Marvin = The master of falling short!

[thefloydian]

I think you're very Marvin sensitive Floyd. My first and second post are about the fact that I believe (unlike you) that Joe's best position is Sf. IF Marvin is signed, I still believe this. If Marvin goes to Portland I still believe this. My basis for this belief is what we saw when Joe played Sf and Flip played SG. Now we just traded for a SG prospect better than Flip. Crawford is a better natural scorer than Flip. Taller than FLip. Puts up more points than Flip. Has been at considered as a guy who could compete to be on the allstar team in the west.. Your Marvin sensitivity makes you think this is about Marvin. This is not about Marvin directly, this is answering the question, what's our best lineup.

You said it would pain you to see Joe at Sf. I said Joe played Sf for 1/4 of the year last year and he did a good job. Where was the pain?

You can be annoyed.

You can be afflicted.

You can be whatever you want to be.

However, right now, you look a tad bit too Sensitive.

I'm not even going to respond to this in-depth. All I will say is that I am not at all Marvin sensitive. I have even agreed with you multiple times that he isn't worth 8 million dollars and overall has underachieved, though not by the margin that you say, in general. I just tire of having every conversation turned in the direction of how he sucks and should be traded/released/benched/etc.

[Diesel]

That's really a legitimate opinion, although one could argue why that lineup wouldn't work. I get what you're trying to say, and I think I got a better example.

Here When I saw the 2nd option in that poll, I just shook my head.

Why didn't you shake your head at the first option?

You may be a little Marvin sensitive too?

I put down guys who were unsigned in that poll. Weather it was Marvin or Teague or Cenk. At the time, those are guys who we have had or have who were not signed. It's not a foregone conclusion that Marvin is signed. It was not a forgone conclusion that we sign Teague. But to round out our 15, I polled that we sign Marvin and Teague. Had Chillz not gone to Europe at the time of the post, I would have had his name down there as well.

Here's the problem as I see it.

You guys read my post, looking for a Marvin slam. Any insignificant mention of Marvin from me will be perceived by you as being Diesel is at it again. You guys need to come off of your Marvin sensitivity and get your head in the game.

[exodus]

I think you're very Marvin sensitive Floyd. My first and second post are about the fact that I believe (unlike you) that Joe's best position is Sf. IF Marvin is signed, I still believe this. If Marvin goes to Portland I still believe this. My basis for this belief is what we saw when Joe played Sf and Flip played SG. Now we just traded for a SG prospect better than Flip. Crawford is a better natural scorer than Flip. Taller than FLip. Puts up more points than Flip. Has been at considered as a guy who could compete to be on the allstar team in the west.. Your Marvin sensitivity makes you think this is about Marvin. This is not about Marvin directly, this is answering the question, what's our best lineup.

You said it would pain you to see Joe at Sf. I said Joe played Sf for 1/4 of the year last year and he did a good job. Where was the pain?

You can be annoyed.

You can be afflicted.

You can be whatever you want to be.

However, right now, you look a tad bit too Sensitive.

Everyone on the board knows that you wouldn't be saying anything about JJ playing the 3 if Marvin wasn't here and Smith was the starting 3 even though Smith is clearly better at the 4. JJ is a 3 time All-Star at the 2 and you want to change his position to make room for Crawford wtf. If you started saying that Horford would be better at the 3 my guess is that nobody would be surprised.

[Sasha_Volkov]

BIAS-NESS

Ok, I'm reversing the internet's long running destruction of the word 'bias'.

Bias is the noun. "You have a bias in favor of Marvin."

Biased is the adjective. "You are biased in favor of Marvin."

Somewhere biased got replaced by bias and bias was bastardized into biasity, biasness, etc. It's so painfully wrong it keeps me up at night.

Now continue, gentlemen.

[EazyRoc]

Why didn't you shake your head at the first option?

You may be a little Marvin sensitive too?

I put down guys who were unsigned in that poll. Weather it was Marvin or Teague or Cenk. At the time, those are guys who we have had or have who were not signed. It's not a foregone conclusion that Marvin is signed. It was not a forgone conclusion that we sign Teague. But to round out our 15, I polled that we sign Marvin and Teague. Had Chillz not gone to Europe at the time of the post, I would have had his name down there as well.

Here's the problem as I see it.

You guys read my post, looking for a Marvin slam. Any insignificant mention of Marvin from me will be perceived by you as being Diesel is at it again. You guys need to come off of your Marvin sensitivity and get your head in the game.

No it's not Marvin sensitivity. It's just you being you. You're absolutely right, though. Any time you mention Marvin, it's predictable the angle you're taking with your comments. After thousands of negative posts, How can you blame us ?

[exodus]

Ok, I'm reversing the internet's long running destruction of the word 'bias'.

Bias is the noun. "You have a bias in favor of Marvin."

Biased is the adjective. "You are biased in favor of Marvin."

Somewhere biased got replaced by bias and bias was bastardized into biasity, biasness, etc. It's so painfully wrong it keeps me up at night.

Now continue, gentlemen.

How much do you know about math? I know someone in this thread that is badly in need of a math tutor.

[Diesel]

Everyone on the board knows that you wouldn't be saying anything about JJ playing the 3 if Marvin wasn't here and Smith was the starting 3 even though Smith is clearly better at the 4. JJ is a 3 time All-Star at the 2 and you want to change his position to make room for Crawford wtf. If you started saying that Horford would be better at the 3 my guess is that nobody would be surprised.

Actually, if Smoove was our starting Sf and he got injured and Joe came in and played the way he played (with a competent SG) then I would be saying that Smoove has to find something else. Maybe even saying that Smoove should be traded.

The point is that we have to put the best players in their best positions. JJ is getting older and chasing the faster 2s is not something that is beneficial to Joe or our team. He's 6'7" 235. That's huge. Especially when you think about guys like TMac = 6'8" 215.

Crawford is a 20 ppg player who can create for himself. What's the problem?

[AHF]

Actually, if Smoove was our starting Sf and he got injured and Joe came in and played the way he played (with a competent SG) then I would be saying that Smoove has to find something else. Maybe even saying that Smoove should be traded.

The point is that we have to put the best players in their best positions. JJ is getting older and chasing the faster 2s is not something that is beneficial to Joe or our team. He's 6'7" 235. That's huge. Especially when you think about guys like TMac = 6'8" 215.

Crawford is a 20 ppg player who can create for himself. What's the problem?

IMO, Bibby, Crawford and JJ would be an absolute disaster on defense and on the boards compared to Bibby, JJ, and Marvin.

I do like that lineup for limited periods but I am very happy that the Hawks never considered using a Bibby/Crawford backcourt as the default backcourt.

[EazyRoc]

Well, he's (Crawford) is lacking in the defensive department. Joe, although he's pretty big, isn't a good rebounder. So, that lineup will suffer a drop off in defense and rebounding.

[mrhonline]

Ok, I'm reversing the internet's long running destruction of the word 'bias'.

Bias is the noun. "You have a bias in favor of Marvin."

Biased is the adjective. "You are biased in favor of Marvin."

Somewhere biased got replaced by bias and bias was bastardized into biasity, biasness, etc. It's so painfully wrong it keeps me up at night.

Now continue, gentlemen.

Wait. I thought Diesel was joking when he used the word "Bias-ness."

I'm having trouble reading between the servers here...

[exodus]

Actually, if Smoove was our starting Sf and he got injured and Joe came in and played the way he played (with a competent SG) then I would be saying that Smoove has to find something else. Maybe even saying that Smoove should be traded.

The point is that we have to put the best players in their best positions.

We all know that has never been your concern. As evidence i site your Smith at the 3 crusade. SMith can't shoot, can't beat 3s off the dribble, can't defend the position since guys drive right past him and it takes him away from the basket making it harder to block shots. But none of that has ever mattered to you.

JJ is getting older and chasing the faster 2s is not something that is beneficial to Joe or our team. He's 6'7" 235. That's huge. Especially when you think about guys like TMac = 6'8" 215.

Crawford is a 20 ppg player who can create for himself. What's the problem?

Yeah JJ is getting older but but so is everyone else on the planet. JJ is in his prime right now and has made 3 straight All-Star games at the 2. JJ changing posotions to accomodate a guy who wasn't a full time starter on two garbage teams makes no sense.

Edited July 24, 2009 by exodus

[macdaddy]

As with so many discussions, i wonder what's the point? Is the conclusion supposed to be that some people won't admit when Marvin has underperformed or are you making the point that we shouldn't resign Marvin. Everyone has players they like and analyzing stats isn't going to change their opinion much. The days of anyone campaigning for Marvin to be the #1 option are over. Even his strongest supporters will admit that. I'm all for JJ playing the 3 and Crawford at 2 but seriously what small forward options are there that are really available that are better than Marvin? I can't believe i typed that because i've never been a fan but that was mainly because i couldn't get over Marv not being better than he is because of his draft position.

I totally agree with Diesel. He has underperformed based on our expectations. What that means I don't know.

Edited July 24, 2009 by macdaddy

[Diesel]

We all know that has never been your concern. As evidence i site your Smith at the 3 crusade. SMith can't shoot, can't beat 3s off the dribble, can't defend the position since guys drive right past him and it takes him away from the basket making it harder to block shots. But none of that has ever mattered to you.

That's pretty bad evidence being that the whole point of Smoove to the three was to get a REAL C here and put Horf at a more natural 4 position!

Like it or not, Smoove's defense still makes him better on the floor than Marvin on the floor.

Yeah JJ is getting older but but so is everyone else on the planet. JJ is in his prime right now and has made 3 straight All-Star games at the 2. JJ changing posotions to accomodate a guy who wasn't a full time starter on two garbage teams makes no sense.

Sorry, but obviously, you didn't see the end of last season. After having chasing Wade around in our first series, Joe had nothing for Cleveland.

[Diesel]

As with so many discussions, i wonder what's the point? Is the conclusion supposed to be that some people won't admit when Marvin has underperformed or are you making the point that we shouldn't resign Marvin. Everyone has players they like and analyzing stats isn't going to change their opinion much. The days of anyone campaigning for Marvin to be the #1 option are over. Even his strongest supporters will admit that. I'm all for JJ playing the 3 and Crawford at 2 but seriously what small forward options are there that are really available that are better than Marvin? I can't believe i typed that because i've never been a fan but that was mainly because i couldn't get over Marv not being better than he is because of his draft position.

I totally agree with Diesel. He has underperformed based on our expectations. What that means I don't know.

The way i see it, we have been experimenting this whole time.

Josh and Al were a better forward combo than what we have with Marvin.

Josh and Josh were a better forward combo than what we have with Marvin.

Who knows what Josh and Horf or Horf and Joe would be...

but we do know that Joe and Josh didn't look bad at all last season.

What I'm trying to understand is why would anybody disagree with Marvin coming off the bench? Especially when one of our main problems have been offensive output and we traded for a SG who is a strong offensive player?

There's a contingency of people here who don't care about what's best for the team but only cares that their guy starts. I say, let's let the experiment be over. Let's put in Craw and let's run.

[exodus]

That's pretty bad evidence being that the whole point of Smoove to the three was to get a REAL C here and put Horf at a more natural 4 position!

Like it or not, Smoove's defense still makes him better on the floor than Marvin on the floor.

We need a real C regardless of what position Smith and Horford play.

Smith's help defense at the 4 makes him a better defender than Marvin. take him away from the basket and his help D is not as effective.

Sorry, but obviously, you didn't see the end of last season. After having chasing Wade around in our first series, Joe had nothing for Cleveland.

If Gearon is to be believed JJ was hurt during the 2nd half of the season. he also got hurt again in the playoffs and there was speculation he wouldn't even play in the 1st Cavs game.

[macdaddy]

The way i see it, we have been experimenting this whole time.

Josh and Al were a better forward combo than what we have with Marvin.

Josh and Josh were a better forward combo than what we have with Marvin.

Who knows what Josh and Horf or Horf and Joe would be...

but we do know that Joe and Josh didn't look bad at all last season.

What I'm trying to understand is why would anybody disagree with Marvin coming off the bench? Especially when one of our main problems have been offensive output and we traded for a SG who is a strong offensive player?

There's a contingency of people here who don't care about what's best for the team but only cares that their guy starts. I say, let's let the experiment be over. Let's put in Craw and let's run.

I've got no issue at all with Marvin coming off the bench. I think the one thing preventing that is Woody will blow a gasket watching Crawford and Bibby get abused defensively. I think Marvin in the starting lineup for the last few years was the opposite of an experiment though. Woody put the most conservative team on the court (which is hard to do with Smoove out there). He put the guys out there least likely to play sloppy d or make mistakes. Bibby plays sloppy d but lets face it he's a pretty conservative point guard.

I have high hopes for Crawford and I do think JJ is the best SF on the team. the guy can get to the hole but we didn't see it as much last year because he settled for jumpers. Having him at the 3 would give him more opportunity to get to the basket and kick out to crawford/bibby/jt.

Marvin is a good/important player for the Hawks starter or bench, but lets be realistic. I haven't heard any teams giving him a red carpet tour of the city to lure him away. I'm glad too because we need him even if he is short of his 'potential'

[jhay610]

Sorry I am late responding as I haven't been around as much.

Since I was quoted by Diesel in the OP (though my original post also qualified my expectations of Marvin in that we should only expect >30% 3PT shooting) I will respond:

I thought those expectations were reasonable from Marvin if he was going to progress to be a number two option in his NBA career. At this point I just don't think he has the mindset to ever do that and he will likely always be a 3rd option guy. He doesn't have the temperament to aggressively look for shots unless forced to do so by the shot clock - he gets almost all of his looks in the flow of the offense, and that alone will not get you more than 15 ppg.

That's not to say he isn't a productive player - he is - and you need guys that can contribute without demanding the ball at all times. He also plays pretty good perimeter defense which is a plus.

Overall, I was slightly disappointed with his year because I thought that last year would really be the indicator as to what type of player he is going to be in this league. With that in mind, I think he'll just be a solid pro. I was very happy to see him shoot the 3 at a decent rate because that is really what we need from him in terms of how he fits our squad (although this is need is somewhat mitigated with the addition of Crawford).

Marv may not be more than a solid starter but he still fits this team well and I for one am happy to have retained him. Contrary to what Diesel would have you believe, he is a far better player than both Mo Evans and Josh Childress.

Edited August 15, 2009 by jhay610