Im calling Marvin out.

[Joker]

Ok, the back injury.

The most easily disguised injury in basketball. What I mean is that nobody really can diagnose if your back is truly injured aside from you telling them. I think Marvin is faking it. I think he's pouting.

Did you see the fall...

On Dec 29 (last year), Marvin fell over A GS Warrior player and landed awkwardly (nothing new). He got up, played for a few more minutes and went out.

Now he's been out for 3 weeks. The fall wasn't that bad. He landed flat not twisted. I think he's pouting. Bring the flames.. but watch the video (around 1:14-1:23). You will see that Marvin didn't fall that badly that he's 3 weeks in. IF Marvin wants a trade, he should come out and ask for one.

Reading LD's comment on Marvin's injury...

"I haven't gotten any indication of when to expect him back," Hawks Coach Larry Drew said.

Really? That fall lead to unexpected return?

Call me what you will but this is the big todo in Atlanta... And guess what? we're still winning.

Unfortunately, we're coming up on the hard part of our season. If Marvin's not in then let's move him.

[Admin]

Didn't mean to -1 this post, so if someone could cancel me out, I'd appreciate it.

You sir get a -1 for this post!

[Atlantaholic]

I'm a card holding member of the Marvin Haters Club, but this thread is just speculative nonsense.

One thing I have taken away from his injury though is that is net impact on the team is not very significant. We are 7-2 this year without him and last year we were something like 11-2 or 11-3 with Mo Evans as starter. Not saying we are BETTER without him but at the very least we can assume that we aren't significantly worse when he doesn't suit up. SF's of Marvin's caliber are not hard to replace and we should really look to find a way to get out of his contract so we have some money left to sign Crawford or a PG next off-season.

[pimp]

I'm a card holding member of the Marvin Haters Club, but this thread is just speculative nonsense.

One thing I have taken away from his injury though is that is net impact on the team is not very significant. We are 7-2 this year without him and last year we were something like 11-2 or 11-3 with Mo Evans as starter. Not saying we are BETTER without him but at the very least we can assume that we aren't significantly worse when he doesn't suit up. SF's of Marvin's caliber are not hard to replace and we should really look to find a way to get out of his contract so we have some money left to sign Crawford or a PG next off-season.

I'm willing to bet that we have a higher winning % without Marvin, then with do with Marvin over the past 6 years.I remember two

years ago, we went on a seven game wining streak after he got

hurt.Even the years when he had loosing records, we had still had a winning record w/o Marvin.

Edited January 19, 2011 by pimp

[exodus]

I'm a card holding member of the Marvin Haters Club, but this thread is just speculative nonsense.

One thing I have taken away from his injury though is that is net impact on the team is not very significant. We are 7-2 this year without him and last year we were something like 11-2 or 11-3 with Mo Evans as starter. Not saying we are BETTER without him but at the very least we can assume that we aren't significantly worse when he doesn't suit up. SF's of Marvin's caliber are not hard to replace and we should really look to find a way to get out of his contract so we have some money left to sign Crawford or a PG next off-season.

Last year Marvin only missed one game.

[Atlantaholic]

Last year Marvin only missed one game.

It must be the year before then.

[niremetal]

Last year Marvin only missed one game.

And the year before, the much talked-about 6 game winning streak after Marvin went down (all of which were home games) was followed by the Hawks losing 6 of the next 8.

Under Woody, the Hawks' trend after a player went down always seemed to be "start off hot because the injury forced Woody to make an adjustment, then regress to the mean once the other teams adjusted to the lineup (and Woody, invariably, would fail to make further adjustments)." That's what happened after JJ's leg injury in '07, Josh's ankle injury in Dec '08, JJ's two-game flu absence in Feb '09 (which saw Marvin go off the chain), and Marvin's back injury later in '09. The only exception was Al's knee bruise early in Jan '09 - Woody couldn't scheme around Al's absence. Other than that, the only variable was how long it took other teams to figure out what simplistic adjustments Woody had made and respond accordingly. The first couple games after a player went down were the only times the Hawks weren't depressingly predictable.

Edited January 19, 2011 by niremetal

[Atlantaholic]

Ok. So I did the math over the last three years. Without Marvin we are 22-15 (.594) With Marvin we are 106-764 (.623)

So actually we have won more with Marvin, albeit not drastically. Overall his impact in wins, (based off win % in games played) is of 6 overall in the last three seasons or 2 games per season. (I.e. if we had played the last three seasons without Marvin we would have won 2 less games per season)

Obviously the sample size is small, and this doesn't take into account any other factors that could have a big impact, such as games missed by other players etc. But well, those are the numbers...

EDIT: Well I went ahead and checked our other starters out to see how we do when they are injured:

Without Josh during the last three seasons we are 7-7 when he doesn't play. Without Joe we are 10-8, Without Horf we are 7-9, Without Craw we are 6-3.

Edited January 19, 2011 by Atlantaholic

[niremetal]

Ok. So I did the math over the last three years. Without Marvin we are 22-15 (.594) With Marvin we are 106-764 (.623)

So actually we have won more with Marvin, albeit not drastically. Overall his impact in wins, (based off win % in games played) is of 6 overall in the last three seasons or 2 games per season. (I.e. if we had played the last three seasons without Marvin we would have won 2 less games per season)

Obviously the sample size is small, and this doesn't take into account any other factors that could have a big impact, such as games missed by other players etc. But well, those are the numbers...

EDIT: Well I went ahead and checked our other starters out to see how we do when they are injured:

Without Josh during the last three seasons we are 7-7 when he doesn't play. Without Joe we are 10-8, Without Horf we are 7-9, Without Craw we are 6-3.

I'm not entirely sure where you got that math from. I calculate us as being 23-12 (.657) without Marvin and 105-67 (.610) with Marvin since the beginning of the '08-'09 year. The math is a bit more interesting if you break it down into home and away:

W/O MARVIN: 23-12 (.657)

Home: 13-6 (.684)

Road: 10-6 (.625)

W/MARVIN: 105-67 (.610)

Home: 66-17 (.795)

Road: 39-50 (.438)

The discrepancy makes more sense if you see the teams we have played at home and on the road during his absences. His injuries have tended to fall during homestands against relatively strong teams - we played NO, UTA, POR, DAL, SAS, BOS, LAL, and ORL at home when he was out in '08 (of which we won 5 and lost 3 for a below-usual .625). The road games, on the other hand, have tended to be against relatively weak ones - this year, we went 4-0 without Marvin in road games against MIN, LAC, SAC, and TOR, but 2-2 in our road games against playoff-bound teams (ORL, OKC, UTA, MIA).

To me, the big thing is the broader trend that the Hawks seemed to get off to hot starts when players missed games due to injury during the Woody era, only to regress and play worse-than-usual once other teams adjusted. That, of course, is an observation that's tough to quantify precisely.

Edited January 19, 2011 by niremetal

[pimp]

To me, the big thing is the broader trend that the Hawks seemed to get off to hot starts when players missed games due to injury during the Woody era, only to regress and play worse-than-usual once other teams adjusted. That, of course, is an observation that's tough to quantify precisely.

I may be wrong ,but think we have a losing record over the last 5 or 6 years when Josh out.But a winning record without any other starter.

[Admin]

I'm not sure where either of you are getting your numbers. Using [he whose name should not be mentioned] math I was able to see that we are unbeaten without Marvin so we're clearly better without him. :snowballfight:

[terrell]

Please tell me you are joking. I've hurt my back playing tennis where there was no fall at all. I won the match and just felt a little sore afterward like I needed to do some stretching. Then I couldn't even walk the next day when I woke up to play the next round of playoffs. It would have been ridiculous to do surgery- then it was just a matter of waiting for my back to feel better. Looking at a tape and deciding that someone isn't having back issues just because you hate them is absolutely ridiculous.

Especially when you walk like you've had back problems since you were a toddler, like Marvin does.

[Atlantaholic]

I'm not entirely sure where you got that math from. I calculate us as being 23-12 (.657) without Marvin and 105-67 (.610) with Marvin since the beginning of the '08-'09 year. The math is a bit more interesting if you break it down into home and away:

W/O MARVIN: 23-12 (.657)

Home: 13-6 (.684)

Road: 10-6 (.625)

W/MARVIN: 105-67 (.610)

Home: 66-17 (.795)

Road: 39-50 (.438)

The discrepancy makes more sense if you see the teams we have played at home and on the road during his absences. His injuries have tended to fall during homestands against relatively strong teams - we played NO, UTA, POR, DAL, SAS, BOS, LAL, and ORL at home when he was out in '08 (of which we won 5 and lost 3 for a below-usual .625). The road games, on the other hand, have tended to be against relatively weak ones - this year, we went 4-0 without Marvin in road games against MIN, LAC, SAC, and TOR, but 2-2 in our road games against playoff-bound teams (ORL, OKC, UTA, MIA).

To me, the big thing is the broader trend that the Hawks seemed to get off to hot starts when players missed games due to injury during the Woody era, only to regress and play worse-than-usual once other teams adjusted. That, of course, is an observation that's tough to quantify precisely.

Heh. I double checked the numbers and I think you are correct sir.

[AHawks89]

Dr. Diesel, what is the point of you whining? Your whining is not going to make Marvin heal (or "unfake") his injury.

We all know your hatred for Marvin. Shouldn't you be happy that Marvin is not playing? I mean after all, like you said, we are winning. So please tell me what good is to be whining about Marvins Injury? You always bash him, he has not been in any recently games (which you should be happy), but yet we are winning, and now you're complaining?

I don't get it. Please explain. :questions:

Edited January 19, 2011 by AHawks89

[gsuteke]

Perhaps I'm in the minority but I really don't view Marvin as relevant any longer.

The only thing the most debated subject in HS history will be remembered for is where he was drafted.

Edited January 19, 2011 by gsuteke

[Seano]

I take it you've never suffered a back injury, Diesel. If you had, I doubt you'd have made a post like that. Back injuries are just a scourge, and they make life infinitely more difficult than it otherwise might be.

There are bountiful and plentiful things to complain about Marvin Williams and his game, I mean there are a ton of valid complaints that one could make regarding those topics, and we have all done so and even more repeatedly as the frustration grows.. But to accuse him of faking an injury or milking one out with absolutely no evidence with which to back that up is just uncalled for in my opinion. It's pretty much just straight-up defamation. Marvin both is and is not a lot of things, but he has shown no indication as to be the type of person who would do something like that. Someone who would do something has by definition a low character, because what they're practicing is deception and they are stealing from their team. From everything I've ever read, heard, watched- Marvin is nothing like that, and by all accounts he comes across as being a person with a good character.

If you want to bash Marvin, bash his game. Go for it. That's legitimate, and will be met with a chorus of agreement. But this stuff is just out of line.

[Diesel]

I take it you've never suffered a back injury, Diesel. If you had, I doubt you'd have made a post like that. Back injuries are just a scourge, and they make life infinitely more difficult than it otherwise might be.

There are bountiful and plentiful things to complain about Marvin Williams and his game, I mean there are a ton of valid complaints that one could make regarding those topics, and we have all done so and even more repeatedly as the frustration grows.. But to accuse him of faking an injury or milking one out with absolutely no evidence with which to back that up is just uncalled for in my opinion. It's pretty much just straight-up defamation. Marvin both is and is not a lot of things, but he has shown no indication as to be the type of person who would do something like that. Someone who would do something has by definition a low character, because what they're practicing is deception and they are stealing from their team. From everything I've ever read, heard, watched- Marvin is nothing like that, and by all accounts he comes across as being a person with a good character.

If you want to bash Marvin, bash his game. Go for it. That's legitimate, and will be met with a chorus of agreement. But this stuff is just out of line.

Actually, I have suffered back injuries.. Much more impactful than what Marvin is dealing with. Based on my experience, an athlete in tip top shape should have been able to recover from that flat fall a lot faster than three weeks. In fact, a lot of you are basing Marvin's time out to your personal experiences, but if you have a beer gut, no abs, and are 30-40 lbs overweight, your commentary is not necessary. Marvin is an elite class athlete. If you look at what I said previously, I said that the fact that he is taking this long to heal means that he must have been out of shape. Maybe I have gotten Used to Joe, Josh, and Al coming back from injury quickly. But three weeks is a long time. According to one poster, even somebody in the Hawks camp is questioning the time Marvin has been out. So it's not a vendetta and I'm not alone in this.

Dr. Diesel, what is the point of you whining? Your whining is not going to make Marvin heal (or "unfake") his injury.

We all know your hatred for Marvin. Shouldn't you be happy that Marvin is not playing? I mean after all, like you said, we are winning. So please tell me what good is to be whining about Marvins Injury? You always bash him, he has not been in any recently games (which you should be happy), but yet we are winning, and now you're complaining?

I don't get it. Please explain. :questions:

How can we trade him if he's on our IL playing playstation and sipping cool smoothies?

[Brokentree]

Actually, I have suffered back injuries.. Much more impactful than what Marvin is dealing with. Based on my experience, an athlete in tip top shape should have been able to recover from that flat fall a lot faster than three weeks. In fact, a lot of you are basing Marvin's time out to your personal experiences...

Oo oo where is that pot and kettle picture.

[Diesel]

Oo oo where is that pot and kettle picture.

Nobody ever said that pot was wrong.

[niremetal]

Nobody ever said that pot was wrong.

No one can say with certainty that the pot is wrong because none of us are doctors who have examined Marvin. We can say, however, that the pot doesn't know what he's talking about.