Would you trade Al Horford?

[crimedog]

Diesel-

1. If I thought trading Al Horford would net the Hawks just the one championship next year, without hesitation, he's gone. I'll help him pack his bags. Let me be clear, I love Al Horford, but I love titles more. I just don't think this trade makes the Hawks a clear favorite to win the title.

2. Didn't I propose another trade, with the Lakers for Bynum, that I felt did give us the chance to contend for a title? How is trading for a kid with superstar potential when healthy somehow an acceptance of mediocrity?

3. I'm saying next year, adding Tim Duncan and subtracting Al Horford makes us the third or fourth best team in the league. That's the basis for not making the trade. We'd be much better, but not good enough. And that's the worst place to end up after making one of these trades.

4. The Hawks team that took Boston to seven games got its collective anus blown out in every road game. That team also lost its best bench player this offseason. Sure, Tim makes it a more competitive series, he's a much better player than Al. But is he 25 or 30 more points than Horford on the road against one of the top defenses in the league better? After all, the Spurs lost to L.A., who in turn got killed by Boston.

But if you're going to ignore, ya know, what actually happened in the playoffs and just declare that putting Duncan next to JJ (who actually isn't as good as Manu) and Bibby (worse than Tony Parker) makes the Hawks the de facto favorites to win the title and that Boston or L.A. or New Orleans or even Detroit won't have anything to say about it, then man, do us all a solid and not call anyone else a homer ever again.

You are ignoring what happened in the playoffs as much as he is by saying that since the Spurs lost to LA and LA lost to Boston, Tim Duncan couldn't lead us to a title.

That Spurs team is built around 3 players, with Manu being out, they couldn't hold a lead down the stretch and gave up two big ones. You pointed out that the Hawks losses were blowouts, there was one blowout apeice in the SA-LAL series and 3 single digit losses.

Duncan is still a good enough player to lead a team to a title, still arguably the most effective defensive force in the game, and still has the ability to be a go-to offensive guy. Manu might be better than Joe in limited minutes but he can't play the whole game like Joe can, its a wash in that regard... Parker is better than Bibby but Smith is better than Oberto and Marvin is, at worst, on par with Bowen.

The playoffs are about matchups and having Duncan would make us one of the toughest matchups in the east, if we make it out of the east... well, Duncan's record is 4-0 in finals series.

What teams, based on roster talent (not extrapolation from "so and so beat so and so, so we wouldn't be as good"), would be stronger than a Hawks team starring Duncan, JJ, and Smith with Bibby and Marvin?

[Hatertots]

You are ignoring what happened in the playoffs as much as he is by saying that since the Spurs lost to LA and LA lost to Boston, Tim Duncan couldn't lead us to a title.

That Spurs team is built around 3 players, with Manu being out, they couldn't hold a lead down the stretch and gave up two big ones. You pointed out that the Hawks losses were blowouts, there was one blowout apeice in the SA-LAL series and 3 single digit losses.

Duncan is still a good enough player to lead a team to a title, still arguably the most effective defensive force in the game, and still has the ability to be a go-to offensive guy. Manu might be better than Joe in limited minutes but he can't play the whole game like Joe can, its a wash in that regard... Parker is better than Bibby but Smith is better than Oberto and Marvin is, at worst, on par with Bowen.

The playoffs are about matchups and having Duncan would make us one of the toughest matchups in the east, if we make it out of the east... well, Duncan's record is 4-0 in finals series.

What teams, based on roster talent (not extrapolation from "so and so beat so and so, so we wouldn't be as good"), would be stronger than a Hawks team starring Duncan, JJ, and Smith with Bibby and Marvin?

Joe needs something like 6 more possessions than Manu to get 20 points. Six possessions that could (and probably would) go to Duncan instead. Plus, Manu gets more rebounds and steals. I don't think it's even close between those two guys once you take efficiency and possession advantage into account. Smith does some really great things on the court and he does some really horrible things with all those ugly turnovers he commits and his poor shot selection. I'm of the opinion that Atlanta's best players are somewhat overrated, especially considering how few games those players have won the past few seasons.

Based on roster talent, I'd take L.A. (if Bynum comes back healthy, they go from better to much better than a Duncan-led Atlanta squad) and Boston still has KG, a talent equal to TD, and Paul Pierce, who I think is much better than Atlanta's second best player. They also have Rondo, who made Bibby look bad.

Those are the two teams that I think would clearly be better than the Hawks. New Orleans, which got rid of the terrible Jannero Pargo and added a good player in James Posey, is at least as good as that Hawks team. Dallas (Nowitski, Kidd, Howard, Diop) and Utah (Boozer, Williams, Okur, Kirilenko, Milsap) would be close, too. And Detroit is still an elite team that we couldn't just walk through if we met in the playoffs.

If we had signed someone like Baron Davis in the offseason, then sure, make that trade. But I think we come up short of being a frontrunner, and I wouldn't want to sacrifice Al just to be a top 5 team that ends up as an also ran.

[Plainview1981]

The Spurs have won about 70% of their games since TD has been with them. That's about all you need to know.

[Iman]

Wow Diesel I got to give it to you on this one for sure! I'm think Horford is the next Karl Malone, I like homegrown teams, etc but I'd still do the deal at the deadline for an injured Tim Duncan that wouldn't play until 2009. As you said, for sure we'd be a top2 team in the East, maybe not make it to the finals on a upset or maybe the finals and even win it all. As constructed with Al I don't see how we ever make it above just a top 3 or 4 team in the East.

I guess maybe being a Braves fan makes me see how you have to deal your young talent to get to and stay at the top.

I wouldn't move Horford for Bynum at this time, probably should but I wouldn't.

Diesel, how bout moving Horford and Bibby for Paul or Deron and fillers. Would you do it and which would you rather have?

[mrhonline]

Actually, it wasn't a homer test, it was a are you ready to win test.

And you didn't spin it back, you proved that you were homers.

Hey, it's not my fault that you don't understand nuance.

But perhaps I can help you...you should probably start here:

http://www.starfall.com/

[EazyRoc]

easyroc, mrh, and georgiaboi, do any of you actually think that Al and two (mid) first rounders could ever equal the impact of even an aging Duncan? That is no slight on Al, Tim just happens to be one of the ten greatest players ever to play the game. Al, Joe, Josh... none of them have the ability to impact a game like Duncan and none of them will. Don't forget that even in his early 30s, Tim is significantly better than Al in all facets of the game and looks to be so for some time.

MrH, your argument is flawed for various reasons. For one, Duncan, Manu, and Parker have won titles (plural) together. Is last season represenative? Manu was physically a mess in that series. Second, is the fact that we aren't assured of a title a reason not to do it? If you don't think we have a good shot with Duncan, we have virtually no shot with our current group.

gboi, a young Shaq was comparable to, if not better than and old Hakeem. Al was 10 and 10 whereas Duncan was 20 11 3 2...

Easy, what makes you think Sananto competes for a title with Al? The think that makes the team special is having Duncan, a legit 20 ppg post player who can carve up the opponent when they throw the double/triple and can be an absolute force on D. Al can rebound well but you can't build an offense or defense around him which you can do with Tim... since the day he came into the league in fact.

I don't get it, half this board was itching to move Smith for the less talented Kaman (older with less upside too) all for the sake of "fit" because they thought they needed a "true" center to "win a title" but if they had the opportunity to trade Al for one of the best centers in the game (ever), a guy who has been the cornerstone of 4 title teams, its a relatively easy no. It seems like some people lose objectivity about what certain players are going to bring.

San Antonio has a better team than we do, players know their roles, and the culture is different. They have a future Hall of Fame coach, and a good GM. You put Al Horford, Ginobili, and Parker on a team with 2 first rounders they could trade for another good veteran player , and they'll still be contenders.

I said the trade wasn't a bad idea. I think Al Horford, like I said in my previous post, would be a better compliment to Tim Duncan. It's not about comparing Al Horford to Tim Duncan, because that's retarded. You wouldn't trade Josh Smith and 1 first round pick for Tim Duncan ?

[Diesel]

Diesel, how bout moving Horford and Bibby for Paul or Deron and fillers. Would you do it and which would you rather have?

Iman,

I would trade Bibby/Horf in a millisecond if I thought we could get Paul or Deron back. Truth is that we can find a C that would make do. Maybe in the draft this coming year... but we can find one. Like I told you guys when we had a chance to draft them...

Paul looked like the next Isiah Thomas and Deron looks better than Kidd. That has become FACT. If we could get our hands on either, I'd give up the stud PF/C.

Hell, I'd give up Smoove and Bibs if it would bring back Paul or Deron!

[Diesel]

Hey, it's not my fault that you don't understand nuance.

But perhaps I can help you...you should probably start here:

http://www.starfall.com/

I never asked you if you liked Horf being in Atlanta (you ninny). Nor did I suggest a frivolous trade. What I did was propose a trade that would get us into title contention. It could have just as easily been Smoove and 2 first. However, the point was to see that given the opportunity, would we pick a championship over waiting on the development of one of our players. What makes answers like yours HOMERISK is because your attempts to answer this question had nothing to do with basketball. In fact, if you were to have made a basketball argument... .it would have been easily shot down, but at least it wouldn't have been the homer BS that you pulled out of your backside. So there is no nuance. Only your stupidity. It's a shame that you result to game play and name calling when asked to use your brain.

[Diesel]

San Antonio has a better team than we do, players know their roles, and the culture is different. They have a future Hall of Fame coach, and a good GM. You put Al Horford, Ginobili, and Parker on a team with 2 first rounders they could trade for another good veteran player , and they'll still be contenders.

I said the trade wasn't a bad idea. I think Al Horford, like I said in my previous post, would be a better compliment to Tim Duncan. It's not about comparing Al Horford to Tim Duncan, because that's retarded. You wouldn't trade Josh Smith and 1 first round pick for Tim Duncan ?

I think when you suggest that San Antonio is _______ you really take a lot of Tim Duncan's credit away.

Here's the litmus test.

If you take Tim Duncan away from San Antonio.. for 20 games.. How many do they win?

Now...

If you take Al Horford away from Atlanta for ...20 games... how many do we win?

SA might be disciplined and all that, but it's the skills of Tim Duncan that makes that team Championship material.

[EazyRoc]

What in the world are you talking about ?

I have said absolutely nothing to take credit away from Tim Duncan's accomplishments and his success with the San Antonio Spurs. You're rambling. Go to sleep.

[crimedog]

San Antonio has a better team than we do, players know their roles, and the culture is different. They have a future Hall of Fame coach, and a good GM. You put Al Horford, Ginobili, and Parker on a team with 2 first rounders they could trade for another good veteran player , and they'll still be contenders.

I said the trade wasn't a bad idea. I think Al Horford, like I said in my previous post, would be a better compliment to Tim Duncan. It's not about comparing Al Horford to Tim Duncan, because that's retarded. You wouldn't trade Josh Smith and 1 first round pick for Tim Duncan ?

They'd be contenders for the 8th seed... maybe, but Al Horford isn't talented enough to push them above the great teams in the west with players like Yao, Dirk, or Amare. There is a big difference between Parker and Gino being great role players like they are when every offensive play gets run through the post and every defensive possession is centered around Duncan and being thrust into the spotlight having to deal with doubles on offense and not being able to play tight on their man on D.

I would trade Smith and the pick, I would trade Joe and a pick and then move Smith or Al for a good wing player. History has shown that if you have a chance to get an all-time great while they are still effective for a player who is VASTLY inferior (all of our players), you will have a good shot at winning a title. Like Hakeem, KAJ, or Ewing, Duncan looks to be able to play at a high level well into his 30s. Hakeem, Kareem, and Shaq were all winning titles and MVPs at Duncan's age and Duncan relies on athleticism less than all of them with the possible exception of Kareem who played into his 40s.

[crimedog]

Joe needs something like 6 more possessions than Manu to get 20 points. Six possessions that could (and probably would) go to Duncan instead. Plus, Manu gets more rebounds and steals. I don't think it's even close between those two guys once you take efficiency and possession advantage into account. Smith does some really great things on the court and he does some really horrible things with all those ugly turnovers he commits and his poor shot selection. I'm of the opinion that Atlanta's best players are somewhat overrated, especially considering how few games those players have won the past few seasons.

Based on roster talent, I'd take L.A. (if Bynum comes back healthy, they go from better to much better than a Duncan-led Atlanta squad) and Boston still has KG, a talent equal to TD, and Paul Pierce, who I think is much better than Atlanta's second best player. They also have Rondo, who made Bibby look bad.

Those are the two teams that I think would clearly be better than the Hawks. New Orleans, which got rid of the terrible Jannero Pargo and added a good player in James Posey, is at least as good as that Hawks team. Dallas (Nowitski, Kidd, Howard, Diop) and Utah (Boozer, Williams, Okur, Kirilenko, Milsap) would be close, too. And Detroit is still an elite team that we couldn't just walk through if we met in the playoffs.

If we had signed someone like Baron Davis in the offseason, then sure, make that trade. But I think we come up short of being a frontrunner, and I wouldn't want to sacrifice Al just to be a top 5 team that ends up as an also ran.

I think you are taking player's stats out of context and using that to decide who is better. I do think that Manu is at least as good as Joe but I wouldn't use season stats to judge. Manu gets to play 31 minutes a game, he is always fresh. Manu doesn't face doubles, he doesn't have the offense run through him on every play. It is easy to be explosive when you aren't always handling the ball, no? Similar to Parker, no one can stay in front of him but its harder to stay in front of a guy when you are constantly in recovery from doubling/tripling a 2-time MVP low post behemoth. Look what happens to Joe when he doesn't have to be the de facto point - guard he goes off. Look what happened once Bibby got here: around 24-7 with astonishing accuracy from 3. Hell, look what happened to Smith once Bibby got here, he got to become more of a finisher, upped his FG% and cut down his TOs by one full loss a game.

Its easier to be efficient when you are put in a position to be efficient.

I don't think it assures us of a title by any means, but any team Duncan is on is going to be talked about as a title contender and for good reason. You can't say the same about Josh/Joe/Al.

[mrhonline]

What in the world are you talking about ?

I have said absolutely nothing to take credit away from Tim Duncan's accomplishments and his success with the San Antonio Spurs. You're rambling. Go to sleep.

What's funny is that I didn't even read D's response. I just noticed he quoted me, and I predicted his answer...

...I went back and read it, and my response (of course) was relevant. :beathorse:

[Swish]

What's funny is that I didn't even read D's response. I just noticed he quoted me, and I predicted his answer...

...I went back and read it, and my response (of course) was relevant. :beathorse:

Seriously, no disrespect meant to Diesel at all, he contributes alot, but why do we continually feed him?

On topic, and the above notwithstanding, I have to agree with Diesel. I wouldn't ship Joe and Al, but I would trade Smoove/Bibby or Al/Bibby or Al/Marvin/Bibby for Tim RIGHT NOW. I mean, seriously, think of Tim/Smoove/Joe or Tim/Al/Joe???

The thing is this. Tim averaged almost 22ppg in his ROOKIE YEAR. Al averaged 10. This isn't even a close comparison. The Big Fundamental is the best PF in the world. The fact that we are arguing this is interesting. To me, Al hasn't shown enough to warrant not trading him for Tim. Come back to me in 2-3 years and we can talk. For now, this is ridiculous.

P.S.

How does my sig show up to y'all? ON another computer it was HUGE and on mine its perfect.

[Traceman]

Before you have a heart attack, my reference is the KG trade from last year.

Here's the rest.

IF San Antonio said that they wanted to get some young talent for their aging talent, and they offered us Tim Duncan for Horford and 2 First round picks...

Would you do it??

I really want some discussion here.

Do you think it's better that we wait on potential and forgo trading for any talent?

or

Should we make a move like Boston did and see what we can do right now?

Has Horf shown you enough that you're totally sold on him being the future?

I'd do it. I love Al but Duncan is one of the greatest players EVER and he still has enough left that Al won't be in his area code as a player for at least a few more years. We would be immediate contenders with Duncan in place of Al. I'd have to do it.

[Hatertots]

I think you are taking player's stats out of context and using that to decide who is better. I do think that Manu is at least as good as Joe but I wouldn't use season stats to judge. Manu gets to play 31 minutes a game, he is always fresh. Manu doesn't face doubles, he doesn't have the offense run through him on every play. It is easy to be explosive when you aren't always handling the ball, no? Similar to Parker, no one can stay in front of him but its harder to stay in front of a guy when you are constantly in recovery from doubling/tripling a 2-time MVP low post behemoth. Look what happens to Joe when he doesn't have to be the de facto point - guard he goes off. Look what happened once Bibby got here: around 24-7 with astonishing accuracy from 3. Hell, look what happened to Smith once Bibby got here, he got to become more of a finisher, upped his FG% and cut down his TOs by one full loss a game.

Its easier to be efficient when you are put in a position to be efficient.

I don't think it assures us of a title by any means, but any team Duncan is on is going to be talked about as a title contender and for good reason. You can't say the same about Josh/Joe/Al.

Crimedog-

The only thing I can look at is what they did in the games. And in the games they played last season (and every other season) Manu was the more productive shooting guard.

The argument that Joe would play better if he had a better point handling the ball and didn't face so many double teams gets thrown around a lot. What you might find surprising is that in Phoenix, where JJ played under those exact ideal conditions, his numbers hardly changed at all. Atlanta Joe takes more shots and, as a result, scores more points than Phoenix Joe and Atl Joe gets slightly fewer rebounds than Phx Joe (I'm guessing that pace accounts for this marginal difference) but any way you slice it, there's no evidence that Joe was a radically better player when he played with Nash, Amare, and Marion. His scoring efficiency was basically the same (with the exception of a one season spike in 3p%, and even that had less impact on his points per shot than I would've thought).

Joe Johnson, regardless of the jersey on his back and the teammates at his side, has played like Joe Johnson throughout his career.

[crimedog]

Crimedog-

The only thing I can look at is what they did in the games. And in the games they played last season (and every other season) Manu was the more productive shooting guard.

The argument that Joe would play better if he had a better point handling the ball and didn't face so many double teams gets thrown around a lot. What you might find surprising is that in Phoenix, where JJ played under those exact ideal conditions, his numbers hardly changed at all. Atlanta Joe takes more shots and, as a result, scores more points than Phoenix Joe and Atl Joe gets slightly fewer rebounds than Phx Joe (I'm guessing that pace accounts for this marginal difference) but any way you slice it, there's no evidence that Joe was a radically better player when he played with Nash, Amare, and Marion. His scoring efficiency was basically the same (with the exception of a one season spike in 3p%, and even that had less impact on his points per shot than I would've thought).

Joe Johnson, regardless of the jersey on his back and the teammates at his side, has played like Joe Johnson throughout his career.

... not sure what Joe Johnson you were watching in Phoenix but he played nothing like the one in Altanta and the numbers show that. In PHX he was primarily an off the ball player who rarely played in isolation. He was the fourth option and it showed in his 3pt%, low rate of assists, and low rate of FTs.

He came to Atlanta and played a lot of point guard in his first season, got to be more of a scorer in his second season while we let other people bring the ball up and initiate to offense, then last season he went back to a de facto pg until we brought in Bibby and Joe got to play to his strengths again.

I find it odd that you refute the argument that Johnson would play better with a point guard and use as your example his play with a different team and coach entirely when you have empirical evidence from his play with and without a pg during the exact same season with the exact same surrounding players. Please explain why plugging Bibby in and keeping the rest of the context the same is less valid to you than going back in time to when Joe was a 22/23 year old fourth option in a different system.

Also the "one season spike" in his 3pt% was the only season he played with Nash, that was also borne out in his time playing next to Bibby. One of Joe's biggest strengths is his jumpshot but its hard to be accurate when you always have a hand in your face. For someone who seems to value shooting efficiency you seem awfully keen to ignore the fact that Joe, next to a good pg (be it Nash or Bibby) has shown the ability to knock down the trey at a rate that most SGs would kill for.

Edited August 28, 2008 by crimedog

[mrhonline]

Seriously, no disrespect meant to Diesel at all, he contributes alot, but why do we continually feed him?

He's not exactly going to sit around and wait on us...so I'd prefer it to be on my terms, not his.

[atlhawks321]

i would make this trade

[hussamga]

I would make this trade without hesitation. Ideally you can draft rebuild to a point..we have surpassed that stage and will no longer be able to re-sign our players without making room elsewhere on the roster. On top of this we have underachieved imo...but we still have many young assets.

Duncan would be a revelation for the team...