niremetal

There is pretty much a push off, hand check, hip check, hold/grab, or armbar on every offensive play in the NBA. it is just like holding in the NFL only IMO more blatant. I think the refs only call things close if they think something is getting out of hand or a specific player/team has drew their ire.

Home teams, especially the underdogs, will get the most favorable calls. Call it a conspiracy, or just call it the refs being human and therefore influenced by the crowd, this is also a fact of NBA life; as was the 2 and 1/2 steps being allowed for over a decade before the league finally said "hey 1 and 1/2 steps is not the real rule".

I do wish they called a cleaner more impartial game, similar to the NFL. But the NBA has never come close to showing that kind of impartial judgement.

I agree. While Josh got away with two travels and a carry and JJ got away with an over-and-back late in the game, none of that is unusual. I wish they called traveling and carrying every time that it happened just so it would be consistent (and players would adjust quickly if they did), but right now, there's traveling and/or carrying on many-if-not-most possessions, and the refs make a judgment call on when to blow the whistle. We whine when it goes against us, Blazers fans whine when it goes against them.

And PS - the Blazers announcers are no worse than Holman and are way better than the Celts, Heat, and Cavs TV crews. Just sayin.

So now, we make the assumption that Woody failed to define roles? Funny thing is Mo Evans and Craw get it. If nothing else, Contract Year can imitate them.

Nire, I see you have the excuse machine running at a steady rate. Keep it coming. It's good for the environment.

Diesel, I see you still have the "oh wait someone suggested that Marvin might not be a complete waste of air TIME TO SMACK THEM DOWN" machine running at full overdrive, as always. Keep it coming. It's good for a laugh.

If it aint broke don't fix it. Marvin wil snap out of it eventually.

Kirilenko had an extended period of adjustment not unlike this when the Jazz took it to the next level in 06-07; Kirilenko sleepwalked through most of that season because he all of a sudden found himself without a defined role on the team. Marvin's role will probably eventually be exactly what you just described for Battier and Posey - a big-time wing defender who drains corner 3s. But it's the coach's job to tell him what his role is, not Marvin's job to figure it out for himself, and Woody's talk before the season was "we need to get Marvin MORE involved in the offense," which is tough when he's ALWAYS getting placed on the weakside and consequently is getting as few touches as he is (which in turn makes it harder for him to find an offensive rhythm).

Give Marvin some time. He'll develop into a slightly taller and longer version of Posey or Battier. But everyone (Woody, Marvin, and us fans) needs to stop expecting him to be an offensive force, and Woody needs to start talking about him that way.

First off Lue and Flip are journeyman nba players who are fringe nba rotation players but they were all we had and you make do with what you have to try and compare them to Crawford is a joke... it really is . To ignore the difference in talent level and experience between the teams is also pretty silly as well. What games out of these first ten have Crawford been ignoring open teammates ? JJ left Phoneix because he didnt want to be the 3rd guy he wanted to be the man? talk about blatantly ignoring well established facts .

Crawford did not lead the knicks in 05-06 Stephon Marbury did 2005-2006 knick stats =0 and he only started 27 of the 79 games he played in as well so he was coming off the bench....well so much for being the main offensive weapon when you are coming off the bench ...

Maybe you should stop quoting people from Sekou's blog and spend a little bit more time getting your facts straight.

If JJ were to leave I stand by my statement that we wouldnt see iso joe anymore .Does that mean we would drop all isolation plays ? heck no but I think with Al and Smooves growth that we would post them, up more and run more pick and roll game with Crawford /Al+Smoove .

First off, there have been plenty of Sixth Men who have led their teams in scoring. Second:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/NYK/2006.html

Jamal Crawford had 149 more points than anyone else on the team and 151 more than Marbury. You can't just ignore the fact that Marbury didn't even suit up for more than a quarter of the team's games. Nice try, though.

And NOW - done with you, fool.

I don't like this kind of basketball, but like Flip, Crawford just fits here with iso driven offensive system.

Exactly. It was a masterstroke by Sund to get a guy who is so perfectly suited for our offense - and who could be a solid contributor in any offense if properly utilized. I was ambivalent about the Crawford addition, but it was one of those "the more I thought about it" deals.

Although we occasionally see someone say this, I think that ship has sailed and even Marvin's harshest critics or Al Horford's biggest supporters are no longer are pushing for Josh Smith to be at the 3.

Over on AJC, I still see the occasional Marvin-hater suggesting trading Marvin for a mediocre big man and shifting Josh to SF. Only one "regular" suggests that, though, and he's an even more visceral (not to mention single-minded) Marvin basher than Diesel. (Although with the way Marvin looks right now, I'm starting to at least understand the harsh criticism - just not enough that I think shifting Josh to SF is a reasonable alternative)

But i thought Smith was better at the 3. :snowballfight:

Yup. I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why on earth we would want one of the league's best interior help defenders (if not THE best interior help defender) - and one whose offensive skills are overwhelmingly better when he gets the ball inside rather than outside - to spend most of his time at a wing position. :question:

I am getting real. As I stated, no hate for JJ. He is an all-star. There is a big difference between having a temper tantrum and bashing the guys complete game (which I am not) and just pointing out the differences between what elite players say at the start of the season and what JJ says at the start of the season.

I don't recall Nash or Nowitski ever stating they wanted to become (go from all-star 8 year vet to elite) elite players at the start of any season. Maybe you can find me their statements to that.

If you happen to find one, bet it came a whole lot sooner than their 8th year in the league; and while they were still much younger than JJ...

Well, would you look at that:

Hawks forward Josh Smith, whose two personal goals for the season are to make his first NBA All-Star Game and first All-Defensive team, is playing some excellent basketball.

OH MY GOD, JOSH SMITH SET PERSONAL GOALS FOR HIMSELF AND DIDN'T SAY A WORD ABOUT WINNING A TITLE. WHAT A DOUCHE.

</snark>

I'm sorry, but it's pretty clear that you either have not watched the Hawks much, don't remember how often Lue and Flip (and now Crawford) went one-on-one and ignored open teammates (and somehow managed to also miss JJ's time in Phoenix under D'Antoni, where he showed no problem playing in a ball movement-heavy system), and/or selectively ignore things that don't fit into your view of JJ and the Hawks offense.

Oh, and Crawford led the Knicks in scoring twice - in '05-'06 and '07-'08. To quote a friend of mine over on Sekou's blog - done with you, fool.

Good Lord where does this stuff come from ?

When was Crawford counted on to carry the Bulls offensively ?

The knicks were never Crawfords team it was Marburys team ? Marbury was making more than Joe is right now ? The knicks traded multiple #1's for Eddy Curry ? Where is he now ?

The Warriors had Monta Ellis who they paid over 60 million as well as Andre Biedrens who they paid 60 million too as well . They also gave Corey Maggette 50 million and then extended Pyscho man Steven Jackson and somehow Crawford was the frontman offensively ?

It seems to me that every team you mentioned sucked because they invested max type dollars in non max type players and when the expectations were raised none of them could live up to them.Crawford was the guy asked to pick up their but hes not a #1 and I think everyone knows this .

What you need to ask yourself is that if JJ walks do you really think we wouldnt be able to score points ? I think we would actually run more plays and fewer iso's if you ask me and that may not be such a bad thing.

Crawford has not taken more than 16 shots in a game this season but somehow hes a ballhog even though thats what the coach has flat out said thats what he wants him to do when he comes in the game . Why should we care what knicks fans or warriors fans think ? Those organizations have their own problems that have nothing to do with Crawford as weve seen the past few weeks . Shouldnt we be judging Crawford but what he does in a hawks uni just as we should do Bibby and everyone else ?

If Joe leaves we will count on Crawford to score but it wouldnt be about Crawford in the last year of his deal moreso than it would be about whether Al and Smoove are bonafide stars and ready to stepup and carry the team .

As for the original question of why Joe is getting so much flack this year ? Its quite simple the expectations have been raised and while Joe is a better all around player than Crawford I think that Crawford has made Joe look bad simply by sharing the ball . Its almost as if Crawfords ability to score and pass has placed a spotlight on Joe and his unwillingness to move the ball at times . His calling out the team in the media just makes the spotlight bigger .

Jamal led Chicago in scoring his last year there. He led the Knicks in scoring twice, and beat out Marbury 3 of 4 times. He scored more - both per game and total - than Monta did last year. Jackson did outscore Crawford, and I admit that I was wrong about him there. But Marbury and Ellis? Doesn't help your argument to cite guys who spent most of their time injured. Like it or not, the Knicks' offense ran through Crawford for 3 years. Ask Knicks fans. And why should we care what they think? BECAUSE THEY WATCHED THE MAN PLAY. Something I'm wondering whether you've done, considering that you seem to be under the impression that Marbury was the Knicks' frontman in anything but the payroll for the last 4 years.

And you're living in a dreamworld if you think that the one-on-one ISO plays started or end with Joe. They are what Woody's "system" entails. Lue, JJ, Flip, Crawford...they all go/went one on one to create offense.

You're also living in a dreamworld if you think Jamal is either less selfish or a better passer than JJ. Again, ask people who actually watched him play before this year. Or hell, watch games this year. Or just check the box score and see that JJ is averaging both more assists per game and more per 36 minutes.

And lastly, you say this:

Crawford has not taken more than 16 shots in a game this season but somehow hes a ballhog even though thats what the coach has flat out said thats what he wants him to do when he comes in the game

So I guess "that's what the coach wants him to do" is a good alibi for Crawford but not for JJ. Ok, thanks. That tells us all we need to know about you.

Again you are avoiding the issue of scheme. Antoni's scheme is predicated on passing and movement ours on Isos.

And that's exactly why no one called JJ selfish in Phoenix even though he was lead guard on a LOT of possessions and was, in D'Antoni's words, essentially the backup PG.

Not going to argue with you about this statement. The comical part is if he could be elite; as in Kobe, Lebron, Wade he would already be there after 8 years. Like I said rookies make these statements not eight year vets and three time all-stars. The other comical part is he did not specify championship as one of his team goals. Lot of balls for his individual goals; no balls IMO for the team goals...

Wade, Kobe, Lebron. Shaq specify championships every year; not individual goals. He wants to be elite; the primary stated goal should always be a championship.

You're right. He said his sole focus is on what the team is trying to accomplish, but you jump up and down and point at scream at the part of his statement where he says he also has individual goals and say that's the only part that he has "balls" for.

And PS - I have no problem with a guy turning 29 and deciding he wants to go from All-Star to elite. Seemed to work ok for Nash and Nowitzki. Worked ok for their teams too.

As I said, get real.

Hope we can sweep those games.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/62727/20091112/byron_scott_fired/

Hope we can steal their coach.

Yea Craw can't guard most point guards and he can't stop any 2-guards either, but if he's hot he may score enough points to off-set it. But without Joe, the double teams would go to Craw or Smoove, shut them down and we are in trouble.

Yyyyyyyuuuuuuuup.

Here is the gist from a post earlier this year:

Link to thread and artcle:

JJ's goals and comments

Like I said to me a 8 year vet worrying about becoming a elite player is comical and trivial compared to wanting to win a championship (which he did not specify as the team goal he set for us). Just my opinion but it did rub me the wrong way...

So I guess that the first part of the statement you quoted is being dismissed as window dressing? Is he not supposed to have any individual goals at all? Get real.

Joe loses multiple possessions each game trying to dribble through a double team, or just plain not giving the ball up when the double comes. He's a momentum and possession killer. I've not been sold on him from day one. He is the only player of the top 6 that doesn't like to run. He is the weak cog at the moment to our flow and he's Woodson's crutch.

The hawks won 13 games without him and 26 games with him the next year and that is as much him as it was the 2nd year of the Josh's and other maturation/additions. The Hawks have been improving every year and that is not to the credit of Johnson but to the credit of the maturation of their players, the addition of a point guard who can shoot and a couple of key acquisitions/trades.

Fact is, Joe has stagnated this group some and his best value to the Hawks may be in a trade of himself and Marvin for one true stud center. Put any solid center in the middle, move horf to the 4, Josh to the 3 and let Crawford start and you have the makings of a very hard team to score on and defend.

1) Who's going to score in that lineup? Crawford? Yeah, because the Bulls, Knicks, and Warriors all did real well when he was counted on to be the offensive frontman. I guess Crawford scoring fewer points than JJ on a lower shooting percentage while commiting more turnovers was all an optical illusion that lasted for several years.

2) You want to move the best interior help defender in the NBA out to the perimeter by making him SF?

NineOh, you've got it pegged. JJ dominates the ball, I agree. But why don't y'all go talk to the folks in New York and Frisco about Crawford. Like Flip last year, people are ok with Crawford being a ballhog because he's new. But "new" is not "better."

I had to watch the game on MSG last night and Walt Clyde Fraiser and the other analyst talked about JJ's comments in length. They said they were suprised that he kept harping on it even after the win vs Denver. Then they mentioned more than once during the game that JJ is one of the main culprits of playing selfish ball on the Hawks team after seeing him try to do something crazy vs a double team and not passing out of it.

If you watched the game on that feed, you also heard them comment on Jamal Crawford going one-on-one and taking bad shots, and commenting that the Hawks do that a lot. And if you watched games last year, you saw Flip Murray do the same damned thing.

People here realize JJ is doing what Woody is asking of him, right? I don't get the cries of "selfish" for our best player the last few years doing what his coach tells him to do. If JJ was pounding the ball while Woody was trying to get the guys to run a Princeton offense that would be one thing. When the coach is going "JJ iso left" and "JJ iso right" then that is less about the player being selfish and more about the scheme.

I honestly think guys would rather see Crawford running this team. Just sad to see how fast we turn on a guy when the next big thing comes around.

AHF and NineOh have it exactly right. I'm definitely not saying that JJ isn't the guy that has done it the most, but that's to be expected since he gets the ball the most. But Crawford going one-on-one and taking contested or off-balance shots (I counted five times that he did that in the second half) is a novelty, so somehow it seems less egregious. Same with Flip last year. Same with Tyronn freaking Lue 2 years before that. How many guards dominating the ball and going one-on-one will it take before people start realizing that it's the system (or lack thereof) that breeds that style of play?

Excerpt from the AJC:

"I don't know when we all of a sudden just really became a selfish team," Johnson said. "Now everybody wants to go one-on-one. It's me, me, me. It's crazy, man."

Coach Mike Woodson called the performance "unacceptable" and was unwilling to blame it on the travel. Johnson added he's been seeing signs of trouble despite recent victories.

"Everybody who touches it wants to score," Johnson said. "I really think guys on this team don't know their roles, so it's killing us. And it's going to continue to kill us."

I think the line "Johnson added he's been seeing signs of trouble despite recent victories" has a ton of meaning.

Didn't this parade pass through like a week ago?

http://www.hawksquawk.net/community/index.php/topic/340959-emo-joe-is-at-again/

I am not bothering to research every player in the NBA.

You gave 4 specific examples of players who, in your mind, made the reliability of per minute productivity numbers suspect and particularly from the point guard position.

Well, you said "none of the players you cited" after I had made a post where I had cited more than those 4 players. I cited Nazr, Rebraca, Ekezie, and several others. So it's not like I was bringing them up for the first time.

C-ya.

Re Jacque and Teague, Jacque Vaughn put up a 6.9 PER his rookie season.

Teague has put up a 13.9 PER so far.

How is that per minute productivity remotely comparable?

I frankly don't care about PER and think it's just about the most bullsh!t thing ever dreamed up (the weighting of each stat is incredibly arbitrary, and is based on assumptions that are, in my view bogus). Their traditional stats per36 were/are very close (11.9pp36 and 7.2ap36 for Vaughn, 12.0 and 7.6 for Teague). I'm actually not a fan of traditional box score stats either, but I think they are less-bad than PER. Unless you really want to tell me that Paul Pierce was better than Steve Nash in 2005-2006 - something that anyone who looked at their stat lines would have chuckled at and anyone who actually watched their games would have died laughing at...but I won't write that essay here.

Every player put up a higher PER with greater minutes and either higher pp36, ap36 or both. In any case, every one of those players did either better than expected or right about where expected based on their per minute productivity from the season before they got the increase in minutes and over the next two seasons of increased minutes.

In every case, the players performed better overall on a per minute basis with the increased minutes.

Did you skip Nazr Mohammed? He never put up per36 stats remotely resembling the 17.5/12.1 he put up in his third year, when he averaged 15.7mpg. He certainly never put up per-game stats resembling that. Oh, and btw - his PER never got up to that level again either.

Rebraca's rookie year was his best by every measure I know of. Ekezie's solid per36 stats in his first two years didn't mean jack when he took on a "larger role" with us in the 13-69 campaign - his per36 stats that year (and, incidentally, his PER) were the worst of his career.

Oh, and about my point:

None of them ever became more than bit players.

I still want to hear you address that. Because that's the crux of my point - solid per36 minute numbers don't mean that these guys will ever be NBA starters (or even good role players). Because again - if Jeff Teague never becomes more than a bit player, then I couldn't care less what his per36 stats (and PER) are.

Actually, I've spent enough time on this. Feel free to talk amongst yourself, though.

Why would you expect someone's per minute productivity to vary when their minutes are increased? All the per minute productivity is supposed to tell you is what productivity you can reasonably expect to get out of those additional minutes based on consistent performance from the player on a per minute basis.

I'm sorry, but do you really not know the answer to your first question?

1) The more minutes someone plays, the more fatigued they become (both during each game and cumulatively over the course of a season). Most players have the stamina to put up the same numbers despite the increased fatigue. Some don't.

2) The more minutes someone plays, the higher the proportion of those minutes will be played against the other team's best players instead of against the other team's reserves (not to mention garbage time minutes). Some players rise to the occasion and produce the same numbers against starters as they would against reserves. But many don't. And I really don't see how you can argue against that with a straight face.

Most coaches realize that 1) and 2) are important considerations and recognize which players don't have the stamina/ability to play starters' minutes. And if a player doesn't show them that he has the stamina and/or skill level to log more minutes against better players, he won't give that player the shot. If you think that means nothing, then I guess you must have thought that Nazr Mohammed could have been a superstar if only a coach had played him 36 minutes per game. Because 17.5 and 12.1 are D-12-esque numbers.

That is useful information and can identify players like Chuck Hayes who are being underutilized and who can earn a larger role based on their productivity.

I never said it wasn't useful. I said it's a poor indicator. I'll modify that again to say "misleading in many cases" instead of "poor" for the sake of precision. In most cases, per36 minutes is a good predictor of what a player can become. But in many cases, it is not.

Every player you mentioned earned a larger role and did as well or better than their extrapolated stats predicted.

That is not true even on a per36 basis. And even if it were, why should I get excited if Jeff Teague is going to be the next Jacque Vaughn? After all, Vaughn was a late 1st round pick who put up per36 minute stats reminiscent of Teague's as a rookie, and his per36 minute stats didn't drop much until his 7th year in the league. That's my point when I say "why should I care?"

This should be simple.

Per minute stats accurate predict per minute production when players are given larger roles.

Why in the world would anyone complain about per36 stats not matching up with per game stats when players aren't playing 36 minutes per game?

To turn that question right back around, why in the world would anyone care about their per36 minute stats if they never get good enough to earn 36 minutes per game? If they never end up being good enough to earn a larger role, what exactly did their earlier extrapolated stats show?

Do you realize that every example you gave actually supports the reliability of per minute statistics? In every case, the players put together better per minute statistics after they got their significant jump in minutes.

Beno Udrih 2006-07 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.0 mpg) - 12.9 pp36, 4.6 ap36, 10.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2007-08 Season After Bump In Minutes (32.0 mpg) - 14.4 ppg36, 4.9 ap36, 13.3 PER

Beno Udrih 2008-09 Season After Bump In Minutes (31.1 mpg) - 12.7 pp36, 5.4 ap36, 12.3 PER

Howard Eisley 1996-97 Season Before Bump In Minutes (13.2 mpg) - 12.2 pp36, 6.6 ap36, 11.1 PER

Howard Eisley 1997-98 Season After Bump In Minutes (21.0 mpg) - 13.2 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 13.6 PER

Howard Eisley 1998-99 Season After Bump In Minutes (20.8 mpg) - 12.8 pp36, 6.4 ap36, 11.7 PER

Jacque Vaughn 1999-00 Season Before Bump In Minutes (11.3 mpg) - 11.8 pp36, 4.9 ap36, 9.2 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2000-01 Season After Bump In Minutes (19.8 mpg) - 11.1 pp36, 7.2 ap36, 12.8 PER

Jacque Vaughn 2001-02 Season After Bump In Minutes (22.6 mpg) - 10.5 pp36, 6.8 ap36, 13.1 PER

Dan Dickau

Dan Dickau 2003-04 Season Before Bump In Minutes (6.8 mpg) - 11.6 pp36, 4.7 ap36, 9.0 PER

Dan Dickau 2004-05 Season After Bump In Minutes (29.4 mpg) - 15.3 pp36, 6.0 ap36, 14.9 PER

Dan Dickau 2005-06 Season After Bump In Minutes (12.3 mpg) - 9.5 pp36, 6.2 ap36, 10.4 PER

You're comparing the wrong things. I said they never put together seasons as starters (ie their ACTUAL PER GAME stats, not their extrapolated and therefore occasionally misleading per-36 minute stats) resembling their pre-promotion per-36 minute stats.

Howard Eisley, 1996-1997 (13.2mpg): 12.2pp36, 6.6ap36

Howard Eisley's best ACTUAL stats, 2002-2003 (27.4mpg): 9.1ppg, 5.4apg

Jacque Vaughn, 1999-2000 (11.3 mpg) - 11.8 pp36, 4.9 ap36

Jacque Vaughn's best ACTUAL stats, 2001-2002 (22.6mpg): 6.6ppg, 4.3apg

I admit that I misremembered Dan Dickau's and Beno Udrih's stats, although I will say that Udrih has been more than a disappointment to Kings fans as a starter, his stats notwithstanding. But as for Eisley and Vaughn, what does it matter if they continued to average the same 36 minute stats if they never actually ended up putting up those stats on a per game basis?

You want some more examples of that? Ok. Check out Nazr Mohammed

Nazr Mohammed, 2000-2001 (15.7 mpg): 17.4pp36, 12.1rp36

Nazr Mohammed's best ACTUAL stats, 2001-2002 (26.4mpg): 9.7ppg, 7.9rpg

Others: Samaki Walker, Felipe Lopez, Obinna Ekezie, Zeljko Rebraca, Rodney White, Brian Cook, Stanislav Medvedenko. All of them put up good-to-great-to-outstanding per 36 minute numbers early in their careers. None of them ever became more than bit players. Some of them got shots at being starters and failed, others never earned a starting job at all. But the point is simple: For a significant number of players, extrapolated stats that make them look promising do not necessarily indicate that they will ever put up the extrapolated stats on a per-game basis. And if they never put them up on a per-game basis, then they aren't an indicator of things to come, are they?

Actually per minute stats have proven to be a very reliable indicator of what players produce when/if they become a starter or play more minutes.

"Very reliable" is a huge overstatement. It has been an indicator for some (ZBo and Kirilenko come to mind), but it has not been for many others - as even a brief glance at the per-36 minute stats for past season on Basketball Reference will tell you. And obviously, the fewer the MPG averaged, the less reliable the indicator. I am particularly wary of extrapolating for PGs, considering how many (Howard Eisley, Beno Udrih, Jacques Vaughn, and Dan Dickau immediately come to mind) never actually put together seasons as starters resembling the per-36 minute stats they produced right before their "promotion." Now granted, I do NOT think Teague is like any of those guys. But per-36 minute production is not "very reliable." My guesstimate is that it misses at least a third of the time when the MPG is below 16mpg (ie 1/3 of the game). To me, that makes it a poor indicator (although "very poor" was an overstatement on my part).

Jeez this post got -2 reputation points? I assume that this was a joke and even as a Woody supporter (most of the time) I thought it was funny.

Yes, it was a joke. I have no clue how that was worthy of downrating. Seriously.