leftwich

I can't believe Woodson missed all those layups in the first quarter. Get him out of here!

Wait, Casspi averaged 4 points and 23 rebounds? That has to be a typo.

Quote: Bibby hasnt been that open but for about 2-3 occasions in the entire series. That's just not true. He's had several open looks and hasn't hit many of them.

Quote: No matter how much you hate him, you have to be happy for himand our franchise tonight. Regardlessof how the game turned out, this organization NEEDED Marvin to show SOMETHING in this series. Whether you want to trade him and need his value increased, or if you love him and want him to be a key cog in our future, either way you needed him to have a good game. Showing some toughness by coming back in (and tackling Perkins on one of those last key possessions to help us procure the rebound )only makes it sweeter. Pretty much every player on our team had "their moment" of this series. I thought Marvin had about 2.5 good games coming into tonight, but in this game he had a few of his own moments, and it kind of completes the series in my mind. each of these Hawks coming back next season, no matter how ugly it gets on Sunday...;) GREAT WIN [censored] yeah! Well said.

Al Horford's the [censored].

Quote: 2) Never has been one to adequately develop players Bullshit.

Quote: We cannot give Woodson any credit for that. we can give him credit for bringing him in.

Quote: for some reason i feel smoove has almost reached his full potential marvin will be a superb scorer Josh has made significant improvements this season and he's 22. There's not really any reason to think he's nearly tapped out his potential.

Quote: But i know one thing for sure. If Marvin had played 33 minutes and scored only 6 points nobody would care how many rebounds he had. It would be "Marvin isn't aggressive enough, he has no heart.....etc". Marvin must score to be effective. He just doesn't bring anything else to the table. Childress can impact the game by keeping our offense moving and setting people up. The only thing Marvin does better than Childress really is defensive rebound. Childress is a better ball handler, better defender, better offensive rebounder, and better passer. Oh yeah, and this. Marvin's points/shot: 1.27 Chill's points/shot: 1.61

Quote: Here's a pic I took.... http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-3687 It's on the front page of ireport.com, pretty crazy.

Quote: Quote: Quote: I see a lot of people who are getting fooled by Childress' high shooting percentage. They think that makes him a good offensive player. It doesn't. You have to consider the effect he has on the other players. Childress can't create at all and kills spacing. That is why... JJ shoots 4.5% worse when Childress is playing. Smith shoots 3.1% worse when Childress is playing. Marvin shoots 2.6% worse when Childress is playing. AJ shot 2.9% worse when Childress was playing. Lue shot 3.6% worse when Childress was playing. http://82games.com/0708/0708ATLP.HTM Is the pattern clear enough? When you couple that with the fact that the Hawks give up 5.6 ppg more when Childress is playing (worst mark among the regulars) http://www.82games.com/0708/07ATL8D.HTM it becomes clear that Childress just isn't worth keeping. You again with the Childress bashing? Is this the only dirt you could find on the guy? Jeez, this is pathetic. Leftwich was right on the money when he said those stats were meaningless. You can either believe a stat sheet or believe what you see during the games. I think I'll stick with the games. Besides, what the heck does the rest of the team's shooting percentage have to do with his play? Chillz doesn't need the ball to do what he does out there, so it's not like he could or should affect the rest of the team's offense in any way. If the rest of the team shoots worse when Chillz is out there it's their own fault. I mean, it's not like Childress is playing defense against any of these guys or something. If someone is spreading the floor and gets replaced by someone who can't space the floor, it certainly impacts the play of their teammates. These numbers are troubling in that regard and do support (but not prove) ex's theory that Childress's inability to spread the floor hurts his jumpshooting teammates. But if Childress is on the floor with a guy like Solomon who doesn't have a clue, Childress will get just as much "credit" for any offensive disruptions that Solomon causes. Childress plays more minutes with the second unit, so these numbers can be at least partially explained by that. Also, there's no way I'm buying that Childress affects the FG%'s of AJ or T Lue. Neither of these guys ever looked to shoot in the spaces occupied by Childress.

Yeah, let's get rid of Childress and get another stagnant player that can fall asleep on the wing opposite of Marvin. Seriously, Childress averages something like 1.57 points/shot. Let's keep the one guy on the team who understands moving without the ball (since it takes a Stanford education). He's a step in the right direction, which is moving away from 1 on 1 Woody ball. I don't put too much weight in those situational stats. Childress plays with the bench more than the starters have to (except maybe JJ), and I think that alters any kind of stat like that.

Man...that really is a ridiculous Woody quote. "...and we'll change them." Come on coach Bibby, let's pick up the pace!

Zaza's a better option than Solo. The thing about Zaza is he needs to be on the bench when Acie is on the court. Zaza knows how to get in position to receive the ball, and when Acie is playing timid throwing the ball in to Zaza becomes his bail out option. On the other hand, Solo should never really play unless a big man has fouled out. He lacks hands on offense and timing on defense. A 5 minute Solo stretch usually includes either a turnover or two or a foul or two. He's also not quite strong enough to grab rebounds over other big men either.

Quote: 1) When Joe has the ball, its Smooves man that comes to double. Instead of Smoove attacking the rim for a bounce pass or alleyoop to make the opposition pay for doubling, it is used as an excuse to launch a long J or 3ptr. If Woody can't correct this then what exactly is his job? Josh Smith has also mastered the concept of lurking around the 3 point line when the shot clock is winding down. If he happens to receive a pass, he can launch a freebie.

Quote: And we beat yet another of the NBA's top running teams in a running game. But we can't run against slow teams. I love Woody's "play however the other team wants to play" coaching philosophy. Interesting reading a Warriors blog on this one. Thanks. It's a general NBA blog. Very true about Woody's philosophy. He'd never play a frontcourt of Smoove and Marvin against any other team.

http://www.freedarko.blogspot.com/ Quote: First, read Shoals’s soul-searching here. Then take a trip through tonight’s Hawks/Warriors game: - Warriors’ color guy Jim Barnett’s keys to the game were all titled after Best Picture winners. I was talking during them and couldn’t hear, but they were: Rocky, Lord of the Rings, and Unforgiven. So I guess the game will be about underdogs (even though the Warriors are the favorite), homoeroticism, and genre revisionism. Actually, that last one makes some sense. - It’s only five minutes in and it’s safe to predict there won’t be three set plays the whole night. - Anyone who doesn’t value the importance of style to a team’s performance needs to watch the Warriors with Webber on the floor. He’s actually playing pretty well right now (some rebounds and smooth passes), but you can sense a general state of lethargy enveloping the majority of the team. I stand by my belief that he only needs to play substantial minutes against teams that can make the Warriors play at a slower pace. - These teams completely demolish our assumptions about the function of the pass. On a regular team, the pass connects parts of the coherent system. On these teams, the pass just gets the ball from individual to individual – the concept reigns over the parts. It’s like the difference between Hitchcock and Malick. - Childress, Johnson, Marvin, J-Smoove, Horford. My favorite lineup in NBA history. Woodson should start that group and consign his name to legend. - This game might be too loose for the Warriors. Their style thrives off of other’s teams’ stiffness; I’m not sure the Hawks are even conscious of what the other team does. If the Warriors are Gravity’s Rainbow, then the Hawks are Tender Buttons. - Is this a pickup game? It doesn’t feel like one. Maybe it’s just what pickup games look like when they’re played by real athletes. - This is seriously the only time the Warriors have looked conventional. They at least have plays where they get the ball to Baron and let him work. The Hawks just throw it around. They practice basketball nihilism. Say what you want about the Warriors’ style – at least it’s an ethos. - Monta Ellis dips his hands in hot wax before games. Apparently it helps his fingers get loose. That’s probably the weirdest pregame ritual that doesn’t involve Moises Alou soaking his hands in urine. - This game is proof that Brandan Wright needs to play more. He fits the style perfectly; there’s no reason he can’t be a more versatile version of Biedrins. - Conceptually, the Warriors’ problem is that they don’t have Stephen Jackson – his complete lack of conscience would match the Hawks. There’s a big gap in the Warriors here that wasn’t so obvious against the Celtics. - Everyone said the worst part of the Bibby trade was that he’s not a pure point guard, but his style might make more sense within the team’s overall concept. He’s not exactly monopolizing the ball, which means that Johnson, Smith, et al. still have plenty of freedom to drive without much thought. This might be the only team for which having a top-shelf point guard would make them less interesting. - The Hawks are up 18 at the half. We can only hope that Jackson is back on March 4 for the rematch in Atlanta. - I don’t want to live in a world in which the Suns play a 43-30 half. - There were 18 combined fast break points in the first half. How do you even differentiate a fast break from a normal play in this game? - After a few minutes of the second half, it seems like it’s not quite as crazy anymore. This will help the Warriors on a night when they don’t have Jackson and Biedrins. - Wright is perfect for a game like this. He doesn’t have to worry about getting pushed around in the post and he can use his length to do things like finish over Josh Smith. Nellie gets deserved credit for letting his players play, but his unwillingness to try rookies for any substantial amount of time is upsetting and doesn’t seem to fit with his overall philosophy. - I don’t know why Atlanta looks more conventional this half. Some of it probably has to do with the Warriors trying harder on defense, but they seem to be coasting on the lead. Golden State has something to counteract now and they’re coming back. - I could watch Monta challenge Josh Smith at the rim forever. - My pro-Stanford bias definitely affects this take, but Josh Childress is one of the more underrated players in the league. I’d love to see him go to a contender this offseason and turn into the coolest legitimate role player around. - Al Harrington is the poor man’s Antawn Jamison. Especially if Jamison decided entire sections of games should only involve threes. - In retrospect, the Warriors didn’t have much of a chance in this game without Jackson. He means too much to their overall philosophy. And the lack of Biedrins obviously didn’t help the defense. - Looking at the Suns/Celtics score right now (67-56 with eight minutes left) just makes me cry. We all need the Lakers to beat these teams and win a championship for the good of exciting basketball. posted by Ty Keenan @ 2/23/2008 02:05:00 AM

Quote: Stop using red herrings. The bottom line is that 1) We will never have Chris Paul so his name shouldn't be used 100 times per day on this message board. 2)With the luck of the lottery balls in landing Horford, we have a core of four guys in JJ, Josh Smith, Al Horford, and Marvin where we can be contenders without our PG having to be top 3 in the NBA. The bottom line is that you just changed the subject. I was responding to two things. 1. That Marvin and Acie are more valuable than Chris Paul. 2. Your using Damon Stoudamire (and Keith Van Horn's) stats to support this claim. Just so you know, Damon Stoudamire's stats dropped off when he got traded from Toronto to Portland. This was because in Toronto he was the go-to guy on possibly the worst team in the league, and on Portland there were far better options than Damon Stoudamire. Damon Stoudamire has never been an MVP candidate, and he's never carried a team to the top of the NBA. The last thing that just baffles me about these bizarre claims you make is why this "Damon Stoudamire Effect" that you pulled out of your ass will apply to Chris Paul but not Marvin Williams, who is the same age.

Quote: But with the luck of landing Horford, we have four guys who give us the leeway of not NEEDING an MVP point guard. Why can't people admit that? That although skipping on Paul was a bad break, if we can keep the core of this team together, we have been fortunate enough to land guys where it won't hurt us. If the core of Marvin, Horford, Smoove, and JJ doesn't have enough upside to win without an MVP candidate, I don't know what core does. Stop using the word need. It's not about what we need but more about the fact that we'd be a much better team with Chris Paul than we are with Marvin and Acie. That's not a slant on Marvin and Acie either. Comparing the third (now fourth) best player and a backup point guard (at this point) on a team that's on the bubble for the 8th spot in the East to a 22 year old point guard that's led his team to the best record in the West (and is leading the MVP talks) is absurd. Comparing Chris Paul to Damon Stoudamire and Keith Van Horn is equally absurd.

Quote: BTW, efficiency of Marvin and Acie combined >>> Paul. haha wow...

Quote: Quote: NO way is Marvin + Bibby = to Chris Paul or Deron Williams neither of those teams would do that deal that is laughable. Chris Paul is only 22 and arguably the best pg in the NBA I dont care what anyone says that was a huge f job. Marvin Williams is 21 and Acie Law is 22/23. I'll take those two combined over Chris Paul I wish you were the GM of the Hornets then.

Quote: 1) MW or JC, Law, and SW for Calderon/Moon/Garbajosa/Graham. We could include SW or ZaZa. Calderon would be worth just about anything for us. Ford is back and playing, just having a 13 assist game. 2) Ben Gordon/Noah for JC/SW or just Gordon for JC. These ideas are certainly BIGGER. They may be harder for you to acknowledge. But they can be done. 3) SW/JC and protected 2010 top 15 protected 1st or MW for Sergio/Webster/Frye This deal could be paired down some. Guess what? None of these ideas cost $14.5 million, return players on the obvious decline, nor would the results be older than our entire remaining team. W I don't think Toronto would trade away Calderon for MW or Childress. Ben Gordon for Childress leaves a big gap at backup SF and hurts the team in every aspect except outside shooting. I don't think Portland would be interested in the third deal.

Quote: Quote: You will really struggle to find statistics to back up Acie playing over AJ. Not really. The team is losing with AJ and he isn't likely to get better all of a sudden. The last time Law started was against the Raps. Both in the first half and in the second half we outplayed them with Law on the court. AJ can't break down defenses at all and isn't quick enough to play D like Acie can. This team is obviously going nowhere with AJ running the point. Going by position http://www.82games.com/0708/0708ATL5.HTM We are getting killed at the point and getting hurt at center also. Might as well play Acie big minutes and hope he finds a groove because what we are doing now isn't working. You can't use a link that is for all three PG's and say it's all AJ. AJ's played 46% of the PG minutes. He has nothing to do with the other 54% of that. Look at the individual numbers for both of them here: http://www.82games.com/0708/0708ATL1.HTM You're making this complicated when it's simple, AJ's numbers are better than Law's. If we start giving the bulk of the minutes to Law, that really kills our chances at the playoffs this season because we won't get there playing behind a rookie PG who is playing scared. It might be a good long term decision, but in terms of who is better right now it's clearly AJ.

Quote: Quote: I can't imagine that whoever voted for Law starting over AJ has watched many games this season. Acie has been much more productive as a starter and his +/- with the starters is +20. http://www.82games.com/0708/0708ATL2.HTM It isn't like AJ is putting up big numbers. I doubt Acie would do worse than AJ's 6/5 playing 30 mnutes per game. I do agree Law was better as a starter than he is as a backup now. I still think AJ is better as a starter because he sets up plays early in the shot clock and moves the ball. AJ also is willing to take the open 3 and can consistently knock it down. Law often looks unsure of who he should go to and will wind up throwing the ball to Zaza posting up at the elbow. As for your 82games link, look at this one: http://www.82games.com/0708/0708ATL1.HTM This is far more relevant than the 99 minutes you're referring to that Law played with the starters, especially when you look at the -16 that's been produced by Law, JJ, Chill, Smith, and Horford in 47 minutes. That practically cancels out the +22 Law's produced with the starters in 99 minutes. And overall, we're +37 with AJ on the floor and -83 with Law on the floor. You will really struggle to find statistics to back up Acie playing over AJ. I really like Acie's defense and finishing, but we're a much better team with AJ at the point right now.

I can't imagine that whoever voted for Law starting over AJ has watched many games this season.