Josh Smith Speaks on his position.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Not exactly.

I like Josh, I just think Josh would be better at Sf. I've come to the realization that Shelden's best fit might be C. That's all we have right now until we've seen Horford play.

I don't think marvin should be off the team.. I just don't think he deserves a magic ride into the starting position.

---

Are we the only people that see he is a tweener, D? It's ridiculous that people think he is a straight 4.

Winning basketball is played from the inside out. Josh plays on the outside. You have to be able to dump the ball in to the post, have a 4 with enough moves to draw doubles or score, and he has to have the ability and desire to make certain kick out passes for straight assists or rhythm swings. Smoove simply doesn't play the game that way. He likes to see the floor from the wing. He makes, imo sometimes beautiful entry passes to cutters or post players. His stroke is fine. His percentage should go up this year. He has poor handles. Even in the post. That is why I like him on the wing, triple threat; pass, shoot, or pump and drive. Minimal dribbling.

Defense is not as defined. You just pick up a man and play. Josh may play post d a good bit. That is not a good thing, imo. His off the ball blocking is lessened and he has problems with physical post players.

But why all this fuss when most NBA teams play a lot of zone D now anyway?

[Diesel]

Exactly.

When you show me that the 4 position has a worse FG% than both the 3 and 2 position.. that's a losing team. That's where we are right now.

We shoot 45% from the field with Josh playing PF.

Most winning teams would probably have their PF shooting closer to 50, maybe over. In order to win games, you have to be able to score at the bucket.

And the guys claim that they know basketball that say (SMOOVE IS A 4)...

We shall see.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Our PF crew shot 45% from the field and you think Smoove is a 4??

Good JOKE!!!

---

A better joke is the fact that you are talking shooting percentages at all.

They didn't seem to bother you much in all those trade threads you created about bringing JO here. You didn't seem to mind paying $20 million to a guy who is a career 46% shooter and shot 43.6% last year.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/stats?statsId=3120

[Diesel]

What subject do you want to talk about Ex.

It's obviously not the fact that we shot 45% from the field from our PF position.

Uhm... Yea...

Poor attempt!

[exodus]

Quote:

---

It's ridiculous that people think he is a straight 4

---

Whats more ridiculous is your strawman. We are saying that he is better at the 4 and neither you nor Diesel have come up with anything to contradict that.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

What subject do you want to talk about Ex.

It's obviously not the fact that we shot 45% from the field from our PF position.

Uhm... Yea...

Poor attempt!

---

If you had your way we would be paying $20 million for a career 46% shooter at the 4 and would be playing Smith at the 3 who is by far a worse perimeter shooter than Marvin.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It's ridiculous that people think he is a straight 4

---

Whats more ridiculous is your strawman. We are saying that he is better at the 4 and neither you nor Diesel have come up with anything to contradict that.

---

I agree with this. Nobody thinks Josh Smith is a classic 4 anymore than they think Kirilenko is. However, many (myself included) think that Smith is best suited for the 4 position on whatever team he plays (like Kirilenko).

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It's ridiculous that people think he is a straight 4

---

Whats more ridiculous is your strawman. We are saying that he is better at the 4 and neither you nor Diesel have come up with anything to contradict that.

---

How is he better? Better than what? We won 30 games, Ex. I know you play ball. Break down what I said about inside out basketball and where Josh is comfortable. You can't just say I haven't come up with anything and leave it at that. Typical, though.

I think my strawman(god that's gay) started the season 4-1 last year. I may be wrong.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

It's ridiculous that people think he is a straight 4

---

Whats more ridiculous is your strawman. We are saying that he is better at the 4 and neither you nor Diesel have come up with anything to contradict that.

---

I agree with this. Nobody thinks Josh Smith is a classic 4 anymore than they think Kirilenko is. However, many (myself included) think that Smith is best suited for the 4 position on whatever team he plays (like Kirilenko).

---

If I'm correct, AHF, Kirilenko mainly plays the 3. Always has. He came in with Karl and Boozer has been there since a year later. His distribution is limited severely from the 4. He is a size nightmare on the outside. Not so much on the inside. Same with Josh.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What subject do you want to talk about Ex.

It's obviously not the fact that we shot 45% from the field from our PF position.

Uhm... Yea...

Poor attempt!

---

If you had your way we would be paying $20 million for a career 46% shooter at the 4 and would be playing Smith at the 3 who is by far a worse perimeter shooter than Marvin.

---

Is Smoove's shooting percentage as a pf ok with you? I think that was the original intent of Diesel's question.

[exodus]

Since you don't know what a strawman is let me explain.

When you make up a position (instead of responding to the actual position) and then argue against it you are making a strawman argument.

I haven't seen anyone say Smith is a pure 4 as you said. He isn't ideally suited for either position but he is obviously better at the 4.

There are no skills he has that are better suited to the 3 . he doesn't handle or shoot well. he is too slow to keep people in front of him. His strengths are rebounding and blocking shots which are traits better suited for the 4 spot.

At the 4 his ball handling isn't as much of a problem. He will have a quickness advantage over most players.

When he gets posted up the opposing player will rarely get around Smith and get to the rim. Their only way to score is to shoot directly over him which isn't that easy given Smiths shotblocking ability.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

If I'm correct, AHF, Kirilenko mainly plays the 3.

---

You aren't. You must have forgotten how much time Boozer missed due to injury. AK has also stated publicly that he prefers the 4.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What subject do you want to talk about Ex.

It's obviously not the fact that we shot 45% from the field from our PF position.

Uhm... Yea...

Poor attempt!

---

If you had your way we would be paying $20 million for a career 46% shooter at the 4 and would be playing Smith at the 3 who is by far a worse perimeter shooter than Marvin.

---

Is Smoove's shooting percentage as a pf ok with you? I think that was the original intent of Diesel's question.

---

No. but i am more ok with a 21 yr old in his 1st year as a starting 4 shooting 44% than i am with a $20 million veteran shooting 44%.

Funny i have never seen Diesel mention anything about JO's shooting percentage, or Sheldens. I wonder why.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Since you don't know what a strawman is let me explain.

---

I know what it is. I think you are using a J.O. one right now with Diesel. I just said it was gay.

Quote:

---

I haven't seen anyone say Smith is a pure 4 as you said. He isn't ideally suited for either position but he is obviously better at the 4.

---

Plenty of people have said it. Start a poll and ask if people think he is a straight 4. See how many respond. I guess that would qualify as anyone, wouldn't it?

Quote:

---

There are no skills he has that are better suited to the 3 . he doesn't handle or shoot well. he is too slow to keep people in front of him. His strengths are rebounding and blocking shots which are traits better suited for the 4 spot.

---

He has a decent stroke, percentage aside, and no post game.

He has no post "handles". His footwork is non-existent.

That too slow crap is old. Zone Defense. We play a lot of it. If you actually WATCHED the Hawks, you would know that. We could play more.

He blocks off the ball and on the break. We all know that, He gets very few blocks straight off his man in the post.

Quote:

---

When he gets posted up the opposing player will rarely get around Smith and get to the rim. Their only way to score is to shoot directly over him which isn't that easy given Smiths shotblocking ability.

---

What are you talking about? He gets banged all the way underneath and they usually dunk it or pump once and lay it in. He gives up far too much ground. Again he rarely gets blocks in the post on his own man. He gets them coming off the ball and in transition.

Can you please explain to me what your position on the importance of inside out basketball is? And How Smoove fits in with that. You still haven't talked about that. You HAVE to command a double team in the post to play winning basketball, imo. Smoove doesn't do that.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If I'm correct, AHF, Kirilenko mainly plays the 3.

---

You aren't. You must have forgotten how much time Boozer missed due to injury. AK has also stated publicly that he prefers the 4.

---

Ak has played more games at the 3 than the 4. That's what I'm saying.

Quote:

---

AK has also stated publicly that he prefers the 4.

---

So, what if Smoove said this about the 3? Would that make him more of one?

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

What subject do you want to talk about Ex.

It's obviously not the fact that we shot 45% from the field from our PF position.

Uhm... Yea...

Poor attempt!

---

If you had your way we would be paying $20 million for a career 46% shooter at the 4 and would be playing Smith at the 3 who is by far a worse perimeter shooter than Marvin.

---

Is Smoove's shooting percentage as a pf ok with you? I think that was the original intent of Diesel's question.

---

No. but i am more ok with a 21 yr old in his 1st year as a starting 4 shooting 44% than i am with a $20 million veteran shooting 44%.

Funny i have never seen Diesel mention anything about JO's shooting percentage, or Sheldens. I wonder why.

---

I understand your point. But the whole "at this age" argument is unattractive to me. It's about wins and losses. Not a players growth. I do know that J.O. commands a double team and can scor down there. Those are valuable assets, fg % notwithstanding, that Smoove does not provide.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

He has a decent stroke, percentage aside, and no post game.

---

LOL so you set his percentage "aside" at the 3 but make a major issue of it at the 4. Very Dieselesque.

Quote:

---

Zone Defense. We play a lot of it.

---

No we don't. We play it occassionally out of desperation. Playing more of it would just lead to more problems on the defensive glass.

Quote:

---

He gets very few blocks straight off his man in the post.

---

He led the league in blocks without blocking shots straight up on his man? LOL

Quote:

---

What are you talking about? He gets banged all the way underneath and they usually dunk it or pump once and lay it in. He gives up far too much ground.

---

I guess that would explain why only Dirk and Duncan averaged more than 2 ppg over their average against Smith (assuming at least 2 games played).

Quote:

---

Can you please explain to me what your position on the importance of inside out basketball is?

---

My position is that it is less important now than it used to be. The rules about zone defense and the hand check rule have shifted more importance to guys who can beat their man off the dribble.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

If I'm correct, AHF, Kirilenko mainly plays the 3.

---

You aren't. You must have forgotten how much time Boozer missed due to injury. AK has also stated publicly that he prefers the 4.

---

Ak has played more games at the 3 than the 4. That's what I'm saying.

---

No question that Kirilenko has played plenty of games at the 3 spot. However, he is much less productive there than he is when he is a 4. The falloff last year when he was required to adopt a more perimeter role was dramatic.

[mrhonline]

Again, this discussion is over. It was quaint up until the first few months of last season...

...BUT JOSH SMITH EXCELLED AT THE 4, AND THE HAWKS WERE THE BETTER FOR IT.

It's not complicated. It's not debatable. While he's obviously not a traditional back-to-the-basket PF, he's the Hawks' PF and will be so for the long-term unless some silly GM offers him the max next season.

THE DEBATE IS OVER.

Let's get back to dissecting Marvin's casual conversations with the media, because at least those had a 0.5% relationship with reality.

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

The falloff last year when he was required to adopt a more perimeter role was dramatic.

---

I think you can attribute that more to his state of mind and strained relationship with Sloan than to the actual dynamics of basketball.