The games Marvin missed

[exodus]

Diesel and Holtanta like to point to the Hawks record without Marvin as if it actually proves something. Let's take a closer look.

Away vs Orlando- Marvin missed the opener and the Hawks won in Orlando. Was Marvin's absence the reason the eventual eastern champs

shot 37% from the field and 16% from 3? Somehow i doubt it. (Smith had a great statline here, 17/10 with 5 blocks, 4 steals and no turnovers.

Home vs Houston- Houston was missing McGrady, Artest and Battier. Do you think that, just maybe, their absence worked in the Hawks favor?

Home vs Toronto- The Raps were missing Calderon and Will Solomon, his backup. Their starting backcourt was Anthony Parker and Joey Graham.

Away vs Chicago- The only notable player missing was Hughes. Looking at the box the Bulls should have won this game. JJ was 5-18 and Flip was 4-13 but Bibby nuked them

with 31/6 with 5 steals, going 5-10 from 3. Mo had 2 pts in 20 minutes starting in Marvin's place.

Home vs NOH- No notable injuries for NO. interesting that Chandler only had 2/5 in 39 minutes. The Hawks made 10 3s compared to only 3 for NO which was the kwy.

Home vs Utah- No notable injuries for Utah. Utah was 15-26 on the road playing their 2nd of a back to back on the road.

Home vs indy- No Granger. A bad team without their best player at home. Real tough game.

Home vs Portland- JJ and Smith went off, combining for 54 pts. Mo had 2 in 23 minutes starting in Marvins place. Murray was 1-6.

Home vs Sactown- Sactown sucks

Home vs Dallas- Dallas missing two starters, Josh Howard and Dampier. JT might as well stayed home going 3-13, 1-9 from 3.

Away vs Cavs- Autoloss

Home vs Minny - No Al Jefferson, A bad team without it's best player.

Home vs Spurs- No Duncan and Manu was badly hobbled, going 1-7 in 14 minutes.

Home vs Boston- Garnett and Powe both out.

Home vs LA- No Bynum. the Hawks shoot 10-19 from 3. Smith and JJ were a combined 7-29.

Away vs Philly- Thad Young went down in the 1st. He was averaging 20 ppg in March.

Away vs Boston- Again Garnett and Powe are out.

Home vs Orlando- Nelson and Petrius both out. They both started the season opener.

Away vs Toronto- Mo finally has a big game and the Hawks shoot 50% from 3.

Away vs Bucks - Redd and Bogut were out.

Away vs Memphis-

Thats 13 home games vs 8 away games. Everyone knows the Hawks are better at home.

Looking at the opponents injuries ( McGrady, Artest, Battier, Calderon, Granger,Josh Howard, Dampier, Al Jefferson, Duncan and Manu was badly hobbled, Garnett and Powe (twice), Nelson, Petrius, Redd, Bogut) it is clear how easy the Hawks schedule was when Marvin was out. In 6 of these games the other team was missing their best player.

So Diesel and hotlanta, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[jy23]

Lol, did you really do this, I don't think I can take 2 much more of this!

[Buzzard]

This is a big diference in how some look at things. I don't wish an injury on anyone; but when a opposing team has a major player out; I do see it as a lucky break for us. Especially when we are trying to at least stay in the 4th spot. Others see it as a I told you so .... we don't need so and so, or so and so is worthless, if we can beat so and so w/o him.

Wierd if you ask me but so is life...

[Diesel]

So Diesel and hotlanta, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

:hush:

OK, smoked it in my pipe. Here's what it smells like. It smells like the loss of Marvin doesn't make a difference. For some of those teams, they were missing the same players when we had Marvin healthy and in the lineup. IF you want to call our season a fluke season then do that. However, when we lost Marvin... Statistics show OUR DEFENSE got better. (There's a PERIOD THERE... not a semicolon. ). Moreover, teams go through injuries all season long. I didn't see your 82 game analysis of the injury list for the Hawks. How many teams had injuries when Marvin was playing?

Oh wait... One more.

When we played Orlando, they were healthy. We beat them.. and you say... We held them to 34% shooting because of ......

Then you acknowledged Smoove's great game.

I wonder how does this begin to help your argument. I'm sure it was starring you in the face like a wedding day for Richard Jefferson when you started typing. Let's think of the thought process:

Ex: Damn, we beat Orlando in the first game without Marvin. It was an impressive win. They were healthy. Damn. this will prove Diesel's point.

Ex: Damn, what am I going to say about that win. Well, I know.. I will say we caught them off guard... SHUCKS.. we played them in the pre-season.

Ex: I know, I will say because we played them in the pre-season that we had a chance to gameplan against them.... SHUCKS They played us too.

Ex: I know, I will say we're better at home. SHUCKs... It was an away game.

Ex: Damn. OK, I will say that Smoove just had an impressive game and hope nobody mentions that without Marvin, Smoove just stepped up... or that we really didn't miss Marvin.

Again, if you want to say that we had a FLUKE SEASON... say that and put it in another post... However, the facts are that in the games we played without Marvin, we didn't miss his contribution.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Diesel

[exodus]

:hush:

OK, smoked it in my pipe. Here's what it smells like. It smells like the loss of Marvin doesn't make a difference. For some of those teams, they were missing the same players when we had Marvin healthy and in the lineup. IF you want to call our season a fluke season then do that. However, when we lost Marvin... Statistics show OUR DEFENSE got better. (There's a PERIOD THERE... not a semicolon. ). Moreover, teams go through injuries all season long. I didn't see your 82 game analysis of the injury list for the Hawks. How many teams had injuries when Marvin was playing?

Oh wait... One more.

When we played Orlando, they were healthy. We beat them.. and you say... We held them to 34% shooting because of ......

Then you acknowledged Smoove's great game.

I wonder how does this begin to help your argument. I'm sure it was starring you in the face like a wedding day for Richard Jefferson when you started typing. Let's think of the thought process:

Ex: Damn, we beat Orlando in the first game without Marvin. It was an impressive win. They were healthy. Damn. this will prove Diesel's point.

Ex: Damn, what am I going to say about that win. Well, I know.. I will say we caught them off guard... SHUCKS.. we played them in the pre-season.

Ex: I know, I will say because we played them in the pre-season that we had a chance to gameplan against them.... SHUCKS They played us too.

Ex: I know, I will say we're better at home. SHUCKs... It was an away game.

Ex: Damn. OK, I will say that Smoove just had an impressive game and hope nobody mentions that without Marvin, Smoove just stepped up... or that we really didn't miss Marvin.

Again, if you want to say that we had a FLUKE SEASON... say that and put it in another post... However, the facts are that in the games we played without Marvin, we didn't miss his contribution.

Hello McFly, is anyone home?

the Hawks won 73% of their home games on the season. They won only 39% of their road games. 13 of the 21 games the Hawks played without Marvin were at home. In 6 of those games the other team was missing their best player, hence the Hawks had an easier schedule when Marvin was out. The facts don't lie but Diesel does.

Are you trying to say Marvin's absence is the reason Orlando shot bricks in the season opener? A simple yes or no will do.

Funny how you make up a strawman about a fluke season to try to change the subject. You even mention preseason in your desperation to change the subject. Where did i say they caught a team off guard? Another Diesel strawman.

[jy23]

You two really make this board entertaining!!!!! lol, but really both of you should just let it go. Neither of you will EVER see the others point of view and its kinda becoming redundant! I enjoy the slick backhanded remarks but the marv stats are really over and done with now. We know that the hawks didn't exactly stink it up when marv didn't play but we also know that in that stretch we caught a couple of breaks due to injuries, that happens in the league from time 2 time, we know that marvin doesn't put up alot of shots which may look like he's unagressive to some but we also know that our offense is pretty much just dribble dribble dribble jack up a jumper. We are not a team that moves the ball around alot and that kinda makes a difference as far as the kinda looks that marv gets. We can talk about josh being more agressive BUT AGAIN anyone who watched just a couple of our games last year can clearly see that josh got more than his fair share of wide open shots and WE ALL KNOW WHY, the only way you can dispute that FACT is if you just didn't watch any games and you're going off of stats, I personally think gameplay means a little more. I really don't feel like going thru every other argument that you two have made but i think we all get the point, its entertaining but come on guys, lol just let it go!

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Hello McFly, is anyone home?

the Hawks won 73% of their home games on the season. They won only 39% of their road games. 13 of the 21 games the Hawks played without Marvin were at home. In 6 of those games the other team was missing their best player, hence the Hawks had an easier schedule when Marvin was out. The facts don't lie but Diesel does.

How many of those 8 road games did we win during that stretch? 2?

You can go even further with this. Not only did the Hawks play more home games during that stretch, if you look at the total games Marvin played, he played in 28 home games . . . compared to 33 road games. I believe he's the only Hawk in the regular rotation to have played in more road games, than home games.

Go even further. Look at some of the games Marvin played in and LOST, when either Smith or Horford were out. In at least half of those games Marvin was acutally one of the Hawks who had a good game.

I specifically remember a road loss to either the Knicks or Nets in January, in which Marvin and Smith were carrying the team offensively. But the reason we lost was because both JJ and Bibby had a HORRIBLE game.

People better remember the 2009 playoffs around here. How when Horford went down for the count, this team almost got knocked out in the Miami series and couldn't do a damn thing with Cleveland.

The mythical big man that would help this team, isn't coming, because people want Smith or Horford . . and we're not willing to trade either one of them for a real good big man. No Amare. No Andersen. No Wilcox. No Kaman. None of those guys.

Like I've been saying, barring a major trade, the big man is going to be Solo, and probably some other dude that no one wants.

And if that's the case, we better keep a 6-9 SF that can also play PF well enough to keep us afloat. That's his worth. That's why the guy is easily worth 8 million to the Hawks.

[Diesel]

And if that's the case, we better keep a 6-9 SF that can also play PF well enough to keep us afloat. That's his worth. That's why the guy is easily worth 8 million to the Hawks.

After 240 something replies and 2500 views... you still don't get it. Nobody has said let Marvin walk? Where was that said. I have said that Marvin's not worth 8 million per and that we should let the market decide and if it doesn't give him 8 million per, give him a 7.355 Million QO. Where is it stated Let Marvin go??

You must not be a bargain shopper. I bet you see Corn in the store for $5.00 a can, you just buy it right? Maybe you say in your heart... Well, I'm here to buy corn. If we don't have corn, we'll starve. Let's buy this $5.00 corn. IT is EASILY the best I can do.

[HAWKS1986]

:hush:

OK, smoked it in my pipe. Here's what it smells like. It smells like the loss of Marvin doesn't make a difference. For some of those teams, they were missing the same players when we had Marvin healthy and in the lineup. IF you want to call our season a fluke season then do that. However, when we lost Marvin... Statistics show OUR DEFENSE got better. (There's a PERIOD THERE... not a semicolon. ). Moreover, teams go through injuries all season long. I didn't see your 82 game analysis of the injury list for the Hawks. How many teams had injuries when Marvin was playing?

Oh wait... One more.

When we played Orlando, they were healthy. We beat them.. and you say... We held them to 34% shooting because of ......

Then you acknowledged Smoove's great game.

I wonder how does this begin to help your argument. I'm sure it was starring you in the face like a wedding day for Richard Jefferson when you started typing. Let's think of the thought process:

Ex: Damn, we beat Orlando in the first game without Marvin. It was an impressive win. They were healthy. Damn. this will prove Diesel's point.

Ex: Damn, what am I going to say about that win. Well, I know.. I will say we caught them off guard... SHUCKS.. we played them in the pre-season.

Ex: I know, I will say because we played them in the pre-season that we had a chance to gameplan against them.... SHUCKS They played us too.

Ex: I know, I will say we're better at home. SHUCKs... It was an away game.

Ex: Damn. OK, I will say that Smoove just had an impressive game and hope nobody mentions that without Marvin, Smoove just stepped up... or that we really didn't miss Marvin.

Again, if you want to say that we had a FLUKE SEASON... say that and put it in another post... However, the facts are that in the games we played without Marvin, we didn't miss his contribution.

Diesel, your analysis of Marvin's negligible and/or non-existent impact is right on target.

And in my opinion, Marvin shouldn't be the starting forward on opening day 2009. To be more frank, the Hawks should go ahead and get rid of him now...

[Diesel]

Hey... Young squawkers...

Check MY SIg and you will see this:

I guess, we know Ex's M.O.: Evade, evade, evade... insult, insult, put up a picture. Put up a picture... change the subject

No read Ex's post in this thread. You know. The one with the picture.

[Diesel]

Away vs Orlando- Marvin missed the opener and the Hawks won in Orlando. Was Marvin's absence the reason the eventual eastern champs

shot 37% from the field and 16% from 3? Somehow i doubt it. (Smith had a great statline here, 17/10 with 5 blocks, 4 steals and no turnovers.

Young squawkers notice this. Ex has no point here. So he ask a referendum question and then proceeds to answer it to help his point. However, the facts speak for themselves here.

IN an Away game. With everybody healthy. We kicked the eventual EC Champions *ss. And Marvin was a DNP.

Now Ex,

I'm not the schedule maker. Again this is your shot at evading. It doesn't matter how the teams came before us. Unless you are willing to call it a fluke. We beat them without Marvin.

That means... That if you believe our record... we would have probably beaten those teams if they were 100% healthy.

In other words... YOU can guess all day Ex. Who wasn't there doesn't matter. Not one bit. the win was a win was a GD win. But the whole board always love it when you make excuses for why the other team lost. I guess you do believe that our season was a fluke and had these other teams had all their players healthy they would have beaten us. That's no strawman. That's what you're suggesting. You are suggesting that things would have gone differently if teams have not have been injured. If you're going to stand on that argument then stop being a wuss and stand there.

However, I'm going with what I know. We beat those teams. Had they beaten us without Marvin, you'd be here saying how much of a difference Marvin makes right? But because we beat those teams... there must be some excuse...

You are pathetic.

[MaceCase]

*ahem* member of the board here and I smell a serious load of BS coming from the member who is obviously trying to divert the conversation. Uhmmmmmmmm so you are trying to run out of this *ss whoopping by claiming the other member said the season was a fluke by doing what exactly? Harping on our very first game of the season that we happened to have won without Marvin? Wow your rabbit hole runs deep................I think the clear point being made here that any member of the board should be able to see is that using our record without Marvin seems to be a little bit tainted considering the manner in which we came about that record. Someone must of trully puffed too strongly on that pipe because they've restricted their brain entirely of oxygen. Stay on point here, the argument is very clearly diagramed out for all to see. I know it's your "masterful" way of fighting arguments by taking the first and only the first sentence of an argument and making that your emphasis for the next 20 or so pages but that diversionary tactic is pretty see through.......along with the weak analogies........and the personal attacks. Just address the whole argument and stop trying to create a spectacle of this very public beating you are recieving. If you are going to go down, go down with some dignity. Theres no need to start bawling in the streets hoping people will become sympathetic to your tears.

[thefloydian]

:hush:

OK, smoked it in my pipe. Here's what it smells like. It smells like the loss of Marvin doesn't make a difference. For some of those teams, they were missing the same players when we had Marvin healthy and in the lineup. IF you want to call our season a fluke season then do that. However, when we lost Marvin... Statistics show OUR DEFENSE got better. (There's a PERIOD THERE... not a semicolon. ). Moreover, teams go through injuries all season long. I didn't see your 82 game analysis of the injury list for the Hawks. How many teams had injuries when Marvin was playing?

Oh wait... One more.

When we played Orlando, they were healthy. We beat them.. and you say... We held them to 34% shooting because of ......

Then you acknowledged Smoove's great game.

I wonder how does this begin to help your argument. I'm sure it was starring you in the face like a wedding day for Richard Jefferson when you started typing. Let's think of the thought process:

Ex: Damn, we beat Orlando in the first game without Marvin. It was an impressive win. They were healthy. Damn. this will prove Diesel's point.

Ex: Damn, what am I going to say about that win. Well, I know.. I will say we caught them off guard... SHUCKS.. we played them in the pre-season.

Ex: I know, I will say because we played them in the pre-season that we had a chance to gameplan against them.... SHUCKS They played us too.

Ex: I know, I will say we're better at home. SHUCKs... It was an away game.

Ex: Damn. OK, I will say that Smoove just had an impressive game and hope nobody mentions that without Marvin, Smoove just stepped up... or that we really didn't miss Marvin.

Again, if you want to say that we had a FLUKE SEASON... say that and put it in another post... However, the facts are that in the games we played without Marvin, we didn't miss his contribution.

This post is just brain dead.

[Plainview1981]

Home vs Houston- Houston was missing McGrady, Artest and Battier. Do you think that, just maybe, their absence worked in the Hawks favor?

The Rockets played very well without Tmac from what I've understood. They even did well in the playoffs without him. I've heard from some Houston fans that they're better off without Tmac. I bet Houston wishes they could unload him right now.

Away vs Orlando- Marvin missed the opener and the Hawks won in Orlando. Was Marvin's absence the reason the eventual eastern champs

shot 37% from the field and 16% from 3? Somehow i doubt it. (Smith had a great statline here, 17/10 with 5 blocks, 4 steals and no turnovers.//quote]

This doesn't make the argument that Marvin is more or equally as worthy as Josh Smith look good.

Injuries happen. Toronto sucks even with Calderon. So what?

But only... they didn't.

Still a hot team at the time and very capable of winning on the road despite their record.

The Hawks got blown out by Indy in November when Josh Smith was out and Marvin was playing. Where was Marv's great defense when the Hawks got slaughtered

113-96? The second meeting came right down to the wire when the Hawks finally put Indy away. The Hawks were 2-1 against Indy with a blow out win, a blow out loss, and a close win. The Hawks lost 2 of 3 to Indiana in 2007 with 2 blow out l's... Including once at home when the Hawks were trying to make the playoffs. The Hawks haven't had an easy time with Indy at all.

You should look back... I've suggested myself that everything isn't Marvin's fault. I don't believe the combo of Josh Smith and Marvin is all that and a bag of chips. The Hawks success with Mo Evans starting (despite his shaky production) makes me believe it even more.

Josh, Joe, Mo and Flip all had big minutes that night and were all pretty productive. Considering JJ played 43 minutes and Josh played 42 minutes you got to figure that

Mo and Flip might not have seen the minutes they did. In fact, Flip was a HUGE part of that win. The Hawks were getting their teeth kicked in until he came into the game. I remember that game very well. Wright had 16 points on 7-15 shooting in replacement of Josh Howard. Not all that bad. Ryan Hollins had `13 points and 7 rebounds in place of Damp. Nice try. It doesn't help your argument when the guy that replaces Damp was more productive than Damp usually is.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=290319001

They're a bad team with Al Jefferson. Also, he is a blackhole on the offensive end.

Which means the loss of Bynum didn't hurt much on the defensive end. Bynum is only a decent scorer right now. So what? Shouldn't the great Marvin Williams cancel that out?

These teams are missing players against other teams also. Do you think Tmac and Howard and Manu have only missed games when they've played the Hawks? The hawks didn't beat Orlando without Nelson and Orlando basically got to the finals without Nelson. So???? You need to do better than this. Boston is still a really good team without KG as they have Big Baby who is productive when KG is out. The Bucks suck regardless of who they have out.

Some of these teams had good/decent playoff runs without these players that you bring up. So losing or beating them with these guys missing is no easy task.

Houston/Boston/SA/Orlando all got out of the first round despite injury problems this year. Josh Howard only played 52 games this year and Dallas still had a good year. The hawks just didn't get lucky with Howard being out that night.

Injuries are a big part of the game. Most every team is going to struggle with injuries and you're going to play a lot of games against injured teams. If you can replace Marvin with a fairly unproductive Mo and still win games and win at even a higher clip it suggest that either Marvin isn't valuable or the combo of Marvin and Josh isn't all that great. Which is what I've suggested all along. This team has never won a lot of games with Marvin and Josh in the lineup. Prior to this season, the Hawks haven't had a winning season with both of these guys starting and both missed a decent number of games this season. The Hawks struggled to win against even mediocre teams without Josh Smith. When Josh was in and Marvin was out, they still won these games and beat a few good teams.

This is a Hawk team with very little marginal of victory. Very little. If a player on this team is valuable and they're out for a length of time, it should reflect in the win/loss record. Even with injuries to other teams.

There is the possibly that Josh holds Marvin back. But the fact that the hawks struggled without Josh and didn't struggle didn't without Marvin doesn't make it look good for Marvin.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Plainview1981]

This team has biggers needs than Marvin Williams. This team needs size and they're not getting it in free agency. Nobody wants to sign here.

Ex... This can go back and fourth all day. But I've put my evidence out.

I've shown the facts:

-This team had a higher winning percentage without Marvin

-They beat good teams without Marvin.

If all Marvin is going to be on this team is a 4th or 5th option... He is very tradable. If the Hawks do sign him up, he either needs to go or Josh needs to go. Unless Jeff Teague develops into a star.... The Hawks are going to have that hole again in a couple of years along with no center.

You can speculate of who this team might have and might have no beat if injuries were not a factor. But over the course of the season they will be a factor quite often. Sure teams like Boston missed players, but they still got PP/Allen and an emerging all star in Rondo. Plus Big Baby was a productive player when they called on him. Sure SA was missing TD when SA beat the Hawks... But Duncan being out only made Parker more aggressive. There is nothing Marvin Williams can do wit hTony Parker.

I've shown facts and have given my opinion and you have given yours. You're going to go with the injuries to other team excuse and I'm going to say that injuries happen and the team still won. Marvin is critic proof to most people here and if you want to believe he is critical to this team, go right ahead. I'm not going to make this a 10 page thread because my opinion can't get any clearer. The bottom line is this team was very successful without Marvin. Even more so than they were with him. Speculate on injuries all you what. Because all the end of the day, it's would'a, should'a, could'a. Maybe the Hawks beat Dallas without Damp and Howard and maybe they don't. The guys that replaced them were productive. In Damp's case, the one that replaced him was a more productive player. I'm sure you will reply back that Dallas missed Damp's defense... Maybe they did. Maybe he wouldn't have made much of a difference. It's a question that can't be answered. So going back and fourth over it will no result in a real answer. Period.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[tbhawksfan]

I think it's a great time to try and move MW for a talented C. Kaman would be great. Sign a guy like Barnes to replace MW's minutes (with Mo). We'd have possibly the best front-court depth and maybe even talent and possibly a SF combo that would fit the Hawks SF role better.

[MaceCase]

Hotlanta I must commend you for actually taking the time to analyze and put forth a concise counter-argument to Exodus' evidence rather than just going off on a wild tangent. I understand your side and Ex's side but by your own argument you've established that teams can win without key pieces. Pieces even greater than Marvin have been injured yet their team's still managed to thrive. That is not a reflection on the team being better or just fine without that player it just means the other players were able to pick up the slack and carry on and maybe catch a couple breaks here and there. This can't last forever though, eventually your injuries will catch up to you especially when you take on greater competition in the playoffs. At that point all hands are needed on deck in order for a team to truthfully have any chance to succeed. We can even look to the teams ahead of us for examples of this, Boston without KG still manged to win only 4 games less than they did a year ago. They were pushed to the limit by yet another young team in the Bulls before pulling through then giving the eventual EC champs all they could before their injuries proved to much to overcome. I mentioned in the last thread how the Houston Rockets survive almost every season and actually advanced in this year's playoffs with key injuries and nothing remaining on that roster than a group of players better suited to the football gridiron than a basketball court. The world champion Lakers were able to make it to the finals last year without both their 5th option starting SF and their developing center, Ariza and Bynum, but got curb stomped by the Celtics despite having the best player in the league on their side. This year we saw the clear difference in having those pieces in their lineup despite people contending, and they showing they could win without them. In this playoffs we were injured and although we managed to advanced on the sheer quality of our team we were not even able to control a single moment against the MVP and his team. When injured, a team may have success beating up on inferior or maybe even some similarly equal teams but when it comes to superior competition every injury is magnified. Every mistake is magnified, every missed opportunity is magnified because they are fewer and farther between, every missed shot, rebound, defensive assignment, etc etc etc. All in all injuries happen all the time and may seem insignificant due to the team being able to carry on based on their quality but in the end that is not a declaration of the player's worth, after all is said and done you still want all available guns in a firefight.

[Diesel]

I think it's a great time to try and move MW for a talented C. Kaman would be great. Sign a guy like Barnes to replace MW's minutes (with Mo). We'd have possibly the best front-court depth and maybe even talent and possibly a SF combo that would fit the Hawks SF role better.

If Kaman guarantees healthy... that's not a bad thought. We could then pick up Flip and roll Joe to Sf.

A craw-flip combo at the OG will guarantee that we have another play maker on the court at all times.

[Diesel]

Harping on our very first game of the season that we happened to have won without Marvin? Wow your rabbit hole runs deep................I think the clear point being made here that any member of the board should be able to see is that using our record without Marvin seems to be a little bit tainted considering the manner in which we came about that record. Someone must of trully puffed too strongly on that pipe because they've restricted their brain entirely of oxygen. Stay on point here, the argument is very clearly diagramed out for all to see.

It's good that somebody who doesn't understand or no the history here would feel the need to take a side and get involved as passionately as you did. However, let me make some strong points to your statements above. I don't think I have to go into too much detail because hots already have. However...

1. Who are the ones trying to diminish the accomplishments of the Hawks without Marvin?

Even you yourself Crawsome says "harping on the first game of the season.....". Since when did the first game of the season not count? A few years ago, we missed out on getting Dwight Howard because we won too many games... You know what every game counted then too.

Us beating Orlando without Marvin (away, very dominantly) is not a rabbit hole running deep. It's a fact that helps prove the point.

So now it's not about how well we played without Marvin. Somehow those games were tainted. Crawful, injuries are part of the game. Many of those "injured" teams were injured all year. Tracy McGrady has been injured so long that Houston has learned to play without him. Same goes for Arenas. Same goes for Granger.

In fact, asit goes for Granger... I noticed that you're quick to jump on Ex argument that includes Granger.. but guess what... We beat them before when Marvin played... and Granger was not there. Why not mention that win as well?

This is where I get the fluke season. You guys have gone in and said that our wins without Marvin are "tainted". IN other words, you are suggesting that had everybody been healthy, we would have lost those games? Isn't that what you're suggesting? Because if not, you have no point!!!

2. Finally, home court advantage.

I we still lost to teams like:

New Jersey. Philly. Clipps. Phoenix. San Antonio... at home.

The point is that when we play at home, we still have to go out there and win them. We're not given extra points because we're at home.

[MaceCase]

The wins aren't tainted, you trying to use the wins as implicit evidence to depreciate Marvin's value is tainted. It's not a defintive point yet you are running your mouth as though you've just recovered a fumble on the goal line and returned it 100 yards for the game winning score. You haven't yet you argue like you have, to keep with the analogy all this arguing has accomplished is a 4th and goal inches from the goal line. Will your defense hold or is your middle linebacker going to get distracted by the QBs haircut and make that his focus of the game?