Just Because we finally have a #1 doesn't mean that we need a #2.

[Diesel]

I know that a lot of you guys think in terms of big three..or maybe Jordan-Pippen.  But Just because we have a #1... doesn't mean that we need a #2.

We finally have a #1.  For years, we cried about not having a guy like Dominique that can take over games in the crunch.  More specifically, I recall us having Korver, Millsap, Horford, DMC, and Teague...  and taking the floor with no #1 guy.  They won the player of the week award and split it.   They also won 60 games.   And Hawks fans biggest gripe was ... We need a #1 guy. 

Did we need one?  Probably not as much as we needed Good Health. 

But Along comes Trae.  Trae has put this team on his back and he is definitely the #1 in Atlanta. 

But we have a good thing now.. We have a #1 and as we look around we have 8 other guys who can step up and be #2 at any time. 

But this is a problem because so many of us have in our mind modeled.. that Jordan Needs a Pippen.  Or Lebron needs a Kyrie or a Wade.

Please stop this foolishness. 

This is more like Hakeem and the Rockets who won championships.  Their first championship, it was Hakeem and who?  This team was dominant.  This team was so dominant that they swept Shaq and the Magic.  And guess what, they didn't have a #2. 

We don't need a #2.

I've heard people say that we should get Ben Simmons because he could be our #2?

So if Trae goes down, the production falls on Ben Simmons.  What happens when we get to the crunch time of the game... it's a tight game and we need a goto guy?  Do you trust Ben Simmons?  hackaben.

 

Here's the thing.. we need to rightly define a #2... vs. a 2nd facilitator. 

Right now, Delon and Lou have not been stellar as 2nd Facilitators in the absence of Trae.   But they work well with the 2nd unit.  Everybody is entitled to a bad game.  If we still believe that we need a 2nd facilitator, then let's go out and find that.  BUt let's stop saying we need a #2.   What we need is what good teams always needs... GOOD HEALTH.

 

[thecampster]

46 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I know that a lot of you guys think in terms of big three..or maybe Jordan-Pippen.  But Just because we have a #1... doesn't mean that we need a #2.

We finally have a #1.  For years, we cried about not having a guy like Dominique that can take over games in the crunch.  More specifically, I recall us having Korver, Millsap, Horford, DMC, and Teague...  and taking the floor with no #1 guy.  They won the player of the week award and split it.   They also won 60 games.   And Hawks fans biggest gripe was ... We need a #1 guy. 

Did we need one?  Probably not as much as we needed Good Health. 

But Along comes Trae.  Trae has put this team on his back and he is definitely the #1 in Atlanta. 

But we have a good thing now.. We have a #1 and as we look around we have 8 other guys who can step up and be #2 at any time. 

But this is a problem because so many of us have in our mind modeled.. that Jordan Needs a Pippen.  Or Lebron needs a Kyrie or a Wade.

Please stop this foolishness. 

This is more like Hakeem and the Rockets who won championships.  Their first championship, it was Hakeem and who?  This team was dominant.  This team was so dominant that they swept Shaq and the Magic.  And guess what, they didn't have a #2. 

We don't need a #2.

I've heard people say that we should get Ben Simmons because he could be our #2?

So if Trae goes down, the production falls on Ben Simmons.  What happens when we get to the crunch time of the game... it's a tight game and we need a goto guy?  Do you trust Ben Simmons?  hackaben.

 

Here's the thing.. we need to rightly define a #2... vs. a 2nd facilitator. 

Right now, Delon and Lou have not been stellar as 2nd Facilitators in the absence of Trae.   But they work well with the 2nd unit.  Everybody is entitled to a bad game.  If we still believe that we need a 2nd facilitator, then let's go out and find that.  BUt let's stop saying we need a #2.   What we need is what good teams always needs... GOOD HEALTH.

 

7 players on that team averaged 9.3 ppg or better..5 averaged double digits.

[HawkingAwesome]

only team like that to win was detroit

[Diesel]

3 minutes ago, HawkingAwesome said:

only team like that to win was detroit

Houston.

Golden State.

Dallas. 

Toronto.

I guess I'm saying.. I disagree with you. 

 

[HawkingAwesome]

Just now, Diesel said:

Houston.

Golden State.

Dallas. 

Toronto.

I guess I'm saying.. I disagree with you. 

 

golden state has a big 3 2 of which are the greatest 3 point shooters of all time. toronto had 2 stars at least dallas had dirk who was unstoppable that year. when did houston win a chip? when i say win i mean win a chip.

[Diesel]

Just now, HawkingAwesome said:

golden state has a big 3 2 of which are the greatest 3 point shooters of all time. toronto had 2 stars at least dallas had dirk who was unstoppable that year. when did houston win a chip? when i say win i mean win a chip.

How bout this.  Give me your definition of what a #2 should look like...

You didn't know that Houston has won chips??  Maybe there's a lot less for us to talk about. 

[HawkingAwesome]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

How bout this.  Give me your definition of what a #2 should look like...

You didn't know that Houston has won chips??  Maybe there's a lot less for us to talk about. 

houston won chips in the 90s different era

 

klay thompson is the quint essential #2 he d's up and can take over when the #1 is having an off night

 

clyde the glide and olajuwan are stars olajuwan especially kenny smith to a lesser degree

[Diesel]

Just now, HawkingAwesome said:

houston won chips in the 90s different era

 

klay thompson is the quint essential #2 he d's up and can take over when the #1 is having an off night

 

clyde the glide and olajuwan are stars olajuwan especially kenny smith to a lesser degree

Kenny Smith????

[HawkingAwesome]

Just now, Diesel said:

Kenny Smith????

he wasn't taking over but clyde could if someone could stop olojuwan 

[Diesel]

Alright... Now that I got that out..

What is your definition for a #2?

[HawkingAwesome]

honestly only the rip pistons won a chip without a bevvy of superstars

Just now, Diesel said:

Alright... Now that I got that out..

What is your definition for a #2?

it's already up there, klay thompson is a #2 someone who can D up and score in bunches take over for the #1 if there's an off night.

[Diesel]

Just now, HawkingAwesome said:

he wasn't taking over but clyde could if someone could stop olojuwan 

Clyde was second championship.

Get your wiki out and look up Houston First Championship... I'll wait.   

By the way.. what is your definition of #2.

 

1 minute ago, HawkingAwesome said:

honestly only the rip pistons won a chip without a bevvy of superstars

it's already up there, klay thompson is a #2 someone who can D up and score in bunches take over for the #1 if there's an off night.

Does the stepping up have to be consistent?

[HawkingAwesome]

Just now, Diesel said:

Clyde was second championship.

Get your wiki out and look up Houston First Championship... I'll wait.   

By the way.. what is your definition of #2.

 

Does the stepping up have to be consistent?

he's doing his part consistently yes

[Sothron]

The only team in modern era ie 2000 till now to win a chip with no superstar was the Pistons and the Mavs won a chip with just one superstar.  Every other team had at least one other superstar player on the roster. 

I don't agree that we shouldn't look for a valid #2 to pair with Trae. It would make winning a chip far easier than depending on just one guy. 

And this Rockets debate you guys are having: Rockets first championship the second best player on that team was Otis Thorpe, definitely not a superstar. Clyde was still a star on the second championship. 

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, Sothron said:

The only team in modern era ie 2000 till now to win a chip with no superstar was the Pistons and the Mavs won a chip with just one superstar.  Every other team had at least one other superstar player on the roster. 

I don't agree that we shouldn't look for a valid #2 to pair with Trae. It would make winning a chip far easier than depending on just one guy. 

And this Rockets debate you guys are having: Rockets first championship the second best player on that team was Otis Thorpe, definitely not a superstar. Clyde was still a star on the second championship. 

We're talking about a consistent #2 guy.

Off the top, 

Houston's first championship was Hakeem alone. 

Golden State's first championship..  Steph was the star, Klay was supposed to be the #2.. but in the finals, Klay was neutralized.  Last two games, he scored 12 and 5 points respectively while Steph also struggled.   Iguadala was named Finals MVP & couldn't hit free throws.   They were about to give Finals MVP to Lebron but felt that the MVP should come from the championship team. 

Dallas' Championship team didn't have a true #2.   It was by committee much like Houston.

Everybody forgets Toronto.  They didn't have a true #2.  JC scores more than Lowry did for that season. 

 

So here's my point.  People readily ignore that there are several teams that have won championships with 1 superstar... (That's what we're talking about Ron.).   Can 1 star win a championship.   There have been a Bevy of teams to get to the finals with 1 superstar.  

A defined #2 is not needed for that. 

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

7 players on that team averaged 9.3 ppg or better..5 averaged double digits.

We have 10 players on our current team that has averaged 9.7ppg or better. 

[Spud2nique]

35 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Get your wiki out and look up Houston First Championship... I'll wait.   

Pick on someone your own old a$$ knowledge..  .. that’s me if you didn’t .. I’ll take on the big cat on the room lessss go big D.

No googles just memory.. ready, fire round.

[Spud2nique]

28 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Everybody forgets Toronto.  They didn't have a true #2. 

Pascal was playing at an MVP level in the finals. He raised his play to a clear #2 imo. 

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, Spud2nique said:

Pick on someone your own old a$$ knowledge..  .. that’s me if you didn’t .. I’ll take on the big cat on the room lessss go big D.

No googles just memory.. ready, fire round.

Spud..

These kids want to argue basketball and they've only been around since Curry  won a chip?   They want to call themselves Hawks Loyalist and they've only been a Hawks fan since Trae got here?

I say Fast Eddie Johnson or John Drew and They dont know what the hell I'm talking about.  They think I'm talking about some guys that played for Phoenix. 

The kidd didnt' even know that Houston won Chips...  He thought I was talking about the Harden-CP3 experiment. 

And yes, I used kidd purposely.. because he probably think Kidd was a #2 for Dallas?  Or maybe that I'm talking about Kidd-Gilchrist!  Or maybe they are the same person.

He probably thinks that Baby Jordan is Kobe?  Or Poor Man's Jordan is Lebron??

Or the Three Bombadere's was Curry, Klay and KD??

I can go on...

 

 

[Diesel]

3 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

Pascal was playing at an MVP level in the finals. He raised his play to a clear #2 imo. 

My point is that with that team, anybody could have been the #2.   That's how I feel about us.  If we make it to the finals, it could be OO that raises his game or Bogi that raises his game or Kev that raises his game or JC that raises his game...

The point is that Toronto didn't have a dedicated #2 that year.. neither did Dallas in their year.