Can we finaly shut up the Josh at the 3 nay sayers

[thecampster]

That's just another stat showing that they are wrong above, but I'm done providing stats and facts that show we are just as effective with Al and Josh at the 4 and 5 as we are with them at the 3 and 4. It's really not worth the time or effort anymore. The ONLY difference in where those guys play and how we perform is the effort that they put into playing.

No...that's him reading the chart wrong. The chart is organized by minutes top to bottom. It's only tops in minutes played for that units.

In that listing there are 20 units listed by time.

16 feature something other than a front line of Smith/Horford/Pachulia. The total time is 393.1 minutes or 8.19 games played. The Hawks are +64 over that time period of +/- of +7.81 per 48 minutes

4 lineups feature a front line of Smith/Horford/Pachulia. The total time is 133.4 minutes or 2.78 games played. The Hawks are +47 over that time period of +/- of +16.91 per 48 minutes.

The sample size shows the Hawks to be 9.10 points better per 48 minuts for the season with Smith/Horford/Pachulia as the front line.

In only 1 instance was this lineup negative and it was a -1.

In 6 of the other 16 instances the lineup was negative. -1, -2, -3, -4, -16, -23

[Mully]

For someone that commands the ball and gets it as much as Smith does, he would have to easily get a pass mark for his outputs. Sure he has brain fades with his range just about every game but he is getting better. Shades better than early season form.

One thing though, Its almost as if Smith doesn't see Teague on the court! he just passes to the exact opposite end of the court when Jeff is open. Also Jeff is not shooting 3's that he is clearly open and has a good look for.

[macdaddy]

No...that's him reading the chart wrong. The chart is organized by minutes top to bottom. It's only tops in minutes played for that units.

In that listing there are 20 units listed by time.

16 feature something other than a front line of Smith/Horford/Pachulia. The total time is 393.1 minutes or 8.19 games played. The Hawks are +64 over that time period of +/- of +7.81 per 48 minutes

4 lineups feature a front line of Smith/Horford/Pachulia. The total time is 133.4 minutes or 2.78 games played. The Hawks are +47 over that time period of +/- of +16.91 per 48 minutes.

The sample size shows the Hawks to be 9.10 points better per 48 minuts for the season with Smith/Horford/Pachulia as the front line.

In only 1 instance was this lineup negative and it was a -1.

In 6 of the other 16 instances the lineup was negative. -1, -2, -3, -4, -16, -23

You are right that it is ordered by minutes but this lineup has by far the best +/- of any 5 man group at +46

Teague-stevenson-korver-josh-al

Which to me means not only that Stevenson is still effective and josh is good at the 4 but that LD is in fact not an idiot as his best +/- lineup is also his most used. There again as this thread shows you can make the stats look a lot of different ways.

[thecampster]

You are right that it is ordered by minutes but this lineup has by far the best +/- of any 5 man group at +46

Teague-stevenson-korver-josh-al

Which to me means not only that Stevenson is still effective and josh is good at the 4 but that LD is in fact not an idiot as his best +/- lineup is also his most used. There again as this thread shows you can make the stats look a lot of different ways.

Which is fine. But the point of the thread still holds some water. The Smith/Horford/Pachulia lineup is not being employed nearly enough based on its success (less than 25% of the time) and some of the other lineup combinations are obviously less effective. We're seeing this lineup less because it doesn't start and has to be worked into the rotation.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

The issue is why is Drew always trying to match up to teams, instead of forcing them to match up with US?Why doesn't he simply go with the "big" lineup all the time, and see what they can do? Have Zaza be one of the first ones to sub out, and move Josh to the PF midway in the 1st. Then bring back in Zaza to sub in for Al toward the end of the 1st/beginning of the 2nd.And I get tired of talking about Ivan, and why he isn't playing every night. Even though he turns the ball over a lot and fouls at a high rate, the team doesn't get hurt by those plays because he's also producing at a very high rate. I just don't understand why he can't make the everyday rotation.

[coachx]

AHEM, it was Dolfan who earlier in this post made fun of someone arguing with the facts. Well the facts are very simple right now using the only "facts" we have. The team is more than twice as efficient based on +/- with Josh at the 3 and the team is +/- 16 per 48 when we play Josh/Al/Zaza. In case you are having trouble with that, here is what it means. We average winning games by 16 points with that lineup. We haven't been winning by 16 all year which means our other lineups are horribly inefficient comparably. Dolfan wanted facts...these are facts.

Context matters when the sample size is small. At 17 games we are creating a sample size large enough to start drawing conclusions if the numbers are significant enough. +16 per 48 is significant.

I am not argueing with facts. I'm only pointing out context that you left out when drawing vast conclusion based on a sample size of 17 games where the size of our starting lineups are changed based on the size of the competition.

The bigger frontline are used when we face bigger frontlines. Context is not just about sample size.........there is also situation analysis being ignored.

The smaller front line is used when we face smaller front lines, like the Heat last night. Now we know the Heat game did nothing to help statistics last night but there is no way I would have started ZaZa vs. Bosh and forced Horford to defend Lebron James or to chase R. Lewis / S. Battier around the perimeter last night. The small line up was the right call last night, in my opinion. The Hawks answered blow for blow until that 4th quarter run. Sounds like your saying we should have started the ZaZa, Horford, Smith frontline last night.

Nothing personal what so ever campster. Just a difference of opinion as far as what is fact regarding your all inclusive conclusion. The Miami Heat game is good example of this in my opinion.

For the all inclusive conclusion to hold true don't we need to see the big lineup start several games against smaller lineups ? You basically ignoring the arguement that matchups do matter. Basketball is not just a mathematical equation....there is a human element here as well.

Edited December 11, 2012 by coachx

[AHF]

I will say that Josh has been more effective at the SF spot than I would have expected. Granting that our SF personnel (particularly without Korver) is pretty terrible, but I am definitely interested in seeing more of Josh at the 3 spot.

I am not convinced yet that he is a match for all situations or that the team is best served by having him primarily at SF with Horford and Zaza, but I want to see more permutations from Drew.

I remain in the "Free Ivan" camp as well.

[Guest]

I am not argueing with facts. I'm only pointing out context that you left out when drawing vast conclusion based on a sample size of 17 games where the size of our starting lineups are changed based on the size of the competition.

The bigger frontline are used when we face bigger frontlines. Context is not just about sample size.........there is also situation analysis being ignored.

The smaller front line is used when we face smaller front lines, like the Heat last night. Now we know the Heat game did nothing to help statistics last night but there is no way I would have started ZaZa vs. Bosh and forced Horford to defend Lebron James or to chase R. Lewis / S. Battier around the perimeter last night. The small line up was the right call last night, in my opinion. The Hawks answered blow for blow until that 4th quarter run. Sounds like your saying we should have started the ZaZa, Horford, Smith frontline last night.

Nothing personal what so ever campster. Just a difference of opinion as far as what is fact regarding your all inclusive conclusion. The Miami Heat game is good example of this in my opinion.

For the all inclusive conclusion to hold true don't we need to see the big lineup start several games against smaller lineups ? Youbasically ignoring the arguement that matchups do matter. Basketball is not just a mathematical equation....there is a human element here as well.

This makes so much sense. Context matters since basketball is not played in a vacuum.

I do hate this constant shuffling of the line-up based on other teams personnel. Championship caliber teams don't do this.

Someone needs to start a "PleaseplayIVAN" website.

Edited December 11, 2012 by JayBirdHawk

[TheFuzz]

I am not argueing with facts. I'm only pointing out context that you left out when drawing vast conclusion based on a sample size of 17 games where the size of our starting lineups are changed based on the size of the competition.

The bigger frontline are used when we face bigger frontlines. Context is not just about sample size.........there is also situation analysis being ignored.

The smaller front line is used when we face smaller front lines, like the Heat last night. Now we know the Heat game did nothing to help statistics last night but there is no way I would have started ZaZa vs. Bosh and forced Horford to defend Lebron James or to chase R. Lewis / S. Battier around the perimeter last night. The small line up was the right call last night, in my opinion. The Hawks answered blow for blow until that 4th quarter run. Sounds like your saying we should have started the ZaZa, Horford, Smith frontline last night.

Nothing personal what so ever campster. Just a difference of opinion as far as what is fact regarding your all inclusive conclusion. The Miami Heat game is good example of this in my opinion.

For the all inclusive conclusion to hold true don't we need to see the big lineup start several games against smaller lineups ? You basically ignoring the arguement that matchups do matter. Basketball is not just a mathematical equation....there is a human element here as well.

Well I guess this thread turned into a big line-up thread.

While I don't necessarily disagree, and I don't think Zaza is a championship starter, let's look at it from the other side. Say we get a real 5 like Gasol. How do they defend us? With quick guard defenders, we can zone up teams like the Heat. How do Lebron, Bosh, and Battier defend Josh, Horf, and Gasol with their interior passing ability and knockdown shooters from outside? Horford or Josh would have a field day on Battier. And when Bron inevitably slides over to help, they have the passing ability to kick it out to Horf, Gasol, Teague or Korver for the shot.

We need more data. I originally thought Josh simply couldn't play the 3. As the sample size gets larger, it's becoming more apparent he can. With some more data, it looks like we are really one piece away from a contender, and it doesn't really matter what position it is.

[Guest]

Well I guess this thread turned into a big line-up thread.

While I don't necessarily disagree, and I don't think Zaza is a championship starter, let's look at it from the other side. Say we get a real 5 like Gasol. How do they defend us? With quick guard defenders, we can zone up teams like the Heat. How do Lebron, Bosh, and Battier defend Josh, Horf, and Gasol with their interior passing ability and knockdown shooters from outside? Horford or Josh would have a field day on Battier. And when Bron inevitably slides over to help, they have the passing ability to kick it out to Horf, Gasol, Teague or Korver for the shot.

We need more data. I originally thought Josh simply couldn't play the 3. As the sample size gets larger, it's becoming more apparent he can. With some more data, it looks like we are really one piece away from a contender, and it doesn't really matter what position it is.

But on the flip side who guards Battier, LBJ and Bosh in the Josh,Al,Gasol line-up- this is such a circular argument. It's all about matchups at any given time during a game. If we start that line-up and is succesful offensively it may force Miami's hand in changing the lineup, but on the other hand if their lineup is running circles around our big lineup, what then? we go small.

I like you thought Josh could not be succeersssful over the long haul in playing the SF, not so much offensively but more so defensively. Josh has been lazy closing out on shooters, navigating screens and moving laterally, he has always relied on his athleticism and not good defensive techniques. However, so far this season I am liking his defensive posture and technique which makes a difference - last night guarding LBJ at the top of the key he is in a defensive stance, knees bent, hands out and up. I don't remember seeing him do that before, it was always play off, hands down then try and use his athleticism to block the shot.

It is still early in the season so I think it's still too early to make a definitive statement that he belongs at th SF spot full time.

[Jody23]

I've always felt he could play the SF and do it well depending on HOW he played the position (playing in the post and playing good defense). Because they drafted Marvin though, he didn't have much time to prove he could. I do think if the Hawks acquire an outstanding center, they should keep both Josh and Al and play with that lineup. The versatility of Josh and Al allow that and they've both proven they can be an outstanding at the 3 and 4 together.

Edited December 11, 2012 by Jody23

[TheFuzz]

But on the flip side who guards Battier, LBJ and Bosh in the Josh,Al,Gasol line-up- this is such a circular argument. It's all about matchups at any given time during a game. If we start that line-up and is succesful offensively it may force Miami's hand in changing the lineup, but on the other hand if their lineup is running circles around our big lineup, what then? we go small.

I like you thought Josh could not be succeersssful over the long haul in playing the SF, not so much offensively but more so defensively. Josh has been lazy closing out on shooters, navigating screens and moving laterally, he has always relied on his athleticism and not good defensive techniques. However, so far this season I am liking his defensive posture and technique which makes a difference - last night guarding LBJ at the top of the key he is in a defensive stance, knees bent, hands out and up. I don't remember seeing him do that before, it was always play off, hands down then try and use his athleticism to block the shot.

It is still early in the season so I think it's still too early to make a definitive statement that he belongs at th SF spot full time.

I've noticed that defensive stance as well.

I also think he's still a tweener. But it's looking like he's the type of tweener who can effectively play both positions. He's somewhere between Marion and Kirilenko in that regard. Basically a Kirilenko that can't shoot but might be better in other areas. Don't really remember how good Kirilenko was in his prime.