Chillz vs. Marvin...why not?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Chill will be the odd man out and you can take it to the bank. There is a general glut at forward and Smith can play some 3 in a pinch or with Horford and Shelden together.

This isn't going to be a neat and clean 3 vs. 4 deal. This is a situation where they can't keep everybody and they will hopefully trade him for a 1st round pick or another player who can add value.

We really need help at the two as well. JJ is great but we need a slasher/change of pace two off the bench. We shoot way too many jumpers.

Thats why I would have gone for a Conley at 3 and a Stuckey at 11. I think that would have had a greater impact on the team.

---

I think right now, our 2nd unit looks like this:

PG - Law ( 6-3 )

G - Lue or Salim ( both around 6 foot/6-1 )

F - Chill ( 6-9 )

F - ZaZa ( 6-11 )

F/C - Shelden ( 6-9 )

You're right when you say that we need a 2 . . preferably one that is around 6-5 . . 6-6. But as for the slasher/change of pace guy off the bench, Chill is that guy for us. Always has been. The pace of the game always increases, when Chill checks in. And he gets to the rim much more often than he shoots jumpers.

Zone03 mentioned Acie Law, and I'm a big fan of his and how he plays the game. Acie will be able to get guys like Lue and Salim open shots from mid-range and from 3-point range, because Law likes to drive and kick the ball out to shooters.

At 6-3, Law can also serve as that slasher/change of pace guy, if we wanted to go with a defensive lineup.

PG - A. Johnson ( 6-3 )

G - Law ( 6-3 )

F - Chill ( 6-9 )

F - Solomon ( 6-10 )

F/C - Shelden ( 6-9 )

With this lineup, you have 2 guys who can get to the hole in Law and Chill. Law also has the ability to create his own shot, ala what JJ does. And both Law and AJ can hit the mid-range or 3 point jumper if left open.

I know you're a Conley guy, but Acie will quickly convert you when you see how efficient he is on offense.

If we subtract Chill, and add a slashing 2-guard, we're still going to need someone to play the 3 ( not named Josh Smith ).

[KB21]

I think the thing that people keep forgetting here is that no matter who had that #2 pick, Marvin Williams would have been the 2nd pick over Chris Paul and Deron Williams. All 29 other teams in the NBA would have taken Marvin with the 2nd pick in that draft, and some of them would have taken him 1st over Andrew Bogut.

Look at the teams that were trying to trade into the Hawks pick. Portland was trying to trade up to get Marvin Williams. Charlotte was trying to trade up to get Marvin. New Orleans tried to trade up to get Marvin. Why is passing on Chris Paul considered stupid when the team that took him was trying to trade up to get Marvin Williams?

A lot of people try to revisit history on this, but the fact is that everyone saw Marvin as the potential superstar of his draft. That is not even debatable. Marvin being one of the top 2 players in that draft was a CONSENSUS.

Plus, Marvin made the type of improvement from his first to his second year and throughout his second year to believe that he will continue this improvement and is well on his way to fulfilling his potential.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

All 29 other teams in the NBA would have taken Marvin with the 2nd pick in that draft

---

Ok Mr. Cleo.

Quote:

---

Charlotte was trying to trade up to get Marvin. New Orleans tried to trade up to get Marvin.

---

Exactly, and it was retarded for BK to not trade down, WE DID NOT NEED A SF, especially an unproven project one at that! If Marvin had a Carmelo/Durant type of freshman season than I would agree, but he was a bench player, noone knew what he could do, all they knew was that he was athletic (overrated) and had a nice looking jumper.

Quote:

---

Marvin being one of the top 2 players in that draft was a CONSENSUS.

---

Wrong, Marvin was a top PROJECT, not player.

Quote:

---

Plus, Marvin made the type of improvement from his first to his second year and throughout his second year to believe that he will continue this improvement and is well on his way to fulfilling his potential.

---

Really? So exactly what did he do this season so much better than last? If you actually research it, his per40 numbers didn't improve at all, and some of them regressed.

[KB21]

Your post is yet another case of revisionist history. Thanks for proving my point.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Man... You guys don't remember do you??

This is what happened. We started off with Al/Walker... we played Chillz some at 2, but he started slowly. We then moved Smoove in there and he started getting recognition because of his finishes and shot blocking.

After that... Walker and Harrington went down. So it was Smoove and Chillz playing the 3 and 2 respectively.. And down the stretch they looked good. So good that it made no sense to go out and draft Marvin... because we had 5 guys who could play Sf and no real PG or C.

---

LOL @ this. You make the claim that we didn't need Marvin, because Smoove and Chillz were playing well down the stretch. Do you remember who else was playing well down the stretch?

Tyronn Lue.

Lue was good in March and April of that season as well, even though we only won 3 games after the all-star break. In fact, he was better than both Chill and Smoove. Did that mean that we didn't need a PG as well?

If we'd been lucky enough to get the top pick, Andrew Bogut would probably be our center right now. And when Bogut wouldn't have panned out, I guess people would be crying about not drafting Paul, Deron or Marvin ( if he happened to play well with another team )

Once Bogut was off the board, Marvin was picked because:

1) we needed talent, regardless of position . . hell, we needed bodies period

2) Harrington was going into his last year of his contract, and we probably wasn't giving him a big money extension, so he would most likely be gone by the next summer.

3) Guys like Hughes, Allen, and Redd never really considered ATL a destination, even if they got max money from us.

4) There was no talk of JJ on the radar at the time of the draft.

5) Very few "experts" thought that neither Paul nor Deron would be star caliber PGs. Those same people thought Marvin could be a star in 3 - 4 years.

Whether people believe it was the right pick or not, I've always understood why the Hawks chose Marvin over the PGs.

---

It has been a long time (or at least since Walter was banned) since I have read a post with this much b.s.

1. Lue playing well down the stretch that year is irrelvant because he was a veteran and everyone knew at the time that he was a limited player (i.e., poor defender; shooting guard in point guard body; etc.) that was not starting caliber. On the other hand, two rookies playing well down the stretch is meaningful. And the fact that both of those players were small forward types (along with the team's first round draft pick from the previous year) does suggest that the team needed talent everywhere EXCEPT small forward. This fact has been painfully obvious for years now with respect to center and point guard.

2. JJ was a consideration at draft time, albeit it was in no way a done deal.

3. Alot of people thought Paul and Deron were potential franchise point guards. Go back to Paul's freshman year in college and there was already talk about him being a potential franchise caliber point guard. They were consistently talked about as two of the best point guard prospects to come along in quite some time.

[khaos7]

Quote:

---

I think the thing that people keep forgetting here is that no matter who had that #2 pick, Marvin Williams would have been the 2nd pick over Chris Paul and Deron Williams.

---

And this statment is part of the problem right now. Because of what the pundits think, people feel that Marvin is entitled to a starting position. All because of where he was drafted and who they though he'd develop into being.

The issue with this is the fact that a player on the bench (Childress) may be a better option. But because of the position Marvin was drafted in, the player who is potentially better is forced to sit the bench.

I know Marvin hasn't reached his full potential. But, who's to say that Childress has. In if in his 4th year, Childress outperforms Marvin in his third, why shouldn't Childress start? If it could impact us in the win column. I just feel Woody, at this stage of perpetual rebuilding, owes it to the team to put the best players out of the court. Maybe Chillz should throw a fit like Smoove did last year (just teasing!) to jump ahead of Marvin! lol!

[TexasPete]

What "pundits" don't think Marvin should start? A few retards on this board?

Were talking about Childress here, not some great player that we are giving the shaft. It's Josh "I can't create my own shot" Childress. Marvin has his faults but Childress is hardly a beauty queen.

Childress type of game lends to being a 6th man. If you don't understand that, then who cares? Starting Marvin over Childress is not some type of dramatic case of favoring a higher drafted player. It's really no issue except for a few blowhards on here who have nothing better to do than take shots at a player who just turned 21. Childress is 3 years older and will play for someone else soon enough. When Marvin is Childress age in a few years he will be exceptionally better than Chill and if you don't get that then go watch tennis or golf.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Your post is yet another case of revisionist history. Thanks for proving my point.

---

Riiight, please find one post around the 05 draft where I supported drafting anything other than a PG. I didn't even like Bogut, I'd have drafted a PG over him. This has absolutely nothing to do with hindsight, but have fun making false claims.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Atlas, we don't need a SF now . . correct?

Well, what would you have done if the Hawks got the #2 pick in the draft, instead of the #3 pick?

We'd still have the same needs at PG and C . . but KEVIN DURANT . . a SF . . would be staring at us right in the face.

So the 64 million dollar question is:

Do you pass on KEVIN DURANT, and take Horford or Conley at #2, just beacuse the Hawks don't have a need at SF, but need a C or a PG?

I mean, we basically were faced with that question 2 years ago, when Marvin was a top 3 pick projection. And yes, I know that Marvin in 2005 isn't nearly on the level of a Durant this year, but their draft status was similar. Both could've easily gone #1, but definitely wouldn't fall no lower than #3. And both are projected to be future stars in this league.

So the situation would've been similar this year. Do you pass on a SF who is projected to be a star, in order to take a player at a position of need that might have a little less star power?

I still say the mistake that we made initially with Marvin, is that we didn't immeadiately clear out the player that he was going to replace. As soon as that JJ deal was done, Harrington should've been out the door . . preferably for a PG.

Very seldom do you see a top 2 pick sitting on the bench behind a player that will probably be gone in a year anyway. That pick almost always sees major playing time right away.

That's why the Bulls had to just let PJ Brown walk. Tyus Thomas needs to be on the floor to gain experience, not sit behind some old veteran. Let him see if he can live up to his #2 pick billing. Let him make his mistakes while he is young, then correct them, to see if he can become an impact player by age 22 - 23. That's exactly what the Hawks are doing with Marvin.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

I still say the mistake that we made initially with Marvin, is that we didn't immeadiately clear out the player that he was going to replace. As soon as that JJ deal was done, Harrington should've been out the door . . preferably for a PG.

---

In fact, I would've bet my house that the JJ deal was going to be for Harrington and a 1st round pick. To me, that was the most logical thing for both teams to do.

The Hawks would get JJ, plus be able to insert Marvin into the starting lineup either at PF or SF. ( Remember, the plan was to play JJ at PG, so the squad would've looked like this at the beginning of the 2005 season )

PG - JJ

G - Chill

F - Smoove

F - Marvin

C - ZaZa

Then, when the JJ at PG experiment hits a snag, and Lue eats up most of the minutes at PG, you'd still have either Marvin or Chill as a starter, with the other getting major minutes.

For the Suns, they get a proven player that can play the 3 or the 4. Plus, Harrington only had one more year on his deal, enabling him to just let him go if they wanted to.

[AtLaS]

northcyde you must have missed this quote, I said it earlier in this thread.

Quote:

---

Exactly, and it was retarded for BK to not trade down, WE DID NOT NEED A SF, especially an unproven project one at that!

If Marvin had a Carmelo/Durant type of freshman season than I would agree,

---

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Let me see if I can clean up some of the BS for you then.

1. Lue was a 27 year old PG that was in the final year of his deal. He was pretty much the engine that ran our broke down car in those final 2 months. JJ and Chill's success does not come, if Lue doesn't play the PG position well enough to get them the ball in good spots.

Lue's numbers those final 2 months:

15.3 ppg . . 5.4 apg . . 47% FG . . 37% 3FG . . 91% FT - in March

16.1 ppg . . 6.3 apg . . 52% FG . . 56% 3FG . . 93% FT - in April

OK . . I'm just supposed to just brush that type of production off? If we got that from Law, or even Speedy this year, people would be praising the heavens and talking Eastern Conference Semifinal or Final appearance.

Lue definitely has deficiencies. I've been one of his biggest critics over the years, especially his defense. But with the way he played in those final 2 months of the season, it's not out of the realm of possibility that BK told Lue:

"Go ahead and see what you can get out on the market, but we'd like to have you back here. If no one offers you a deal to your liking, we'll take care of you."

It may have been BK's "plan" to always get either Bogut or Marvin with that #2 pick, because he knew he had Lue in his back pocket if he needed an adequate PG to put out there with the kids. Even Paul's stellar workout wasn't enough to sway BK off of Marvin, because of his "potential" to be a star. And because most NBA stars play either the 2, 3, or 4, BK was willing to take Marvin instead of the solid PGs in Paul or Williams. I don't think that's BS at all.

2. OK, let's assume you're right. BK's plan for JJ was for him to start at the point, and be Chauncey Billups-like. Maybe not from a playmaking standpoint, but definitely from a scoring standpoint.

But we all know that JJ was at the very least 4th on BK's target list, behind Allen, Redd, and Larry Hughes ( oh God, imagine this team with Hughes. We'd definitely be in trouble. )

Espn reported here that Larry Hughes had agreed to sign with Cleveland. This was on July 9th of that year. A full 2 weeks after the draft. Of course, this had been rumored for a few weeks before the actual signing, but Hughes was being courted by a number of teams, including the Hawks.

But if you're right, and JJ was talking to the Hawks before the draft, then that would give even more credence to why BK took Marvin, instead of Paul or Williams.

3. I agree with that. But there's a difference between a franchise caliber PG, and a superstar caliber franchise PG. Both of those guys were definitely good enough for us to take at #2. But the fear in the NBA has always been passing over a young guy that is projected to be a star. We've seen this with Garnett, Kobe, T-Mac, Amare and a host of lesser players that turned out to be pretty good. It's easy to believe that the Hawks didn't want to be the franchise to pass over the next potential star young player.

It's like KB said. It's easy to provide revisionist history on a guy who hasn't developed quite as fast as people would want him to. But at the time he was selected, he was almost a lock to go no less than #2.

A team that had won 13 games the year before, couldn't afford to pass up on the guy that most "experts" thought would be the "star" out of this draft class. Neither Childress nor Smith showed any inkling that they'd rapidly turn into star players anytime soon. And Smoove would've definitely fit into that mold, had Woody not moved him to the 4.

People may not agree with the decision, but I can easily see why the Hawks did what they did when it came to selecting Marvin.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

My bad Atlas. I did miss that.

The premise is still the same though. Marvin was the potential superstar in that draft. Not Bogut, Paul, or Deron . . Marvin.

Can a 13 win team afford to pass on a potential superstar, just because they needed a PG?

[khaos7]

The "pundits" I'm referring to is anybody who feels Marvin is justified in having a starting position because of where he was drafted. Nobody said Childress was the next coming of Jordan. But it's not far fetched to say, at this stage of the game, he's a better option in the starting lineup than Marvin. That doesn't mean anybody is giving up on Marvin, saying he's a bust, or can't play ball. But, in my view, Marvin hasn't proven much to suggest he deserves to start over Childress. If Chillz out plays him in camp, why shouldn't he start? Because he was a second overall pick? Chillz isn't the best at making his on shot, but that doesn't mean Marvin's game is beyond examining. And in my opinion, from games I've watched (all of them) last year and the year before, Chillz was a better performer in areas that are important to the success of a ballclub (field goal percentage, defense) than Marvin.

So, if the same thing holds true this year, why is it crazy to suggest Chillz can't start? This should be "grow up year" for Marvin, Smoove, and Chillz. This is the NBA. The guys Marvin faces don't give a flip how much older/younger he is. If, as Woody proposes, this is the year the Hawks make a move, the best PERFOMING PLAYERS SHOULD PLAY. And if certain players are still fumbling out the gates, no spot should be secure until they earn it. So I don't think it should be out of the question to ask Marvin to EARN his spot. If Childress proves that he's a better option, he should play. That's not being a blowheart. That's straight up fundamental coaching 101. I think everyone wants Marvin to succeed for the betterment of the Hawks.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Marvin is 3 years younger than Childress and their numbers are close. Chill is what he is at this point. He cannot get his shot off and depends on others to get him looks.

Again, go back and look inside the numbers. Does any reasonable person really think Marvin will still have Chill like numbers in 3 years? It's called "upside" and Marvin has a lot more.

Chill will not even be a Hawk next year. He is perfect coming off the bench as a spark.

Even Woody knows better to than to start Chill over Marvin. The people here proposing it are showing their lack of knowledge and understanding of the bigger picture. That's not surprising. But when Marvin is a 17ppg/7rpg player at 22 I don't want to hear any of you jumping on his bandwagon.

---

I agree with TP. I'm no huge fan of Marvin, but to suggest that Childress should start, is absurd to me. No offense, Khaos. I like JC, but he is far better suited to be a bench player. There is nothing wrong with that. I like the way he plays offense. he does attack the rim. Having said that, Childress is nothing special on defense, and with that laughable jumpshot he is a liability as a 2/3. Marvin is also our best "teammate" for the past two years according to 82 games duo stats. That doesn't tell everything but it tells something.

Basketball can be a simple game. Sometimes it just comes down to being able to shoot the damn ball! Watch Chill, then watch Marvin. C'mon.

[Swatguy]

Last year the fated (injuries) starting lineup envisioned by the coaches was:

Zaza

JSmith

Marvin

JJ

Speedy

That lineup lacked balance which necessitated Childress and others to rotate in. We now have an opportunity to have balance and the ability to win the "mismatch game" in the game. Consider, with Zaza and JSmith in the lineup, upfront man defense suffers. Install better man defense with rebounding by Shelden for Zaza. With Marvin and JJ in, we have jumpshots and little penetration (slashing, inside movement). Insert Childress for Marvin. The result is balance:

Shelden - Rebounding,interior defense(man/zone). verses Zaza

JSmith - The overall stat bringer.

Childress - Outside to in (the rim) offense, extreme movement (Marvin is outside to outside).

JJ - Dominates the outside to the paint.

Speedy - Penetrator kick pass point. Dominates defense against points and ball stripper extraordinariness.

The first rotation is Horford, Zaza, Acie and Marvin for Shelden, JSmith, Speedy and JJ (JJ for brief breather). Marvin becomes the outside shooter, Acie with outside and BHandling. Horford and Zaza for interior scoring. Zaza (at PF) has less defensive pressure with Al behind him.

Second rotation, JJ and JSmith in for Chillz and Zaza.

It is an idea.

I

The idea is Childress and JJ on the court (especially with Smith) means less standing and jumpshooting than having Marvin in for Childress.

Childress in for Marvin means less pressure for Marvin to slash as he develops that portion of his game.

Who starts although pales compared to who finishes.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

Last year the fated (injuries) starting lineup The result is balance:

Shelden - Rebounding,interior defense(man/zone). verses Zaza

JSmith - The overall stat bringer.

Childress - Outside to in (the rim) offense, extreme movement (Marvin is outside to outside).

JJ - Dominates the outside to the paint.

Speedy - Penetrator kick pass point. Dominates defense against points and ball stripper extraordinariness.

---

Where is the mid range game if defenses decide to trap the ball out of Joe's hands and pack the middle? This is exactly what most teams did last year which cause the Hawks to struggled in the half court when Lue when down. Lue had a career year because he was the only other midrange shooter on the team! The Hawks scored much better when Marvin's shooting from the perimeter improved later in the year.

[thesheedera]

I don't care who among them starts at this point. They should both get major minutes (and so far they have) until one definitvely proves they're more valuable than the other. I think Childress will improve, but I think Marvin will improve much more.

It's not who starts that matters anyway, it's who's on the court in crunch time.

[khaos7]

I hear what you're saying. All I know, percentage wise, Chillz shots (however ugly they may be) go into the bucket more times than Marvins. Or half the league for that matter. He's a high percentage shooter. A defensely? He's no Tayshun Prince, but he held people down better than Marvin. Plus, he's more of a playmaker in my eyes, with the ability to play a psuedo point forward. Saying all of that, IF HE OUTPERFORMS MARVIN IN CAMP, why shouldn't he start? With a team that has been a bad as the Hawks have been, only a hand few should have a spot locked up. I just don't believe Marvin has earned that right yet. Hell, if Chillz does out play him, that may make Marvin a better player. I'm not one of these guys who's saying "Marvin is a bust" or "Marvin sucks." I just say, let him earn his keep. I don't believe he has. I'm also saying that I'm not convinced, at this stage, he's better than Childress. That's not to say he won't be (he has the potential).

Bottom line, if we want to win, the best players should be on the floor. Me personally, I don't know if Marvin is there yet. I would LOVE to be wrong.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

I hear what you're saying. All I know, percentage wise, Chillz shots (however ugly they may be) go into the bucket more times than Marvins. Or half the league for that matter. He's a high percentage shooter. A defensely? He's no Tayshun Prince, but he held people down better than Marvin. Plus, he's more of a playmaker in my eyes, with the ability to play a psuedo point forward. Saying all of that, IF HE OUTPERFORMS MARVIN IN CAMP, why shouldn't he start? With a team that has been a bad as the Hawks have been, only a hand few should have a spot locked up. I just don't believe Marvin has earned that right yet. Hell, if Chillz does out play him, that may make Marvin a better player. I'm not one of these guys who's saying "Marvin is a bust" or "Marvin sucks." I just say, let him earn his keep. I don't believe he has. I'm also saying that I'm not convinced, at this stage, he's better than Childress. That's not to say he won't be (he has the potential).

Bottom line, if we want to win, the best players should be on the floor. Me personally, I don't know if Marvin is there yet. I would LOVE to be wrong.

---

You are missing the point! Marvin fits better in BK offense. He has the midrange game Childress will never have!