Ferry as GM Poll

[Buzzard]

I voted greatness but you need a middle ground between that and wait and see how he fills out the roster this year.In just a short time he has turned us from one of the most cap strapped franchises into one of the most flexible. While adding Devin Harris who I think can make up for JJ's lost production and now it looks like we are also getting Kyle Korver who should help replace Marvin. Not to mention a solid sixth man is Lou Williams.The potential for great is there but that is also a process that does not happen by just filling out the roster this year....

[Nicholasp27]

His avatar is billy knight, surprised people don't recognize himAnd I agree; he is overly negative and annoying

[BusBoyIsBack]

All of the moves he's made so far have been incredible.Yet his grade is still incomplete because of the Dwight Howard situation. As great as these moves have been, the fact of the matter is that you can't win a championship in this league without a superstar. And if we can't match the lousy offer that the Rockets have on the table or even the Lakers by comparison to what we can offer, then it negates a whole lot of what Ferry has accomplished.Because if he says the "status quo" isn't good enough, then we have to land that superstar that would get us above that status quo.All of the moves he's made so far have been incredible.Yet his grade is still incomplete because of the Dwight Howard situation. As great as these moves have been, the fact of the matter is that you can't win a championship in this league without a superstar. And if we can't match the lousy offer that the Rockets have on the table or even the Lakers by comparison to what we can offer, then it negates a whole lot of what Ferry has accomplished.Because if he says the "status quo" isn't good enough, then we have to land that superstar that would get us above that status quo.

[Buzzard]

All of the moves he's made so far have been incredible. Yet his grade is still incomplete because of the Dwight Howard situation. As great as these moves have been, the fact of the matter is that you can't win a championship in this league without a superstar. And if we can't match the lousy offer that the Rockets have on the table or even the Lakers by comparison to what we can offer, then it negates a whole lot of what Ferry has accomplished. Because if he says the "status quo" isn't good enough, then we have to land that superstar that would get us above that status quo. All of the moves he's made so far have been incredible. Yet his grade is still incomplete because of the Dwight Howard situation. As great as these moves have been, the fact of the matter is that you can't win a championship in this league without a superstar. And if we can't match the lousy offer that the Rockets have on the table or even the Lakers by comparison to what we can offer, then it negates a whole lot of what Ferry has accomplished. Because if he says the "status quo" isn't good enough, then we have to land that superstar that would get us above that status quo.

There is more to free agency next season than Howard. Chris Paul, Andrew Bynum, Manu Ginobili, Paul Millsap, and Al Jefferson.

[benhillboy]

There is more to free agency next season than Howard. Chris Paul, Andrew Bynum, Manu Ginobili, Paul Millsap, and Al Jefferson.

If Ferry is as smart as I think he is, he covets Milsap out of that group. Rebounds win championships in the words of the most championship-winning mofo in Bill Russ, and Sap makes it a priority to go get 'em. He should also be the best combination of youth and value out of that group. I'd have no problem with Al playing 5 next to him. Edited July 14, 2012 by benhillboy

[gurpilo]

I think he focused on getting expiring deals for next year but the roster is a non sense. We have too many shooters, no reliable starter at SF or C, nobody can play defense on the perimeter, I am assuming this is a lost season and I'm Ok with that, probably we will be one of the worst 8 teams next year, so will go to the lottery and begin rebuilding. For next year, 1st year of rebuilding, we will have Teague, Lou Williams, Jenkins, Scott and Horford 22M$ on 5 players, no reliable starter at SG, SF and C unless Jenkins proves me wrong, 2 1st rd picks and lots of cap space to sign FA, so before giving my vote I want to see how he makes a team. And for all of you that think that JJ and Marvin can be replaced by Lou Williams and Korver... that makes me really wonder if you have seen any basketball match.

There is more to free agency next season than Howard. Chris Paul, Andrew Bynum, Manu Ginobili, Paul Millsap, and Al Jefferson.

Harden and Ibaka are one of the 2 main targets we should have.

[Buzzard]

If Ferry is as smart as I think he is, he covets Milsap out of that group. Rebounds win championships in the words of the most championship-winning mofo in Bill Russ, and Sap makes it a priority to go get 'em. He should also be the best combination of youth and value out of that group. I'd have no problem with Al playing 5 next to him.

I know Manu is old now but give me him for a decent price coupled with anyone else of the above and I like our team provided we keep what we have now in Harris, Horf, Smoove.

[gurpilo]

My list of preferences would beSG Harden, M. Ellis, T. EvansC Howard, Bynum, Jefferson, Ibaka, PekovicOklahoma cannot match 12 M$ for Harden and Ibaka and both of them deserves the money, there is risk involved on the operation but both would be reliable starters and future stars on the league, so if we make it well we should have at least one of themThe problem I see is that I don't see any SF FA that I would like so that would have to be through the draft or a trade.

[Buzzard]

The problem I see is that I don't see any SF FA that I would like so that would have to be through the draft or a trade.

That is why I like Manu at SF for three years and make the Spurs pay a price if they want to keep him. Would prefer a younger player but if Manu does same as he did last season, 13, 3.4, 4.4 in only 20 mpg, you cannot argue with his production. In the playoffs for 6 games he averaged 18 ppg against OKC in just 30 minutes.

[BusBoyIsBack]

There is more to free agency next season than Howard. Chris Paul, Andrew Bynum, Manu Ginobili, Paul Millsap, and Al Jefferson.

The last 3 guys don't even count because none of them are championship caliber #1 options either. Not even close. The closest thing to filling that superstar label other than Howard is Paul, and there is zero guarantee that he gets away from the Clippers who can offer him the max deal right now. People are focusing so much on 2013, they don't realize that right now is our best chance at controlling the situation and getting the guy we want

[Gray Mule]

Where is it written, "Without Superman, we are doomed?"

Doom and gloom. Superman is a super star. If we just had him, all our

problems would be over. Doesn't matter if we have to trade all our assets,

everyone on the roster + all our draft picks. Give us Superman and finish

the roster with minimum salary, D-League players.

Then, we win every game. The stadium is sold out every game. Hawks must

have a super star to win and he's it. Must have. Must have. Must have.

Without Superman, we end up with a super lottery team. With all the players

we now have, that 13 win season will look great.

Superman is great. I'll admit that. A superstar, no doubt.

Why hasn't his team won it all, every year?

Back to the question.

Our new GM has done a fine job, so far. Wait until the final roster

is set, then ask how he did. It ain't over - - not yet.

He may get us Superman yet. He may not. Whatever happens, Hawks

will put an exciting team on the floor.

[gurpilo]

That is why I like Manu at SF for three years and make the Spurs pay a price if they want to keep him. Would prefer a younger player but if Manu does same as he did last season, 13, 3.4, 4.4 in only 20 mpg, you cannot argue with his production. In the playoffs for 6 games he averaged 18 ppg against OKC in just 30 minutes.

Ginobili is not a SF and he will be 35 next season, it's not an option.

[gurpilo]

Where is it written, "Without Superman, we are doomed?"

Doom and gloom. Superman is a super star. If we just had him, all our

problems would be over. Doesn't matter if we have to trade all our assets,

everyone on the roster + all our draft picks. Give us Superman and finish

the roster with minimum salary, D-League players.

Then, we win every game. The stadium is sold out every game. Hawks must

have a super star to win and he's it. Must have. Must have. Must have.

Without Superman, we end up with a super lottery team. With all the players

we now have, that 13 win season will look great.

Superman is great. I'll admit that. A superstar, no doubt.

Why hasn't his team won it all, every year?

Back to the question.

Our new GM has done a fine job, so far. Wait until the final roster

is set, then ask how he did. It ain't over - - not yet.

He may get us Superman yet. He may not. Whatever happens, Hawks

will put an exciting team on the floor.

I'm sure we are not getting Dwight Howard, he doesn't want to be here and we cannot put on the table a better offer than Houston or Lakers.

And I think we are done doing moves this season, the roster you have now is the one that will play on the opening night, that's it.

My only hope is that Jenkins can become a 14 ppg guy his first season, fills the hole of JJ and becomes an all-around player and a builiding block for the future, not just a shooter.

But for this season we have huge gaps at defense on the wings, at SF and C position, we are much worse than last year and will be one of the worst teams next season, which is fine if we are able to land an all-star FA next year butwe haven't done that in years....We have traded two important players without receiving any young players useful for the rebuilding mode we are entering, just expiring contracts, we should have received Marshon Brooks on the NJ deal, so for me I still put my opinion on hold till next season.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Danny Ferry has been great so far. He shows that he understands value relative to the players' actual worth.

Let's take a look at what he has done so far.

He has essentially replaced Joe Johnson with Lou Williams:

Joe Johnson - career 0.529 TS%, 0.494 eFG%, 16.4 PER, 108 ORtg, 110 DRtg, 0.097 WS48

Lou Williams - career 0.532 TS%, 0.466 eFG%, 17.6 PER, 109 ORtg, 108 DRtg, 0.121 WS48

On the court, the swap is a wash. Joe is a slightly better spot up jump shooter, while Lou Williams is much better at getting to the free throw line. The big difference here is this. Joe costs $20 million, and Lou costs $5 million. Lou's contract isn't going to keep the Hawks from making moves down the road like Joe's would have. Danny Ferry won in this swap.

He has replaced Marvin Williams with Kyle Korver. This one is going to be a bit closer than the previous one, but value is at hand here.

Marvin Williams - career 0.539 TS%, 0.474 eFG%, 13.8 PER, 110 ORtg, 108 DRtg, 0.102 WS48

Kyle Korver - career 0.576 TS%, 0.543 eFG%, 12.8 PER, 112 ORtg, 107 DRtg, 0.112 WS48

Marvin's ability to rebound the basketball and his ability to defend gives him a slight on the court advantage, though Kyle Korver is a much better and more efficient shooter. However, in the long run, $8 million with a player option vs $5 million on an expiring deal gives Danny Ferry a win in this swap.

Anthony Morrow is a tremendous upgrade to Willie Green. Adding Devin Harris is like the cherry on top, as he really isn't replacing anyone, but is a tremendous upgrade to Jannero Pargo if you want to make that comparison. Johan Petro can't be anymore useless than Jason Collins.

Synergy Sports Statistical breakdown of each guy

Top 4 Joe Johnson type offensive possessions: ( regular season + playoffs )

- Isolation: 23.3% of poss . . . 42.4% FG . . . 39.3% 3FG . . . 0.89 pts per poss

- Spot Up: 16.9% of poss . . . 42.5% FG . . . 39.3% 3FG . . . 1.17 pts per poss

- Post Up: 12.1% of poss . . . 53.3% FG . . . ----------------- . . . 1.01 pts per poss

- Pick/Roll Ball Handler: 11.8% of poss . . . 40% FG . . . 34.6% FG . . . 0.80 pts per poss

Top 4 Lou Williams type offensive possessions: ( regular season + playoffs )

- Pick/Roll Ball Handler: 29.6% of poss . . . 41.1% FG . . . 37.7% 3FG . . . 0.94 pts per poss

- Isolation: 18.2% of poss . . . 36% FG . . . 25% 3FG . . . 0.90 pts per poss

- Transition: 12.8% of poss . . . 49% FG . . . 37% 3FG . . . 1.20 pts per poss

- Spot Up: 11.9% of poss . . . 34.4% FG . . . 33.3% 3FG . . . 0.96 pts per poss

The thing about Lou's game is this. He is at his best and is most efficient when he is drawing fouls. This is why despite his low to mediocre percentages shooting the ball from the field, he can make his overall possessions worthwhile with his ability to draw fouls. Basically playing like a poor man's Allen Iverson. But as you see, he definitely needs the ball in his hands in order to be effective.

If JJ could draw fouls at the rate that Lou could, he would be a borderline superstar in this league. But last year, he only drew a shooting foul 4.1% of the time, compared to Lou's 10.1%.

Throughout the course of a game, it'll be like this for Lou. He'll be able to draw fouls and get to the FT line. As long as he doesn't fall in love with the 3 point shot ( as he has a tendency to do ), he'll be good for us. But like with Jamal Crawford, shot selection has always been a problem for him. Especially the "home run" ball.

Clutch Production 2011 - 12:

( Clutch is defined as . . . 4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points )

Johnson:

26.1 Field Goal Att ( per 48 min )

10.4 Free Throw Att ( per 48 min )

7.7 Three Point Att ( per 48 min )

37.9 pts ( per 48 min )

46.7% FG

50% 3FG

L. Williams

24.6 Field Goal Att ( per 48 min )

16.1 Free Throw Att ( per 48 min )

11.3 Three Point Att ( per 48 min )

34 pts ( per 48 min )

34.6% FG

25% 3FG

If the Hawks try to turn him into something that he isn't ( like a Spot Up shooter ), he's going to crash and burn. They basically have to use him like how we used Jamal Crawford. Just give him the ball and let him do his thing.

And that's the problem I see coming up this year, if we keep all of these guards. It's one thing to let him do his thing on a Sixers team in which he was not only the backup PG, but also the best scorer on the team. It's totally different to just give him the green light when we already have Teague and Harris in the mix as potential PGs, as well as good frontline scorers in Smith and Horford.

Something has to give.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Just watching Lou on Synergy and just focusing on the shooting fouls he draws, that dude is crafty. When he goes to the basket, he goes looking to draw a foul if a man is in front of him. While he can get to the rim and shoot the floater somewhat, his main goal seems to be to draw contact. This is probably why he shoots a lower percentage than most guards going toward the rim.He definitely has the Jamal Crawford disease though. He's in love with that 3 point shot, despite not being a good shooter from there at all. Meanwhile, he's knocking down the 16 - 23 foot shot at a 45% rate. Why guys like he and Jamal just don't take more midrange shots, is beyond me.When you shoot in the low 30% as a 3 point shooter, you're not better off taking a 3 over a long 2, when you can knock down that shot 45+% of the time.

Edited July 14, 2012 by northcyde

[Guest]

When you shoot in the low 30% as a 3 point shooter, you're not better off taking a 3 over a long 2, when you can knock down that shot 45+% of the time.

What? Shooting 50% from two is equivalent to 33% from three. If you are shooting 45% from two, then your equivalent from three is 30% exactly. So sure, if you say you are not better off taking the 3 that is true. What is also true is that you are not better off taking the 2. You should exactly indifferent between the two (unless making more buckets somehow gives you more joy even though you score at the same rate).

[Nicholasp27]

What? Shooting 50% from two is equivalent to 33% from three. If you are shooting 45% from two, then your equivalent from three is 30% exactly. So sure, if you say you are not better off taking the 3 that is true. What is also true is that you are not better off taking the 2. You should exactly indifferent between the two (unless making more buckets somehow gives you more joy even though you score at the same rate).

More likely to get rebound with 2s than 3s and shorter rebounds so less fast breaks for opponents Also, if 2 things are same ppp but one has less variance, then that is better from a consistency and winning games perspective, especially in crunch time Edited July 14, 2012 by Nicholasp27

[Guest]

More likely to get rebound with 2s than 3s and shorter rebounds so less fast breaks for opponents Also, if 2 things are same ppp but one has less variance, then that is better from a consistency and winning games perspective, especially in crunch time

Actually you are more likely to get an offensive rebound with 3s than 2. I didn't think anyone was advocating 3s over 2s or 2s over 3s for specific times, but just a generality. Good point about the variance, but once you bring up variance then it becomes more of a risk preference than a steadfast rule. Also it is not immediately clear to me that 2s have a lower variance than 3s, how exactly do you propose to measure the variance of shooting percentage? At crunch time, I am not convinced that you choose the lower variance option (which I think you really just mean choosing the event that occurs at a higher frequency). Suppose you are down 2 and you can only get one shot. If you shoot the long 2 you make it 45% of the time, but then OT is typically a 50% chance of winning. So shooting the long 2 you actually win .45*.5= 22.5% of the time. Now if you shoot the 3 you make it 30% of the time and thus win at a higher rate.

[Nicholasp27]

45% is lower variance than 30%Obv in last shot situations then it may be different...

Edited July 14, 2012 by Nicholasp27

[Guest]

45% is lower variance than 30% Obv in last shot situations then it may be different...

That is not a measure of variance, that is an expectation. Or a mean. Or an average. It all depends on how fancy you want to get, but a shooting percentage is the number of successes divided by attempts. Measuring the variance involves deviations from the mean. If you treat each shot as the "event" then you actually have higher variance with long 2s than 3s. Clearly this is not what you are talking about, but there are other ways of measuring variance like from a game-to-game form of variance. If I have to explain to you that a fg% is a mean then I doubt this is a road you were planning to travel. My guess is you actually mean "frequency of shots made", that's not variance and I already said the amount of shots made really shouldn't matter to you unless you get great joy out of seeing buckets.