Hawks a lottery team?

[MaceCase]

Even with Joe here we never played consistently from night to night. Whether he stays or goes, if this team ever played with 100% concentration and effort each night, we would be a playoff team. Look at the Bobcats as a prime example. Not including Joe we are possibly just as talented. They just play hard every night. What we need most, more than a star player, is a star effort from our young studs.

the Blazers (injuries), Bobcats, and Bucks are great examples of teams that won with heart over talent most nights and made the playoffs. The Rockets werent far of either. They are whowe need to imitate if we lose Joe.

The Bucks and Bobcats weren't going anywhere until they made trades for Stephen Jackson and John Salmons to be primary scorers. The Blazers just finally let Andre Miller loose from their rigid offense when injuries happened and he even responded with a 52 point game. End of the day, with all their toughness all three teams were bounced in the first round whereas we moved on because Joe is better than those guys.

[RedDawg#8]

The Bucks and Bobcats weren't going anywhere until they made trades for Stephen Jackson and John Salmons to be primary scorers. The Blazers just finally let Andre Miller loose from their rigid offense when injuries happened and he even responded with a 52 point game. End of the day, with all their toughness all three teams were bounced in the first round whereas we moved on because Joe is better than those guys.

TRUE, BUT the questions was are we a lottery team w/o Joe, not will we make it out of round 1. Im sure we probably will have a hard time in the playoffs but we wont be a lottery team.

Also, neither of those guys is as good as Joe, but still made a huge impact on their team making the playoffs. If we lose Joe, those are the type of players we will look at to bring in.

One other thing, we still have 2 All-Stars left on our team. And Jamal is just as dangerous of a scorer as anybody in the game. We wont be hurting. We will need another wing to take scoring/ball handling pressure off of Craw but we will be fine.

[KB21]

We have questions to answer on this team KB. If we lose JJ, who is our best on the ball defender we have a huge hole to fill. Craws value is off the bench. He is a instant offensive threat that has to be accounted for by a 1st team type player or defensive specialist.

Anyone who thinks Craw can fill JJs shoes on both ends of the floor is not seeing the overall picture that JJ has on our team.

That is all true, but this is still something that is going to come down to value. The fact is, someone is going to be willing to pony up a lot of cash for Joe Johnson this offseason. Should the Hawks go all the way to the maximum deal to keep him? The numbers suggest they shouldn't, because they show that Al and Josh have more of an effect on this team's wins than Joe does. As far as Joe being the best perimeter on the ball defender on the team, I will agree. However, is he the best defender because he can defend, or is he the best in comparison to the substitutions for him? Joe had 2.4 defensive win shares last year. Jamal had 1.7. Marvin Williams, who IMO is really the best perimeter defender on the team, had 2.6 defensive win shares, and even with him there is a question as to whether he is actually a solid defender or is he just that much better than his back up.

Brett LeGree on Joe Johnson

I think Brett makes great points about Joe's actual defensive value to the team as well as how much longer he will be able to keep up his current production.

I would like to see Joe back and see if he can score efficiently with less useage next year, but I also want him back with a contract that will not cripple the salary structure of this team 3 years from now and cost them a chance at resigning they player they should be building this thing around in Al Horford.

[MaceCase]

Ugh I truly hate the term "Allstar" at times. Seriously, people were and are criticising Joe's 4 selections yet they are rallying behind Al's one and Smoove's none. Pick a side people, is that award worthy to you or not? I rather have one Carter on my team than a combination of Kirilenko and Antonio Davis.

[Buzzard]

Ugh I truly hate the term "Allstar" at times. Seriously, people were and are criticising Joe's 4 selections yet they are rallying behind Al's one and Smoove's none. Pick a side people, is that award worthy to you or not? I rather have one Carter on my team than a combination of Kirilenko and Antonio Davis.

About the only thing to rally behind is Horfs one and Smooves almost there if JJ walks. And you are right, four selections is a great accomplishment and should not be bashed at all.

[Crank]

We have questions to answer on this team KB. If we lose JJ, who is our best on the ball defender we have a huge hole to fill. Craws value is off the bench. He is a instant offensive threat that has to be accounted for by a 1st team type player or defensive specialist.

Anyone who thinks Craw can fill JJs shoes on both ends of the floor is not seeing the overall picture that JJ has on our team.

Actually no one knows what JJs value is to the team under Drew will be we know what it is was under Woody but to assume that it will be the same is just as bad as assuming that he had none at all. If Craw were to start then I would imagine that just like on most other teams the starting SF would take the other teams best SG/SF but thats assuming we start Craw at SG and not at PG. .

[TheNorthCydeRises]

As I look a little deeper into the stats, Jamal had a career year last year coming off the bench. Prior to last year, Jamal Crawford was roughly a 3 win share per year player. His scoring in previous years did not contribute much to wins. The question is, can Jamal repeat what he did last year if he is moved into the starting line up? Looking at the numbers, it appears that Joe and Jamal helped one another out and both had career years in terms of producing wins last year. The problem is, neither player is worth the contract he has or will end up getting this offseason in Joe's case because scoring is really the only aspect where they truly effect the game. Neither player makes defensive plays.

So, yes, I can see where the Hawks could go from being a 53 win team to being a team that plays closer to 0.500 ball if they let Joe go, but that has less to do with losing Joe than it does losing the effect that Joe and Jamal apparently have on each other. As I said, one of the questions is whether Jamal can repeat his efficient scoring season from last year. Another is how much will increasing the roles of Al Horfod, Josh Smith, and Marvin Williams have on the win total of this team?

Even with these questions, I would only resign Joe Johnson if he's willing to sign a contract at his value, and I would really push for nothing more than a three year deal at this point.

KB . . . the problem with losing JJ, is what it was when we had JJ. At the end of games, teams aren't going to run a motion offense to get a good shot for just anybody. They're going to give the ball to their best player(s), and give him a chance to make a play. Or they're going to run their best play, to get their scorer the shot.

Now if we lose JJ, who becomes that end of the game scorer? It'll be Jamal Crawford . . . unless Smoove or Horford undergoes some drastic upgrade in their offensive game in which they can become a go-to scorer. But for now, Jamal Crawford will be "Mr ISO" at the end of games . . out of necessity. Then I guess people will hate Jamal then.

When you look at what JJ did on the road last year, it was amazing how many big games he had, only for us to still lose the game because either Horford or Smoove didn't step up on the road. And I mean he had some MONSTER GAMES, and we still lost. JJ shot 50%+ FG in each of these games

@ LA Lakers - 27 pts

@ Chicago - 40 pts

@ Cleveland - 35 pts

@ San Antonio - 31 pts

@ Oklahoma City - 37 pts

@ Golden St - 31 pts

@ Milwaukee - 27 pts

Now you can definitely go the other way, and look at some of the games that JJ didn't show up in, and we still won. We were 14 - 8 in games in which JJ shot under 40% in ( 12 wins at home ) . . . and 9 - 9 in games in which he scored 16 points or less ( 6 wins at home ). So the team has shown that they can still win if JJ has a bad night. But only at home.

And that's going to be the danger. We're already a team that struggles to win on the road as it is. Does it get worse or better with JJ out of the picture?

When you lose JJ, you're going to have to hope that Jamal can make plays at the end of close games, or that Horford and Smoove can.

This team had a tendency throughout the "JJ Era" to undergo complete collaspes when JJ even went out of a game for 4 minute stretches. He'd go out of a game, and we'd see the other team immediately go on a 6 - 0 . . or 10 - 2 run ( mainly due to our poor bench ), and Woody would have to put JJ right back in the game, without the luxury of giving him 6 or so consecutive game minutes of rest.

The play of Teague is going to be important as well. With JJ gone, he's going to have to score, or be a very good playmaker for others. If Teague can step up like a lot of you think he can, then the loss of JJ will be lessened a great deal.

Jamal can replace some of JJ's scoring, but JJ brings so many things to the table, that we may need multiple guys who can do one specific thing very well, in order to compensate for that. Along with Jordan Crawford, we may have to go out and get a defensive 2-guard to play defense when we need it.

LOL . . we may have to bring back Mario West just to shore up the dang defense.

[NJHAWK]

Im not saying Joe Johnson is a 10 in the nba BUT if Joe who is the high water mark player on this team score was 10 the next closest player to him on this team in terms of importance would be Al Horford and he is a 7. This team would struggle to go .500 if they lose him for nothing.

[tremor]

posted before on wrong thread

Joe is without a doubt one of the best SGs in the game. The strength of top 6-7 players on the team is what is taken into account when the team is evaluated. It means if the team loses one of top 3 guys and gets 2 decent ones it won't stay at the same level in general. Hawks certainly would be worse team without JJ but a lottery team? It depends on other factors - what would roster look like on 1st of Nov., what system LD will install, how young players develop, injuries during the season and, of course, strength of other teams in the East.

It's too early to tell something about those factors at the beginning of the season and even more right now, but being borderline play offs team is quite possible but IMO Hawks would still be top 10 team and compete for 8-6 seed which is not what "lottery team" means.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

I don't even know who Eddie Johnson is....

He's the shooter that I would wish Marvin could turn in to. At one point, Marvin did look like he could be a deadly mid-range shooter, and all was needed was him developing a 3 point shot. Now, we don't know if he can even make the mid-range jumper now.

Anyway, this is Eddie Johnson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2CxDlHpZmU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UFsuCk2A5s

[BusBoyIsBack]

Im not saying Joe Johnson is a 10 in the nba BUT if Joe who is the high water mark player on this team score was 10 the next closest player to him on this team in terms of importance would be Al Horford and he is a 7. This team would struggle to go .500 if they lose him for nothing.

Don't be absurd. Josh Smith is just as important to this team as Joe Johnson. And Horford has potential to be that guy as well. With Horford and Smoove and Jamal this is still an above .500 team rather easily.

Especially considering we may actually run a real offense next year, we may still be a 50 win ball club with or without Joe

[Kimsey]

A 1-2 punch of matthews/salmons/m. miller and crawford is enough to get the team to atleast the 8th spot.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Don't be absurd. Josh Smith is just as important to this team as Joe Johnson. And Horford has potential to be that guy as well. With Horford and Smoove and Jamal this is still an above .500 team rather easily.

Especially considering we may actually run a real offense next year, we may still be a 50 win ball club with or without Joe

Defensively . . . I'd say yes. That's Smoove's main worth to this team. When he's not active defensively and/or on the boards, it definitely shows up in the won/loss column.

But teams aren't game planning to stop Smoove on offense. Matter of fact, they kind of game plan to have the ball in his hands, especially if he's on the outside, by leaving him wide open. If JJ leaves, Horford is going to have to be the guy that really steps up offensively. Smoove's lack of a jumpshot isn't going to allow him to be a big time scorer on a nightly basis. His inconsistency at the FT line will play a part in that too. And even with Horford, he'll have to really step up with his back to the basket post offense, and be more efficient there.

Hopefully we're not put into a situation in which Crawford has to carry this team on a nightly basis. That'll pretty much put him in the role he's been in his entire career. And it's a role in which he's shown that he can be brilliant on one night, and downright horrible the next. He's proven that he's too inconsistent to be the #1 scorer on a team.

So it's going to have to be up to Horford . . or we're going to need this type of across the board point production from the Hawks:

Jamal: 19 ppg

Horford: 18 ppg

Smith: 17 ppg

Marvin: 13 ppg

Teague: 10 ppg

Jordan: 9 ppg

Bibby: 6 ppg

Zaza: 5 ppg

Evans: 5 ppg

That's 102 ppg between those 9 players, with the big jump in production coming from Horford and Teague, with major contributions still coming from the bench.

[Buzzard]

A 1-2 punch of matthews/salmons/m. miller and crawford is enough to get the team to atleast the 8th spot.

That 3 million dollars they got is going a long ways looking at the list you just came up with. You have a lot of confidence in our ownership signing and/or trading for vets after they claimed to be so broke thay cannot afford a 2nd round draft pick.

Edited June 27, 2010 by Buzzard

[TheNorthCydeRises]

And the main issue is still going to linger with this team.

Size on the frontline . . . rebounding . . . and defense.

[Johnnybravo4]

I don't understand why we don't believe that Josh Smith, Marv and Horf are going to make any strides at all in their game? Lets not forget that JJ was an avg player until he turned 25 and we got him.

[MaceCase]

posted before on wrong thread

Joe is without a doubt one of the best SGs in the game. The strength of top 6-7 players on the team is what is taken into account when the team is evaluated. It means if the team loses one of top 3 guys and gets 2 decent ones it won't stay at the same level in general. Hawks certainly would be worse team without JJ but a lottery team? It depends on other factors - what would roster look like on 1st of Nov., what system LD will install, how young players develop, injuries during the season and, of course, strength of other teams in the East.

It's too early to tell something about those factors at the beginning of the season and even more right now, but being borderline play offs team is quite possible but IMO Hawks would still be top 10 team and compete for 8-6 seed which is not what "lottery team" means.

If we finish 9th, we are in the lottery making us a lottery team.

Way I see it, in our division alone we have the Magic ahead of us, the Heat with the ability to leap frog ahead of both us and the Magic, the Bobcats made the playoffs and Washington has retooled with the number one pick and has cap. Every team within our division has the ability to improve while we are strugglng to maintain. Non playoff teams like the Knicks and Nets are looking to both be playoff teams and the Bucks and Bulls will be better too. We were discounting the Celtics last season but they just proved the world wrong so that leaves Cleveland as the only playoff team that could fall out the top 8 other than us, of course

This is not the time to be imagining that the great fro, a rookie non lotto pick, a sophmore non lotto pick and the 20 and 10 duo of Horf and Smoove will keep us afloat. I'm not even sure if Joe returning would even ensure that we are a 50 win club with all these damn teams in the east having caproom.

[GST]

I don't know how relevant this example is, but the 95-96 Spurs went 59-23. The next season, David Robinson went out with a back injury (IIRC), and they went 20-62.

[Buzzard]

I don't know how relevant this example is, but the 95-96 Spurs went 59-23. The next season, David Robinson went out with a back injury (IIRC), and they went 20-62.

I do not think we will slide that badly (39 games) but 20 to 30 more in the loss column is forseeable...

[Gray Mule]

:thumbsdownsmileyanim:

Apparently, we believe that, if JJ leaves, and I believe he is gone, Hawks will just have one less player.

Will the Hawks not find another player to go on the roster? Or, is our draft pick his replacement?

The statement about using the $3 mil. to sign veteran help - - Is there no veteran players out there

who are willing to come here and play? Is our money no good?

Woe is us. JJ will leave and we'll never win another game. Oh, we'll win. Just not very much.

Gloom despair and agony on me. If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all.

:help wanted3:

Hawks still have some good players. Hawks will make the playoffs, with or without JJ.

Every off season, we hear the same thing. Every team in the NBA is going to be SOOOO much better

next season. And, they all believe this and make us believe it too!

GO DREAM!

11-4 FIRST PLACE!!