Hawks system who you taking: Aldridge or Millsap at 4/80?

[Guest]

LMA is 3 months younger than Millsap, but has played more minutes.

I'm going with Millsap. As someone else said, he's a better defender, and we know he fits in well in this system. He also was the only realistic option of the two to come here. And with Bud emphasizing a culture of familiy and rewarding players that put in the work for you, when we can afford it obviously (hello DMC), Millsap is the obvious choice.

Oh only 3 months younger?...hmmmm for some reason I thought a couple years younger. But ya that makes sense cuz both part of 06 draft.

[cam1218]

I think LMA is a guy who can carry a team at times and Sap lacks that. Look back a playoff ago and watch what he did to Houston. Because of that I would take him, but I don't think we were a serious option for him anyways.

Sap isn't a bad fall back and he didn't sign a huge contract. I'm happy with how things played out.

[Diesel]

I think LMA is a guy who can carry a team at times and Sap lacks that. Look back a playoff ago and watch what he did to Houston. Because of that I would take him, but I don't think we were a serious option for him anyways.

Sap isn't a bad fall back and he didn't sign a huge contract. I'm happy with how things played out.

 

Our system doesn't require one guy to carry the team.  I think that's what many squawkers are hoping for but that's not the case.   If one guy is carrying the team, then everything has failed and we're in trouble... ala Teague vs. the Pacers.

  When our system is working at full capacity, everybody on the court contributes and there's nobody for the defense to key in on.  That's the best part of what we have.

[cam1218]

Our system doesn't require one guy to carry the team. I think that's what many squawkers are hoping for but that's not the case. If one guy is carrying the team, then everything has failed and we're in trouble... ala Teague vs. the Pacers.

When our system is working at full capacity, everybody on the court contributes and there's nobody for the defense to key in on. That's the best part of what we have.

I agree with this, trust me. Our system is unique and at its best when everyone is playing together. I still think you need a guy that can dominate a game here or there when "the system" isn't working for whatever reason (injuries, fatigue, poor shooting, etc).

[thescout5]

Our system doesn't require one guy to carry the team.  I think that's what many squawkers are hoping for but that's not the case.   If one guy is carrying the team, then everything has failed and we're in trouble... ala Teague vs. the Pacers.

  When our system is working at full capacity, everybody on the court contributes and there's nobody for the defense to key in on.  That's the best part of what we have.

See that is the problem while the Hawks system doesn't require one guy to carry a team you better have a 10 pt lead in the closing minutes of a game or your pretty much sunk with a loss. Their are no dependable scorers when it comes to crunch time. You saw the playoffs players seemed hesitate to shoot.Hawks players kept passing the ball letting the clock to run down and finally chucking up a bad shot at the end. A reliable scorer wants the ball at the end and will get you a basket if you need it. Give me LA all day. Sap can't guard bigger power forwards gets eaten up on the boards.LM can get you a rebound and score when he is needed.

[Diesel]

See that is the problem while the Hawks system doesn't require one guy to carry a team you better have a 10 pt lead in the closing minutes of a game or your pretty much sunk with a loss. Their are no dependable scorers when it comes to crunch time. You saw the playoffs players seemed hesitate to shoot.Hawks players kept passing the ball letting the clock to run down and finally chucking up a bad shot at the end. A reliable scorer wants the ball at the end and will get you a basket if you need it. Give me LA all day. Sap can't guard bigger power forwards gets eaten up on the boards.LM can get you a rebound and score when he is needed.

 

If this were true, we wouldn't have won 60.   We went  into the playoff injured and we caught a bad matchup with the Cavs.  Not because they were better or because we lacked a star... but because we were injured and they were willing to play a physical game with us.  However, put those same teams on the court when everybody on both teams are healthy and we will beat them.

[thescout5]

Will visit this thread next year. I'd like to see the Hawks healthy and if they are and lose like they did vs the Cavs then I hope this injury excuse thing will finally go away and people will have to admit the Hawks don't have enough talent to get it done. Yes they won 60 in the reg season but take the 19 game winning streak away what was the record? Playoffs are different than reg season teams took away the outside shot and the Hawks didn't perform. Missing wide open shots how can you blame that on injuries? Terrible decison making for example Hawks had a 3 pt lead or was it 4 with 25 seconds (?) and almost blew the game.I think that game went into over time. Anyway I do question if the hawks have enough high BBIQ players. 

 

Getting back to the question LA all day.  

Edited July 4, 2015 by thescout5

[asdogg]

Objectively SAP has higher WAR and better real plus minus numbers

Advanced Metrics on Aldridge suggest hyping up a solid all star to a superstar

If you go strictly by metrics, Aldridge's reputation outstrips his actual production and impact. That's a mild criticism, though, as he's a bona fide All-Star no matter how you measure performance. The disconnect is this: Some view Aldridge as a true centerpiece player, meaning he can be the best player on a title contender. From a statistical standpoint, that's just not the case. His three-year WARP ratings have ranked in the 92nd to the 94th percentile for the past five years. Again, that's All-Star stuff, but the highest he has ever finished in a single season is 15th. Last season was his second-best ranking, and he was at No. 31.

The ding on Aldridge's dossier is that metrics love efficiency, and his has been so-so in that regard, which marks him as a volume scorer. The past two years, he has used about 30 percent of Portland possessions when he's on the floor. His true shooting percentages have been below league average in each of the past three seasons. Still, Aldridge has arguably become a better shooter every season of his career. In 2014-15, he not only introduced occasional 3s to his arsenal more than before, but he also shot a career-best 84.5 percent from the foul line. It's the development of the skill part of his game that is so intriguing. While his passing skills (i.e., assist rate) aren't great, his turnover rates are almost absurdly low.

The bottom line is that Aldridge's ability to operate from a variety of scoring spots and to get shots up without turning the ball over is a combination of skills that you can build an offense around. That's why his offensive RPMs have been plus-1.5 or better for five straight years. Last year, it was plus-3.76. His defense is below average, and his rim protection is worse than that, but it's difficult to find offense-oriented big men this accomplished.

-- Bradford Doolittle

[Guest]

Aldridge seems just a tad soft to me.

Not saying I wouldn't take him over Sap but not saying I would either.

I'm undecided at the moment

[Plainview1981]

LMA... He destroyed the Hawks defense this year.

[Sothron]

I'd take LMA any day of the week, twice on Sunday but he wasn't going to pass up playing for the Spurs and being in home state with there is no state income tax.

[turnermx]

I like Sap for us. More defense and more crafty +keeps the ball moving on offense. In response to Hots, LMA has destroyed a lot of teams but i dont think his destruction of us resulted in even one win for his team? (EDIT: last season )Gotta play both ends of the floor gimme Sap and his hardhat.

Edited July 4, 2015 by turnermx

[cam1218]

And even though I said LMA, we can't forget Sap was hurt during the playoffs. Part of his game is his ability to stretch the D with his shooting and that wasn't there after he hurt his shoulder against Brooklyn.

[benhillboy]

Objectively SAP has higher WAR and better real plus minus numbers

Advanced Metrics on Aldridge suggest hyping up a solid all star to a superstar

If you go strictly by metrics, Aldridge's reputation outstrips his actual production and impact. That's a mild criticism, though, as he's a bona fide All-Star no matter how you measure performance. The disconnect is this: Some view Aldridge as a true centerpiece player, meaning he can be the best player on a title contender. From a statistical standpoint, that's just not the case. His three-year WARP ratings have ranked in the 92nd to the 94th percentile for the past five years. Again, that's All-Star stuff, but the highest he has ever finished in a single season is 15th. Last season was his second-best ranking, and he was at No. 31.

The ding on Aldridge's dossier is that metrics love efficiency, and his has been so-so in that regard, which marks him as a volume scorer. The past two years, he has used about 30 percent of Portland possessions when he's on the floor. His true shooting percentages have been below league average in each of the past three seasons. Still, Aldridge has arguably become a better shooter every season of his career. In 2014-15, he not only introduced occasional 3s to his arsenal more than before, but he also shot a career-best 84.5 percent from the foul line. It's the development of the skill part of his game that is so intriguing. While his passing skills (i.e., assist rate) aren't great, his turnover rates are almost absurdly low.

The bottom line is that Aldridge's ability to operate from a variety of scoring spots and to get shots up without turning the ball over is a combination of skills that you can build an offense around. That's why his offensive RPMs have been plus-1.5 or better for five straight years. Last year, it was plus-3.76. His defense is below average, and his rim protection is worse than that, but it's difficult to find offense-oriented big men this accomplished.

-- Bradford Doolittle

Great post, backs up my eyes. Wish him luck in San An. He seems like a great kid who should soak up all the game Timmy lays down. Notably that bank shot jumper and doing your work super-early with off-ball positioning on both ends. Edited July 4, 2015 by benhillboy

[Guard]

If this were true, we wouldn't have won 60.   We went  into the playoff injured and we caught a bad matchup with the Cavs.  Not because they were better or because we lacked a star... but because we were injured and they were willing to play a physical game with us.  However, put those same teams on the court when everybody on both teams are healthy and we will beat them.

The Cavs were injured too. 

[turnermx]

Would have been nice if Love took away a chunk of Tristan Thompsons minutes and more hero ball from Irving

[Guard]

The thing about the NBA is that it's real consistent. Talent usually wins 98% of the time. It's why time and time again the team that holds the trophy up usually is one of the most talented teams in the league. Even the anomalies that win without a superstar end up being elite at something. Talent trumping everything is just a constant at this point. It's not an opinion or a guess or a hope. It's reality. 

[Diesel]

Will visit this thread next year. I'd like to see the Hawks healthy and if they are and lose like they did vs the Cavs then I hope this injury excuse thing will finally go away and people will have to admit the Hawks don't have enough talent to get it done. Yes they won 60 in the reg season but take the 19 game winning streak away what was the record? Playoffs are different than reg season teams took away the outside shot and the Hawks didn't perform. Missing wide open shots how can you blame that on injuries? Terrible decison making for example Hawks had a 3 pt lead or was it 4 with 25 seconds (?) and almost blew the game.I think that game went into over time. Anyway I do question if the hawks have enough high BBIQ players. 

 

Getting back to the question LA all day.  

 

If  it were about talent... Hand the Cavs the championship now.  No team conceived can match the talent of the Best Player in the Universe, Uncle Drew and those others.  That was true of those Miami teams too.  However, when the games were played and that talented Miami team faced San Antonio, they were spanked.  Spanked by the better team.

We are a good team. We play very good team ball.  INjuries do tend to effect us in a greater way.  However, the depth that we have created this offseason is good depth.   We will be a horror movie for the East and the West.

[Diesel]

The Cavs were injured too. 

Yes.  Put both teams on the floor completely healthy.  We would beat them.

 

The cavs wouldn't have resorted to an all out physical play.  They would have left in soft Love and Horf and Sap would have had a field day.

[RandomFan]

The thing about the NBA is that it's real consistent. Talent usually wins 98% of the time. It's why time and time again the team that holds the trophy up usually is one of the most talented teams in the league. Even the anomalies that win without a superstar end up being elite at something. Talent trumping everything is just a constant at this point. It's not an opinion or a guess or a hope. It's reality. 

 

If talent wins 98% of the time, then by your own definition that must mean a 60 win team that made it to the ECF has a lot of talent.

Edited July 5, 2015 by RandomFan