Hawks Perpetual Preseason Watch

[NBASupes]

 

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 2/19/2005 at 11:51 PM, KBatPCSOM said:

This is the class that will set the stage for the next 10-15 years of NBA basketball. LeBron James may be the flagship player of the NBA, but the 2004 high school class will replenish the NBA with the stars it is currently lacking.

 

To start it off, you have four members of that class who are already doing very well in the NBA, considering their age.

 

Dwight Howard -- Up until recently, he was averaging a double double on the year.

 

Josh Smith -- The future is bright in Atlanta with this kid around. He's so much like Dominique Wilkins it is scary.

 

Al Jefferson -- He's playing so well for the Celtics that they refuse to trade him in a deal that may be able to get them over the hump and into the playoffs this season. Bright, bright future as a power forward.

 

J.R. Smith -- This is another kid that has gotten a lot of playing time recently and hasn't disappointed.

 

Four other players from this class are in the NBA, but their contributions will be made down the road.

 

Shaun Livingston -- He was actually playing well before he got injured. When he gets his jumper down, he's going to be a very good point guard for a very long time.

 

Robert Swift -- He hardly gets any playing time, but he's a seven footer that moves fairly well and is a good rebounder. I don't think he will be a star, but he should be at the least an adequate starting center with added strength.

 

Sebastian Telfair -- Tremendous passing instincts. He's just got to get used to the speed of the game.

 

Dorrel Wright -- Probably the second best athlete of the group (second to Josh Smith). He's in Miami, sitting, and learning. A future backcourt of Wade and Wright looks very dangerous for the opposition.

 

Then, you have the impact freshmen at the college level who will be entering the NBA either this year or in 2006.

 

Marvin Williams -- He doesn't start at North Carolina, but he has flashed tremendous abiltiy and athleticism A 6'9" player who will be able to play on the inside in the NBA and can extend the defense out to the arc. Tremendous upside.

 

Rudy Gay -- Another athletic demon who can really play off the wing. Tremendous defensive potential with his long arms and athleticism.

 

Malik Hairston -- Tremendous pure shooting guard prospect.

 

Randolph Morris -- May be the best NBA center prospect in college basketball.

 

Rajon Rondo -- Tremendous vision, length, and athleticism with this instinctful point guard.

 

This is just a tremendous class. The 2005 class has some good players, but some of the top guys have a lot of question marks about their pro potential. Louis Williams and Monta Ellis are probably the top two players in the class, but both are undersized shooting guards.

 

On 4/12/2006 at 12:44 PM, AHF said:

In a column describing the players ESPN's Marc Stein will miss the most during the playoffs, Stein wrote:

 

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

Atlanta's Josh Smith

 

 

 

 

 

He's a lovable lefty. He's a new-millennium highlight reel in the grand Hawks tradition of Dominique Wilkins. And he's on this list because, like Kirilenko and Wallace, he's one of those Freak O' Nature guys who offset a lack of offensive sophistication with an ability to rebound, defend and cause random mayhem. Regular readers know I'm trying as hard as I can to stop obsessing about the backcourt Atlanta would have assembled if they had drafted Paul before signing Joe Johnson. Well ... this is the Hawk who gives you something else to think about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?pa...ht&lid=tab2pos2

 

On 6/25/2004 at 5:11 PM, cyman3 said:

dont get me wrong now... i hope JOSH SMITH proves me wrong and becomes the next Dominique Wilkens.

 

but as of now, it looks like hes nothing more than GERALD WALLACE (at best). and we all know what Nelson can give us... hes a sure thing.

 

and at the 17th pick, we're in a situation where we can pick a BIG SLEEPER...

 

i dont mind takin chances with 2nd rounders but at the 17th pick, i still think we shoulda went w/ Nelson (a sure thing... worst case, he'll be a solid backup PG playing 10 years in the NBA as a role player).

 

but ur rite- Smith does have potential to be GREAT... and i hope he does!

 

On 6/10/2004 at 1:32 PM, emeans said:

Exactly...we need to stop giving away future picks. I don't like the idea of giving away future 1st round picks. I we can get Josh Smith (the next Dominique Wilkins) at 6 then I say stay right where you are and get the best available talent at 17.

 

I would hate to give up that much for 1 pick!!!

Two years later: 

 

On 2/6/2006 at 7:07 PM, Duff_Man said:

Just came across this video...BAD ASS.

 

Smith vs. Nique video

 

On 2/9/2006 at 10:57 AM, gsuteke said:

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

Josh missed more dunks in a game last week than Nique missed in his entire career..There is no comparison..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

not dissing Nique but I hope you are right. Josh had the dunks like Nique in this video, yet he had some blocks that were just as impressive. not one defensive highlight from Nique on that entire video. I hope you are right about there being no comparison between the two players.

 

On 11/2/2006 at 8:58 AM, Diesel said:

Since Josh has come into the league..

Everybody has equated him as being the next Vince Carter... The Next Shawn Kemp.. or the Next Dominique.

 

Well, it should be evident that even though Smoove is a high flyer... Smoove doesn't have it in him to dunk on people. It takes a certain type of cockiness to dunk on people. Smoove doesn't have it. Smoove is not a beast. He's a regular guy with Beastly potential... But he's not a beast.

 

Beast is his buddy Dwight Howard!! Did you see any of that beat down last night... As I was flipping from Hawks to Orl to Beef on BET.. I was made to stand up a few times by some of the things that i saw Howard do... This being a contract year for Grant Hill means that they may just get 60 games out of him?!!!

Small hands and weak hands will do that to you. 

On 11/3/2006 at 3:43 AM, AtLaS said:

Funny he's nothing and never will be nothing but a poor man's Kirilenko, he's 20 years old give the guy a freakin break.

 

The funny thing is that when we drafted Josh, EVERYONE (including us) said it would be at least 2-3 years before he was even ready to contribute. Everyone knew he was very raw coming out, that's why he dropped to 17. He comes out has a pretty good rookie season, then a better 2nd season, and now after one bad game shooting he will NEVER get better? Players like him with raw skills need time to put their full game together, most of his points the last few seasons are jumpshots, put backs or fast breaks, and now y'all expect him to breakout and become the next big thing? It's not that easy. Remember that he's 20, giving up on him now for the rest of his career is just dumb..

 

Look how much better his jumpshot is since we drafted him (exception last night, of course), he's DEFINATELY improving. Plus players like him need a PG or at least someone to get them the ball when they are open, Speedy had 3 TO's and 0 assist, JJ had 4 assist. BTW I only remember one shot Josh took that I thought was bad, most of them were WIDE open, I can't blame him for taking those. Our whole team missed wide open jumpers all game long, it wasn't just him..

This sounds similar, give him time, he's only in his 2nd year, he will be great. 

On 11/3/2006 at 9:39 AM, AHF said:

I think Josh Smith has fantastic potential and has done a great job developing himself as a player over the last two years. I do think he needs to start exercising better shot selection and taking the ball to the hole a little more. If he settles for jump shots as his primary weapon he will never maximize his potential.

 

He is still very young, very raw and a very exciting prospect!

@AHF did Smoove live up to his fantastic potential or was he fool's gold like I said? 

 

On 11/3/2006 at 9:53 AM, AHF said:

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

I agree with that post but it's only one game and I feel as though there is no need to panic .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

I totally agree. No need to panic at all.

 

I expect Josh Smith to be a young stud this season. My biggest worry coming into the season is that he will get too far away from taking the ball to the hole by focusing too much on jump shooting. I don't take this game as as much of an indicator as his summer league play and play at the end of last year. I just want to see him start to move the trend away from jump shots a little bit.

 

 

On 6/22/2006 at 7:21 AM, vdunkndunk said:

I think Rondo is more like Mookie Blalock than D-Wade. That's why I think maybe we should trade down and grab Rondo and Sene.

 

Then we could have the old school/new school Hawks:

 

Rajon Rondo = Mookie Blalock

Joe Johnson = Steve Smith

Josh Smith = Dominique Wilkins

Saer Sene = Dikembe Mutombo

 

 

Three years later: 
 

On 12/9/2007 at 9:16 AM, Eddielives said:

My 2 cents time. When it comes to Smoove, nobody can deny his ability, at times, to change the game with his defensive energy and playmaking ability. At the same time, he definitely tries to play outside of his comfort zone too much and thus causes some to cover their eyes and say oh God!...I can't look. For instance, shooting too many jumpers. I'm not against him taking open looks but he settles for the jump shot too much. And I will agree that the bank shot to put us up the other night against Minny was more luck than skill. Let's be real here, no one would have said let's run a play for him to shoot a fadeaway bank shot.

 

Still, all in all, the biggest concern I have w/ Smoove's future w/ this team is a simple and basic one...can he really play power forward? Specifically, can he learn to control his talent enough on the offensive end to not try and do too much and can he really defend the Garnetts and Duncans MAN-TO-MAN. Blocking shots is one of the most exciting things to see in b-ball but it is only one part of being a good defensive player. I'm afraid he may never be as great a one-on-one defender as he is a great shot-blocker.

 

I love Smoove and would absolutely hate to see him traded but the only consolation to seeing him go would be if he were traded for another established star player. Not a potential guy either. Nothing short of a Kobe or Kidd level player would make Smoove being traded an option for me!

A post like this got me thinking, maybe we should trade JC this offseason. 

On 12/9/2007 at 11:11 PM, NJHAWK said:

Who the hell was bashing Smoove after these last 4 games? Can you read? Your the low life.

@kg01

On 5/24/2007 at 12:51 PM, gutz said:

I would give them anyone but JJ and Smoove for Oden. So basically all our picks and any player on the team. Smoove is going to be one helluva ballplayer folks and in my eyes he is untouchable.

 

On 5/24/2007 at 2:05 PM, gsuteke said:

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

I would give them anyone but JJ and Smoove for Oden. So basically all our picks and any player on the team. Smoove is going to be one helluva ballplayer folks and in my eyes he is untouchable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

Frankly, I'd give him both JJ and Smoove as well. Oden is a rare body type.

 

 

---

 

that statement made me cringe.

 

Josh Smith is more untouchable than Dominique Wilkins was.

 

On 5/24/2007 at 3:34 PM, gutz said:

So then who in the hell do you want to play with Oden. You can't give them our 2 best players in JJ and Smoove. Sorry dude but Smoove is going to very special. You just don't find game changing players like that can do EVERYTHING on the court offensively and defensively.

 

On 3/7/2007 at 2:11 AM, Diesel said:

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

if you think smoove sucks then i aint a black guy gettin laid everyday.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

 

For Smoove's sake, I hope you're not some fat Bald guy looking like Dr. Phil. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

I think what's missing in this conversation is the fact that Smoove has shown that he's young but he's able to improve significantly.

 

Also, Smoove has the biggest Heart of any Hawk.

 

This is our new Dominique. Get the right coach in here and Smoove becomes "THE MAN".

/forums/images/graemlins/drink.gif

 

On 3/7/2007 at 2:13 AM, Diesel said:

If you don't think the rest of the league values him, then you don't hear the other broadcasts AND you don't see the way these coaches shake his hand....

 

It was like Avery Johnson dropped everything he was doing to run over to shake Smoove's hand.

 

Teams know that our ownership is in a bad position and they value Smoove as much as we do. Instead of Josh Howard think Impact like Shawn Marion.

 

On 3/11/2007 at 9:21 PM, BusBoyIsBack said:

Don't insult Josh like that.

 

If we don't re-sign him there will be more than 8-10 teams interested in him. More like TWICE that number. 21 year old kid on the verge of all-stardom? Young kid with the ability to change the game on both sides of the floor? I think 75% of the league would want Josh Smith.

 

Can we afford to give him a max contract?

 

On 3/6/2007 at 12:00 PM, Diesel said:

I say 5 year 65 million starting in 2008.

 

On 3/6/2007 at 2:58 PM, Joker said:

I wouldn't pay him over 5 million. He sucks, only idiots think he is any good. He is below average at best and is worth 5 at max... anymore for him is ridiculous. I'll happily trade him for some role playing talent... He is one dimensional at best, not really worth more then 4 mil a season to be honest. Just from reading a lot of post on this site I come to a realization that most of ya'll have no clue about basketball... Joe Johnson is a great role player on a team that wants him be a star.... SW is a joke.. Marvin talented but needs to improve on all aspects of the game... Chillz is good but not on the right team for his skill set....

 

no player on the Hawks is worth 10 mil except for Joe, pay anybody anymore then that a that organizational suicide and ya'll don't want that...

 

On 6/26/2004 at 12:43 PM, Diesel said:

OK, we have our team now. What if in 2 to 3 years both Diaw and Josh Smith develops like we wish they would. Josh Becomes that exciting Dominique/Tmac like player. Diaw becomes that Pippen like player. Neither is suited to play PF. Diaw is not a good shooting guard. What would we do?

 

I say a developed Josh Smith has the ability to be a franchise player. As good as Diaw may become, I don't think he has the drive to be a star.

 

Just interesting thinking.

Four years later: 

On 6/24/2008 at 1:13 PM, RMJ said:

The Hawks will never win anything over paying role players like JS. If they were smart they'd trade him and Bibby to Detroit for Tayshaun, Billups, and Maxiel. That trade would make the hawks a much better team than the current team.

 

On 6/24/2008 at 3:42 PM, joshuaneder said:

This post is a perfect example of someone who is not a long term Hawks fan and has zero understanding of all facets of the NBA game (fan interest, momentum, defense etc.)

sounds like kg01

On 6/25/2008 at 10:12 AM, AHF said:

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

 

Quote:

 

---

 

It's silly to claim that JS isn't 'worth' 10 million per. He's worth whatever the market decides he's worth, and it's looking like the market is setting his price tag at 10M+. So that's what he's 'worth'. You or anyone else may disagree with that amount and think it's too much, but that's an opinion that's entirely subjective. The market sets his price, ergo- that is his worth.

 

 

 

This should be mandatory reading for any poster that wants to further comment on Josh Smith's "worth."

 

There can be a bit of circular logic with that, though.

 

By that rationale, the actual worth of Brian Cardinal over the next two seasons is $13 million because that is what someone was willing to pay him. That is what the market bore yet it is hard to find that the concept of "worth" has any real meaning other than what someone is paid.

 

If what someone is paid is by definition what they are worth, then the Hawks could resign Josh Childress and literally could not pay him more than he was worth because whatever salary they offer would be what he is "worth" by seano's definition.

 

To me, there is a more meaningful concept of worth that both accounts for a player's actual contributions, future growth, and the market forces in the league. Under that definition, some players are overpaid, some are underpaid because teams don't always accurately asses someone's contributions, growth or the financial conditions of the market. For example, I think paying Josh Childress a deal starting at $13M is more than he is worth but paying him with a contract starting at $4M is less than he is worth. If you merely say that worth is objectively measured by whatever a team is willing to pay a player, then Josh Childress gets the exact amount of his worth whether he signs for $13M or $4M.

@AHF ... Making sense but was it worth it for Smoove? 

 

On 6/25/2008 at 1:53 PM, crimedog said:

I think to a large extent "worth" is determined by context.

 

The example I like to use is Mike Redd. Last year his team was terrible and as the most highly compensated player, the responsibility fell on him. You heard choruses of "he's not worth the money, he's not worth the money!!!". However, if Cleveland swings a trade to get him next to Bron' and he becomes the second best player on a 57 win team, he's suddenly going to be "worth it" because its hard to find elite scorers in this league and people recognize your value when you win but your faults when you lose.

 

... and I don't even like Redd.

 

With regards to Josh, I'm of the opinion that you almost always have to overpay for the elite talents. I think Smith's shotblocking ability and ability to pass and draw fouls at his position will allow him to become one of those elite talents that you overpay for (just as we had to overpay for what JJ provided when we signed him). What that means is that you have to be very astute with the rest of your signings. Going off the Redd example above, Redd isn't good enough to drag a team of average and below average players to the playoffs but maybe he wouldn't have to if his management hadn't committed $16m a year to Bobby Simmons and Dan Gadzuric, see where I'm going here? That philosophy makes me a little wary of committing to Chil/Marv until I know how they fit in around our talent core which is JJ, Smith, (hopefully) Al.

@JayBirdHawk this you? 

[nathan2331]

No, no, no. I won't accept any of this Josh Smith slander. Any Hawks fan in 2008 should've been excited about what we had in Smith. The fact that he kept taking jumpsuits he couldn't make is an indictment on him as an individual basketball player. Paying Smith was never an issue for us, the reality is that we did not have a #1 option in Atlanta and didn't have the capability to bring one in.

Now in 2020, we have Trae. The most important piece of a basketball team we've got, we just need to surround him with the right talent to make us a contender. John can be part of the equation like once upon a time Smith could've been. Nobody in this thread is making John something he's not. Even if he's always going to be limited in certain areas you can still improve your game.

[Diesel]

Josh Smith was a player who always had more potential than he was willing to play up to.  That's why he was frustrating to watch. 

[High5]

3 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Bembry improved his jumpshot from his rookie year. So has Damian Jones. Would you say they don't need to be Steph Curry with the shot? 

What? 

[NBASupes]

2 hours ago, nathan2331 said:

No, no, no. I won't accept any of this Josh Smith slander. Any Hawks fan in 2008 should've been excited about what we had in Smith. The fact that he kept taking jumpsuits he couldn't make is an indictment on him as an individual basketball player. Paying Smith was never an issue for us, the reality is that we did not have a #1 option in Atlanta and didn't have the capability to bring one in.

Now in 2020, we have Trae. The most important piece of a basketball team we've got, we just need to surround him with the right talent to make us a contender. John can be part of the equation like once upon a time Smith could've been. Nobody in this thread is making John something he's not. Even if he's always going to be limited in certain areas you can still improve your game.

I 100% disagree with this statement outside of the 1st option talk. 

Paying Smoove was always going to be a mistake because he was starting and wanted to paid like an all star starting PF when he was at best a backup PF on a contender type. 

Trae has major flaws, saying we have a #1 option and let's move on is an useless point as our #1 option has flaws that we have to hide or make irrelevant in some ways. Just become Iso Joe was more of a complementary player than a top scoring option doesn't mean he didn't have an all around game. Something Trae lacks.  Every decision we have to make is to build a championship team in Atlanta. Not just to be the Nique era Hawks. 

Anyone saying this dude who is assisted on 78% of his offense is going to have self-creation skills who gets 67.5 touches per game is out of their rocker. Anyone who think is kid with a 22+ TOV% who's historically been a poor passer will become a playmaker is smoking some of Bob Marley's finest. 

The reason why he's the new Josh Smith is because of the foolishness of Smoove's fans in 2008 equals the foolishness of JC's in 2020. He was always at best a 6th man on a contender. The is literally little difference between JC and Smoove as there is one team he can start for right now who will contend and he will be fine which is GS. For Smoove, that team was just the Suns with Steve Nash and that up-tempo style at that time. 

I posted a lot of posts how Josh was seen at that time. Now that we all know what he is, everyone wanted to run from it but facts are facts. 

 

[NBASupes]

2 hours ago, Diesel said:

Josh Smith was a player who always had more potential than he was willing to play up to.  That's why he was frustrating to watch. 

No he didn't. He was fool's gold. 

He never had the potential ya'll thought he had. 

He can really pass it! Poor decision maker, prone to turnovers making decisions. 

Josh is uber athletic, why doesn't he go iso more. Weak hands, poor first step, Small hands, can't gripped the ball, poor feel for the game, and slow shooting form. 

Add the fact that he has poor shooting touch, he gets 99% of his rebounds based on raw explosiveness, and it took him forever to actually have the right attention to detail. He was one of the most flawed players I've seen with more serious barriers than anyone I've ever seen. 

Cam might be more flawed as a prospect but he doesn't really have many barriers. Josh had a serious barrier for every two strengths. 

That said, Smoove had more strengths than other Hawks I've seen in the last 30 years. Any Hawk. That includes Al, Trae, Cam, Nique, Joe, Deke, Smitty, etc. 

The explosiveness he had was once in a generation level. His pop was insane. When he got his attention to detail down, it was insane too. His speed and agility rivals JC. 

But man did he have flaws. Such a tremendous athlete in the air with exceptional body control but moved laterally like his feet was stuck in quicksand. 

Insane ability to play free safety on defense. He was a walking stat. He could get stats in EVERY category with minimal effort. 

He had a lot more physical barriers than what people remember him for with his stupidity, inconsistency, and bad shot selection. A lot of people will say the game is mental when mentioning Smoove but honestly, he wasn't that bad at the mental side of the game. At least not to the degree it's made out to be. 

[aali34]

6 hours ago, NBASupes said:

There is no pathway for him becoming a self-creator. 

There is no pathway for him becoming a playmaker. 

We have no signs of him being anything but a bad self-creator at every level. We have no signs of him being anything but a bad playmaker at every level. He is who is he. Why is it so hard to accept? 

Could you elaborate what you mean by self-creator? At Wake he posted up quite a bit. I don't see him being a point forward or a primary/secondary creator but reducing him to just pick and roll seems kinda limiting. Simple reads on the short roll and improved ball handling can make our offense smoother so I don't see any harm in letting it play out. If Cam is going to be as good as you say that would make John the teams third option. Whats wrong with him trying to expand his game beyond finishing plays? If it doesn't translate than it gets scrapped.

What else should he work on besides defense? His pnr and rebounding is already top tier for his position. His shooting and defense have been trending upward. Should he just stop looking for other ways to improve at this stage in his career?

You mention Josh Smith alot, but I think John is more self-aware than Josh was and definitly less egocentric. 

[Diesel]

3 hours ago, NBASupes said:

No he didn't. He was fool's gold. 

He never had the potential ya'll thought he had. 

He can really pass it! Poor decision maker, prone to turnovers making decisions. 

Josh is uber athletic, why doesn't he go iso more. Weak hands, poor first step, Small hands, can't gripped the ball, poor feel for the game, and slow shooting form. 

Add the fact that he has poor shooting touch, he gets 99% of his rebounds based on raw explosiveness, and it took him forever to actually have the right attention to detail. He was one of the most flawed players I've seen with more serious barriers than anyone I've ever seen. 

Cam might be more flawed as a prospect but he doesn't really have many barriers. Josh had a serious barrier for every two strengths. 

That said, Smoove had more strengths than other Hawks I've seen in the last 30 years. Any Hawk. That includes Al, Trae, Cam, Nique, Joe, Deke, Smitty, etc. 

The explosiveness he had was once in a generation level. His pop was insane. When he got his attention to detail down, it was insane too. His speed and agility rivals JC. 

But man did he have flaws. Such a tremendous athlete in the air with exceptional body control but moved laterally like his feet was stuck in quicksand. 

Insane ability to play free safety on defense. He was a walking stat. He could get stats in EVERY category with minimal effort. 

He had a lot more physical barriers than what people remember him for with his stupidity, inconsistency, and bad shot selection. A lot of people will say the game is mental when mentioning Smoove but honestly, he wasn't that bad at the mental side of the game. At least not to the degree it's made out to be. 

Disagree strongly.

He wasn't fools gold.   He led just about every competitive stat for our team and will go down as top 10 in just about all of them for our team History. 

More importantly.  Place his skillset on another player who wasn't in love with the jumpshot and you have a great basketball player.   All this other stuff that you say and you qualify as "explosiveness" is what 99% of the league wish they had. 

 

 

[NBASupes]

6 hours ago, aali34 said:

Could you elaborate what you mean by self-creator? At Wake he posted up quite a bit. I don't see him being a point forward or a primary/secondary creator but reducing him to just pick and roll seems kinda limiting. Simple reads on the short roll and improved ball handling can make our offense smoother so I don't see any harm in letting it play out. If Cam is going to be as good as you say that would make John the teams third option. Whats wrong with him trying to expand his game beyond finishing plays? If it doesn't translate than it gets scrapped.

What else should he work on besides defense? His pnr and rebounding is already top tier for his position. His shooting and defense have been trending upward. Should he just stop looking for other ways to improve at this stage in his career?

You mention Josh Smith alot, but I think John is more self-aware than Josh was and definitly less egocentric. 

He always been the same type of player. He wasn't creating his own baskets at Wake. He was in a system in movement and Wake playing a style of Basketball where they call plays and the end result is to get JC touches as well as JC was a tremendous offensive rebounder so he would also score that way using his tremendous athleticism, touch, finishing ability and length for that level of Basketball. 

It's not about being a #2 or #3. It's about being the right player for a championship run. I see JC like the Hawks version of David Lee in GS when we need someone closer to Draymond in GS where they add playmaking and something else. If JC was a tremendous playmaker. I wouldn't have any trouble resigning him for whatever but if he was that, he would have been a top 3 to 5 pick in the draft. Everyone is looking for that skill-set from bigs. He would be leading us to the playoffs and there would be a legit discussion who's more valuable, JC or Trae.

The comparison to Smoove has nothing to do with Smith as a person or player but his perception by the fanbase going into year 3 and year 4. 

[JayBirdHawk]

12 hours ago, NBASupes said:

 

@JayBirdHawk this you? 

What? No....I've only had one user name here.

[bleachkit]

This thread has gone off the rails.

[JayBirdHawk]

 @AHF cam move the JC discussion to that thread. Thnx.

[nathan2331]

9 hours ago, NBASupes said:

I 100% disagree with this statement outside of the 1st option talk. 

Paying Smoove was always going to be a mistake because he was starting and wanted to paid like an all star starting PF when he was at best a backup PF on a contender type. 

Trae has major flaws, saying we have a #1 option and let's move on is an useless point as our #1 option has flaws that we have to hide or make irrelevant in some ways. Just become Iso Joe was more of a complementary player than a top scoring option doesn't mean he didn't have an all around game. Something Trae lacks.  Every decision we have to make is to build a championship team in Atlanta. Not just to be the Nique era Hawks. 

Anyone saying this dude who is assisted on 78% of his offense is going to have self-creation skills who gets 67.5 touches per game is out of their rocker. Anyone who think is kid with a 22+ TOV% who's historically been a poor passer will become a playmaker is smoking some of Bob Marley's finest. 

The reason why he's the new Josh Smith is because of the foolishness of Smoove's fans in 2008 equals the foolishness of JC's in 2020. He was always at best a 6th man on a contender. The is literally little difference between JC and Smoove as there is one team he can start for right now who will contend and he will be fine which is GS. For Smoove, that team was just the Suns with Steve Nash and that up-tempo style at that time. 

I posted a lot of posts how Josh was seen at that time. Now that we all know what he is, everyone wanted to run from it but facts are facts. 

 

Once upon a time Smoove was getting DPOY talk. You might've seen through it all at the time, but I remember thinking the sky was the limit for him. And even in hindsight he could've been successful had he actually focused on what made him good, instead of trying to be a jump shooter he could never become. Paying Smoove never limited our options, you should remember that at the end of the day we were never serious about winning a championship. We proved that when we gave Joe the max that definitely locked us into mediocrity.

I just reject the notion you have to build a championship roster a certain way. My point regarding Trae is that if you want to mask his limitations, you can do that from other positions on the roster and how we set up our defense. While a good defense cannot stop everything, it can force a team to score outside of where they want to attack. So with the right personnel, we can mitigate John and Trae's defensive shortcomings in certain areas.

I don't think anyone in this thread thinks John can become a best-in-position playmaker, or that he'll be highly effective defender on switches. He can improve in those areas though to his and the teams benefit. You can quote all the stats you want to say Collins cannot create for himself, but as others have said, if you don't try how do we know he wouldn't get better. It's hypothetical, and the stats suggest it won't work, but maybe Collins figures it out like he did with the three pointer. 

While we've been losing games, Pierce should've tried making him a bigger focal point to see if there was something there. I don't think that should be controversial, even if you think you know the outcome.

[NBASupes]

32 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

Once upon a time Smoove was getting DPOY talk. You might've seen through it all at the time, but I remember thinking the sky was the limit for him. And even in hindsight he could've been successful had he actually focused on what made him good, instead of trying to be a jump shooter he could never become. Paying Smoove never limited our options, you should remember that at the end of the day we were never serious about winning a championship. We proved that when we gave Joe the max that definitely locked us into mediocrity.

I just reject the notion you have to build a championship roster a certain way. My point regarding Trae is that if you want to mask his limitations, you can do that from other positions on the roster and how we set up our defense. While a good defense cannot stop everything, it can force a team to score outside of where they want to attack. So with the right personnel, we can mitigate John and Trae's defensive shortcomings in certain areas.

I don't think anyone in this thread thinks John can become a best-in-position playmaker, or that he'll be highly effective defender on switches. He can improve in those areas though to his and the teams benefit. You can quote all the stats you want to say Collins cannot create for himself, but as others have said, if you don't try how do we know he wouldn't get better. It's hypothetical, and the stats suggest it won't work, but maybe Collins figures it out like he did with the three pointer. 

While we've been losing games, Pierce should've tried making him a bigger focal point to see if there was something there. I don't think that should be controversial, even if you think you know the outcome.

I always felt better about paying Iso Joe anything than overpaying Smoove at all cost. A championship 2nd option is much more valuable than a 6th man at any level. I clearly saw through it and I wasn't alone either. @Plainview1981 was right there with me.

The biggest issue with the 2nd paragraph is I don't believe JC is good enough offensively to have shortcomings defensively. That's where we completely differ. I don't think believe JC is playoff good. I think he's Bledsoe or Smoove where they add value but how important are they really...

Getting better and being what we need are two different things. Bembry has been a better shooter since his rookie year but has he been what we need in terms of shooting, no. That's where I keep stepping in. The assumption from Hawk fans who love JC is this is a factual improvement area while I am a lot less optimistic 

[nathan2331]

1 hour ago, NBASupes said:

I always felt better about paying Iso Joe anything than overpaying Smoove at all cost. A championship 2nd option is much more valuable than a 6th man at any level. I clearly saw through it and I wasn't alone either. @Plainview1981 was right there with me.

The biggest issue with the 2nd paragraph is I don't believe JC is good enough offensively to have shortcomings defensively. That's where we completely differ. I don't think believe JC is playoff good. I think he's Bledsoe or Smoove where they add value but how important are they really...

Getting better and being what we need are two different things. Bembry has been a better shooter since his rookie year but has he been what we need in terms of shooting, no. That's where I keep stepping in. The assumption from Hawk fans who love JC is this is a factual improvement area while I am a lot less optimistic 

Overpaying for Joe guaranteed we'd never win with him on the roster. There was no one else we could package to bring in our #1 option. You say Smith was only valuable as a 6th man, but losing him and replacing him with Millsap did not immediately make us a better team. So again, I think you're valuation of Smoove is still off. The fact that he never planned out is his fault, but he could've been an effective power forward in his own way.

John I think will be fine in the playoffs so long as he's not facing Johnathan Isaac who's the only match up along with Giannis I'd say he struggled with. Offensively, he's a consistent presence no matter what team he's playing due to the fact he can get himself open and he's comfortable finishing all around the floor. That's very valuable in the playoffs. It might require other players on the team to get him the ball, but the fact that he's such an effective finisher is valuable no matter the opposition.

Like I've said other times, if we need to play Collins at center against certain teams, it won't be a negative if we have the right personnel around him. You can play Collins at center against the Celtics and Theiss won't make you pay for instance. Our problem has been that the first forward off the bench to deploy next to Collins has been Jabari Parker or Vince Carter the past two years. We can't win with that weakness in depth.

I can understand the hesitation to commit to Collins when he's got critical flaws that suggest we should do otherwise. But we're very much better off with Collins than without him, this past season was evidence of that. If we want to build a winner, we need to add defensive options behind our core players. Having a better bench available along with our natural growth should double our win totals next year.

[High5]

3 hours ago, NBASupes said:

The assumption from Hawk fans who love JC is this is a factual improvement area while I am a lot less optimistic 

Except no one is saying that. We're just pointing out how silly it is to say he can't improve in that area because Shaq never became a good FT shooter.

[AHF]

Improvement for JC is not guaranteed at all.  But he has made demonstrable improvement since coming into the league.  No one should be baking in a transformation into a point forward or Ben Wallace D but incremental development is not off the table.

With Smoove, his potential was there.  Problem was between the ears and it got worse rather than better as his career progressed.   

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]