Shelden: Disappointment

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Atlas, wtf? I didn't make the draft pick. I'm not Billy Knight. I'm not defening the pick. I'm defending the potential of the player. Go jump on someone else's ass.

---

My bad bro, I just get so pissed with BK's retarded thinking sometimes, he just doesn't consider things that need to be.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...I agree with AHF, for a great guy like Sheldon to say that he has no idea what Woody wants from him is a HUGE black mark on Woody. Its almost like Woody expected Sheldon to play like a ten year vet instead of a rookie. My gosh what a foolish mistake.

---

I re-read the whole AJC article and it just steams me. Woody preaching about "winning basketball" when his offensive "system" looks like pickup ball and he can't teach our guys to defend the pick-and-roll. What the H#LL is this "dirty work" Woody - You just want Shelden to abandon any thought of using any skills he may have and just foul all the time and play dirty? WTF? This is the worst of blame-gaming IMO. I'm beginning to think the #1 THING wrong with the Hawks is coaching.

A good coach could have gotten us over the hump in some of those 1-2-3 point home losses and we'd have a real shot at the playoffs now.

As much as BK's arrogance bothers me - Woody's incompetence is much worse...and it's much more detrimental to the team. My guess is that word is already circulating around the league. Hawks need to clean house.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day...teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime...unless it's Woody, he's clueless"

[DJlaysitup]

P.S. - One other thing. The simple statement that Shelden is here to do the "dirty work" infers that there are those on the team not expected to do the dirty work - they get to just do the clean work.

Obviously the dirty work refers to things like fouling in the paint, taking charges, diving for loose balls, and the like.

This demonstrates to me that the one thing Woody is supposed to be good at - defensive philosophy - is seriously flawed. TEAM defense gets the job done...not preferential treatment.

Woody's comment sends a bad message to his "team".

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

As much as BK's arrogance bothers me - Woody's incompetence is much worse...and it's much more detrimental to the team.

---

While I agree that Woody is bad, if we had Paul or Deron, Woody wouldn't even matter (as much), and we'd be 10 games better.

[DJlaysitup]

Sometimes I wonder - CP3 would probably be in Woody's Doghouse and Ivey would be starting.

[Diesel]

When the draft was coming around, Smoove had not shown any PF skills and really he still doesn't. He doesn't play strong low post offense and his low post defense is merely marginal. Back when we had Al, Al was a low post scorer... Something that we really miss... But a crappy defender. something we don't. So going into a draft knowing that we were not going to keep AL... What do you want, Another 1 or 2.. Or a Post presence.

I feel that we got two of the best post defenders in the draft. Shelden actually plays passing lanes very well and he plays positional defense 3 times better than Smoove. The problem is that we don't play him.

Say what you want about Marvin, if we were to move Smoove back to the 3 and play Shelden at the 4, we wouldn't miss Marvin one IOTA. In fact, our team would be better... Smoove still plays defense like a Sf. He allows guys to catch the ball too deep, but he's beautiful coming around with the backside block. Shelden knows how to jockey for position before the ball comes, keep guys off their spot, and get position. His rebound isn't what it was at Duke, but you expect that. His shot blocking isn't what it was at Duke but you expect that too. The thing is that if he got the consistent minutes that Marvin sees, He would be everything we drafted him for.

Back to Smoove. I think as long as Smoove is comfortable with his role, Shelden will be a bench player. Woody has to go with what is working at this point. That's the real reason why Shelden doesn't play more and why Solomon and Este doesn't play...

[Nicholasp27]

until shelden is healthy and his shoulder is 100%, i'm not gonna pass judgement

he's been disappointing so far, but how much of that is due to his injury? pre-injury he was doing well

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

When the draft was coming around, Smoove had not shown any PF skills and really he still doesn't. He doesn't play strong low post offense and his low post defense is merely marginal. Back when we had Al, Al was a low post scorer... Something that we really miss... But a crappy defender. something we don't. So going into a draft knowing that we were not going to keep AL... What do you want, Another 1 or 2.. Or a Post presence.

I feel that we got two of the best post defenders in the draft. Shelden actually plays passing lanes very well and he plays positional defense 3 times better than Smoove. The problem is that we don't play him.

Say what you want about Marvin, if we were to move Smoove back to the 3 and play Shelden at the 4, we wouldn't miss Marvin one IOTA. In fact, our team would be better... Smoove still plays defense like a Sf. He allows guys to catch the ball too deep, but he's beautiful coming around with the backside block. Shelden knows how to jockey for position before the ball comes, keep guys off their spot, and get position. His rebound isn't what it was at Duke, but you expect that. His shot blocking isn't what it was at Duke but you expect that too. The thing is that if he got the consistent minutes that Marvin sees, He would be everything we drafted him for.

Back to Smoove. I think as long as Smoove is comfortable with his role, Shelden will be a bench player. Woody has to go with what is working at this point. That's the real reason why Shelden doesn't play more and why Solomon and Este doesn't play...

---

His low post defense is way better than marginal...as long as he is playing PF's close to his size.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

When the draft was coming around, Smoove had not shown any PF skills and really he still doesn't. He doesn't play strong low post offense and his low post defense is merely marginal.

---

So what are you saying? That BK drafted Shelden to bench Smith? Because BK obviously thinks Marvin is the SF of the future since he took him #2 overall.

Quote:

---

Back when we had Al, Al was a low post scorer... Something that we really miss...

---

Al shot 45% for us, Josh is shooting 43% right now, and that's with his horrible percentages early in the year.

Quote:

---

I feel that we got two of the best post defenders in the draft. Shelden actually plays passing lanes very well and he plays positional defense 3 times better than Smoove. The problem is that we don't play him.

---

I agree, and I think Shelden WILL be a good player, but right now he has NO place on our team. If Smoove didn't show PF skills, than Shelden was either drafted to bench Smoove or Marvin, AND Childress. Either way, he was either drafted to be a bench player, or to bench one of our already core players, just not a smart move.

Quote:

---

Say what you want about Marvin, if we were to move Smoove back to the 3 and play Shelden at the 4, we wouldn't miss Marvin one IOTA.

---

You don't have to tell me this, I was the one who claimed Marvin as THE problem for our woes, and I still believe that.

What I'm saying, is that BK drafted Marvin to be the SF of the future, and he isn't about to abandon that idea. So drafting Shelden was either going to bench Smith or Marvin, AND Childress, or Shelden was going to be a bench player himself.

Quote:

---

Smoove still plays defense like a Sf.

---

How so? He's too slow laterally and gets beat off the dribble by quick SF's, and on offense he can't beat SF's off the dribble. He is almost a legit 6'10 and is gaining weight every year while retaining his athleticism, he is most definitely a PF in my eyes. Why do you think he's been so much better since Marvin has returned? Because he is playing PF.

Quote:

---

Shelden knows how to jockey for position before the ball comes, keep guys off their spot, and get position. The thing is that if he got the consistent minutes that Marvin sees, He would be everything we drafted him for.

---

I agree, but again, right now he has no place on this team, and now it seems as if we may have a Diaw situation between him and Woodson, by judging Woody's and Shelden's quotes from yesterday.

Quote:

---

Back to Smoove. I think as long as Smoove is comfortable with his role, Shelden will be a bench player. Woody has to go with what is working at this point. That's the real reason why Shelden doesn't play more and why Solomon and Este doesn't play...

---

All good PF's don't have a great post up game. Smith has played great and improved tremendously since moving to that position, not to mention he played PF or C his whole high school career. He was never a perimeter player in high school, and I know, I saw quite a few of his games when he was at McEachern. Smith is scoring inside anyway, although he's not necessarily backing people down.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Why do people always bring up CP3 and JJ when we brought JJ in to play PG? We drafted Shelden because he was a two time defensive player of the year and the All-time leading shot blocker at Duke. We needed interior defense, so we picked the highest rated defender. He may still develop into that. He is a positional defender and not a natural shot blocker like smoove, nor is he a 7 footer who can block shots by default like a Diop. When he adjusts his game to the NBA style of play he will be an effective defender. Calm down.

---

you can't have JJ and drink your Paul Koolaid too. Joe being the PG of the future is how he sold everyone down the river on that trade from management, season ticket holders, to the casual fan.

Everyone agreed that the Hawks needed interior defense going into the draft. Shelden was the best player available to fit that need when #5 rolled around.

---

I don't understand this argument at all.

Examine the premise behind this:

(1) JJ was signed to play PG.

(2) BK wouldn't sign JJ if already has a PG on the roster.

(3) Therefore, if we drafted Chris Paul we wouldn't sign JJ.

This doesn't hold water, in my opinion.

(1) JJ was not signed to play exclusively PG.

A. What was said

Look at the announcement of the trade for JJ:

Knight:

Quote:

---

“He has the versatility to play several positions for Coach (Mike) Woodson."

---

http://www.nba.com/hawks/news/Hawks_Announ...son_081905.html

The words "point guard" don't even appear in the announcement.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/gl....2&year=2006

It is true that after not acquiring a real PG in the offseason that the Hawks stated that Johnson would start at PG. But how committed were they?

B. The proof is in the pudding

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/gl....2&year=2006

The Hawks gave the JJ at PG experiment a total of 10 games before they regularly started someone else at PG. 10 games. That is it.

How can anyone sustain the argument that we valued JJ so highly we gave up Diaw and 2 first round picks with the intent that he would be our exclusive starting PG but we believed in him as a PG so little that we started someone instead of him after 10 games?

2. Would we sign JJ if we drafted Paul?

A. JJ is the exact profile of the talent BK wanted to sign

JJ was recognized as a versatile talent by the franchise. He was young, up and coming, and wanted to play in Atlanta. His natural position was either SG or SF but he was so versatile and talented that we also considered him running the point.

Why in the world would we pass on this guy?

B. BK has no problem bringing in seemingly redundant talent

The premise of the argument that we wouldn't have signed JJ is that BK would be so reluctant to invest in JJ that he would pass him up because we had Chris Paul (or Deron Williams). All evidence is to the contrary.

BK showed no reluctance to draft:

Josh Childress

Josh Smith

Donta Smith

Marvin Williams

All in a row right before signing JJ. He had no PG in place but was content to draft the best talent.

3. Knight would have signed JJ regardless

There is little evidence in my opinion to support the notion that Billy Knight would pass on a rising 6'8'', versatile talent under 25 years old simply because he drafted Paul or Deron.

Are we really going accept a premise that this GM who loves versatile 6'8'' talent is going to pass on JJ because he is too duplicative of Chris Paul? JJ is a versatile 6'8'' talent who was under 25 and wanted to play for the Hawks. Paul is a 6'0'' pure point guard. Does BK really think they couldn't play in tandem together? I can't accept that notion after the way JJ played with Nash.

There is no way we don't make the same play for him because Knight recognized that he was a potential star talent on the rise and someone the Hawks could actually acquire. BK would have targeted JJ almost regardless of who else was on the roster, IMO.

I don't like to relive the Marvin pick over and over but saying that taking Paul means not taking JJ is tough for me to accept.

[AtLaS]

We absolutely would have still signed JJ, no question about it.

[Johnnybravo4]

You also need to consider that we signed Marvin because it was thought we needed a big man. Most draft experts had Marvin projected as a power forward. We wanted Andrew Bogut, but the Bucks got him. If the Bucks got Marvin we would have picked Bogut...plain and simple. BK made the decision that Al Harrington wasn't our PF of the future, he was basically a "dead man walking" the moment we drafted Marvin. In BK's world our starting linup was supposed to be

JJ

Smoove

Childress

Al

Zaza (well actually Curry)

In all likelyhood, had we gotten Curry, we probably don't go after JJ. BK was fine with Lue running the team.

[emeans]

Quote:

---

This team has had so many opportunities to get great players and have blown it EVERY time. One less win with Sura and we'd have Dwight. BK selected Marvin over Deron/Paul. Shelden over Roy/Foye. Childress (is still a good player) over Deng/Iguodala.

We never spend cap space and BK is so great about not wasting money, and then he FINALLY signs a pg, and the guy is a career backup with chronic knee problems, who will miss an average of 25-30 games per season, and isn't good even when he IS healthy.

I think about this crap all the time, and it sucks.

---

That pretty much sums BK up. He has failed in the draft. The only thing he has done well is save us money, but that isn't necessary translating to wins.

We are eventually getting better, but we could have been really really good right now, if he had drafted better. Overlooking ROY last year took the cake.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

You also need to consider that we signed Marvin because it was thought we needed a big man. Most draft experts had Marvin projected as a power forward. We wanted Andrew Bogut, but the Bucks got him. If the Bucks got Marvin we would have picked Bogut...plain and simple. BK made the decision that Al Harrington wasn't our PF of the future, he was basically a "dead man walking" the moment we drafted Marvin. In BK's world our starting linup was supposed to be

JJ

Smoove

Childress

Al

Zaza (well actually Curry)

In all likelyhood, had we gotten Curry, we probably don't go after JJ. BK was fine with Lue running the team.

---

I agree Harrington was a dead man walking but that doesn't change the fact that Williams does not have the build of a classic power forward and had a very similar overall game to that of Chills, Josh Smith, and Donta Smith, our 3 prior draft picks.

Both Knight and Marvin Williams agreed they were all in the same bag together on draft night:

Quote:

---

“We have

three quality forwards

,” the GM said. “The NBA is too stuck on saying you’ve got to have a small forward and a power forward. What’s wrong with being a basketball player? What’s wrong with being just a forward?”

Williams couldn’t help but notice the glut of players at his spot.

“There’s definitely some guys

at my position

who are pretty good,” he said by telephone from New York, where the draft was held. “I know they drafted Josh Childress and Josh Smith last year. They are two pretty good players.”

---

Given BK's evaluation of players, I don't understand why we would not have gone after JJ.

I am also not entirely sure where you are going with the Curry thing since our pursuit of a C is entirely independent of our pursuit of FAs at other positions except to the extent that they would have put us over the cap. Curry walked out of his interview and never got close to signing here so worrying about the impact of his signing is stretching things a bit, IMO.

Also, I agree we would have gone Bogut if he would have been there. My prediction?

If we draft Bogut we go after JJ.

If we draft Marvin we go after JJ.

If we draft Paul we go after JJ.

If we draft Deron we go after JJ.

I don't have a complex position on this issue!

[Diesel]

I'm sorry,

I watched the game with the Suns.. granted he wasn't the only one guarding Amare... But when he did Guard Amare, Amare got the ball where he wanted it. Smoove is good at Blocking shots, but the coaches note on Smoove is hit him with the upfake...

You notice that a lot more often, Smoove is in foul trouble during the middle of the game.

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

I'm sorry,

I watched the game with the Suns.. granted he wasn't the only one guarding Amare... But when he did Guard Amare, Amare got the ball where he wanted it. Smoove is good at Blocking shots, but the coaches note on Smoove is hit him with the upfake...

You notice that a lot more often, Smoove is in foul trouble during the middle of the game.

---

Amare outweighs him by about 20 lbs. But he rejected Amare 2-3 times that night.

Back on the other subject here is a link to the CNNSI post draft coverage. Notice that none of the columnist criticize us for not picking a pg. In fact Marty Burns gives us an A-

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/basketbal...als/draft/2005/

[Diesel]

What I am saying is that BK has always had this plan of taking his time with Marvin... whereas Shelden was thought of as a player who can play now.

When we had the injuries, Shelden didn't do badly... It wasn't until everybody started coming back and Shelden's minutes were lost in Woody's top drawer... that Shelden began to play irratically... BUT What do you expect? You got a guy playing 23 mpg, pulling down 6-7 rebs a game putting up 9 ppg.. and then all the sudden, you cut his minutes? First, from the guys perspective... "I must be doing something wrong"... "damn, I don't know what I'm doing wrong"... "I thought I was doing everything right."... "What am I doing?"

Woody sends out conflicting signals..."He's not doing the dirty work"...

What exactly does that mean... You want him to be our enforcer? or do you want him to dive for more loose balls.

The truth is that Woody don't have it in him to say "we're playing Smoove at the 4 because that's where he's most productive.". He did the same thing to Smoove last year..

[Diesel]

Most experts noticed that we had a gapping hole at PF and figured that we would use these commodities called Sfs as trade bait...Either now or down the road.

Marvin hasn't done anything to be given the must be in the starting lineup card... Except be drafted Second.

There's so much egg on BK's face about picking Marvin that Woody has to play Marvin until Marvin meets his potential. Like it or not, that's just the fact of the matter..

So in order to get that done, we will play guys out of position, we will bench guys, we will do all kind of things to make Marvin into what BK said he would be.

Take out your Stromile Swift notes... and see if I'm telling the facts.

[TexasPete]

Marvin has picked it up the last few games and has been finding a nice groove. You have no credibility at all when you compare Marvin to Shelden and act like Marvin was just handed a job. Shelden doesn't have 1/10th of Marvins ability. I find it amazing and highly humorous that you make all kinds of excuses for Shelden and you just keep ripping Marvin. When Marvin does well you still rip him.

Did Marvin steal your woman? I can't figure out the Marvin hatred. The kid is only 20 years old. You would rather line up behind a 23 year old with limited upside over Marvin. Makes sense I guess, in your strange world view.

I wish that we had taken Deron or CP3 over Marvin. It would have done great things for the team. But Marvin is 20 and is a nice up and coming player with a ton of upside in his package. The fact that you don't see it doesn't mean it isn't there. Shelden just doesn't measure up to Marvin. Sorry. Marvin has put up 54 points the last 3 games...18ppg...Shelden isn't remotely capable of that kind of 3 game output. And Marvin does play defense. Shelden is a better rebounder and thats all. He gets toasted off the dribble.

Stop your freaking whining about Marvin. Or, if you whine, don't line up and defend a highly inferior player. It just makes you look STUPID.

[coachx]

Atlas, you know what Diesel said you just love play Bill O'Riley and twist words out of context and use stats that weaken your point not improve it.

An example was the point you tried to make about Al not being a better low post scorer than Smoove b/c Al's FG % is 45% and Smoove is 43%, not a big difference on the surface.

Too bad it has nothing to do with Diesels point. You should see that Smoove scores more like a SH with his slashing. No low post game to force double teams and run an offense through.

Smoove may score 1 or 2 baskets a game on true low post scoring in the half court set. Al did this 5 to 10 times a game. Enough you could run the offense from the inside out on occasion.It was his jumper that was inconsistent last year and huet his FG%.

Al did not get the high % dunks that Smoove gets, his points came from more difficult low post / back to the basket moves nad too many outside jumpers. Al's post scoring is better then anyone on the team last year but his defense was horrible.

Not tometion we were last in the league in opponents points in the paint witha tweener playing PF last year.

Now can you see why a true low post player was needed in the draft? Can you see why a prudent person would not be comfortable with Smoove and Batista being the only PFs on the roster ?

Even a casual fan should see this. I think you know this - but you have a great love of argueing and taking quotes out of context.