Hawks are shopping Marvin

[MaceCase]

Smith and Gomes for Marvin? Give me a break.

Marv > Smith and Gomes

Of course he is but make no mistake, any trade of Marvin will be for lesser talent with financial flexibility in the future being the ultimate goal. Despite his impassioned detractors ever so fresh assessments of his draft position his contract is still pretty fair considering his production, it just happens to run too long.

It's pretty clear who the core is the fact that they've nearly plateaued and the financial issues of the ASG. Then there's the firm knowledge that Marvin will never rise as an option above JJ, Smoove and Horf and that triumvirate alone has us above the cap. The ASG now has to strike the balance between fielding a competitive team and selling off talent now in order to allow the ability to sign better supporting, equivalent or greater talent in the future.

By no means is Marvin a "terrible" player nor does he contribute to this team's weaknesses but at the same time he will not push us beyond what we are.

With that in mind, the team will have to either trade one of our core three to improve the team now or sell off support players and watch others expire for nothing in order to improve the core 3 later.

I do not mind either, it at least shows that management can concoct a plan for the future and are not just content with watching this team play together until oblivion. For the latter plan though we can expect moves similar to what the Knicks have done, we will move Marvin for a Gomes type, either let Jamal walk or resign him to a very cheap deal or a lucrative but short deal. The rest of the roster will be minimum or slightly overpaid but short term talent to flank the core until the ASG can identify a free agent or agency period that they want to make a splash in with the core 3 being the attraction.

Basically we are going to be still treading water but at least a ship is in view over the horizon.

[AHF]

We all know and have talked about it ad nuaseum that the Hawks made a bad pick in selecting Marvin not because it was a reach (unlike Sheldon) but because we needed a PG and had wing players already on the roster....end of story....NOT HIS FAULT.

My perspective is different. I don't care much about the position issue. We should have taken the #2 pick and drafted a star. Because we passed on multiple stars to take Marvin, we wasted pick and that was the problem. The fact that he was a forward isn't the biggest issue for me. If all the commentators (including many who bash the pick now) had been right about Marvin being the best player from this class, I wouldn't have a problem with passing on our position of need.

We were too young and too far away to worry about drafting for need, IMO. We needed to pick a star. That was BK's job and that is what he blew, IMO.

Portland made the same mistake by taking their "need" into account. They had their lottery PG already on the roster and passed on Paul and Deron for a mediocre forward because they had a need at forward. They blew it by passing up a star for a mediocre player just like we did.

Edited February 20, 2011 by AHF

[EazyRoc]

My perspective is different. I don't care much about the position issue. We should have taken the #2 pick and drafted a star. Because we passed on multiple stars to take Marvin, we wasted pick and that was the problem. The fact that he was a forward isn't the biggest issue for me. If all the commentators (including many who bash the pick now) had been right about Marvin being the best player from this class, I wouldn't have a problem with passing on our position of need.

We were too young and too far away to worry about drafting for need, IMO. We needed to pick a star. That was BK's job and that is what he blew, IMO.

Portland made the same mistake by taking their "need" into account. They had their lottery PG already on the roster and passed on Paul and Deron for a mediocre forward because they had a need at forward. They blew it by passing up a star for a mediocre player just like we did.

The Trailblazers picked 6th in that draft, after Paul and Williams were gone.

[EazyRoc]

No, the Trailblazers had the 3rd pick and traded down with Utah.

Oh, in that case, yes it was a terrible move. However, Deron Williams and Chris Paul both had big question marks about how effective they would be in the league.

Edited February 20, 2011 by EazyRoc

[Guest Walter]

personally, i want more touches for horford, a pg that distributes and thus handles the ball more often than bibby; those mean we don't necessarily want a sf that needs to the ball a lot to be effective...we want someone that can defend, can score/get to the line when gets a few touches, etc...basically what marvin does

i'd rather upgrade pg than sf

I think Eyenga fits this mold and is CHEAP for the next 4 years. If we're looking toward trading with Cleveland and and trash doesn't get us Sessions, think Teague/Marvin/2nd or maybe 1st rder for Sessions/Eyenga/Parker. Eyenga gives us that lock down perimeter defender we need and Parker a perimeter shooter who is actually efficient and not high volume. Sessions may be the type Pg we need. In short. We can get MORE THAN "what Marvin does" (as he is not that good of a shooter for all the hoopla about his form 6 years ago and not that good of a defender) for less AND fill out one of our two greatest team needs at Pg.

[Kimsey]

I heard rumors Portland was willing to give us their 3rd pick and next years top 4 or 5 protected first for our 2nd overall pick(marv). The reason was because how poor the 2006 draft was, see sheldon william, saer sene, etc. But man we could have had paul and roy in back to back drafts.

But back to MW, he was brought here to be Joes robin or vice versa. Now it's look like we have him being JCs robin, oh my.

[AHF]

Oh, in that case, yes it was a terrible move. However, Deron Williams and Chris Paul both had big question marks about how effective they would be in the league.

Which is an argument why taking Marvin wasn't so bad.

In either case, my issue is not that we missed on getting a PG which was a position of clear need. It was that we missed getting a star at any position.

[pimp]

But back to MW, he was brought here to be Joes robin or vice versa. Now it's look like we have him being JCs robin, oh my.

Marvin wasn't brought here to be JJ 's sidekick.

Because ,Marvin was already on the team when we signed JJ.

[Diesel]

Yall talk about Marvin like he's Horrible...

He's a good defender and can make open shots....

if he wasnt taken so early in the draft would there be so much hate...?

We are beyond the failed hope of his draft pick. We have moved on to the 8 Million dollar contract and the fact that he isnot producing. He's the most non-impactful player. He just doesn't show up. For 8 million, you have higher expectations than a guy not showing up. That's a 5.5 Million dollar guy.

[Diesel]

Even Diesel endorsed that signing. Had he continued playing like he did that last season it would have been fine and had he continued developing like he had every year up until then it would have looked good. Since he has regressed and generally been a minor role player, it looks ugly now.

If you tell it, tell the whole truth.

I endorsed, resigning him because he hadvalue...

Edited February 21, 2011 by Diesel

[niremetal]

I did so not just for positional and skill-set needs but because after watching MW's for many games as a BU I knew that he simply didn't have the stomach to become a star.

Ask ANYONE who watched UNC for more than 5 games that year and you would have actually gotten a "hell no" to the question of whether we should draft MW ahead of either Deron or Paul.

Funny. I'd say ask anyone who watched UNC for more than 5 games that year and they'd tell you that Marvin played with a fire and intensity in college that faded within a few months of his first game in the NBA.

If you want to say that the people hyping Marvin were all suffering from irrational exuberance, I just don't buy that. His athleticism measurements at the combine were excellent for a guy his size, he had a sweet shooting form, he played hard, and all his coaches raved about his work ethic. When Rick Majerus calls you Worthy with a jump shot, it's a sign that the people who know best thought he had what it took to be a player. Hindsight, though, is 20/20.

Edited February 21, 2011 by niremetal

[BrazilianHawk]

Nope. But thats the point. He was. And to make things worse, we already had Childress and Smith, and were in desperate need of a young pg. I'm not saying he's as bad as Zaza, but the pick just didnt make any sense, considering we were starting T "dribble, dribble dribble" Lue and Anthony freakin Johnson at pg. And we had just drafted 2 sf's the previous year. That why the pick was so bad. At least we tried to address NEEDS when we picked Teague, Acie, and even Shellhead(rebounding, defense). We had no NEED for Marvin at the time. Unless they, for some unknown reason, saw superstar potential from a 6th man. lol!

Marvin can't be faulted for being selected #2. It wasn't HIS pick. He´s got good defensive and rebounding abilities, makes open jumpers and goes to the hole/line when possible. He's far more useful to this team than Crawford it isn't even close. Shouldn't trade a player only because he fails to be someone the GM thought he was. It was BK's fault and for that (among several other "mistakes") he was fired. I'm cool with Marvin, at least he tries to do something useful instead of just jacking up bad shots. Someday he'll understand his role as a bench player is much bigger than as a starter and he'll be fine with that. Then we'll have a second unit that at least will be able to not squander double-digit leads in the second quarter.

We had no need for him then but we do have need for anyone who plays a lick of D now. I'd keep him unless we can get someone who's going to address a bigger need and play D as well.

Edited February 21, 2011 by BrazilianHawk

[AHF]

If you tell it, tell the whole truth.

I endorsed, resigning him because he hadvalue...

That is the whole story. We all know you didn't like Marvin and didn't have a change of heart. You said he was a good investment at that price - whether to retain, trade, or whatever. I.e., the guy who hates Marvin the most on this site didn't criticize the signing at the time.

[sasuke]

I'm a 100% sure that if Drew run some plays for Marvin it will pay off. The guy has no touches. Guys saying Jamal is better are stats nerds.