niremetal

Who's a better center in the NBA?

The Yao argument is kinda like the "Nadal is better than Federer because Nadal usually beats Federer" argument in tennis. It's faulty because their one-on-one matchups are just a tiny fraction of the games each has played over the course of their respective careers (the logic is wrong in the case of Nadal and Federer for a variety of other reasons, but I digress...). The Bobcats have dominated the Lakers during the last couple years, but I don't think anyone would say the Bobcats have been a better team. For the same reason, you can't judge Yao/Dwight and Nadal/Federer just based on their head-to-head performances.

Now who has been the better center in the NBA during the past couple years between those two? Well Dwight almost wins by default because of Yao's injury difficulties. A fully healthy Yao versus a fully healthy Dwight? I don't think there's a right answer to that one.

I agree with the sentiments around here that the fact JJ dominates the ball is primarily Woody's responsibility, since JJ isn't the one who designs our offensive "system." I'll also say that unlike certain other All-Star shooting guards who shall remain nameless, JJ consistently used "we" in his comments - he included himself in the criticism. That's a big step up from said nameless SGs and also a big step up from his "young guys just running wild" comments after the Boston series.

I think the problem many have is that Vince handed Joe his lunch right from the start. Where is that leadership on the court when someone like Vince is going nutz ? How about he throw a hard foul or something .He was so laid back he shouldve just stayed on the team bus and snoozed . Where is Joe taking a charge, going hard for a block,or diving for a loose ball ? The young guys have followed his lead of laid backness and now hes shocked ? Say it aint so Joe ..

Yeah, because we all know how many times Wade, LeBron, and Kobe have thrown hard fouls during a game...

Looks like he is trying to be a more vocal leader this season.

Very good to see.

I am glad he is not afraid to call the team out.

He's done this a couple times in the past, as I recall, and both times the Hawks came out of the gate strong after his comments. But as always, we weren't able to sustain it. C'est la Hawks...

Wow, you haven't been around the NBA very long huh?

It's almost like an extreme case of Marvin Williams Draft Critic Syndrome - he's focusing on where Horford was drafted and comparing him to what he'd hoped out of someone picked in that draft position rather than focusing on his game compared to the game of the actual players he's comparing him to. But in this case, Horford is not exactly underperforming what you'd expect from a #3 pick in his second year, particularly one stuck in an offense that never gives its big men touches, so you can't blame this absurd post JUST on that...

And this post is absurd. Ask all 30 NBA coaches and all 30 NBA GMs which player they'd rather have between Horford, Anderson, and Collins, and all 60 would say "Horford." Well, at least that's what they'd all say now that Isiah Thomas and Kevin McHale are gone...

Not a fan - I don’t like the big “ATL.” Looks jarring to have lettering that much bigger than the uniform number.

I am saying he gives effort on both ends of the floor and has for all of his nine years. What I am also saying is he is not capable of playing better defense. You are asking Crawford do something he is not capable of and blaming this inabilty on a lack of effort which is BS.

If Crawford was a pg who everaged 12 ppg and 8 assist would you expect him to become a better scorer after nine years? And if he did not, would you blame it on his lack of effort?

Crawford is a high energy guy who does not quit. I have never heard of a team mate or coach questioning his effort on the court, just his decisions.

Uh...I've heard that plenty of times. True, not from a teammate or coach (although see below) - but I've also never heard a teammate or coach praise his effort on D. And to be blunt, you're the first person I've ever heard say that Crawford gives 100% effort on D. I guess we can agree to disagree on that point, but to me, Jamal shows excellent quickness, speed, and ability to change direction on offense, but not on defense. That indicates a lack of effort. And I'm far, far, far from the only one who thinks so:

Draftexpress:

Defense: Has the lateral quickness and length to a factor, but tends to shy away from taking advantage of his tools when he’s not motivated. Comes up with a few steals by virtue of his incredibly quick hands and superb wingspan. Doesn’t make hustle plays, but shows some anticipation and timing. Won’t show a lot of effort playing defense on the ball. Tends to avoid getting in a low stance, allowing slower players to beat him into the lane. Will go under some screens and has a hard time fighting to get through solid picks on the perimeter. Gets a hand up when his man looks to score, but doesn’t get in position to effectively use his length. Usually opts to sag off his man, allowing him to accumulate some mid-to-long rebounds over the course of a game. Isn’t a great weakside defender either. Doesn’t leave his man, which is a good thing, but closes out very high and will sometimes take himself out of the play. Often winds up having to guard taller players, making it hard for him to be effective. Was much more effective defensively when he was coming off the bench and was playing with a sense of urgency.

Sports Illustrated (from an NBA scout):

It's going to help Johnson to have another potential 20-point guy playing with him. But that scoring may be offset by the fact that Crawford has been one of the worst defenders in the league at his position. With his height and length and athletic ability, you have to question why he isn't a better defender.

Hoopshype also says he "doesn't play much D." And this is from when he arrived in Golden State. Gee, whaddya know - a coach noticed that he doesn't play much defense too:

“I’ve told him, ‘Nobody probably ever told you how important it is that you play defense. This is something that has to be a part of you as a point guard in the NBA. You have to give more effort playing defensively.’ So a lot of this stuff is new being reinforced to him. . . . We’re looking at it from ground zero.”

You can also go chat with all the Knicks fans who watched him on a nightly basis for 5 years and ask if they think he gives his best effort on D; heck, you can just go check their message boards. And you can go ask Golden State fans or check their message boards to see if they thought Smart's off-the-court work with Crawford led to him giving more defensive effort on the floor last season.

But I guess you're right and all of us are full of "BS."

That is showing up with Crawford. I can only assume you know nothing of his game if you expect better defense. He could not stay in front of small quick guards when he first came into the league, he sure as hell is not quicker now nine years later. What he gave was all he has. Expecting him to stay in front of guards as quick as Nelson without fouling is asking the impossible. He can't do it; and unless you accept that as a reality, you are going to be whining about his defensive effort for the next two years.

Him and Bibby on defense are pretty much equals. Accept it, deal with, but don't act like you did not expect it. Makes you look clueless or at the least very naive.

I'm sorry, but did you even read my post before you posted that response? I explicitly said I expected it. I just don't think that expecting a player to not give his all makes it ok to not give his all or means that we should overlook that aspect of his game when assessing that player's performance. Jamal Crawford doesn't give his all on defense. Everyone who watches him knows this, but that doesn't make it ok. How is that "acting like I did not expect it?"

It's starting to look like you have little-to-no interest in actually reading and responding to my posts, so if you're not going to do that, let me know so I won't bother responding to you anymore.

Shaq looks really fat this year.

He's been slowly inflating for a few years now.

As for who can guard Howard 1 on 1...I seriously haven't seen anyone who can do it consistently. I woulda liked to see Divac in his prime try to get under his skin, though...

Let me put it this way, Crawford has never been good on defense in nine years. I know this because I have followed him and wanted him on our team for nine years. His effort last night on both ends of the floor is about as good as it gets. In case you have not noticed he is bigger than most point guards in the league and a hell of a lot slower. And the flip side is he is to small to deal with most SG's in the league.

The reason I suggested you may be a casual fan is most fans know this and expect it. He gave the same effort last night on both ends of the floor he has given for nine years. I wish I could say that about all our players.

That's fine. But the thing I was disputing is the idea that Crawford "showed up" last night. In my book, you don't show up unless you show up on both ends. It's something that ticks me off to no end - a lot of people judge whether a player "shows up" by how aggressive he is offensively, without regard to what happens for the other 50% of the game.

As for whether I expect it from Crawford...yes, I do. I know he does not lay it out there on defense, and I've come to expect that from him after watching him on WGN and the MSG Network (I've lived in Philly for 6 of the past 8 years and both are part of the digital cable package around here). But just because he never "showed up" on defense before doesn't mean that we should pat him on the back for continuing to do it. And that's what it seems like you're doing when you applaud someone for "showing up" when he is aggressive offensively even though he didn't give an effort on the other end of the floor. And that annoys the hell out of me. (This is all aside from the fact that he threw two of the worst passes I've seen in quite awhile and didn't set anyone up to score all night)

I've also come to expect these types of games from the Hawks every once in awhile, so I don't know about how dissonant last night was with expectations for the rest of the players...

In any case, you know what they say about people who assume. So don't do it.

And its funny how some people ignore basic effort like yourself. Guess you think Crawford should be an all world defender just because he plays for us now. Maybe you have not watched him play for the last 9 years being a casual fan and all; so here is a news flash, Crawford will never be a all world defender; but at least he showed up last night.

Dude, you don't know me or anything about me. I am no casual fan, and have watched Crawford plenty. Don't get personal if you don't know someone.

I agree he gave "basic effort" and "showed up" on offense. But he "showed up" and gave "basic effort" only on offense. On defense, he was barely making an effort to deny penetration. To me, it doesn't count as "showing up" if you only do it on one side of the floor.

To me when it comes to effort, its about pride and motivation. Back to backs are tough in the NBA but thats no excuse for not even showing up. A 10 to 15 pt loss and I would have thought maybe they are just tired. Being down over 30 with your starters on the floor is a total lack of effort in my mind.

My observations on three bench players:

Teague looked like a total rookie.

Crawford looked like he wanted it.

Morris actually showed some flashes.

You know its a bad game though when Morris scores as many points as any of our starters in less minutes. Our starting five did not come to play and Orlandos did.

Funny. Crawford didn't seem to "want it" much on defense. Amazing how people seem to completely ignore what happens on that side of the ball.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/basketball/nba/hawks.scout/

An opposing team's scout sizes up the Hawks

They lost Flip Murray as a free agent [to the Bobcats], and that is going to hurt them more than most people would think. On the other hand, I like their signings of Joe Smith and Jason Collins because the Hawks were lacking in size off the bench. Those are moves a contender would make, and moves the Hawks didn't make in the past.

Joe Johnson is by far and away the best player on this team. I know Josh Smith gets a lot of attention because of the highlight dunks, but he isn't even the team's second-best player. I would say Al Horford is their No. 2 guy, and there is a big drop-off between Johnson and Horford. Everyone would agree that Kobe Bryant and Dwyane Wade are the top two shooting guards in the NBA, and in my mind Johnson would be No. 3. He's in that second tier of stars. You can't build a championship team around Johnson, but if he's the No. 2 guy on your team, now you have a chance to win the whole thing. He would be perfect as the No. 2 player on a contender because he is a quiet, unselfish guy who can do so many things well. But I don't think he's one of those assassins who would do anything to win. I would also think he has to be pleased with the growth of the team in Atlanta, going from the lottery to the playoffs to making the second round last year, which means his move there has been the opposite of a failure.

If Johnson were to leave as a free agent [after the season], it would be a killer because of all the things that would have to be replaced. He can score in a variety of ways -- out of the low post, shooting the ball or off the dribble. But what really separates Johnson from a lot of other guys is that he's a willing passer who makes his teammates better. When the defense collapses, he will find the open man instead of trying to do it all by himself. At the same time, you've seen in the playoffs that he can make shots with deep range even when defenses are scheming against him. He could be an All-Defensive team guy, but he has had to be not only the scorer but also a playmaker who gets the team into offense while being among the league leaders in minutes played. With Jamal Crawford now in Atlanta, Johnson may not have to play 40 minutes a night anymore, and if his defense improves, the team may have a chance to progress further.

At the very least, acquiring Crawford gave the Hawks leverage in their negotiations with Mike Bibby, which enabled them to sign him back at a lesser salary [three years, $18 million]. Crawford is a scorer who takes a lot of shots and his selection isn't great, but there will be nights when his scoring will put them over the top. It's going to help Johnson to have another potential 20-point guy playing with him. But that scoring may be offset by the fact that Crawford has been one of the worst defenders in the league at his position. With his height and length and athletic ability, you have to question why he isn't a better defender.

I wonder what they're going to do with the minutes between Crawford and Bibby. Is Crawford going to accept a role off the bench if coach Mike Woodson decides to continue to keep Bibby as his starter at point guard? Bibby gives them a bit of a calming influence and some veteran leadership, but the main thing he does is make shots. Basically he's a catch-and-shoot guy now, and that has served as a good complement to Johnson. My feeling is that Crawford is more likely to accept the role off the bench than Bibby.

Horford has given them stability and surprising maturity in the frontcourt. It's surprising because he's had only two years in the league and he's been playing out of position at center. But playing center probably helps him because he's not one of these modern big men who wants to shoot from the perimeter. A generation or two ago, he would have been too small to play center, but today there are only a handful of guys who are so much bigger than him to cause matchup problems. I'm not sure how much upside he has because he doesn't have that impressive athleticism. But he will be a very good player for a long time because he rebounds, defends and plays every play. He plays like you want your big man to play, as a physical guy with effort. You'll see him telling teammates where to rotate or covering for them when they get beat. He won't be a great scorer, but his post game is improving and he can make the 15-to-17-foot shot. On a lot of nights, he's quicker than the center who is guarding him and that gives him an advantage.

Then there's Smith, who seems to be focused more on making the spectacular dunk than on doing the things he needs to do to help win the game. To his credit, he has taken fewer threes the last couple of years. But so often the ball just stops when it gets to him, and then bad things happen. The ill-advised three is like a turnover to his team. Not only is he great athletically, but he also has some skill. The problem is that he's trying to make the spectacular play. He'll make that spectacular play look routine, but the easy or simple play is something he can't or won't make, and that leads to more turnovers. But let's be fair: The guy is still only 23, which is why it's still too early to give up on him. He hasn't had veteran leadership in Atlanta. He's a guy who could be a better-skilled version of Dennis Rodman while leading the league in rebounds and blocked shots. Offensively he should focus on rebounding the offensive boards and trying to take bigger players off the dribble. He should also be developing his ability to score in the low post because most nights he'll be guarded down there by a bigger, slower player.

I don't know if Marvin Williams will ever be able to overcome the fact that he was picked too high in the [2005] draft at No. 2, ahead of Deron Williams and Chris Paul. I would argue that Williams has maybe turned into a better pick than Andrew Bogut, who was No. 1 that year. It was a very promising sign that Williams developed his three-point range last year. The difference between shooting the three as opposed to the 17-footer has to do with the spacing. It becomes more difficult for defenders to either suck into the paint to help while still being aware of a shooter like Williams at the three-point line. The Hawks missed him over the second half of the year when he was hurt. He still doesn't have a bread-and-butter move that will allow him to score anytime. He has developed as a catch-and-shoot guy, which makes him a complementary player. He'll occasionally surprise you with a quick move off the dribble to dunk on you, so he's an OK athlete. He can be a 17-to-18-point scorer eventually. At the other end of the floor, he's a decent defender because he makes the effort.

Jeff Teague is an intriguing rookie. He's ultraquick and he can get anywhere he needs to go. The only real question is whether he'll be able to make enough shots on the perimeter to keep defenses honest. His motion is unusual -- he shoots it low and out in front, and he may have to adjust that for the NBA. The other thing is whether he'll gain Woodson's trust by not taking bad shots and turning it over early in the year.

As for their other reserves, Joe Smith still provides offense at power forward. He's a big man who can score in the low post and face the basket and make a jump shot. His veteran leadership may be even more important, though it will be interesting to see if he can have a big enough role to command the respect of someone like Josh Smith. Collins may play only a few minutes a game, but he'll be there to bang and defend the bigger centers. When Zaza Pachulia is inspired, he's a capable rebounder, especially on the offensive glass. Mo Evans may be the fourth guy on the wing, and he might not be happy with the limited minutes.

Woodson is in another lame-duck year. It isn't the first time, so it shouldn't be a big distraction, although it would help to get off to a good start and take the heat off that situation.

My only quibble: While I agree that his ceiling is that of a "Rodman with some offensive game," I actually think they're a bit hard on Josh's mentality. He doesn't just go for the spectacular dunk or block anymore.

Its funny, we have not even played a single game of the regular season and people have already given up.

I agree, but the man had a point re: Woody's "system"

I'm going to give Teague a pass tonight because he was actually playing hard. It isn't his fault that while he's trying to run a play, that no play appears and he says f it and throws up a shot before the shot clock expires. He did drive the ball many times and was blocked but at least he was taking it to the rim. He did have a very impressive block on Howard. Teague is going to be okay. As for the Hawks as a whole, this is just a continuation of how we match up against a team with chemistry and very good talent. Hawks have little chemistry. It's seems to me it's still all jumpshots and a wide open lane for the other team to have layup drills. Where's the heart?

I hate it when people say someone "played hard" when that player gave zero effort on D - which was the case with both Teague and Crawford tonight. Defense is 50% of the game. Sorry, but you're not "playing hard" if you're not trying for 50% of the game.

Any other team out there losing by 40?

Yup:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2009102209 (G.S. beat N.O.)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2009102005 (Cavs beat Dallas)

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2009101303 (Magic beat N.O.)

Not that that excuses it, but even the best teams get their asses handed to them sometimes and this IS the preseason. Rather it happen now to give them a wake-up call.

This is like flipping out if the Falcons lost 45 - 7 to the Steelers . . in the last preseason game . . and saying that you're done with Michael Turner.

Some of you have been waiting to revert back into the "woe is me as a Hawk fan" mode. So go ahead and get it out of your system tonight.

But as soon as JJ hangs 25 - 35 points on somebody, I bet you'll be cheering his azz. So go ahead and get the crying out of your system. Cry all of that stuff out tonight.

The REAL SEASON starts Wednesday.

Something tells me Sasquatch won't be cheering JJ anytime. He has "hater" written all over him. There are people like that on Sekou's blog - there's a resident Bibby hater, Horford hater, and Marvin hater. My guess is that he is a JJ hater, and it'll never be out of his system.

9 FTAs, can't be that gutless.

Thank you. I'm sorry, but this thread is laughable. If Crawford is so much better than JJ, why did JJ average more points on better teams while shooting a higher percentage from the floor and getting more assists? Please.

I keep reading this over and over, and I don't know how many of us come to this conclusion? The only clear, undebateable fact is Joe Johnson is our number one option on offense, After that, it's anyone on the floor as a second option, and that's it. (Flip the disclaimer here, because he was the option on the floor because of his one-on one skills). How can anyone justify Bibby,Smoove, Horford as a second, third, or fourth option? Or Marvin as a fifth option? Bibby gets open jumpers because JJ is doubled - same with Smoove - to our dismay. Horford gets no sets run his way. Marvin very well could be the second option on offense if we HAD an offense.

Co-sign.

This year he has us at 44-wins and Chicago finishing ahead of us at 49.

Phew. For a second there, I thought you were gonna say that he had predicted that we would win 50 games - in which case, of course, we would actually headed back to the lottery.

I'm glad to see he predicted Portland to do so poorly though - that means my second-favorite team is a lock to win 60.

No, its Smack a Smoove.

BRILLIANT!

That gets five JTOs.

Yawn. Three years late to the parade, and obviously didn't watch any Hawks games before Marvin got hurt and probably hasn't looked at anything but Marvin's stat sheet if he thinks that he "didn't show much improvement from the year before" last season.

You've gotta be kidding me right? First off as Dolfan said, Woody specifically stated he was going to do this so we shouldn't even bring the coach up because this was expected. Secondly, here are the minutes from other players on good teams last night:

-Carmelo, 32 minutes

-Chauncey, 34 minutes

-Kobe, 30 minutes

-Artest, 31 minutes

That completely negates your argument, and the one or two extra minutes are not going to make a difference! If Woody starts doing this throughout the season then that is different but it was ONE GAME! Give it a rest.

One or two extra minutes makes a big damned difference over the course of a full season - even more if it starts 2 games early in the preseason. Yeah, Woody said he'd be giving his starters more burn in the last two games of the preseason. But he gave JJ more burn last night than any of the guys you listed (Billups was closest at 0:38 less). That's not a good thing to see this early considering that JJ already has a higher MPG over the last 5 years than any other player in the league.

You want to say this is just one game and not a sign of things to come? Fine. All I'm saying is that if JJ is averaging more than 38mpg over the course of the full season again, I'll point to this as the first indication. And if you want to argue that averaging "just" 1-2 extra MPG over the course of a full season doesn't matter, then I don't know what world you're living in.

DWade played almost 30 minutes, is there really that big of a difference in your eyes? And how are the players supposed to build up their stamina for the game if they don't start extending their minutes? You don't expect them to continue to play 24 minutes and then all of a sudden play 35+ do you?

Uh...yeah. That's exactly what I expect. BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT EVERY OTHER GOOD TEAM IN THE DAMNED LEAGUE DOES WITH THEIR STARTERS.

Pre-season. He could be 1-50 right now and it's all moot. When, if, he starts the season the same way, it needs to be addresed.

I don't care if it's the backyard of his beach house when he's drunk and high. NBA players have no excuse for missing 9 of 10 free throws.