Sekou has us taking TY LAWSON at 19.

[AtLaS]

I'm not sure where I posted a comparison to Lawson and Flynn? Anyways, if we are talking about those two then I would rather have Lawson. We've seen what happens on the Hawks when we take potential over actual product.

Bad things have also happened when we take product. Shelden, Acie, and Childress. Marvin was a bad potential pick but at least he's a starter.

EDIT: My fault Soth, it was MrH who made the quote.

Edited June 1, 2009 by AtLaS

[AtLaS]

I don't agree at all.

I think Lawson is the better NBA PG right now.

Well, that's all speculation. The only barometer is their college play along with their tangibles/intangibles. And I would agree that Lawson was the better college player, although in much different situations.

[AHF]

Bad things have also happened when we take product. Shelden, Acie, and Childress. Marvin was a bad potential pick but at least he's a starter.

You can't assume that will always be the case.

Chris Paul, Paul Pierce, Tim Duncan, etc. all were polished product coming out of college. Just because some product fails doesn't mean that all product fails. And just because BK's product failed doesn't mean Sund's product will fail.

(Just as Sund's potential big men picks don't mean that all potential big men he drafts in the future will fail.)

[AtLaS]

You can't assume that will always be the case.

Chris Paul, Paul Pierce, Tim Duncan, etc. all were polished product coming out of college. Just because some product fails doesn't mean that all product fails. And just because BK's product failed doesn't mean Sund's product will fail.

(Just as Sund's potential big men picks don't mean that all potential big men he drafts in the future will fail.)

I agree completely.

Soth said he'd rather take Lawson because we've "seen what happens when we take potential over actual product." I was pointing out that we've also made mistakes by taking actual product. That's why I wouldn't put the barometer on potential versus actual production, especially given they were reasonably close anyway.

[AHF]

I agree completely.

Soth said he'd rather take Lawson because we've "seen what happens when we take potential over actual product." I was pointing out that we've also made mistakes by taking actual product. That's why I wouldn't put the barometer on potential versus actual production, especially given they were reasonably close anyway.

Agreed. Just take the better NBA prospect with the better high upside/low downside ratio.

[DrReality]

I'd be surprised if he was there when we pick.

[mrhonline]

Who's talking "college product?"

I'm saying that Lawson has more NBA PG skills than Flynn. He shoots more efficiently, passes more efficiently, runs a team more efficiently, and even plays defense more efficiently.

Flynn is more athletic and has longer arms.

Again, Flynn might become the better NBA PG, but he is not now the better PG.

Ty Lawson looks as good as anyone from this perspective, regardless of position.

As we put this data together, we weren't surprised that Ty Lawson excelled from a situational perspective, as he did play for the most potent offense in all of college basketball, but we didn't expect him to look this good. He ranks first in a number of key categories, including overall FG% (52%), Points Per Possession [PPP](1.13), pull up jump shot FG% (47%), and %shots he was fouled on (16.1%). Though his teammates did a lot of scoring as well, Lawson functioned seamlessly as a complementary scorer. Looking past his efficiency as a shooter off the dribble, he was second in catch and shoot field goal percentage at 48%. From a purely statistical sense, no player on this list scored more efficiently than Lawson.

We thought that UNC's transition offense might have given Lawson a decided advantage over some of his counterparts in terms of efficiency, but that wasn't entirely true. He did get 10% more offense in transition than any of the other players we looked at (an outrageous 38.6%), but his transition PPP of 1.2 is the same as his PPP in spot up situations and not as far above the average as his PPP in pick and roll situations (1.19 PPP, +.29) or on isolations (1 PPP, +.16). Lawson was an incredibly prolific transition player (which is quite an advantage in itself today's NBA), but he was comparatively better in other areas as well. When you consider that he only turned the ball over on 13.8% of his half court possessions (5th best) and can drive left and right equally well, it seems like Lawson could be an excellent offensive fit on virtually any team, regardless of tempo.

Edited June 2, 2009 by mrhonline

[ngc7]

first post ..whts up Hawks fans. Ive been a Hawk fan since birth lol anyways been looking for a good Hawks forum and looks like i found one.

Well back to the thread. I would love to have Lawson . He will be a impact right away just because of his speed and toughness.

I dont think we need a big time shooting pg. i believe we need a someone with Mario West hustle with a better skill set. Which i would hope Lawson has if we get him . we need someone who will take it to the hole and give it up to JJ , Marvin for open shots or down low to smith and horford. We have enough scorers . We need someone that will handle the ball and get open looks for all the scorers we have.

[Sothron]

Bad things have also happened when we take product. Shelden, Acie, and Childress. Marvin was a bad potential pick but at least he's a starter.

EDIT: My fault Soth, it was MrH who made the quote.

That's a very fair point to make and it only shows how much a crap shoot the draft is. Hell I remember when Babs passed on Tony Parker and Tinsley. Then BK idiotically passed on Deron and Paul when everyone in the NBA was raving over them as the two next best generational point guards. Then BK passed on Stuckey to take Law and for reasons I still don't understand Woody just freakin' superglued Law's *ss to the bench. He wanted a more NBA ready point guard, BK got him Law, then Woody refuses to play him. Its unreal. So who knows if we got Lawson or Flynn if Woody will play either guy.

[ngc7]

That's a very fair point to make and it only shows how much a crap shoot the draft is. Hell I remember when Babs passed on Tony Parker and Tinsley. Then BK idiotically passed on Deron and Paul when everyone in the NBA was raving over them as the two next best generational point guards. Then BK passed on Stuckey to take Law and for reasons I still don't understand Woody just freakin' superglued Law's *ss to the bench. He wanted a more NBA ready point guard, BK got him Law, then Woody refuses to play him. Its unreal. So who knows if we got Lawson or Flynn if Woody will play either guy.

unreal that we didnt take stuckey . he would fit perfectly with the team we got

[AtLaS]

Who's talking "college product?"

I'm saying that Lawson has more NBA PG skills than Flynn. He shoots more efficiently, passes more efficiently, runs a team more efficiently, and even plays defense more efficiently.

Flynn is more athletic and has longer arms.

Again, Flynn might become the better NBA PG, but he is not now the better PG.

The bolded statements completely describe the college product. Lawson shot more efficiently but his shot release is very low and it will be tough for him to shoot in the NBA unless he's wide open. There are a lot of college players with bad/low releases who shoot well in college, but most of them do not translate into productive shooters in the NBA. An undersized one will have an even worse chance. Lawson struggled to finish inside even at UNC, it will be much harder in the NBA. He also has significant injury concerns.

Flynn on the other hand has a great release that is much higher. He is more athletic and longer and will have a much better chance of being a better finisher in the NBA IMO. Regardless, he still has work to do on his shot, though. But, don't let his shooting percentages fool you. He was given a LOT of responsibility at Syracuse and took a lot of tough jumpers because of that. That won't be the case in the NBA and if he was just shooting when open he'd have shot a lot higher percentage IMO.

I do NOT agree at all that Lawson is the better defender. That's quite a bold statement to make. They are very comparable and IMO Flynn is at least as good. But I wouldn't flat out say that Flynn or Lawson is definitively better as an end all statement as you have done.

The one thing I love about Lawson is his fastbreak ability which could really help this team. But, Flynn isn't exactly a slouch in that area either.

But regardless, I have agreed that Lawson's the better college player. But, the two players had very different roles on their teams and differing levels of teammate talent to play which could explain some of the differences.

[AtLaS]

That's a very fair point to make and it only shows how much a crap shoot the draft is. Hell I remember when Babs passed on Tony Parker and Tinsley. Then BK idiotically passed on Deron and Paul when everyone in the NBA was raving over them as the two next best generational point guards. Then BK passed on Stuckey to take Law and for reasons I still don't understand Woody just freakin' superglued Law's *ss to the bench. He wanted a more NBA ready point guard, BK got him Law, then Woody refuses to play him. Its unreal. So who knows if we got Lawson or Flynn if Woody will play either guy.

This is my concern as well, especially if Bibby is resigned.

[Diesel]

I think it would be great to get our hands on Lawson. We must realize that we need a player who can immediately step in and perform! Lawson fits that bill, plus he's a type of PG (regardless of his questionable size) that fits well with Hawks... experience (compared to other PG's from this class) quickness, decent passing, solid D and a jumper to go along...

P.S. I don't understand why his stock is sliding... anyway, I hope he falls to 19!

If we skip Teague to take Lawson, we're making a mistake.

[Diesel]

Agreed. I'm not taking anything away from Lawson, but you gotta believe he benefited from a loaded UNC team. Flynn had a lot less to work with, but still came up HUGE in Big East competition, which was very physical and competitive this season. The fact that you can compare the two despite the differences in experience and supporting cast speaks volumes about the type of player Flynn is right NOW. He has a long way to go but he's certainly not a "raw" prospect like Holiday. I feel like this guy could contribute sooner rather than later with his natural abilities.

In this whole Lawson vs. Flynn argument. Nobody discusses the fact that these guys are both short and don't shoot so well? Why are you guys praying for the next Nate Robinson? Even Robinson's job is not secure these days... In the NBA, Speed is good, but you have to have more than Speed. Ask Ty Lue! The bottom line is that you have to guard somebody. Both Flynn and Lawson represent a mismatch for the other team. They both represent a post up opportunity. You guys need to take your Syracuse and your UNC pennant down and start looking at this situation clearly. The best pick for us is clearly Teague.

An absolute assassin on the offensive end. Can score in a variety of ways. Shoots for a tremendous percentage from the three-point line. Can take the ball to the rim with great control and finishes strong. Runs the floor very well. An above-average passer. Breaks down a defense and either creates for himself or his teammates. Wants the ball in his hands at the end of the game. Clutch player. Plays solid defense. Very good basketball IQ. Really sees the entire floor and is a tremendous distributor when running the break. Does a very good job of using his steps to shift away from his opponents. Has a very good first step as well as a pullback jumpshot. Good free-throw shooter. A good finisher once he gets into the paint. Has a terrific crossover. Has the size and athleticism to finish in the paint. Does a good job of scoring off the dribble. Has great speed and quickness.

[mrhonline]

In this whole Lawson vs. Flynn argument. Nobody discusses the fact that these guys are both short and don't shoot so well? Why are you guys praying for the next Nate Robinson? Even Robinson's job is not secure these days... In the NBA, Speed is good, but you have to have more than Speed. Ask Ty Lue! The bottom line is that you have to guard somebody. Both Flynn and Lawson represent a mismatch for the other team. They both represent a post up opportunity. You guys need to take your Syracuse and your UNC pennant down and start looking at this situation clearly. The best pick for us is clearly Teague.

I'm just trying to address what I think is classic 'overhyping' of Flynn, who is no better than the undersized, set-shooting Ty Lawson. (I don't like college basketball myself, so it's not about a team to me).

If anything, you and I are in agreement - I think Teague could quite easily become the best NBA guard of the 3, and his skill set seems to best fit what the Hawks like in PG's. You have to really convince yourself out of a guy that shot so well from the perimeter AND got to the line at will AND who has great length for a PG.

[DrReality]

I think Lawson has more maturity than Teague which could be an important factor given Woody's style of playing them.

[TheDude]

i dont care which one as long as they have true point guard skills...if they don't have much true point guard skills,, i'd be just as happy getting tony doulgas in the 2nd round who should have beat lawson in acc playerof the year honors anyway...

but if lawson or flynn is a point guard in not only body but also in mind, then i'm happy with either one...

[AtLaS]

If we skip Teague to take Lawson, we're making a mistake.

I like Teague as a scorer, but not too much else. He really reminds me of Flip part 2, but he'll probably be a little better. The guy isn't a true PG and he's not a leader which are both things we desperately need.

Both Flynn and Lawson represent a mismatch for the other team. They both represent a post up opportunity.

The new NBA defensive rules largely favor quick guards. There are not many post-up points anymore. Billups is one of the few. Cassell is gone. Payton is gone. This really doesn't concern me too much.

[hawkman]

In this whole Lawson vs. Flynn argument. Nobody discusses the fact that these guys are both short and don't shoot so well? Why are you guys praying for the next Nate Robinson? Even Robinson's job is not secure these days... In the NBA, Speed is good, but you have to have more than Speed. Ask Ty Lue! The bottom line is that you have to guard somebody. Both Flynn and Lawson represent a mismatch for the other team. They both represent a post up opportunity. You guys need to take your Syracuse and your UNC pennant down and start looking at this situation clearly. The best pick for us is clearly Teague.

Didn't both Teague and Lawson have some discplinary issues in college? That may be of some concern to NBA GMs. All I hear of Flynn is that he is a "high character" guy, which kinda fits in with what we already have right now. It ain't a big deal to me, but there has to be a reason both of these guys are either in the late lottery or late first round right now. It has to be something because they all have lottery talent. In any case, I'd be cool with any of these guys as I think all of them have the talent to contribute right away.

[mrhonline]

Didn't both Teague and Lawson have some discplinary issues in college? That may be of some concern to NBA GMs. All I hear of Flynn is that he is a "high character" guy, which kinda fits in with what we already have right now. It ain't a big deal to me, but there has to be a reason both of these guys are either in the late lottery or late first round right now. It has to be something because they all have lottery talent. In any case, I'd be cool with any of these guys as I think all of them have the talent to contribute right away.

I've been wondering the same thing...