thesheedera

I was hoping it would be for $35 or $37.50, but $40 is definitely within reason.

Seems like everyone involved - players, staff and management - really wants to keep the core intact and add as opportunities come along. There is something to be said for stability, as long as it doesn't lead to complacency.

Why would you do such a thing?

Sucker for torture.

I feel like that monster thread had a lot of gnashing of teeth over something that at the end of the day, I think both sides aren't too far apart on. Let's see.

He always seemed like a taller version of Lonny Baxter to me. I don't think he is suited for the NBA. Even when he was healthy his conditioning was awful and he seemed to get tired after 4-5 minutes of play.

A minimum contract wouldn't bother me, but anything above that would.

His conditioning issues and injury issues are one and the same. He's a guy that will put in the work to stay in shape, but when injured the weight piles on fast.

For the right price he's worth a shot, but it could take him a while to get into game shape. One thing's for sure: He can score in the post. Also extremely high bb iq.

I've been mostly absent for so long that I thought I'd lay it all down in one post. Sorry for the inevitable repeats:

Questions:

1) Are we involved in any summer league? If not, where are our guys playing.

2) Is there a mobile version of the squawk for blackberry users?

Thoughts:

1) Despite being a card carrying marvin nuthugger, I'm intrigued with a starting lineup of bibby (or teague when ready), crawford, jj, and then either horford and a new center, horford and zaza, or smith and horford. Also like it with marv and horford, or marv and new center.

We're at a stage in our development where our "pet players" truly need to take second stage in our individual minds to the overall good of the team. I hope the smith nuthuggers are in agreement with that.

2). I'm starting to buy into the stability line of reasoning. I think we need more post depth, but what was once a toxic lockerroom environment now seems to be a olace that our guys want to return to. We do have room for organic growth, and with some more bigs I feel comfortable going back at it with much the same cast of characters plus crawford.

3) woody remains my biggest fear

What's Marvin gonna do? Shoot him with his Super Soaker 3000?

That's actually pretty darn funny.

And the top 10

Thanks to the Spurs, Cavaliers and Magic, it's possible to believe that at least some NBA teams are more committed to raising a championship banner than protecting the profit margin.

Now the questions are: How committed? Will any other teams join the party? And if they do, will they make the right choices?

Although the 2010 free-agent class might be loaded with franchise cornerstones, the current class has enough cornices and rebar to upgrade a team from fixer-upper to showcase status. Even if Kobe Bryant, Mehmet Okur and Carlos Boozer opt to enter the pool, the options for reworking a team's foundation are limited. (Bryant has indicated he'd opt out of his contract only to sign a longer deal with the Lakers, so he is not included in the rankings.) That's not great for Detroit and Oklahoma City, which have the most cap room and are looking to upgrade their respective cores. But for teams in search of specialty items, an array of young role players and battle-tested veterans are available.

The key, as always, is to pay the right price and add pieces that don't just look nice but also fit the decor. The 76ers blew their budget by landing Elton Brand last summer, not anticipating that he'd bog down their up-tempo offense. The Clippers emptied the till to add Baron Davis, not figuring on Brand's defection or Davis' balking at coach Mike Dunleavy's play calling. The Magic, conversely, made a lower-profile move in signing guard Mickael Pietrus, but his athleticism, 3-point shooting and ability to defend bigger wings filled a glaring need at shooting guard and made him an invaluable ingredient in getting them to the Finals.

It's through that lens that we examine the 20 free agents who could have the biggest impact next season, either on their current teams if they're re-signed or on a new team badly needing their services. To help any real or imaginary GMs, a synopsis of what each player can deliver at this stage of his career (which might not match popular opinion) and the best and worst systems for him are included. You know, just in case someone is thinking of building a grand staircase for a mobile home.

*UFA = unrestricted free agent

*RFA = restricted free agent

1. Hedo Turkoglu, SF/PF, Magic (UFA)

His game: Playmaking forward who is as close to LeBron James as any 30-year-old in the league can be. Very good passer but a better scorer, particularly in the clutch. Has complete face-up game -- 3s off the dribble, pull-up jumpers and the ability to finish at the rim. Size and length discourage most teams from attacking him defensively, but without a shot-blocker behind him, he's an easy mark.

Right system: In short: Orlando's. Doesn't have stamina to orchestrate offense all night but is fearless when needed. Has to have shooters spacing the floor because his handle is shaky in traffic. Also needs a strong team-defense concept.

Wrong system: A point guard-dominated one or any emphasizing pick-and-rolls or a drive-and-kick style in which he's not directly involved. Loses much of his value if he's merely a spot-up threat or a third option. Up-tempo is not his strength, either, because he has amazing skills but average athleticism for a small forward/power forward.

Best fits: Magic, Pistons, Blazers, Grizzlies, Bucks

2. Carlos Boozer, PF, Jazz (UFA)

His game: Equally adept at pick-and-roll and pick-and-pop. Confidence-based jump shooter -- when he's feeling it, he knocks them down, but when he's not, his shot is way off. Better inside when he can body an opponent. Average on-the-ball defender, not a shot-blocking or ball-hawking presence. Exceptional offensive rebounder, especially off his own shots, and strong on boards overall.

Right system: The more structured, the better, but he needs a similarly versatile big next to him. Has to have a dominant playmaker to use all his strengths and a shot-blocking center to protect his defensive weaknesses. Ideally, he's the second or third option, even though he would like to be the first. Needs an organization that advertises its belief in him publicly and privately.

Wrong system: One in which he's not at least the second option or in which public critiques by coach/GM/owner are accepted. He's an elephant: He never forgets. Long bigs who can match his agility give him fits, which is why he can't be a team's only front-line threat.

Best fits: Cavaliers, Lakers, Celtics, Magic, Grizzlies, Jazz

3. Ben Gordon, SG, Bulls (UFA)

His game: Scorer, pure and simple. Despite his size (6-foot-3), he can elevate and knock down contested jumpers off the dribble against almost anybody and get to the rim. Quick brakes and release are the keys. Mediocre or worse in every other aspect of the game, but you can count on between 20 to 30 points every night and half of those in the fourth quarter.

Right system: Simple and wide-open with a place to hide him on defense. Teammates who will do the dirty work without complaint and a point guard strong enough to keep the rest of the team involved and defend the opposing shooting guard.

Wrong system: Low-scoring, defensive-oriented team that sees him as anything more than a designated scorer. Not likely to mesh with a star who expects to get the ball at crunch time. Has to have an agile shot-blocker behind him to discourage opponents from exploiting his size and overall lack of defense.

Best fits: Bulls, Hawks, Mavericks, Timberwolves, Knicks, Suns, Hornets

4. Andre Miller, PG, 76ers (UFA)

His game: Strong on pick-and-rolls and post-ups. Remarkably effective when getting into the paint, considering he is not a threat from farther than 20 feet. Much better finisher than passer in the paint, unless it's a lob. Uses his size and strength well when he can get up into his man on defense; capable of guarding both 2s and 1s.

Right system: A self-sufficient one in which he can be a closer rather than creator. Works well as a calming influence in an up-tempo attack. Exceptional rebounder for a point guard, so when he's paired with athletic wings, there are lots of transition points.

Wrong system: Anything that asks him to be a traditional point guard. A post-up big man limits the best parts of his game. Needs a star who draws double-teams and an alley-oop big man to open up his midrange game.

Best fits: 76ers, Blazers, Warriors, Heat, Raptors, Knicks, Pacers

5. Rasheed Wallace, PF/C, Pistons (UFA)

His game: Unlimited jump-shooting range with ability to turn and score over either shoulder in the post. Excellent help and on-the-ball defender when he's in the mood; has strength to play behind and length to three-quarters on the block. Smartest all-around post defender in the league.

Right system: Half-court, slower tempo, now that age has cut his endurance. Requires a commanding, battle-tested coach because he won't hesitate to go off the reservation at the first whiff of uncertainty or incompetence. Needs an aggressive No. 1 offensive option because he would rather play off a star than be one. A team and coach with a defensive focus are important to keep him committed to the cause.

Wrong system: One without clearly defined roles. Or a team that relies on him night in and night out, offensively or defensively, or with a coach still learning the ropes.

Best fits: Celtics, Mavericks, Spurs, Magic

6. Mehmet Okur, C, Jazz (UFA)

His game: Versatile scorer, particularly lethal on pick-and-pops and weakside 3s, but has a serviceable post game against slower bigs. Deceptively nimble. Also a deceptively effective passer. Makes an effort to defend the ball but is nonexistent giving help. Decent defensive rebounder.

Right system: Ideally a pick-and-roll-dominated offense in which he is the third option, although he's capable of being the No. 2 guy next to a shot-blocking power forward. Also needs a dominant point guard who can draw the defense and allow him to go one-on-one or shoot on the catch. Needs plays run for him to get shots.

Wrong system: A one-on-one dominated attack that doesn't allow offense to be a form of defense or expects him to score off rebounds. Okur won't lock down anybody or break anyone down, so he needs an offense that gets him shots in general -- and 3s, in particular -- to win his matchup.

Best fits: Jazz, Warriors, Bulls, Cavaliers, Magic, Spurs, 76ers, Suns

7. Lamar Odom PF/SF, Lakers, (UFA)

His game: Ultimate facilitator, the basketball equivalent of a utility infielder. Capable of a little of everything -- post scoring, 3-pointers, dribble drives, assists, rebounds, blocked shots -- and usually does exactly that.

Right system: Any that he can enhance rather than engineer. Needs a strong leader, an understanding coach and hard-nosed guys next to him up front to handle the physical chores in the paint. The more structure, the better, because decision-making is suspect.

Wrong system: An inflexible one that counts on him to contribute in a specific area. He does not impose his will, so it's paramount that he finds a matchup he can exploit naturally. Can't be the best or second-best player.

Best fits: Lakers, Spurs, Magic, Celtics

8. Trevor Ariza, SF, Lakers (UFA)

His game: Streaky 3-point shooter, good finisher off cuts, but marginal handle and no midrange jumper off the dribble. Tenacious, eager defender, both on the ball and in passing lanes. Quick and lanky but surprisingly strong, so he can defend bigger players in the post.

Right system: A structured defensive-oriented one with at least one playmaker, because he's not comfortable shooting contested jumpers. Extremely quiet, so leadership has to come from elsewhere. Very adept at moving without the ball and a willing passer, so he flourishes in a pass-and-cut offense.

Wrong system: Freewheeling, drive-and-kick in which he has to handle or be a playmaker. His 3-point shot still isn't good enough to be a staple of his game.

Best fits: Lakers, Cavaliers, Celtics, Bobcats, Magic, Spurs, Rockets, Pistons, Jazz

9. Anderson Varejao, PF/C, Cavaliers

His game: Defensive stopper on the post, clever moving without the ball, chasing loose balls and rebounds for extra possessions, excellent help defender in every way except as a shot-blocker. Deceptively agile and athletic. Finishes well around the rim in traffic. Jump shot is improving but still unreliable.

Right system: Defensive-oriented with four offensive threats around him, leaving him free to score off putbacks and backdoor cuts. Drive-and-kick in which he's the big rolling to the basket.

Wrong system: Post-player-dominated offense or scheme based on pick-and-rolls in which he's not involved. Those frameworks eliminate his cuts off the ball for baskets or chances for putbacks.

Best fits: Cavaliers, Celtics, Hawks, Bulls, Nuggets, Thunder, Suns

10. Marvin Williams, SF, Hawks (RFA)

His game: Versatile scorer, especially now that he has developed corner 3-point range. Can isolate and score on post moves or face-up drives. Might have been Hawks' best defender when healthy; developing into stopper for league's growing legion of playmaking small forwards.

Right system: Handle still needs improvement, so he needs shooters/scorers who space the floor. Good transition finisher. Would flourish with a disciplined defensive team.

Wrong system: One built around a dominant, scoring post player, because the best part of his offensive game is around the paint, and his 3-point shooting isn't that good.

Best fits: Heat, Mavericks, Blazers, Pistons, Bulls, Hawks

very very interesting

glad to see him get some good press

Understood, but it's arguably poor for a SG...

I was really asking the question more than stating the position. I assume that when Teague and Ish were on the floor together that Ish was playing much of the time as PG. Thy may have just had a combo backcourt with both in the game. Don't we have a resident Deacon around here to paint the picture?

The A/T scares the crap out of me. It may be though that I was so spoiled with the anomaly that is Ty Lawson. That kid played faster than any PG I've ever seen, but had an A/T ratio of a half-court tactician.

My hopes are largely hinging on what I saw of Teague AGAINST Lawson. I think Lawson was among the better college PGs I've ever seen, but head-to-head Teague had a clear advantage on that particular day. Teague looked like a Jason Williams (of the dook variety) type player that day. He not only played out of his head but he played wth an edge you usually only see with guys who are headcases and can't back it up or who are legitimate phenoms.

Actually Jason Williams may be a good comparison? Jason had a bulkier frame but not the explosive ups. Jason was probably a better defender by a decent margin. He played with a better PG than Teague did, but like Teague he was clearly the superior talent compared to the "other" guard, and was needed to provide scoring moreso than to distribute. They were both "pg"s who played more like "lead" guards in college.

Jason's last season he had a 1.4/1 A/T ratio and for his career he was 1.5/1. He avg 19 ppg in college on 45% fg and 39% from 3. They both played with no fear and a helthy dose of attitude. Jason was a flat out champion and had a lot more on his team to work with. I guess there were doubts about his ability to run an NBA franchise, but for the most part I think a lot of people believed that he could do it.

...'not a PG' knock because they are ASKED to score, because they CAN.

Remember that Law guy?

Let's bring Sheed back to the Hawks! I think he averaged 20 points a game here!

Yes!

I watched some Wake games over the last two years, but not a lot of them.

Ish Smith is a true and capable PG (probably cause he's not a true "scorer") and played 32 mpg in Teague's freshman season and 22 mpg in his sophomore season.

- When they were on the floor together, what were their roles?

- Is it possible that we would have seen Teague become more of a true PG if not for the presence of Ish, or if there had been more capable scorers surrounding Teague?

It seems like out of the guys he's most often compared against, he was the only one who was in the unique position of playing alongside a veteran PG.

- Ish averaged 3.4 apg.

- On VCU Joey Rodriguez was #2 in assists with 2.5 pg - no idea if he played any at the 1.

- Ellington and Green avergaed 2.7 apg each, but neither played any time at the 1. The only time Ty wasn't the pG was when a backup was letting him rest.

- I guess Jrue was in a pretty similar situation to Teague, and they probably have similar doubts but are comforted by his height.

Thoughts?

Diesel - I understand your point about Crawford being a starting level 2G and I don't disagree. My question is: do you like this move for us?

Not the transaction (obviously a huge win for our front office), but the direction(s) it leads (or could lead) us in?

I'm on the fence. Love the deal itself, not sure about what it means for us.

Bibby (or a newly acquired or drafted PG)

Crawford

Johnson

Smith (sometimes Marv perhaps)

Horford

...with Marvin (or Childress), Zaza, Flip coming off the bench??? there's a TON of versatility there and it actually looks like a lineup where pieces fit.

I want to like it.

I just get weird Shelden feelings about Hansbrough.

Had we picked Shelden at #19, he may still be a backup big on our squad.

I'm not sold on TH as an NBA player, but I believe he'll always have a spot in NBA rotations, and if he's on the bench , he's #6 or 7, not 8 or 9.

At 19 I think he's a no-brainer.

Prefer to go PG if we think a starter is available.

What we know is that the Hawks need more shooters, and because of JJ, they need them to be able to play off the ball. (Obviously if a lottery talent falls, it complicates matters).

Based on what I've read about Teague, he needs the ball in his hands to be effective. The same can be said for Maynor and Mills, who aren't great perimeter shooters anyway. I don't think Lawson or Collison shot enough contested shots to consider them eligible for this list.

I think the Hawks' list of "good fits" would be:

Wayne Ellington

Jodie Meeks

Jack McClinton

Marcus Thornton

Toney Douglas

Measurables:

Ellington - 6'5 w/ 6'7 wingspan, 11'6 max vert reach, 13 bench, 11.14 agility, 3.20 sprint

Meeks - 6'4 w/ 6'5 wingspan, 11'3 max vert reach, 14 bench, 10.96 agility, 3.10 sprint

McClinton - 6'1 w/ 6'3 wingspan, 11'1 max vert reach, 13 bench, 10.44 agility, 3.21 sprint

Thornton - 6'4 w/ 6'5 wingspan, 11'0 max vert reach, 14 bench, 10.73 agility, 3.28 sprint

Douglas - 6'2 w/ 6'6 wingspan, 10'10 max vert reach, 15 bench, 10.63 agility, 3.03 spring

Ellington has legit SG size while McClinton and Douglas will only be able to guard 1's. Meeks and Thornton are somewhere in between.

Offense (per 40)

Ellington - 54% 2pt, 2.6 FTM, 1.7 ORebs, 0.40 PPR

Meeks - 52.1% 2pt, 6.5 FTM, 0.6 ORebs, -4.40 PPR

McClinton - 44.6% 2pt, 4.5 FTM, 0.7 ORebs, -2.32 PPR

Thornton - 52.2% 2pt, 5.2 FTM, 2.5 ORebs, -1.30 PPR

Douglas - 48.9% 2pt, 5.9 FTM, 0.9 ORebs, -1.54 PPR

Ellington is obviously going ot be more efficient because he played next to three other future NBA players, but it's clear that he is a catch-and-shoot player only. Meeks can get to the line, but he doesn't take care of the ball or get offensive rebounds as much as you would like. McClinton will have all kinds of trouble finishing in the NBA, I think. Douglas can get to the FT line, which he'll need because he's not a great finisher. Thornton looks solid across the board as an offensive player.

Defense (per 40)

Ellington - 3.9 D Rebs, 1.1 Stls, 0.2 Blks

Meeks - 3.2 D Rebs, 1.5 Stls, 0.2 Blks

McClinton - 3.1 D Rebs, 0.9 Stls, 0.0 Blks

Thornton - 4.2 D Rebs, 2.0 Stls, 0.5 Blks

Douglas - 3.1 D Rebs, 1.8 Stls, 0.4 Blks

Hollinger has stated that guards who register some decent steals + blocks stats project better to the NBA game than their counterparts. So, while Thornton may not have the measurables, he does hint at some ability to compensate for that. Douglas looks great in this aspect. I also like Meeks' steal averages. All of the guards seem to rebound well enough to not be a problem there.

Overall

Ellington - I see him as a reserve shooter on a playoff team, but not much else. Dallas (#22), LA (#29), Washington (#32), and Detroit (#35) should be interested.

Meeks - I think he should go back to school to work on his other offensive skills. He's not as good as Ellington or Thornton, so he's a likely 2nd rounder.

McClinton - I like him as an "Eddie House" type, which means he's a mid-2nd rounder. (Is there a more overused comparison in the draft?). Portland at #38 is his max IMHO.

Thorton - Because of his short arms, I can't see him going any higher than #19. After that, it might be #29 before he's selected.

Douglas - He's not a PG in any form, but he's your prototypical reserve guard because he can hit the open 3 and defend at the 1. I see him as a late first rounder with LA (#29) being the first team interested.

--- ---

If no one surprisingly falls to #19, I think the Hawks should try to get themselves either Thornton or Douglas by trading down. There are a number of teams in the later half of the first round who don't really fit there - Kings (#23), OKC (#25), Chicago (#26), Memphis (#27), Minnesota (#28). As long as they jump ahead of LA, one of their options should still be there.

The Hawks could swing a deal to get one of the players they really want and move up in the 2nd round as a reward.

Awesome breakdown. I haven't considered Wayne at all up until now but it is an interesting thought to me. Did he really measure out at 6'5"???

I disgagree somewhat with this: "but it's clear that he is a catch-and-shoot player only"

That was an area on the college level that he struggled with early, but by this season he really became a guy that could create his own shot and score in a variety of ways. Now the NBA level is obviously a brand new start, but I expect him to have at least some success with the ball in his hands making plays. He's a very good passer as well.

Wayne has a good balance between having the mentality of a gunner, someone who wants the ball late, combined with the mentality of being team-oriented.

I think growing up playing alongside Gerald Henderson made them both into rare combos of part alpha dogs and part role players.

He's a silky smooth guy more than he is a power burst guy, and he can finish difficult shots. Out of highschool he was looked at as a guy that could run the point if necessary, but that was never fostered at Carolina. The more I think about it the more I would be excited about pairing him up with JJ in the backcourt.

Lawson had a DUI last June but I never remember any locker room or personality clashes involving Lawson.

Teague and Johnson had some clashes in the Wake Forest locker room according to the rumors. Who knows who's fault it is but 9 time out of 10 times its b/c the little guy is not passing the ball to the big guy enough and Teague is known to be a ball hog / hot dog.

Lawson didn't actually get a DUI. He blew below a .08 but since he was 20 at the time he may have received some kind of related charge. Regardless, he was by no means "drunk", which doesn't mean he didn't make a mistake, but I think it's an important detail.

He did have his windows down and got a noise ordinace violation and a suspended license charge for having a suspended or revoked license or something.

As a UNC fan, Ty is a good kid. The thing that scares me about him is that he seems to be less mature than a lot of guys who make as positive an impact on their team. By that I mean that he absolutely was the difference between UNC being good and UNC being champions. He was never an issue off the court (except for the isolated event above), and his on court play was incredible. While I believe his play/determination/will led us to a championship, I don't know if he's a natural leader. It really seemed to take him a long time to accept that role. So is the process complete and he's a leader forever? Or was it a temporary stretch for him during this season.

Other thing that scares me is when he was injured last year he came back so tentative that it seemed like he was trying to preserve his health for his pro career. What we didn't know was whether he was holding back, or if it was 100% the injury holding him back?

I want to believe in him because of how amazing he was this season (and I don't think I'm exagerating), and how much he improved along the way. But I have a sliver of doubt that makes me uneasy. I think he's more than a great kid, just not sure if he is teh ideal PG leader for the long term. Felton was such a warrior and I have no doubt about his intangibles. If you combined Felton's heart and leadership with Lawson's game, quicks (yes, he's quicker than Felton) and strength, and add another inch or two, you'd have a perfect PG.

All that said, at 19, he's a given.

Actually i think Bibby would be more likely to go. He is taking nearly 6 three point attempts per game and shooting 45%. It doesn't get much better than that.

One thing I think would hurt Marv in a 3pt contest is how high he jumps when he shoots from long distance. Joe and Bibby don't put as much into the jump part of the jump shot. marv would wear himself out quickly.

I don't think he should NEED to jump as much as he does with his height, but right now that's the only shot I've seen from him.

If Joe got hot in one of those contests it would be lights out.

Ice cold shots by JJ and MW. Not so bad from Flip from the line to finish it off.

Huge for Marv's confidence to hit 3's like these at the end of big games.

Nothing but business as usual for JJ of course.

@ NJ

vs. NJ

@ IND

vs. WSH

vs. CHA

@ CLE

This is huge for us. Last year we beat Dallas, Lakers, Toronto etc.. but would lay eggs against Charlotte and Indiana. We have to run the NJ b2b, WSH and CHA at home, and at least one of the other away games.

5-1 or I'm disappointed.

As good as we've looked, I'm having trouble imagining true disappointment in any stretch of games that "only" ends in 67% wins. And .500 really won't bother me much at this stage.

Hell, if we "only" win half our games going forward and end up with 44 wins I'll look at it as a successful season. 44-38 would have been good enough for a 5 seed in the east last year.

I have my hopes up, but don't want to get my expectations our of whack.

So I don't show strong support? What is strong support in your mind?

I think you'd be hard pressed to get many people to agree with you there. I have supported this team for 22 years and I watch every game and cheer for them and get excited when they win and disappointed when they lose. I spend HOURS every day on this site reading, posting, and developing the site. I'm the same vocal fan when they are almost the best team in the league (late 80's) and when they're the worst or near worst team in the league (recent years). That's my definition of strong support. So again, please tell me what your definition of strong support is.

I would define Dolfan as cautiously optimistic, not fickle, and I think I'm in the same boat that he's in. Peoria's reading too much into two quotes that were made in different conversations in different context.

It's still VERY early. The Hawks look nothing short of awesome so far, but it's VERY early. If we have two horrible games in a row it will change how I feel about the progress of the team. With such a small sample size, every game is a big factor in how we perceive the team. So if the team is consistent, our opinions are likely to be consistent. If the team isn't, then expectations may bounce around with some volatility.

Personally, I won't completely rule out the possibility of this team contending for a championship, but I don't expect that by any means and certainly won't be disappointed AT ALL if we end up somewhere in the 4-6 range of the East seeds. That would be fantastic!

Some fans seem fully convinced tat we're already "there". Personally, I don't believe we're "there", but for the first time in the last decade I'm convinced we're truly on our way. Until we show that we will focus and compete for a SUSTAINED period of time, I'm not gonna assume that we're a contender. 7 games shows a really good indication of where we are and to me it does prove that we're gotten a lot better. But I need 15-20 games of this level of play to be convinced we're a top tier team. Until that happens, I may seem fickle, but it's just a result of a small sample size in my opinion.

At the beginning of the year I expected 40-44 wins. A few games in I starting thinking .500 is the minimum, or it's a really disappointing year. Now I'm thionk under 45 wins would be disappointing, and 50 is possible. If we lose 4 straight, thatw ill probably adjust back to .500 expectations.

Mason was scoring everything he touched? It seems like every post you just throw something in that you pull out of thin air. Like Marvin only having a couple of 20 point games last year. If someone going 4-11 upsets you then I'd say our defense did pretty good. There were a handful of ugly breakdowns, but we held them under 40% shooting, blocked 9 shots, and had 10 steals. That's pretty good with or without Josh.

Overall a good defensive game. Many of Durant's points came on shots that are impossible to defend. No one on their team shot for better than 50% other than Wilcox and Swift - both at 1-1. We also forced a lot of turnovers with pressure and Horford's 5 blocks are the epitome of "stepping up" in Smith's absence.

We were just inconsistent. During a few stretches we lost focus and looked horrible on D. But we had enough stretches of excellent D to make up for it. Itw ill take time to adjust to life w/o Smith on defense, and in the end it will likely make this team much better all around.

Flip was enormous, JJ looks as good as at any time he's been a Hawk, Horford is my favorite Hawk in years and makes an enormous impact even when shooting poorly and only taking 6 shots. And Marvin was very solid. He's looking aggressive on O, on the boards, and very good on D. He (and the rest of the team) had several shots rim out that would have made for a very different game had they dropped in.

What were his 3 TOs? One was a crossover on the left wing that must have been a carry but looked clean to me on the replay.

He had a feet shuffling one closer to the top of the key I think that was the right call.

Can't remember the 3rd. Good news - they were the results of being aggressive and forcing the issue. Bad news - his dribble drive still needs some polish.

He flat out when STRONG to the hole a few times, which is definitely new/refreshing.

Not nut hugging, just discussing my (now) second favorite Hawk.

DEAD

How about the play of Zaza and Murray. I guess the motto of this message board should be "if you can't say anything bad about certain players, you shouldn't say anything at all"

This is the way it's always been since I first logged in. If you post something along the lines of "Player X played well tonight" when the guy had a just decent game, then you get internet crucified for nut hugging and having low expectations.

If you say that when he had a great game, you get internet crucified for only speaking up on the blue moon he has a great game.

But if you bash the players Y and Z who didn't play so well, you get resounding support from the masses.

This goes for every player not named Joe Johnson.

It's a very negative, argumentative board. It ain't gonna change. Even if we start winning for real, it ain't gonna change. We won't ever be good enough (even after a title) for the toxic nature of this crew to turn positive.

This is one of the more ridiculous "headline stories" I've ever seen.

I'd love more stories like this, maybe is someone mentions that the ac was turned on too high in an arena, or that the Bobcats have rough towels in the locker room. Or maybe one of the players can't stand the in flight movie selection across the continent.

Silly attempt at getting readers to be drawn to "something".

It may have something to do with the fact that the Pistons have (a) actually won an NBA title recently despite the obvious draft blunder and (b) remained one of the top teams in the east despite the draft blunder.

It's called respect. They've earned it, over and over and over again.

Our franchise keeps giving people reasons to NOT respect it.

I hope Marvin can shoot threes decently this year. Let's be realistic...if you can hit long twos you may as well shoot some threes. Let's say you go 2 for 6 shooting long twos - you are basically hurting the team. On the other hand, if you go 2 for 6 on threes you are shooting 50% (based on a 2-point per shot approach)...you made 6 points on 6 shots.

To quote the dude from Lenox financial, its the biggest no brainer in the history of earth.

Another point: Long 2s are just as dangerous as 3s are in creating transition opportunities for the opposing team. So go ahead and make it worth it by taking the one that gets you 150% of the points in return that the other does if you make the shot.

Marvin took 5 three pointers?! Wow that is a big deal to me even though it is only preseason. The fact that he is making them is nice but the main issue for me is that he actually takes them consistently. I want to see him average at least 2 attempts a game from 3 during the season.

It is a great thing to see, finally. Hollinger's preview says it all:

Only one small forward took fewer 3-pointers per field-goal attempt than Williams, and only seven had a higher rate of free-throw attempts per field-goal attempt. Based on those numbers you'd think he was a lumbering post player, but he's a jump shooter. Really, I swear.

In fact, nearly half of his attempts were long 2-pointers, and only three players in all of basketball -- Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady and Travis Outlaw -- took more long 2s than Williams. He made a healthy 45.4 percent of them, the best mark of any player in the top 10 in attempts, and only Portland's Outlaw had a greater proportion of his attempts come from this distance.

Not extending his range has been the second most frustrating thing to see from him for this Marvin fan. The first has been his overall lack of aggression compared to his college days.

I'm not sure what to think about it, but this could be the final nail in the coffin of Marvin becoming a strictly perimeter oriented player who occasionally mixes it up inside.

The potential good news - if he can become a really dependable 3 point shooter, his entire value to our team changes dramatically in a way that definitely translates to more Ws. Increased point production and better spacing of the floor, as well as directly addressing one of our team's biggest weaknesses.

The potential bad news - I really hope it doesn't lead to him standing in place more than he already does.

I REALLY wish we could watch these games to see how these shots have been coming in the flow of the offense.