Smith/Horford situation..

gsuteke · May 13, 2008

Quote:

My comment to the people questioning David Anderson's "experience" would be this, when was the last time the US dominated International Basketball play?

The rest of the World may not have caught up with US players on SportsCenter but they've definately caught up with them in the W/L column.

It is about winning in the end, is it not?

Seriously Andersen is a proven player. he isn't going to be our "two way dominate center" as your buddy likes to say but i think he will be a big help, especially considering how bad our offense is in the half court.

Exactly. He's a piece. A piece the Hawks sorely lack right now. Even if he isn't hitting 3s he can still make defenses pay if he's smart enough to find an open spot on the other side of a Joe Johnson double team.

Considering the situation he's walking into I find the fact he was drafted 6 years ago a positive as opposed to a knock on the guy.

Diesel · May 13, 2008

Sorry Atlas...

But you can't project only the negative into the future.

You say we will not have Bibby going into the future... Well, who will we have? Your crystal ball is acting as if the new GM will just sit idly by and do nothing but watch players walk without trying to address needs. He may end up trading for Jason Terry.. You never know. Or he may renounce Bibby and resign him at a lower price? You just don't know.

Moreover, you have prematurely judged Andersen too. Right now, nobody knows what this guy can do but we do know that he has Range in international play.

Diesel · May 13, 2008

The bottomline Northcyde is that you need to quantify how much Smith makes up for our defense and compare his impact with Marvin's impact.

You say everything has to be changed to accomodate Smith? Oh No my brother. Smith was here before Marvin. By the end of his rookie campaign, it seemed like Smith had earned the Sf Spot. However, one GM who has since quit made the mistake of drafting Marvin anyway. So it's not Smith who has to be accomodated.... It's Marvin.

Smith has a bigger impact on the games.

Smith has higher potential.

Smith seems to actually work at his craft and you can see the improvement in his play year by year.

If there's a choice to be made, it's not about Smith and Horf... Horf is the PF.

It's about Smith and Williams. And in this case, Williams has earned his spot on the bench or in a trade.

thefloydian · May 13, 2008

Quote:

You be specific. Why does anyone owe you some kind of scouting report on Andersen?

I don't know what to expect from him. I don't know anything about him aside from his Euro stats. I think they should try him out as a bench player and see what he can do. If he can shoot and play even passable defense, then I think he should get at least around 20 minutes a game.

See, now that wasn't hard to do. I'm just trying to get a feel of what the board expects of him. So if he's good enough, you expect him to at least be our 7th man off the bench, which should put him ahead of Zaza on the depth chart.

Quote:

Is our starting 5 really so great that he shouldn't be able to break in if he's good enough? I don't get why you think there aren't shots to go around. There's only one person on the entire team who can actually shoot day in and day out.

Well, if JJ and Bibby are our backcourt, they're going to take about 25 - 30 shots a game between them next year. (( JJ around 16 - 20 FGA, Bibby around 8 - 11 ))

Smoove took 14 shots a game last year. (( take away his 3's, and he shoots 48% FG last year ))

Marvin 11.5 ( if he took 14 shots like Smith did, he averages 18 ppg. ))

Horford took under 10. (( He'll need 10 - 14 shots this year, in order to be that legit threat offensively.

So yeah, I think shots are going to be a real big issue, because the 2 guys that need to shoot less, Bibby and Smoove, won't be happy givng up some of their shots.

I see Andersen, if he's able to shoot 50%, taking no more than 5 - 6 shots a game. So if his typical game is 3 - 6 FG, and one of those FGs is 3-pointer or a few FTs, I could see him averaging 8 ppg ( at the max ).

Quote:

It would not hurt my feelings at all to see Marvin moved to the bench and a starting lineup of Bibby/Acie, Joe, Smith, Horford and Andersen. Not that I'm expecting him to be a starter, but if he could consistently hit shots and play defense, I don't think Marvin exactly earns his keep as a starter on a regular basis.

Marvin shot 46% FG last year, and was our 2nd best perimeter shooter, even without the 3s. And speaking of shots being taken away, Bibby's presence got Marvin more open looks, but fewer shots per game.

People are all over Marvin, even though he had 4 months this yar in which he shot over 46% FG this year, and consistently 80% from the line. He had a horrible February, but everything else was solid, from a shooting standpoint. Yet, people are all over him because he's not playing at a star level. He was a huge reason why we got off to the start that we did last year. He was EASILY our most consistent player during November and December.

Playing Smoove at SF reduces him to a Kirilenko-like role player. I'm sure that won't set well with him, just like it didn't for AK 2 years ago.

As for where Andersen will get minutes . . .

PG: Bibby 32 / Acie 16

G: JJ 40 / Chill 8

SF: Marvin 32 / Chill 16

PF: Smoove 36 / Horford 12

C: Horford 24 / Andersen 12 / Zaza 12

Now if Andersen is significantly better than Zaza, he may phaze Zaza completely out of the rotation, and get his 20 mpg. If he's anything less than instant offense though, he'll have a hard time getting more than 10 minutes a game.

I don't get why you think everyone should keep their same # of shots per game when most of them can't shoot.

Smith should NEVER take an outside shot. That eliminates about 4-5 right there. Bibby can't shoot worth a crap at least half the time, so he could donate some shots as well. Chillz could also stop taking outside shots when Andersen is in the game. Just because they average a set # of shots now doesn't mean they have to continue taking them.

thefloydian · May 13, 2008

I also don't understand why putting Smith at the 3 would make him any less effective. He could still play around the basket on offense, while Andersen mostly hangs out on the perimeter to shoot jump shots.

If anything, it would make him more efficient by getting rid of some of his awful jumpers.

AHF · May 13, 2008

Quote:

I also don't understand why putting Smith at the 3 would make him any less effective. He could still play around the basket on offense, while Andersen mostly hangs out on the perimeter to shoot jump shots.

If anything, it would make him more efficient by getting rid of some of his awful jumpers.

I think the thought is that defensively he struggles more with faster perimeter players than with PFs and that offensively he would spend more time on the perimeter - although you correctly point out that this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

TheNorthCydeRises · May 13, 2008

Quote:

The bottomline Northcyde is that you need to quantify how much Smith makes up for our defense and compare his impact with Marvin's impact.

Oh there is no doubt that Smith has a greater impact on defense than Marvin. The problem though, is that if you put him at SF, you either force the Hawks to constantly play zone ( which you can't do all the time in this league ), or you expose him to guard players much quicker than he is.

Like you said, Smoove is a rover. Not a great "on the ball" defender like AK47. That's the reason why although he's a tremendous shot blocker, he didn't make any of those all-NBA defensive squads. At PF, he does get punked down low sometimes, but he creates much more havoc defensively with even the threat of a shot block.

Quote:

You say everything has to be changed to accomodate Smith? Oh No my brother. Smith was here before Marvin. By the end of his rookie campaign, it seemed like Smith had earned the Sf Spot. However, one GM who has since quit made the mistake of drafting Marvin anyway. So it's not Smith who has to be accomodated.... It's Marvin.

No it isn't. Marvin is a SF, almost the prototype of a SF. Whether Smoove is here or not, Marvin does not have to be moved around in order to maxmize his potential. To maximize Smoove's potential, he HAS to play the 4. Horford's toughness will enable him to be a success, whether he plays the 4 or the 5.

I've compared Smoove to Diaw ( NOT TALENT WISE ), but how they can be most effective for a team. In Diaw's case, he was best when he played either the 4 or the 5 in Phoenix's system, especially when Amare was out. Why? Because he could take those slower guys off te dribble with ease, and get to the rim. He looked like a rising star at times.

The minute Amare came back, and Phoenix tried to use him more at the 3, was the time when all of the grumblings about Diaw started to resuface. Because he wasn't playing "point" center anymore, he started to revert back to tht passive-aggressive player that he was here.

Add Shaq to the mix, and the situation got worse for Diaw as a player within that system because he played SF much more, making him even more passive-aggressive to the point where D'Antoni stopped using him as much.

When WOODY decided to go with Smith as his PF, it was the best thing that ever happened to Smith's career, because it gave him an opportunity to be a legit scoring threat, along with the defense he already brought to the table.

Woody, and the 8 games he sat out because of the hernia injury, helped him see that if he just started to go to the rim, that he could be a better offensive player. He still loves the jumpshot, but he also knows he has to get to the rim as well.

Put him back at SF, and you run a big risk of taking that scoring element right out of his game, because he'll settle for the jumper even more.

Quote:

Smith has a bigger impact on the games.

Smith has higher potential.

Smith seems to actually work at his craft and you can see the improvement in his play year by year.

No one will dispute that. But it's the Smith that plays the 4, not the 3, that has him on the verge of becoming a star. Marvin at the 3 hs ALWAYS been better than Smith at the 3.

Quote:

If there's a choice to be made, it's not about Smith and Horf... Horf is the PF.

It's about Smith and Williams. And in this case, Williams has earned his spot on the bench or in a trade.

It only comes down to Smith and Marvin ONLY if we get a bonafide legit center here that obviously helps us to be a much better team . . and . . if Horford needs to be alongside that center at PF.

But until we get that legit center ( aka - a center who can play the position better than Horford ), you keep Horford at the 5, and Smoove at the 4 until further notice, because it presents the bst chance we have at winning games.

thefloydian · May 13, 2008

Quote:

I also don't understand why putting Smith at the 3 would make him any less effective. He could still play around the basket on offense, while Andersen mostly hangs out on the perimeter to shoot jump shots.

If anything, it would make him more efficient by getting rid of some of his awful jumpers.

I think the thought is that defensively he struggles more with faster perimeter players than with PFs and that offensively he would spend more time on the perimeter - although you correctly point out that this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

That might be the case defensively, but I think Smith is athletic enough to guard 3s just as well as he would guard big 4s.

I'm not expert on his on-the-ball defense though.

TheNorthCydeRises · May 13, 2008

Quote:

I also don't understand why putting Smith at the 3 would make him any less effective. He could still play around the basket on offense, while Andersen mostly hangs out on the perimeter to shoot jump shots.

If anything, it would make him more efficient by getting rid of some of his awful jumpers.

I think the thought is that defensively he struggles more with faster perimeter players than with PFs and that offensively he would spend more time on the perimeter - although you correctly point out that this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

Travis Outlaw.

Dsinner · May 13, 2008

Quote:

Well if Woody is coming back you can expect that everyone's shot numbers and percentages will be lower than we would like. However, having a legit shooter at the C position will allow for EVERYONE's %'s to go up. He will spread the floor and allow JJ to not get doubled as often while also allowing Horford and Smoove to operate/drive around the basket. The opposing teams C will constantly be near the top of the key.

Fawk your numbers, I'm more interested in actual offensive production. Save that crap for your fantasy league.

Why do people get mad because I'm not drinking this Andersen kool aid? I'm just trying to point out legitimat questions.

And the opposing team's center isn't following Andersen out to the perimeter. A team will switch, so that their main rebounder or shot blocker can stay close to the rim. That's exactly what we do with Horford and Smoove. If Andersen is out by the 3 point line, he'll end up with a SF on him most of the time. That will give Andersen the ability to shoot over the guy.

If we were playing the Spurs, Duncan isn't following Andersen out behind the line. He'd either be on Horford in the first place, or switch to him.

Hopefully, he'll knock the shot down if a smaller man is on him. If Andersen can shoot as well as Marvin from midrange, that will be good.

Again WTF are you talking about? Don't quote my post and say I'm getting mad because you're not drinking the Anderson kool-aide. I simply made the point that he's not a stiff like a couple of the other stiffs he was compared to and you assumed I was bottling up and selling said kool-aide. I thought I made my point very clear even a 2nd time.

Dsinner · May 13, 2008

Quote:

Now I see why you have no faith in the guy. You hate Duke and Anderson is doing well in a league a Duke player owned.

LOL @ you thinking it's better to skip NCAA to avoid getting your game "defined" by Duke.

LOL . . I'm U of Tennessee alumni. I hate Florida and Memphis, not Duke.

Quote:

Tell that to Boozer, Battier, Brand, Deng, Duhon, Dunleavy, Ferry, Hill etc. etc. All, with the exception of Deng, stayed a while and have (are having) decent NBA careeres.

Don't forget about all the average players that became well known for playing at Duke.. Laettner, Redick, Williams (Jay and Sheldon), Hurley etc. etc.

I'm not going to get into a Duke battle with you, so I'll just say this. Almost every guy that comes out of Duke, is heraled as being a potential star or superstar, based of what kind of player they were in college.

Coach K's system is about the success of the team, not necessarily about showcasing the talent and skill of individual players.

Duke doesn't scout talent the same way other major Bball schools do. They don't go for the 1st tier individual talent because they know they'll be gone in a year. They try to get talent that's good enough to win but who also won't be a top 3 draft pick. In other words the talent that goes through Duke isn't necessarily supposed to have great NBA careers. They're supposed to have long great Duke careers. Unfortunatly most of us Duke fans are now growing wary of this type of scouting.

You made it sound like Duke is in fact hurting their NBA career and I say that's rediculous.

AHF · May 13, 2008

Quote:

Duke doesn't scout talent the same way other major Bball schools do. They don't go for the 1st tier individual talent because they know they'll be gone in a year.

That is why they have more McDonalds All-Americans than any other school in the nation. They can take those elite talents and turn them into role players better than anyone in the country.

AHF · May 13, 2008

Quote:

I also don't understand why putting Smith at the 3 would make him any less effective. He could still play around the basket on offense, while Andersen mostly hangs out on the perimeter to shoot jump shots.

If anything, it would make him more efficient by getting rid of some of his awful jumpers.

I think the thought is that defensively he struggles more with faster perimeter players than with PFs and that offensively he would spend more time on the perimeter - although you correctly point out that this wouldn't necessarily be the case.

Travis Outlaw.

Are you arguing that Smith had trouble defending the quicker Outlaw or that Smith should be used offensively like Outlaw....??

TheNorthCydeRises · May 13, 2008

Quote:

Are you arguing that Smith had trouble defending the quicker Outlaw or that Smith should be used offensively like Outlaw....??

He can't be used like Outlaw offensively, because he doesn't have Outlaw's perimeter or ball skills.

I was referring to when Smoove could do nothing to contain Outlaw during that Portland game in ATL. I don't put the blame on him though. That has to go all on Woody, because that was a bad matchup for Smoove in the first place. Nobody could've contained Outlaw that day though.

But it illustrates that if Smoove can't even contain a marginal SF like Outlaw, he'd have major trouble against the top tier SFs. But let Outlaw go to the hole, with Smith lurking off of his man, and he may find that shot blocked out of bounds.

Lascar78 · May 13, 2008

Quote:

That might be the case defensively, but I think Smith is athletic enough to guard 3s just as well as he would guard big 4s.

I'm not expert on his on-the-ball defense though.

He gets burned by SFs big time. Think Josh Childress trying to guard a quick PG. Not to mention that defensively, it puts him on the perimeter where he is not able to provide his huge impact as a help defender. You really need him at the 4. Which is why Smith-Horford is such an awkward pairing with Horford clearly being a 4 playing out of position.

thefloydian · May 14, 2008

Quote:

That might be the case defensively, but I think Smith is athletic enough to guard 3s just as well as he would guard big 4s.

I'm not expert on his on-the-ball defense though.

He gets burned by SFs big time. Think Josh Childress trying to guard a quick PG. Not to mention that defensively, it puts him on the perimeter where he is not able to provide his huge impact as a help defender. You really need him at the 4. Which is why Smith-Horford is such an awkward pairing with Horford clearly being a 4 playing out of position.

I'm not saying you're not right, but I would like to see what would happen with a Smith/Horford/Andersen front court. I think it would definitely help offensively.

Diesel · May 14, 2008