly resemble the Bulls right now of 6 years ago (pre Rose). Look at this roster from 2007-2008 and see how many similarities you can find. http://www.82games.com/0708/0708CHI.HTM That team won 33 games but then improved to 41 wins the next 2 years before their drafting, moves finally vaulted them to contention.

I had this same thought the other day. Korver deal is very movable to a borderline contender. Brand deal could be bery good for a borderline contender. (always need serviceable defense minded bigs). Or assuming I'm wrong and the team is better or not worse, there is cap room and certain players can be flipped at the deadline for other teams higher priced talent. For example, flipping a few contracts for a Varejeo or Bogut type of a deal.

Now go back a season before without Harris. He's back down to a +2.5. Millsap is very point guard, creator dependent. This will put a great deal of pressure on Teague/Williams/Dennis etc.

http://www.82games.com/1213/12UTA11.HTM To get a link choose Home. Then click the team in the left. Once the season changes, you can choose prior seasons below the team name to get older years. Okay so once you've chosen a team, click the player name. Which brings me to point #2. Going back one season, Smith's points per 100 possessions was +8.2. +6.6 offense on court, giving up 1.6 less on defense. Millsap in 11/12. An amazing +11.6. The difference, Devin Harris as the starter. Harris was very adept that year in playing the point for Utah, especially at the end of the year. This shows how important having a solid creator is to Millsap.

Milsap is +1.5. The offense scored 4.1 more points with him on the floor but gave up 2.6 more points with him on the floor. A net +1.5. Compared to Josh where our offense scored +2.6 more with him on the floor and gave up .6 less with him on the floor for a net of +3.2. The defensive drop concerns me. This isn't because Milsap is a bad defender, Josh just changes many things when he's on the floor defensively that Milsap does not. Also, Milsap isn't able to score without help which is why his efficiency is higher. Our current issue as currently constructed is we have an entire team of people that rely on others to get theirs. This will lead to a very stagnant offense at times. Defensively, we have an entire team of people who play solid team concept but don't "make anything happen". What this means is a big drop in the transition game. So given you accept my premise that the offense will suffer due to a lack of creation and a lack of turnovers/fast breaks and the defense will suffer because of a lack of steals/blocks/turnovers then you must also accept an increase in opponents points per 100 possessions and a drop in team points per 100 possessions.

Just to climb on top of my own post. Last year here were the simple ratings of our top players. Horford +6 Korver +4 Smith +3.6 Harris +3.4 Williams +1.2 Teague +0.4 Johnson -0.9 Pachulia -1.2 Everyone else was in serious minus territory. You lost 3 of the top 7 in 100 possessions +/-. Stevenson -4.4 Tolliver -5.9 Jones - 9.4 Petro -11.2 It could be argued that since most of those players won't be back we are experiencing addition by subtraction but not that Smith/Harris or Pachulia do.

Very simple statistics. http://www.82games.com/1213/12ATL14.HTM On court last year the Offense was 2.6 better with Smith on the court (per 100 possessions). Off court the defense was .6 worse with Smith off the court (per 100 possessions). IE. on average the Hawks were 3 points better in a game where Smith was playing as compared to when he was not. Losing Smith could cost the Hawks 10 games next year.