Jj Turned The Hawks Season Around

[Boomer]

Hmmm...

Kobe

Arenas(SG?)

Iverson

T-Mac

Kevin Martin

Dwayne Wade

Baron Davis(SG?)

Michael Redd

Yeah, I'd put him in the top 5.

[crimedog]

Hmmm...

Kobe

Arenas(SG?)

Iverson

T-Mac

Kevin Martin

Dwayne Wade

Baron Davis(SG?)

Michael Redd

Yeah, I'd put him in the top 5.

Kobe and Wade are the top 2 easily. TMac is probably 3, then AI... I think JJ at his best is much better than Roy but for last season at least, Roy was more consistent. I take Joe over Redd, KMart, Richardson pretty easy. Vince Carter is good too, its so easy to dislike VC because he doesn't love the game but then you look back and realize that even a half-a** Vince Carter with bad knees can do some pretty incredible things (like light the Hawks up for 39-10-8, I was in Jersey for that one, as if being in Jersey wasn't bad enough I had to see VC go off).

So yeah, I'd put him in the 5-7 range for shooting guards but I see him passing AI and TMac before he gets passed by a Roy, Marting, or Ellis.

[Boomer]

I had Roy on there and took him off. I guess I didn't want to acknowledge how good he is after only a couple seasons. You're spot on about VC.

[jhay610]

No way I take AI over JJ right now. In his prime, AI was better but give me Joe all day as of 2008. AI is over his hill.

[Traceman]

Kobe and Wade are the top 2 easily. TMac is probably 3, then AI... I think JJ at his best is much better than Roy but for last season at least, Roy was more consistent. I take Joe over Redd, KMart, Richardson pretty easy. Vince Carter is good too, its so easy to dislike VC because he doesn't love the game but then you look back and realize that even a half-a** Vince Carter with bad knees can do some pretty incredible things (like light the Hawks up for 39-10-8, I was in Jersey for that one, as if being in Jersey wasn't bad enough I had to see VC go off).

So yeah, I'd put him in the 5-7 range for shooting guards but I see him passing AI and TMac before he gets passed by a Roy, Marting, or Ellis.

I'd take JJ over AI at this point. AI is a better scorer but JJ is FAR better on the other end and you don't have to compensate for his lack of size. If you put JJ in DEN in place of Iverson, I think they would have had a MUCH better showing versus LAL than they did. Conversely, you put AI here in place of JJ, I think BOS would have swept us.

Personally, I'd put JJ tied for 4th behind Kobe, D Wade and T Mac. Vince Carter is more talented and better WHEN MOTIVATED ( I agree 100% with your assessment) but he only plays with the effort that he should play with like every 3rd game.

[EazyRoc]

I definitely think Joe is a top 5 SG in the league. Iverson is great, but he doesn't make his team better like he used too. He also doesn't have a Carmelo Anthony to make things easier. If we were going by just skillset alone (excluding athleticism) I would say Joe is second behind Kobe.

[Swish]

I definitely think Joe is a top 5 SG in the league. Iverson is great, but he doesn't make his team better like he used too. He also doesn't have a Carmelo Anthony to make things easier. If we were going by just skillset alone (excluding athleticism) I would say Joe is second behind Kobe.

I would say third behind Tracy McGrady right now. We really do have a gem. Hard to believe he was the 4th or 5th option in PHX.

[crimedog]

Hard to believe he was the 4th or 5th option in PHX.

That Suns team had a retardedly good offense. The last team whose offense was statistically better was the 96' Bulls.

[Swish]

Yeah.

Nash

JJ

Q-Rich

Marion

Stoudemire

Barbosa

?? Crazy!

[crimedog]

Yeah.

Nash

JJ

Q-Rich

Marion

Stoudemire

Barbosa

?? Crazy!

If I recall correctly, the sixth man was Jimmy Jackson because Barbosa sucked still.

Anyway, topic at hand. This season I'd still probably take AI over Joe, Joe is certainly a better defender of shooting guards but we almost always play him on the weaker offensive player so he doesn't tire. AI is probably a better help defender, he gambles waaaaaay too much but he does create turnovers. On offense, AI is still better than Joe - he was actually pretty unbelievable on offense.

Now, I sure as hell wouldn't trade Joe for Iverson but that is another question altogether.

[Swish]

Are you stoned man? AI over JJ? lol

[crimedog]

Are you stoned man? AI over JJ? lol

Going forward, no. This season, yes.

AI scored a lot more and did so more efficiently. He got over a full assist more and only a quarter of a TO more.

He isn't as much of a defender but since coming to Atlanta, we haven't played Joe as a stopper because he spends so much energy on offense... AI's team was better defensively anyway so he wasn't that much of a liability.

What about saying that makes me stoned?

[EazyRoc]

Everybody has a right to their opinion. I think Joe made his team better than A.I. did for his team. A.I. is definitely the better scorer, but he hasn't had to deal with the type of attention Joe is getting in Atlanta. Atleast not since he's came to Denver..

[Swish]

He scored five more points in two more minutes played per game than JJ. He averaged two less boards than Joe, same on steals, a few more dimes. He is six years older. There is a six million dollar salary difference.

Denver was one of if not the worst defensive team in the NBA. There is no way you can say they were better defensively as a team. They allowed 107 ppg. We allowed 100. The two are close in PER but Iverson wins because he plays two more minpergame than JJ.

You want to rethink your argument?

[crimedog]

"He scored five more points in two more minutes played per game than JJ. He averaged two less boards than Joe, same on steals, a few more dimes. He is six years older. There is a six million dollar salary difference. "

Better player this year - more points, higher efficiency, more minutes

"Denver was one of if not the worst defensive team in the NBA. There is no way you can say they were better defensively as a team. They allowed 107 ppg. We allowed 100. The two are close in PER but Iverson wins because he plays two more minpergame than JJ. "

Close in PER - Iverson (20.92) v. Johnson (17.34), not close at all

Denver worse defensively - Denver was the fastest paced team in the NBA, their games averaged 99.7 total possessions per game. We were one of the slower teams, we averaged 91.1 total possessions per game. When the game is that much faster, the score is going to be higher. Denver was 14 in opponent FG%, we were 21. If you evened out possessions to 100 per game, Denver allowed 106.3 points and we allowed 108.9 points.

"You want to rethink your argument?"

What part of my argument should I rethink? You were dead wrong on every single count.

[EazyRoc]

While there's no argument that A.I. had better stats, Denver was/is pretty bad defensively.

[crimedog]

While there's no argument that A.I. had better stats, Denver was/is pretty bad defensively.

Denver isn't a great team, 50 wins is good but not great. The thing is, they are massively overated on offense and underated on defense. Points against isn't a great way to determine who was better defensively, Denver ran more than anyone including GSW and PHX and definitely us. They also happened to do a better job at keeping opposing teams from shooting good percentages and they were better at keeping opposing teams off the glass. Yes more points were scored, but if you have more possessions, you will have more points. There is absolutely no arguing that Denver had fewer points per possession than Altanta. It is a fact that you have to deal with if you are going to claim that Atlanta is better defensively.

Conversely, Denver scored the second most points in the league last season but they weren't as good an offensive team as PHX, Utah, LAL, Orlando, NOH, and about 5 others. Why? The scored a lot because they ran but they weren't scoring as many points per possession because they don't take as many 3s per possession and their frontcourt players don't score at a high efficiency (compare to guys like Bynum, Shaq, Chandler, etc. who shoot around 60%, Camby shoots well below 50%).

Edited July 30, 2008 by crimedog

[EazyRoc]

I didn't reach that assessment by reading over stats. I've watched them here and there. They aren't that good defensively.

[crimedog]

I didn't reach that assessment by reading over stats. I've watched them here and there. They aren't that good defensively.

Thats fine and good, I've watched them too and I don't think they are very good defensively either. Iverson and Camby gamble too much and Melo' doesn't give a crap. They are still better than the Hawks and when facts go against you, as they do in this case, you have to give a real counterpoint other than "I disagree." ... well you don't have to, but you lose credibility if you don't.

Edited July 30, 2008 by crimedog

[Admin]

Thats fine and good, I've watched them too and I don't think they are very good defensively either. Iverson and Camby gamble too much and Melo' doesn't give a crap. They are still better than the Hawks and when facts go against you, as they do in this case, you have to give a real counterpoint other than "I disagree." ... well you don't have to, but you lose credibility if you don't.

The stat the best defines which team is best offensively or defensively is offensive and defensive efficiency and Denver is 6 spots better offensively and 9 spots better defensively than we are. I think that the reason people perceive them to be so bad defensively is the way that they ended the regular season and in the playoffs when the Lakers just ran through them. Of course you can't judge either JJ or AI based on their teams performances, but I'd say AI is equal to Joe defensively, although Joe has certainly closed the gap from when AI was one of the best in the league. The only problem I have with AI is that he kills your offense because he dribbles too much and doesn't move without the ball nearly enough. He gambles a bit too much, but he does make a lot of big steals.