The games Marvin missed

[Plainview1981]

{quote]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.

I understand that. BUT.... BUT....A lot of those teams are already on a championship level. This team is trying to get there. Marvin doesn't suck. But there is no reason to believe that he will be more than a 4th or 5th scorer anytime soon. Marvin or Josh is probably the best way to get this team some real front court help. Can this team get to the next level with what it currently has? I don't believe so. This team doesn't attract FA's.... In order for this team to take the next step it's probably going to have to come via trade. Even if I'm wrong about Marvin being a go-to guy, we probably will not find out anytime soon.

[Diesel]

The wins aren't tainted, you trying to use the wins as implicit evidence to depreciate Marvin's value is tainted.

First of all, I am not using our wins to depreciate Marvin. As I have said. we play better as a team without marvin.

I don't have to do this over and over again. However, on 82 games... It shows that statistically when Marvin is off the floor... WE LOSE NOTHING. IN fact, we are a better defensive team.

How aboutJosh Smith?

Josh Smith makes us better offensively.

How about Flip?

We're better offensively and defensively with Flip.

And with Bibby, we're a better offensively and worse defensively.

However, with Marvin. Statistically, we're not better at anything excepted assisted FGs when he's on the court.

[Plainview1981]

{quote]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.

I understand that. BUT.... BUT....A lot of those teams are already on a championship level. This team is trying to get there. Marvin doesn't suck. But there is no reason to believe that he will be more than a 4th or 5th scorer anytime soon. Marvin or Josh is probably the best way to get this team some real front court help. Can this team get to the next level with what it currently has? I don't believe so. This team doesn't attract FA's.... In order for this team to take the next step it's probably going to have to come via trade. Even if I'm wrong about Marvin being a go-to guy, we probably will not find out anytime soon.

I also should say that yes... Teams can survive injuries, but the team struggled a lot more without Josh than they did with Marvin. As far as other people picking up the slack... I don't remember anyone other than Flip taking his game to another level the second half of the season.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Sasha_Volkov]

I don't really see how Marvin being signed for $8 million prevents the Hawks from being a championship team. There are far greater problems with the roster than a decent SF making decent money. Signing Marvin to an affordable, very tradeable deal like this doesn't prevent the team from making future moves. I agree that the team likely isn't going past the 2nd round as constructed but what's the solution? There is no mythical true center available out there. And Woody will still be driving the offense into the ground. If you want to balk at resigning Marvin then you might as well blow up the roster...again. Otherwise the team will just be regressing rather than being reborn.

[Plainview1981]

I don't really see how Marvin being signed for $8 million prevents the Hawks from being a championship team. There are far greater problems with the roster than a decent SF making decent money. Signing Marvin to an affordable, very tradeable deal like this doesn't prevent the team from making future moves. I agree that the team likely isn't going past the 2nd round as constructed but what's the solution? There is no mythical true center available out there. And Woody will still be driving the offense into the ground. If you want to balk at resigning Marvin then you might as well blow up the roster...again. Otherwise the team will just be regressing rather than being reborn.

Obviously Marvin has to be signed. But he needs to be signed and traded or Josh Smith needs to be traded.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

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.

The bargain, is retaining a guy like Marvin at a reasonable price right now, than possibly paying an inflated price for him next year, or flat out losing him outright. ( gsuteke explained this perfectly in the other thread )

I honestly think he'll reject any offer under 8 million anyway, and do exactly like Ben Gordon did last year, and take his chances as a UFA. But I do think he is easily worth 8 million to the Hawks right now, because he can effectively play 2 positions.

The 800 lb elephant in the room that you're not addressing, is that we only have 3 quality big men on the frontline. Solo is too much of a hack machine to be counted on. That makes Marvin the default 4th best big man. 3rd, if you want to rank them talent wise, because Marvin is a better 4, than Zaza is a 5.

The only reason why Zaza has to be kept, is because he's the only quality big with size that we have. It's not because he's necessarily a talented big. That's why he got a contract that still paid him under 5 million a year.

But you say that you haven't said get rid of Marvin? LOL. OK man. I never said that I wouldn't mind letting the market dictate his value either.

But the question was . . . has he earned an 8 million contract from the Hawks. I said "close, but not quite" . . . but in terms of team value, he's easily worth 8 million because of his ability to both play the 3 and the 4

So let's lock you down right now.

Memphis, unhappy with the way Thabeet played in summer league, offers Marvin a 4yr - 32 million dollar contract sometime in August. Do you match?

I say YES.

What do you say?

[MaceCase]

First of all, I am not using our wins to depreciate Marvin. As I have said. we play better as a team without marvin.

I don't have to do this over and over again. However, on 82 games... It shows that statistically when Marvin is off the floor... WE LOSE NOTHING. IN fact, we are a better defensive team.

How aboutJosh Smith?

Josh Smith makes us better offensively.

How about Flip?

We're better offensively and defensively with Flip.

And with Bibby, we're a better offensively and worse defensively.

However, with Marvin. Statistically, we're not better at anything excepted assisted FGs when he's on the court.

And how does that prove your argument again? This is just like the assist percentages that you tried to throw on as something intrinsic to only Marvin. Now you've moved on to using points per 100 possesions. As it is Bibby, Marvin, Al and also Mo since he started in place of Marvin, all put up negative net per 100s. That's 3 out of 5 starters, yet we seem to have welcomed one back with open arms and some think that the other is untouchable and then Marvin's backup is no better than him. Hell out of all good teams' best players Joe only puts up a miniscule net difference of 3 points. Again this is yet another stat that is not definitive in proving that Marvin is the boulder holding down the team.

[exodus]

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. You are pathetic.

I am not evading. You are. I asked you specifically if Marvin's absence was the reason that the Eastern champs shot poorly. You still haven't anserwed.

Instead you make a big deal about Josh Smith's game, showing once again your terrible grasp of the obvious.

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.

Since your memory of the season is so bad i should point out that this game was BEFORE SMITH GOT HURT. In his first three games Smith got 32 rebounds and 10 blocks. At the end of the season he averaged only 1.6 blocks and 7.2 rebounds. Given your ingrained agenda i have no doubt you believe that Smith's big first game was due to Marvin's absence but a sane person would conclude Smith's health was a much bigger factor.

Given your inability to make a coherent argument you mention only 1 game and ignore the other 20, and you can't even answer a direct question about that game. Sad how desperate you are.

[exodus]

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.

13 of the 21 games played without Marvin were at home where the Hawks won 73% on the season. In the games played without Marvin the other teams were missing

McGrady, Artest, Battier, Calderon, Granger,Josh Howard, Dampier, Al Jefferson, Duncan and Manu was badly hobbled, Garnett and Powe (twice), Nelson, Petrius, Redd, Bogut. In 6 of those games the other team was missing their best player.

Case dismissed.

[Diesel]

I don't really see how Marvin being signed for $8 million prevents the Hawks from being a championship team. There are far greater problems with the roster than a decent SF making decent money. Signing Marvin to an affordable, very tradeable deal like this doesn't prevent the team from making future moves. I agree that the team likely isn't going past the 2nd round as constructed but what's the solution? There is no mythical true center available out there. And Woody will still be driving the offense into the ground. If you want to balk at resigning Marvin then you might as well blow up the roster...again. Otherwise the team will just be regressing rather than being reborn.

Right now for what Marvin has shown, 8 is a stretch. The cap will go down next year. Some (owners) are suggesting 5% or greater. If you know anything about the history of this franchise you will recognize that the difference between championship level and mediocrity has always been a bad contract.

When we had Deke, Smitty, and Mookie... We languished for years needed a good SF like Rick Fox or Ced Ceballos but we could only afford the Corbins of the world because we had heavily invested into Hendu. We stretched for Hendu in order to keep a "Young player with potential".

Previously, when we had Nique, Willis, and Rivers... what kept us from being championship material was the KONCAK contract. There again, we overpaid for potential and having those funds tied up stopped us from getting players who could have really helped us.

Once again, we come to an important point in history. We have a player whose only claim to fame is potential. 8 Million is a lot for a 4th option on offense. Especially in the year after he missed 20 something games and it didn't make much of a difference to the team.

[Diesel]

The 800 lb elephant in the room that you're not addressing, is that we only have 3 quality big men on the frontline. Solo is too much of a hack machine to be counted on. That makes Marvin the default 4th best big man. 3rd, if you want to rank them talent wise, because Marvin is a better 4, than Zaza is a 5.

Memphis, unhappy with the way Thabeet played in summer league, offers Marvin a 4yr - 32 million dollar contract sometime in August. Do you match?

I say YES.

What do you say?

First. I don't think we sign Marvin because of his duty on our frontline. Honestly, we need to address the frontline directly... not indirectly. Just like Marvin is not a direct answer to our PG situation, he's also not a direct answer to our thinness at C. Josh, Horf, and Zaza can all play PF. So spending 8 million per to get a 4th pF is not the best of moves. I would much rather see us make a real move for a C. Even if it means us picking up another good BU.

Secondly, I'm not saying that we shouldn't sign Marvin to a QO. I think I have said that already. Moreover, if Memphis offered a 4 year 32 million dollar deal, I would match. That's called letting the market dictate his value. The point is that if one team shows the willingness to pay him that much, then that means that for the foreseeable future, we may be able to find a trade if need be. What we don't need to do is go out and overpay him and give him an amount that nobody else would be willing to pay.

[Diesel]

And how does that prove your argument again? This is just like the assist percentages that you tried to throw on as something intrinsic to only Marvin. Now you've moved on to using points per 100 possesions. As it is Bibby, Marvin, Al and also Mo since he started in place of Marvin, all put up negative net per 100s. That's 3 out of 5 starters, yet we seem to have welcomed one back with open arms and some think that the other is untouchable and then Marvin's backup is no better than him. Hell out of all good teams' best players Joe only puts up a miniscule net difference of 3 points. Again this is yet another stat that is not definitive in proving that Marvin is the boulder holding down the team.

Try as you will to try to lump the statistics into a category and devalue them. The truth of the matter is still that when Marvin was NOT ON THE FLOOR...

1. We fielded better teams. (5 man combinations)

2. Statistically we didn't miss him. (on/off court stats).

If you can try to make those other stats means as much, I applaud you. But the writings on that page Crawful.

[Diesel]

I am not evading. You are. I asked you specifically if Marvin's absence was the reason that the Eastern champs shot poorly. You still haven't anserwed.

SO now you want my opinion like you gave yours??

The facts are... we beat them. AWAY. Without Marvin. And we looked dominant.

Since your memory of the season is so bad i should point out that this game was BEFORE SMITH GOT HURT. In his first three games Smith got 32 rebounds and 10 blocks. At the end of the season he averaged only 1.6 blocks and 7.2 rebounds. Given your ingrained agenda i have no doubt you believe that Smith's big first game was due to Marvin's absence but a sane person would conclude Smith's health was a much bigger factor.

Given your inability to make a coherent argument you mention only 1 game and ignore the other 20, and you can't even answer a direct question about that game. Sad how desperate you are.

Well, ex, let's be a sane person today... Shall we?

If you say that Smoove was like Superman because he was healthy and that's why we dominated the Magic without Marvin... then guess what.. We all expect Smoove to come back healthy this season. Why are we talking about signing Marvin to a longterm deal at 8 per, when we have a Healthy Smoove?

[Diesel]

13 of the 21 games played without Marvin were at home where the Hawks won 73% on the season. In the games played without Marvin the other teams were missing

McGrady, Artest, Battier, Calderon, Granger,Josh Howard, Dampier, Al Jefferson, Duncan and Manu was badly hobbled, Garnett and Powe (twice), Nelson, Petrius, Redd, Bogut. In 6 of those games the other team was missing their best player.

Case dismissed.

Seeing that you are trying to dismiss cases..

Are you saying that given those circumstances (the injuries specifically) that we could not have beaten those teams had their players been there?

[atlien]

not great quality, but applicable

[MaceCase]

Try as you will to try to lump the statistics into a category and devalue them. The truth of the matter is still that when Marvin was NOT ON THE FLOOR...

1. We fielded better teams. (5 man combinations)

2. Statistically we didn't miss him. (on/off court stats).

If you can try to make those other stats means as much, I applaud you. But the writings on that page Crawful.

Once again the writing is clear yet you only chose to look at part of it. On/off is important but the win% that's part of that stat is not....hmm me thinks one is only trying to single out the part of stats that help his argument and not the whole truth. I'm on my phone now so I can't check but I'm pretty sure Marvin was part of 4 out of 5 of our top 5 man teams based on winning %. "But noooooooooo I'm only going to use on/off and not the percentage" Okay then have it that way but now we've crippled our team from ever competing because we resigned bibby and have yet to trade Marv, Al and Mo for starters that actually have positive on/off stats. Promote Zaza to starting C and resign Flip to a 4 year 44million dollar deal and force Joe to take a paycut and backseat to our new franchise player. Again you have yet to definetively argue that Marvin is not worthy of 8 million without devaluing other teammates and hall of famers through the league. Since you are so focused on stats now, albeit selective, how bout you cite the percentage of votes for Marvin getting 8 per to votes against. Seems like a week into this and that stat has yet to change in your favor.

[Plainview1981]

13 of the 21 games played without Marvin were at home where the Hawks won 73% on the season. In the games played without Marvin the other teams were missing

McGrady, Artest, Battier, Calderon, Granger,Josh Howard, Dampier, Al Jefferson, Duncan and Manu was badly hobbled, Garnett and Powe (twice), Nelson, Petrius, Redd, Bogut. In 6 of those games the other team was missing their best player.

Case dismissed.

Done trying to pat yourself on the back? I see no need to repeat myself. Always try to play on the injury thing because that's all you ever got.

Edited July 19, 2009 by Hotlanta1981

[Plainview1981]

Seeing that you are trying to dismiss cases..

Are you saying that given those circumstances (the injuries specifically) that we could not have beaten those teams had their players been there?

It's funny that he brings out minor bench players and guys like Tmac... A guy that hasn't been healthy in years and he played poorly in the 30 something games he played this year shoot 38% and averaging only 15PPG.

The Spurs were 5-2 without Duncan this year with wins over Portland and Dallas.

[Duff_Man]

I think the three of you should make out and just get it over with.

[Diesel]

I think the three of you should make out and just get it over with.

Sounds like you've been watching too much gay porn.