Diesel's theory on offensive production.

[Diesel]

Flip or whom ever else can be as aggressive as they see fit no matter who is in or out! I don't get the connection between Flip's aggressiveness and Marvin's injury unless you are saying that Flip is taking it upon himself to take make up the scoring slack. Under those circumstances, it wouldn't matter who is out!

The bottom line Perioa is for whatever reason, our team chemistry is much better without Marvin. That means that our lead scorer is scoring and he has help. Last night every scorer hit double digits. That's not normally the case when Marvin is here.

The suggestion on the floor is why not play Marvin off the bench?

He could use the time to develop his aggressiveness and we need a good scorer/defender in the game when our starter is out. Moreover, he could provide good rest for Joe.

Now, could you consider what we have before us or will you continue to be a Marvin homer?

:huh:

[Diesel]

You guys continue to dream that someday this offense will improve and the bottom line is that it won't as long as Woodson is coaching. Woodson's focus will always be defense and against weaker teams without a star 3, you can start Mo Evans and get away with it. But against great teams with great 3's Mo Evans becomes a very noticeable liability which would lead to bad starts in 1st quarters making it difficult to consistently win. It would be tough to get by with 2 poor defenders on the floor to start the game since Bibby is our starting point guard!

Even with the defense, haven't you noticed that without Marvin we get stops when we want them? And they coincide with our scoring?

I know that tonight you will be on your knees praying that we lose to PTL so that the voices will cease.. well, let me tell you... when we beat PTL and the next team, the voices will be twice as loud!

[Peoriabird]

He could use the time to develop his aggressiveness and we need a good scorer/defender in the game when our starter is out. Moreover, he could provide good rest for Joe.

:huh:

The above statement makes no sense!

[Peoriabird]

Even with the defense, haven't you noticed that without Marvin we get stops when we want them? And they coincide with our scoring?

I know that tonight you will be on your knees praying that we lose to PTL so that the voices will cease.. well, let me tell you... when we beat PTL and the next team, the voices will be twice as loud!

I would love for the team to go 17-0 the rest of the way and will still not be convinced that Mo Evans is a better player than Marvin. When Marvin is healthy, he will go back to his starting position regardless of how many stupid threads you start on a message board! :thumbsupsmileyanim:

[Diesel]

The above statement makes no sense!

Last night, on the chat (and you were there) Busboy made reference that the reason that Marvin is not aggressive is because the starters take all the shots. Even your boy Exodus keeps trying to bring up the fact that Marvin plays well without JJ.

Well, if that is certainly the case, then playing off the bench behind JJ should empower Marvin to be the most aggressive Marvin that he can be. He can be the lead reserve. The only reason that wouldn't make sense is because you're a Marvin homer and you care more about Marvin than about the team. If the chemistry is better without Marvin then why are you trying to pound the square peg into the round hole?

[Diesel]

I would love for the team to go 17-0 the rest of the way and will still not be convinced that Mo Evans is a better player than Marvin. When Marvin is healthy, he will go back to his starting position regardless of how many stupid threads you start on a message board! :thumbsupsmileyanim:

It has nothing to do with Mo being a better player than Marvin. It has everything to do with our players playing better together without Marvin.

Didn't our team play better without JR Rider once upon a time?

Didn't our team play better without Antoine Walker?

It wasn't because we replaced these guys with better players.

It's that without these guys our team (not one player) played better.

[Peoriabird]

Last night, on the chat (and you were there) Busboy made reference that the reason that Marvin is not aggressive is because the starters take all the shots. Even your boy Exodus keeps trying to bring up the fact that Marvin plays well without JJ.

Well, if that is certainly the case, then playing off the bench behind JJ should empower Marvin to be the most aggressive Marvin that he can be. He can be the lead reserve. The only reason that wouldn't make sense is because you're a Marvin homer and you care more about Marvin than about the team. If the chemistry is better without Marvin then why are you trying to pound the square peg into the round hole?

Marvin already plays almost every minute JJ isn't in the game so I still don't get your point! :ph34r:

[Diesel]

Marvin already plays almost every minute JJ isn't in the game so I still don't get your point! :ph34r:

Marvin starts with JJ and plays a lot of minutes Period. My point is let's see what happens if we play Flip at the OG, Bibbs at the PG and Joe at the Sf (starting) and bring Marvin off the bench.

How simple do it need to be for you to get it?

[Peoriabird]

Marvin starts with JJ and plays a lot of minutes Period. My point is let's see what happens if we play Flip at the OG, Bibbs at the PG and Joe at the Sf (starting) and bring Marvin off the bench.

How simple do it need to be for you to get it?

So the success and the so called better chemistry has come when Mo Evans has started at the 3 but you want to now start Flip instead of Mo? You do realize that you are all over the place!

[Diesel]

So the success and the so called better chemistry has come when Mo Evans has started at the 3 but you want to now start Flip instead of Mo? You do realize that you are all over the place!

No. Actually, the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

How many times do I need to say that.

Can you read?

the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

[AHF]

No. Actually, the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

How many times do I need to say that.

Can you read?

the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

How do you conclude it has nothing to do with Mo? Aren't we undefeated when Mo starts this year in place of JJ or Marvin?

I understand the point you are making about chemistry being better without Marvin, but don't understand how you can conclude that it has nothing to do with Mo when the same rationale underlies both:

Team has played better without Marvin = better chemistry without Marvin.

Team has played better starting Mo = better chemistry with Mo.

[Peoriabird]

No. Actually, the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

How many times do I need to say that.

Can you read?

the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out. the success has nothing to do with Mo. It's the chemistry of Marvin being out.

So in other words, we can start anyone other than Marvin with the other 4 starters and our chemistry would be better!

[mrhonline]

LOL @ the idea of the chemistry being better with Marvin out. The chemistry was fine when Marvin was playing. The difference is that Smith has decided to rebound and JJ to actually earn his keep. It also happens that the Hawks are a strong home team.

You're amusing, D.

But please do try to keep the Marvin-hate in one single thread. You've started nearly a half-dozen threads in the past week on the same subject.

[buckeye242424]

Flip or whom ever else can be as aggressive as they see fit no matter who is in or out! I don't get the connection between Flip's aggressiveness and Marvin's injury unless you are saying that Flip is taking it upon himself to take make up the scoring slack. Under those circumstances, it wouldn't matter who is out!

Being coached or taking it upon himself to have more of a scoring mentality doesn't change his role? If he keep playing the way he is, the team is going to expect his contiributions every game.

[Diesel]

How do you conclude it has nothing to do with Mo? Aren't we undefeated when Mo starts this year in place of JJ or Marvin?

I understand the point you are making about chemistry being better without Marvin, but don't understand how you can conclude that it has nothing to do with Mo when the same rationale underlies both:

Team has played better without Marvin = better chemistry without Marvin.

Team has played better starting Mo = better chemistry with Mo.

Well, namely because Mo isn't the reason that our offense is more cohesive. Mo doesn't bring offense to the party. Mo may have his contribution that helps our defensive chemistry but my opinion is that it's just the fact that we don't have to hold up our progress with Marvin.

So yes, that means that my preference is Flip. We seem to play a lot better with Flip out there because JJ shows a lot of trust in Flip and Flip just seems to make our team play better when he's on the court. However, this effect may possibly be seen if we start with Rio. In essence, it's addition by subtraction. (Chemistry).

[Diesel]

LOL @ the idea of the chemistry being better with Marvin out. The chemistry was fine when Marvin was playing. The difference is that Smith has decided to rebound and JJ to actually earn his keep. It also happens that the Hawks are a strong home team.

You're amusing, D.

But please do try to keep the Marvin-hate in one single thread. You've started nearly a half-dozen threads in the past week on the same subject.

I went and checked my "Marvin hate" threads for this week. You said half a dozen? I count 3.

Edited March 14, 2009 by AHF

[Plainview1981]

That's one of the main points. Our chemistry is just better without Marvin. Teke said that it might be to the fact that Marvin is not a guy that can create for himself with the ball in his hand. Let's be honest. When Marvin is in the game he's usually waiting for a pass and standing on the perimeter. i.e. not moving with the ball... stagnant. This forces Joe to hold the ball 100% of the time and create to Marvin. However, when Flip is in the game, he can take the ball and move with it, he can dish off...he can cause problems for defense. Tonight in the 3rd, there was one time when Joe dribbled through the lane, out to flip at the three and Flip suddenly to Bibby in the corner. Bibby had time to eat a sandwich out there because the ball movement was so good that the defense was so good. We don't have that kind of chemistry with Marvin. Like I said the other day, Marvin playing gives a different dynamic. Not neccessarily bad, but our offense is not as free flowing. You who watch us play without Marvin, you can see us having a little swagger. Joe doesn't have that look as though he doesn't want to pass. I think he has more trust in flip than he does in Marvin. And Flip can rotate the ball better.

Now let's talk Sf shop...

Paul Pierce.

Lebron James

Shawn Marion

Danny Granger

Caron Butler

Rashard Lewis

Rudy Gay

Carmello Anthony

Vince

Artest

GForce Gerald Wallace

Durant

Josh Howard

Maggette

Deng

Jefferson

Moon

Dunleavy Jr.

Charlie V.

Thad Young

Al Thornton

Tayshun Prince

Grant Hill

Jeff Green

Which of these guys does Marvin play like. Seriously. The only one is Shawn Marion... and Marion is more like a PF than a SF.. plus Marion is a hellavu finisher. The problem is that Marvin can't do what these guys do. These guys can all take their man off the dribble. These guys are all aggressive. These guys are all about to work in the perimeter as well as drive through the lane. These are not allstars, these are guys who's name pop up as Sfs.

If you want to compare Marvin to a player... here's your list:

Marion

Battier

Bowen

Kirlenko

Peja

All of these guys are what I call end user guys. They are the terminus point of an offense just like Marvin. In actuality, they are more suited to play PF because their skillset is more like Powerfoward. Because of their lack off offensive ability, most of these guys have made up for that by concentrating on defense. This is where Marvin belongs. These guys do not help offensive chemistry.. Well maybe Peja does. but these guys have to be spoonfed offense. Marvin does too.

Although I prefer Flip coming off the bench instead of starting the game I basically agree with this post. It would be great if Mo would produce abit more, but he doesn't drag down the flow of the game. This team has too many tweeners in the lineup. That's a big part of the problem.

Edited March 14, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[mrhonline]

I went and checked my "Marvin hate" threads for this week. You said half a dozen? I count 3.

Diesel, I merged several of your "Marvin hate" threads. Trying to count them now isn't really going to do you any good.

Edited March 14, 2009 by AHF

[exodus]

Diesel, I merged several of your "Marvin hate" threads. Trying to count them now isn't really going to do you any good.

Silly goose. Don't you realize he is using Diesel Math? Just because you (and most homo sapiens) don't understand it doesn't diminish it's validity.

I am a little disappointed though that the Dieselputer hasn't explained why Smith's rebounding is do much better when Marvin is out. He also hasn't explained why JJ is shooting 3s and free throws so much better with Marvin out.

[tonegully]

Silly goose. Don't you realize he is using Diesel Math? Just because you (and most homo sapiens) don't understand it doesn't diminish it's validity.

I am a little disappointed though that the Dieselputer hasn't explained why Smith's rebounding is do much better when Marvin is out. He also hasn't explained why JJ is shooting 3s and free throws so much better with Marvin out.

Because Marvin is the Anti-hawk