Would you trade Al Horford?

[EazyRoc]

Like I said, I like the trade. After meditating on it, I probably would do it. I still think Al Horford would be the better compliment to Duncan, but either way our team is better. Either way, I would do it. I was being a homer by denying the trade in my first post.

[Hatertots]

... not sure what Joe Johnson you were watching in Phoenix but he played nothing like the one in Altanta and the numbers show that. In PHX he was primarily an off the ball player who rarely played in isolation. He was the fourth option and it showed in his 3pt%, low rate of assists, and low rate of FTs.

He came to Atlanta and played a lot of point guard in his first season, got to be more of a scorer in his second season while we let other people bring the ball up and initiate to offense, then last season he went back to a de facto pg until we brought in Bibby and Joe got to play to his strengths again.

I find it odd that you refute the argument that Johnson would play better with a point guard and use as your example his play with a different team and coach entirely when you have empirical evidence from his play with and without a pg during the exact same season with the exact same surrounding players. Please explain why plugging Bibby in and keeping the rest of the context the same is less valid to you than going back in time to when Joe was a 22/23 year old fourth option in a different system.

Also the "one season spike" in his 3pt% was the only season he played with Nash, that was also borne out in his time playing next to Bibby. One of Joe's biggest strengths is his jumpshot but its hard to be accurate when you always have a hand in your face. For someone who seems to value shooting efficiency you seem awfully keen to ignore the fact that Joe, next to a good pg (be it Nash or Bibby) has shown the ability to knock down the trey at a rate that most SGs would kill for.

Crimedog-

The only thing I'm keen to do is discuss basketball. You claimed in an earlier post that if JJ didn't have ball handling responsibilities or didn't have to face double teams, he would be 'fresh' and be more productive like Manu Ginobili, who has a point guard in Parker and a low post threat who faces double teams in Duncan. Presumably, your point is that acquiring Duncan would make Joe a more efficient player. I pointed out a situation in which Joe played with an MVP point guard and a huge offensive threat in Amare, yet Joe offered nowhere near the scoring efficiency that Manu does.

For his career, Joe has produced a shade over one point per shot attempt (about 1.18 in seasons where he's gotten 35+ minutes), regardless of the talent level or skill set of his teammates. Therefore, I'm skeptical of any claim that Joe's efficiency can be raised by adding Duncan. According to that argument, we should have expected a huge decrease in Joe's scoring efficiency when he left Phoenix for Atlanta, but that never happened.

[Diesel]

Crimedog-

The only thing I'm keen to do is discuss basketball. You claimed in an earlier post that if JJ didn't have ball handling responsibilities or didn't have to face double teams, he would be 'fresh' and be more productive like Manu Ginobili, who has a point guard in Parker and a low post threat who faces double teams in Duncan. Presumably, your point is that acquiring Duncan would make Joe a more efficient player. I pointed out a situation in which Joe played with an MVP point guard and a huge offensive threat in Amare, yet Joe offered nowhere near the scoring efficiency that Manu does.

For his career, Joe has produced a shade over one point per shot attempt (about 1.18 in seasons where he's gotten 35+ minutes), regardless of the talent level or skill set of his teammates. Therefore, I'm skeptical of any claim that Joe's efficiency can be raised by adding Duncan. According to that argument, we should have expected a huge decrease in Joe's scoring efficiency when he left Phoenix for Atlanta, but that never happened.

I've stayed out thus far, but let me get in here.

Ginobili is nowhere close to JJ's level. Mainly because Ginobili cannot lead a team. You're compared stats of a guy who faces double teams, triple teams and delivers to a guy that basks in the shade of Tim Duncan the best PF this side of Karl Malone and offensively the best PF probably in the history of basketball. IN Phoenix, Amare wasn't the show. Amare was a cog in the wheel of a system created to run and gun. However, in San Antonio, the reason that those guys do so well is because the offense runs through Duncan. He is the big show. He's what defenses game plan for. The same is true of JJ. When teams talk about playing Atlanta, their first thought is "How are we going to stop Joe Johnson.".

Has anybody ever uttered "if we're going to beat San Anton, we have to stop Ginobilli?" and leave Tim Duncan out of the conversation???

Hell No.

You're comparing Apples to Oranges.

[crimedog]

Crimedog-

The only thing I'm keen to do is discuss basketball. You claimed in an earlier post that if JJ didn't have ball handling responsibilities or didn't have to face double teams, he would be 'fresh' and be more productive like Manu Ginobili, who has a point guard in Parker and a low post threat who faces double teams in Duncan. Presumably, your point is that acquiring Duncan would make Joe a more efficient player. I pointed out a situation in which Joe played with an MVP point guard and a huge offensive threat in Amare, yet Joe offered nowhere near the scoring efficiency that Manu does.

For his career, Joe has produced a shade over one point per shot attempt (about 1.18 in seasons where he's gotten 35+ minutes), regardless of the talent level or skill set of his teammates. Therefore, I'm skeptical of any claim that Joe's efficiency can be raised by adding Duncan. According to that argument, we should have expected a huge decrease in Joe's scoring efficiency when he left Phoenix for Atlanta, but that never happened.

His scoring efficiency was noticably lower in his first and third seasons in ATL than his final season in PHX and his second season in ATL. Both of those seasons he was treated more as a scorer than a point guard.

I think you don't understand what I was saying. Why would you compare Joe's production in completely different contexts when you can compare his production in the same context with pre and post Bibby and see that Johnson is much more effective when he isn't constantly handling the ball? It takes out all the extenuating things like he was still so young in Phoenix or more importantly and he was the fourth offensive option (allowed him to shoot 47% from 3 but didn't have as high a usage). Moreover, the Bibby comparison allows for examination of Joe with his current skillset, not the one he had 4 years ago as a fairly young player.

I don't think Joe is ever going to draw fouls at the same rate as Gino but he can certainly hit from 3 well enough if he's given the space. If we can get the same shooting effiency from 06-07 when we had him in more of a scoring role, I'd be content saying that he was at least as effective a player as Ginobili. All emprical evidence shows that his scoring efficiency his higher when he isn't playing point guard as much.

[Swish]

Diesel hit the nail on the head there...Manu is a sixth man. Comparing him to JJ, as stated, is foolish.

Though, Diesel, would you say that it is folly to NOT game plan for Manu? He can go off. Obviously Tim is a major part of the equation but Ginobili is right behind him as far as just stopping SA, don't you think?

Relating to hatertots and crimedog, I believe Joe's efficiency would nearly have to go up just plainly because if you toss to Duncan in the post and kick out, Joe is going to hit that shot; or someone else is, because those are two guys right there that command a double team and occasionally triple.

BTW, crimedog, relating to your last paragraph, don't you think that Joe has shown he can hit from downtown better than Manu? His shot is so smooth he could probably win the 3pt competition if he wanted to.

[crimedog]

Diesel hit the nail on the head there...Manu is a sixth man. Comparing him to JJ, as stated, is foolish.

Though, Diesel, would you say that it is folly to NOT game plan for Manu? He can go off. Obviously Tim is a major part of the equation but Ginobili is right behind him as far as just stopping SA, don't you think?

Relating to hatertots and crimedog, I believe Joe's efficiency would nearly have to go up just plainly because if you toss to Duncan in the post and kick out, Joe is going to hit that shot; or someone else is, because those are two guys right there that command a double team and occasionally triple.

BTW, crimedog, relating to your last paragraph, don't you think that Joe has shown he can hit from downtown better than Manu? His shot is so smooth he could probably win the 3pt competition if he wanted to.

Yeah, I realized that was sort of unclear. Joe can, when given space, hit the 3 like very few other shooters in the game.

I sort of disagree with your assessment though. Manu is a bench player but not because he isn't talented enough to start, because he is one of those rare players willing to do anything to help his team.

He isn't the pure shooter Joe is but he has a good jumper that he is confident taking with a hand in his face and he is phenomenal around the hoop. The combo of a lot of 3s a FTs make him a very efficient scorer at a deceptively high volume. He puts up numbers in 27-30 minutes that most All-Star guards need 39 or so minutes to put up. Per minute he is very effective... he just happens to be in a lucky position where he only has to play that many minutes a game and he can come in, give it his all, and then be confident that he'll get his rest.

If he played on another team though, he'd be a starter and put up gaudier but probably less efficient numbers and he'd be on the injury list because of that style of play a la Wade.

[Hatertots]

I've stayed out thus far, but let me get in here.

Ginobili is nowhere close to JJ's level. Mainly because Ginobili cannot lead a team. You're compared stats of a guy who faces double teams, triple teams and delivers to a guy that basks in the shade of Tim Duncan the best PF this side of Karl Malone and offensively the best PF probably in the history of basketball. IN Phoenix, Amare wasn't the show. Amare was a cog in the wheel of a system created to run and gun. However, in San Antonio, the reason that those guys do so well is because the offense runs through Duncan. He is the big show. He's what defenses game plan for. The same is true of JJ. When teams talk about playing Atlanta, their first thought is "How are we going to stop Joe Johnson.".

Has anybody ever uttered "if we're going to beat San Anton, we have to stop Ginobilli?" and leave Tim Duncan out of the conversation???

Hell No.

You're comparing Apples to Oranges.

Fascinating, as always. Thanks for your input, Diesel.

[Diesel]

Diesel hit the nail on the head there...Manu is a sixth man. Comparing him to JJ, as stated, is foolish.

Though, Diesel, would you say that it is folly to NOT game plan for Manu? He can go off. Obviously Tim is a major part of the equation but Ginobili is right behind him as far as just stopping SA, don't you think?

Hell, it is folly to Not game plan for Robert Horry or Kurt Thomas also. I'm not saying that you ignore Ginobili, but I'm saying that when you consider how to beat the Spurs, stopping him is not the first thing on your list. I think Wrangling Duncan and Parker comes before Ginobili.

Here's Steve Kerr's take:

When we look at NBA history, a common theme among NBA champions is the presence of star tandems. Cousy and Russell. Magic and Kareem. Bird and McHale. Jordan and Pippen.

The idea is that if you can put two superstars together, you've got a chance to win it all, at least in theory. When the San Antonio Spurs won their first NBA title, most of the credit -- rightfully so -- went to a pair of Hall of Fame big men, David Robinson and Tim Duncan. But since Robinson's retirement in 2003, it has been a different, very unlikely tandem that has made the Spurs the most consistent team in the NBA: Duncan and ... Bruce Bowen?

Yes, I know it doesn't have much of a ring to it (so to speak), and the names don't exactly conjure up images of West and Chamberlain. But watching San Antonio beat the Phoenix Suns in Game 6 on Friday to win the series, it was clear that Duncan and Bowen have become the most important tandem in the NBA.

I know Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili are great players and are the keys to the team's success, but Duncan and Bowen define the Spurs. They're incredible defensive players -- one inside and one outside -- and their relentlessness on every possession gives opponents fits trying to score the ball.

Ultimately, the combination of Bowen's perimeter defense and Duncan's rim protection is the reason San Antonio is who it is. No matter the opponent, all Gregg Popovich has to do is put Bowen on the best perimeter player and Duncan on the best inside man, and the Spurs have an advantage.

Visit My Website

[foeteen14]

I would trade Al and Marvin for Oden and Outlaw. We stay young, we get a legit center, we get rid of Marvin, and Outlaw can already shoot the 3.

[Swish]

Well, I agree with Kerr on TD but the Bowen thing is a stretch IMO (of course I can't say I know more than Kerr, just $0.02). Manu is, next to Flash and Bron the best penetrator in the world. I just think that if you over plan for duncan Manu will score 35 and you are toast.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I am absolutely shocked . . . SHOCKED . . that 58% voted that they wouldn't trade Horford for Duncan. Duncan right now, may be a top 5 player in this league. If he's slipped a little, he's still a top 10 player. Put Smith beside Duncan, and we'd easily have the best defensive frontline in the league for the next 3 - 4 years.

I like Horford, but he'll be nowhere near the player that Duncan was/is today. Duncan is an impact player on both ends of the floor and commands your total attention.

LOL . . . JJ might shoot 50% FG and 45% 3FG, if he played alongside Duncan.

Bibby

JJ

Marvin

Smith

Duncan

Good lord people.

Like someone else said, that may be an NBA title team right there.

2 bonafide all-stars . . . one potential all-star . . . a solid PG . . and a solid SF

We could play inside/outside . . uptempo . . any style of b-ball you wanted.

Even 4 years from now, Duncan may still be one of the best center in the league, because his style isn't based on explosiveness or overpowering strength. It's based on fundamentals.

He won't fall completely off the map like Shaq did, once he started to slow down. Duncan could still be a 15 ppg - 10 reb - 1.5 blk - 3 assist guy 4 years from now. It might take Horford another 3 years to even reach that level.

[HawksBalla]

I wouldnt. thats like trading a young Shaquille O'Neal for an older Hakeem Olajuwon..

lol Dont insult young Shaq. He had FAR more impact then Horford did last year. If Horford was a young Shaq we would have won a lot more then 37 games last year.

[HawksBalla]

I am absolutely shocked . . . SHOCKED . . that 58% voted that they wouldn't trade Horford for Duncan. Duncan right now, may be a top 5 player in this league. If he's slipped a little, he's still a top 10 player. Put Smith beside Duncan, and we'd easily have the best defensive frontline in the league for the next 3 - 4 years.

I like Horford, but he'll be nowhere near the player that Duncan was/is today. Duncan is an impact player on both ends of the floor and commands your total attention.

LOL . . . JJ might shoot 50% FG and 45% 3FG, if he played alongside Duncan.

Bibby

JJ

Marvin

Smith

Duncan

Good lord people.

Like someone else said, that may be an NBA title team right there.

2 bonafide all-stars . . . one potential all-star . . . a solid PG . . and a solid SF

We could play inside/outside . . uptempo . . any style of b-ball you wanted.

Even 4 years from now, Duncan may still be one of the best center in the league, because his style isn't based on explosiveness or overpowering strength. It's based on fundamentals.

He won't fall completely off the map like Shaq did, once he started to slow down. Duncan could still be a 15 ppg - 10 reb - 1.5 blk - 3 assist guy 4 years from now. It might take Horford another 3 years to even reach that level.

Yeah I thought about this some more and...we would definitely be a contender the for Eastern Conference title.

-Against the Celtics, would they there put Perkins on Duncan? If they dont, then we have Smith against Perkins, which would be a rout.

-Against the Pistons, Josh Smith would run circles around McDyess

-Duncan would completely tie up Dwight Howard, which would leave Smith on who, Rashard Lewis? Please.

See a pattern? When we played other teams, they would most likely scheme to take out Duncan. That would leave Josh Smith free to terrorize. Duncan hasnt played with a big of all-star calibur skills since David Robinson, and Robinson couldnt run or have the range that Smith does.

And we havent even talked about all the wide-open looks that JJ, Bibby and Marvin would get from people trapping Duncan. His affect on our team would be huge. Plus remember the East only has a couple of quality big men. Outside of the Magic, Celtics, and Raptors (who I think we are better then without Duncan), Duncan would be able to put up 20 without even trying.

The downside is yes we'd lose Al Horford and Duncan is going to fall apart if 4-5 years. But lets say Duncan gives us Shaq's current numbers in 5 years...that aint bad folks.

EDIT: No way the Spurs trade Duncan for a package where Horford is the centerpiece unless Horford starts averaging 20+ a game. The Spurs dont have enough scoring to just give away Duncan's points, and like others have said...they would be a fringe playoff team at best with Horford. I think its more likely the Spurs trade Duncan in the same manner the Knicks traded Ewing to the Sonics, or how Houston traded the Dream to Toronto.

Edited September 1, 2008 by HawksBalla

[crimedog]

Nice post Hawksballa. I don't think Smith, JJ, Marv, or Bibby would score more but they would be more efficient. I still think Duncan has quite a few good years in him. He's a skilled 7-footer, he'll continue to be both for a long time. His numbers haven't dropped off too much from his MVP days, he's just playing between 4-6 fewer mpg.

He had the 6th highest PER last season and that doesn't even account for the impact he has on D. He'll be 32 for all of next season.

Hakeem, another comparable skilled big but one who was a little shorter and used his athleticism more, played at a All-NBA level until 36 winning a title at Duncan's age. People thought he was older than listed too.

Kareem, a phenomenally skilled player who learned how to rely less and less on athleticism, was the second option on one of the greatest dynasties of all time until he was almost 40.

I have no reason to think Duncan can't have the longevity of those two meaning that he will play at a level far higher than Horford's ceiling until the 2012-2013 season.