I Agree W/ Sekou > Evans Doesn't So Much Replace Chilz

[sturt]

MO, MO, MO: I do like the acquisition of Mo Evans, though not necessarily as a replacement for Childress.

How smooth would it have been to add him to the mix along with the Hawks’ top eight rotation (from the playoff series against Boston)?

The role Evans can play for this team has nothing to do with offense and so much more to do with what he can do defensively.

The Hawks have needed a defensive stopper (if you will) to help alleviate that pressure on Joe Johnson. Evans could be the off-the-bench stopper the Hawks haven’t had the past few years, a guy that comes in alongside Johnson on the defensive end and a guy who can also stroke the ball from deep to keep team’s off balance on the other end of the floor.

[exodus]

I like the Mo signing but i am not convinced he is a defensive stopper. I haven't seen any Magic fans refer to him that way. "Solid" is the most common description i have seen about his defense although some have said it isn't even that. Only time will tell.

FYI West isn't on the roster and if he was he couldn't get pushed down much further than he was last season. I think he should have gotten more minutes. he was pretty effective when he got more than 2 minutes in a game.

Edited July 26, 2008 by exodus

[Cwell]

I didn't want anybody to "replace" Childess because I hated the whole 6th starter concept. Those minutes should have been spread to other bench players as well as some minutes from the starting 5.

[WraithSentinel]

I wonder if we will see Chill back in a Hawks uniform next year? Right now it could be a 10/90 chance of happening. By this time next year it could be 60/40.

[GTfan44]

I wonder if we will see Chill back in a Hawks uniform next year? Right now it could be a 10/90 chance of happening. By this time next year it could be 60/40.

I doubt it.

He said something along the lines of "I have the opportunity to opt our (whatever the term was?) after each year and see what NBA teams are interested" plus he was treated just soooooooooo badly by ASG (LOL) that he won't be back, which is good, because he probably thinks he's worth 8 mill a year after next year.

No 6th man besides Manu should be paid more than 7 mill.

[Mojo]

We dont necessarily need a 6th man. What we need is 4 or 5 guys who can come off the bench every night and continue and Mo is exactly that.

[jaywalker72]

Whether or not someone agrees about the virtues of replacing the actual role of Josh Childress of the 6th man, so to speak, we can all agree that the Hawks are faced with replacing an extremely efficient and productive 29.9 minutes per game.

As I mention on the HHB, Mo Evans is a replacement level player who had a so-so year in Orlando, and that was a year that was on par with the best of his NBA career. The Hawks are counting on him sliding into Childress' role, at least part of it. They have also given a three year deal to a player who has likely already seen his peak, and it wasn't all that good.

So whether you say that Evans isn't replacing Childress or whatever, the fact is that the Hawks have to replace Childress' minutes with either one player or a combination of players, and starting with Evans as a means of doing so leaves much, much more to do to get there. If this is the guy that was mentioned by Sund as being "equally productive", he is way off.

Edited July 26, 2008 by jaywalker72

[hawkman]

Nice to hear from you Jay. I agree 100%. Maybe Chillz did overvalue his role on the team, but it appears that Sund may have undervalued him a little more. He used words like "supplemental" to describe Chillz and I'm not sure how accurate that is. He was like our 6th starter out there and he often finished games.

[jaywalker72]

Hawkman, thank you. You're right---I think from the Hawks perspective, there was undervaulation across the board as to how efficient and productive Josh was. Now, it can be argued that the Hawks rightfully elected not to go higher in their offer, but they have to go about filling those minutes with players that will at least match that production. Childress was NOT replacement level, even if the offers for him were around the mid-level. He produced at a higher level than those who are more regarded and that is what should be measured. And---it's not like he was a cancer or a problem to the team in other areas.

With Evans, I believe they took a step backwards with an older, smaller, less effective player whose value is based more on personality and perception rather than performance. I am sure he will be a good guy and a hard worker, but those qualities only go so far.

I hope that should the Hawks trade Josh Smith, they don't undervalue him the same and deal for someone older, less productive, and contractually obligated.

Edited July 26, 2008 by jaywalker72

[exodus]

Whether or not someone agrees about the virtues of replacing the actual role of Josh Childress of the 6th man, so to speak, we can all agree that the Hawks are faced with replacing an extremely efficient and productive 29.9 minutes per game.

As I mention on the HHB, Mo Evans is a replacement level player who had a so-so year in Orlando, and that was a year that was on par with the best of his NBA career. The Hawks are counting on him sliding into Childress' role, at least part of it. They have also given a three year deal to a player who has likely already seen his peak, and it wasn't all that good.

So whether you say that Evans isn't replacing Childress or whatever, the fact is that the Hawks have to replace Childress' minutes with either one player or a combination of players, and starting with Evans as a means of doing so leaves much, much more to do to get there. If this is the guy that was mentioned by Sund as being "equally productive", he is way off.

The Hawks need size inside and perimeter scoring. Childress provided neither. Paying $7 million/yr to a guy who isn't a core player and doesn't compliment the core players doesn't make sense.

Childress averaged less than 1 made jumper per game in 30 minutes. If there is a wing player in the NBA who scores less from the perimeter than Childress I sure haven't heard of him. The Hawks spacing sucked in their half court offense and Childress was a big reason why.

Childress was good at cherry picking and putbacks but not much else. He isnt a playmaker. He can't create his own shot. He isn't much of a defender yet people act like losing him is such a huge blow.

The Hawks played some of their best ball when he was out hurt.

[hawkman]

Hawkman, thank you. You're right---I think from the Hawks perspective, there was undervaulation across the board as to how efficient and productive Josh was. Now, it can be argued that the Hawks rightfully elected not to go higher in their offer, but they have to go about filling those minutes with players that will at least match that production. Childress was NOT replacement level, even if the offers for him were around the mid-level. He produced at a higher level than those who are more regarded and that is what should be measured. And---it's not like he was a cancer or a problem to the team in other areas.

With Evans, I believe they took a step backwards with an older, smaller, less effective player whose value is based more on personality and perception rather than performance. I am sure he will be a good guy and a hard worker, but those qualities only go so far.

I hope that should the Hawks trade Josh Smith, they don't undervalue him the same and deal for someone older, less productive, and contractually obligated.

If we continue to play hardball with our free agents, we may very well lose Smith as well for next to nothing. It seems like some fans are all too willing to see integral parts of our team leave/get traded AFTER we made the Playofs last season. Why is that? What was all of the losing for the past few years if we're just going to let players go after their Rookie contracts are up? All the protest over Belkin trying to run the team on the cheap, and yet everyone seems ok with our recent Donald Sterling/Clipper-like moves. Are we just so used to discussing the draft/possible trades around here that we can't fathom that we had a decent chance of making the Playoffs as a higher seed if we had just kept the team as-is? I watched this team play some of its best basketball just a few months ago. What's changed since then? Why not build on that success and chemistry?

[jaywalker72]

exodus, I give you that, at some point, the price is too high and you can't overspend for someone that is not part of your starting core or if you have to spend that money to address other needs (center, point guard).

However---

Childress was productive, productive in a way that Mo Evans has never been, and the point of whether or not Evans was signed to replace Childress or not, Childress' production in the 29+ minutes per game he played must be filled---And if Evans is the first step, it's already a downgrade in production.

I am completely for fiscal responsibility, especially in the cap era, but if you choose to go that route, you must be ready with productive alternatives when players leave.

[cordele]

Nice to hear from you Jay. I agree 100%. Maybe Chillz did overvalue his role on the team, but it appears that Sund may have undervalued him a little more. He used words like "supplemental" to describe Chillz and I'm not sure how accurate that is. He was like our 6th starter out there and he often finished games.

chill was actual in a starter like manu with the spurs. marvin game and chill were both stunted by this method of playing them. think about it joe was in the game all the time and mario got the last seconds of the half for joe. most all of chill time came at marvin loss. they adv. 24 points from the 3 and now that one is gone the other can grow. how many times did marvin have 12 points in the first quarter and lifted not to ever get back into the flow and end with 15 points in the game. will evens replace chill, no but now we have 5 starters instead of 4 starters and a 5\6 man rotations.

[hawkman]

chill was actual in a starter like manu with the spurs. marvin game and chill were both stunted by this method of playing them. think about it joe was in the game all the time and mario got the last seconds of the half for joe. most all of chill time came at marvin loss. they adv. 24 points from the 3 and now that one is gone the other can grow. how many times did marvin have 12 points in the first quarter and lifted not to ever get back into the flow and end with 15 points in the game. will evens replace chill, no but now we have 5 starters instead of 4 starters and a 5\6 man rotations.

But that makes it seem like we needed to dump Chillz so that Marvin could play more minutes, and therefore, be more productive. Sorry, but I don't agree with that, even though that may be the underlying reason that some fans seemed to have a problem with Chillz. That was the reason everyone was using to dump Harrington. I didn't buy it then, and I don't buy it now. Marvin gets more than enough time to do his thing out there. Either he's playing well or he's not with the minutes he's getting. You can't put that on any other player on this team. In that case, you could blame JJ for playing 40+ minutes because Chillz could've just as easily been coming in to sub him if Woody would allow it. Chillz was a swingman and was able to competently play the 2/3 if asked to.

[exodus]

Childress was productive, productive in a way that Mo Evans has never been,

Childress averaged 11.8 ppg in 29.9 minutes. That means he averaged 15.78 ppg for 40 minutes.

Evans averaged 8.9 ppg in 22.9 minutes. That is a per 40 average of 15.54 ppg.

I am definitely not seeing the big gap there.

We also have to take into account how a player fits the team. Horford, Smith, Zaza and Childress are all most effective inside which makes things a little crowded in the lane. That is probably part of the reason why Smith spent so much time outside jacking up jumpers he can't make which is exactly what the defense wants him to do.

Getting someone else on the floor who can make 3s will open things up inside for Smith and Horford and hopefully get Smith off the 3 pt line.

Edited July 26, 2008 by exodus

[Swish]

I'm not really seeing the gap either Ex. Plus evans is a better 3pt shooter. It may come out roughly even in the end. We are still a long way from competing though.

[High5]

I don't see much of a gap, either. For what Childress gave us around the basket, he didn't give us much on the defensive end or help spread the floor. Whether or not Evans can be a "stopper" doesn't matter, he's without a doubt better than Childress. Then he gives us outside shooting that will let (make) Smith play more around the basket and open things up. I'd rather have Childress, but I think Evans fits this team nicely.

[Peoriabird]

Childress averaged 11.8 ppg in 29.9 minutes. That means he averaged 15.78 ppg for 40 minutes.

Evans averaged 8.9 ppg in 22.9 minutes. That is a per 40 average of 15.54 ppg.

I am definitely not seeing the big gap there.

We also have to take into account how a player fits the team. Horford, Smith, Zaza and Childress are all most effective inside which makes things a little crowded in the lane. That is probably part of the reason why Smith spent so much time outside jacking up jumpers he can't make which is exactly what the defense wants him to do.

Getting someone else on the floor who can make 3s will open things up inside for Smith and Horford and hopefully get Smith off the 3 pt line.

I'm with you on this one Ex. I don't know why people are so down on the Mo Evans signing. The Guy came dirt cheap and his pers have been consistenly equal to that of Josh Childress. He is probably a better defender and just as athletic.

Jay called him small but I don't think that he is smaller than Childress. Maybe an inch shorter! These guys do realize that Childress cost 3 times as much as Mo and they have similar per 40 minute numbers right? Which means that we can bring in other players to form what is called a bench! Jay called him old also which is curious. Posters have been screem for veteran help off the bench for years and now that we have taken the 1st step to making it a reality, This Schizophrenic MB changes it mind again.

[High5]

Better defender for sure, but not as athletic. He's not a stiff by any means though.