Smoove = +by-

[Diesel]

Yeah. Addition by Subtraction.

Did Josh's time on the court take away from the team or did he make us better?

[turnermx]

Smoove could individually impact the game more than anyone else on the team. He wouldn't stop shooting so if he was hitting we were OK but when he missed we would be in bad shape. As went Smoove so went the team. Last year I think the bad Smoove canceled out the good Smoove for the most part. This dynamic cant be good for stability of the team. I'm excited about a group of guys that play consistently under a coach with a good system and gameplan to their individual strengths and not give in to individual weaknesses. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[Plainview1981]

Smoove could individually impact the game more than anyone else on the team. He wouldn't stop shooting so if he was hitting we were OK but when he missed we would be in bad shape. As went Smoove so went the team. Last year I think the bad Smoove canceled out the good Smoove for the most part. This dynamic cant be good for stability of the team. I'm excited about a group of guys that play consistently under a coach with a good system and gameplan to their individual strengths and not give in to individual weaknesses.Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Josh's free throw shooting also became a problem last year.

He was negative in terms of win shares on the offensive end this year.

[turnermx]

You are right how could I not mention that? Teams were even starting to hack him on purpose. Who is the biggest free throw liability on the roster now? I don't think there is one?Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[yungsta]

with him gone it will create a better environment. You cant create a winning culture when one of your "leaders" is a headcase.

[Plainview1981]

You are right how could I not mention that? Teams were even starting to hack him on purpose. Who is the biggest free throw liability on the roster now? I don't think there is one?Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Stevenson was also a liability and he will not be one this year.

[Gray Mule]

Did he help our team? Yes, he did. Over the time period he was here,he was a great help, especially when the "good Josh" showed up inthe game.It seemed that, the longer he was here, the more we saw the "bad Josh."Maybe we looked for it more than before or maybe we just finally tiredof it all. And, yes, he struggled to hit 50% of his free throws last season.He said it was a lack of concentration, so, why couldn't he concentrate?Super athlete who I really enjoyed and pulled for him when we had the"good Josh" but was more and more disgusted with the "bad Josh."I'm glad he was here. I'm glad he's gone.GO HAWKS!

[Randy]

_{Thing about additional by subtraction is that you can only do it for so long before you end up with nothing.}

_{But yeah, I think it still works the 2nd time around.}

[Plainview1981]

_{Thing about additional by subtraction is that you can only do it for so long before you end up with nothing.}

_{But yeah, I think it still works the 2nd time around.}

It's not like Josh was replaced with nobody. It would be fair to say that JJ was replaced with nobody of note, but that's not true in Josh's case. That said, having such a turnover in back to back years could be problematic.

We replaced a 17/8/4 on 46% shooting for a 16/8/3 player on 50% shooting.

I think it's fair to assume that Millsap's scoring will go up a bit this year considering he will be playing in the east and he will be the 2nd best scorer on the team. Plus his minutes will go up most likely.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Hotlanta1981

[Buzzard]

For me its addition by subtraction in this sense. If we don't have anyone else, Smoove makes us better. But take a very average shooting big who also hits the offensive boards; and our team becomes much better.

In other words, Millsap on our team is a much better fit because of his complete overall game vs Smooves dynamic impact and inconsistencies from game to game.

Millsap is a average shooting big, Smoove is below average.

Millsap is a slightly above average offensive rebounder, Smoove is a below average one.

Edited July 28, 2013 by Buzzard

[benhillboy]

The fact that you can seriously ask the question pretty much affirms it.

[Eddielives]

I answered yes to both questions. Losing Josh was a plus yet het was a player who helped this team be better. Yet, replacing him with MIllsap will quickly make people realize what was the problem with Josh. Maybe we won't be as flashy but I bet we are going to develop into a more consistent and offensively reliable team that might even make it deeper into the playoffs than before.

[DrReality]

Their I no "I" in team. Not the Spurs model. Josh doesn't get this

[thecampster]

Very simple statistics. http://www.82games.com/1213/12ATL14.HTM

On court last year the Offense was 2.6 better with Smith on the court (per 100 possessions).

Off court the defense was .6 worse with Smith off the court (per 100 possessions).

IE. on average the Hawks were 3 points better in a game where Smith was playing as compared to when he was not.

Losing Smith could cost the Hawks 10 games next year.

[thecampster]

Just to climb on top of my own post. Last year here were the simple ratings of our top players.

Horford +6

Korver +4

Smith +3.6

Harris +3.4

Williams +1.2

Teague +0.4

Johnson -0.9

Pachulia -1.2

Everyone else was in serious minus territory. You lost 3 of the top 7 in 100 possessions +/-.

Stevenson -4.4

Tolliver -5.9

Jones - 9.4

Petro -11.2

It could be argued that since most of those players won't be back we are experiencing addition by subtraction but not that Smith/Harris or Pachulia do.

[turnermx]

Interesting. Millsap for the Jazz last season was +2.6..I wonder if Teague can improve from his +0.4 since the ball should be in his hands more in Buds offense.Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

[Gray Mule]

Interesting. Josh not being here could cost the Hawks 10 victories this upcoming season.I believe that's what was said.Does that mean that Millsaps, who is here to replace Josh, will be responsible for us losing10 games that we would have won. Is he THAT bad?I would think that perhaps Josh would lead his new team to 10 extra wins against the Hawksbut I don't believe we play them that many gomes.We can speculate. We can ponder over what will happen and how it will be. The kicker is,we just will not know until we see this team on the floor. We may struggle to top our 13 winseason. Me? I believe we will be better than last season! ! !

[Plainview1981]

Very simple statistics. http://www.82games.com/1213/12ATL14.HTM

On court last year the Offense was 2.6 better with Smith on the court (per 100 possessions).

Off court the defense was .6 worse with Smith off the court (per 100 possessions).

IE. on average the Hawks were 3 points better in a game where Smith was playing as compared to when he was not.

Losing Smith could cost the Hawks 10 games next year.

Josh is being replaced with someone that can score just as much as him and do it more effectively. He is not being replaced by nobody.

[Plainview1981]

Just to climb on top of my own post. Last year here were the simple ratings of our top players.

Horford +6

Korver +4

Smith +3.6

Harris +3.4

Williams +1.2

Teague +0.4

Johnson -0.9

Pachulia -1.2

Everyone else was in serious minus territory. You lost 3 of the top 7 in 100 possessions +/-.

Stevenson -4.4

Tolliver -5.9

Jones - 9.4

Petro -11.2

It could be argued that since most of those players won't be back we are experiencing addition by subtraction but not that Smith/Harris or Pachulia do.

So according to that, Korver is more valuable than Josh?

Yeah, I'm glad we didn't give him that kind of cash.

[IllestPamfilis]

Addition by subtraction absolutely. Millsap knows what he is a plays to his advantages. Josh is definitely more talented but has too many game changing mental farts. Loved Josh, but I was yelling at the t.v. more times than not on a boneheaded move by him.