John is not stepping up like a max player should

[Wurider05]

He is playing like one of the guys instead of being the man. There was no reason why he should not have been the best player on the floor tonight. He is far from a bad player but he can't realistically think that he is getting a max from the Hawks. 

Edited April 27, 2021 by Wurider05

[Spud2nique]

But he just came off guarding the Greek freak less than 24 hours before this and helping us get a W. Ah I’m just playing ’s advocate I guess. Let’s see what he does for us in the playoffs.

[Atlantaholic]

It's not about whether he is "worth" the max or not, it's about whether we can afford to let him walk. Spending the max on him is overpaying but the opportunity cost of not signing him is higher. Who do we get to replace him when he bolts to an eastern conference rival?

Edited April 27, 2021 by Atlantaholic

[Spud2nique]

3 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

Who do we get to replace him when he bolts to an eastern conference rival?

Are the Mavs in the East next season?

- The Bobs & co-signed by Texas(shek) chic  

 

[sturt]

No single game, good or bad, is salient to the final verdict on this point. Rather, the entire body of work is. Agreed that it's that kind of game where you expect your best players to grind it out and pull you through. But it's not like that will happen every game.

 

[bleachkit]

You can overpay a guy or let him walk. Letting him walk doesn't help us. Unfortunately, that just how it goes in the NBA. A level stars are underpaid and B level stars are overpaid. 

[REHawksFan]

40 minutes ago, sturt said:

No single game, good or bad, is salient to the final verdict on this point. Rather, the entire body of work is. Agreed that it's that kind of game where you expect your best players to grind it out and pull you through. But it's not like that will happen every game.

 

It's not that one game delivers a verdict. It's more that last night and a few other games shine a light on the shortcomings of JC (and Clint).  That is, neither player can create for themselves or really dominate a game unless they are being set up by a legit facilitator.  Bogie and Goodwin each had a few assists but neither were able to create offense through their passing to the bigs.  At least not consistently.  JC and Clint both had to work hard just to get a bucket.  When Trae is in the game, he's delivering passes that neither Bogie nor BG can and they allow JC and Clint to feast on easy buckets. 

As this pertains to JC and his value, it is evident that he's not a max value player because his production is largely tied to the abilities of Trae or some other elite pg. JC can't even dominate or take over against a middle of the road team let alone a top tier team unless he has Trae or the equivalence feeding him. 

That said, I agree with @Atlantaholic that the decision should be less about JC's worth and more about how and if the Hawks could potentially replace his production.  Here's how I see the situation.

Tier 1 - Generational player

Tier 2 - Max player (franchise player but not top 5 in NBA)

Tier 3 - All Star player

Tier 4 - Starter

Tier 5 - Bench / Roll player

Tier 6 - Developmental player 

The problem with JC is he is SOLIDLY in the Tier 4 range and we all think he probably should be in Tier 3.  But to me, his absolute ceiling is like Tier 2.5.  So if you give him a max, you are overpaying.  BUT, if you let him walk, you are looking at replacing him with a Tier 4 most probably. 

So if you are the Hawks, you probably just suck it up and accept that you are going to slightly overpay for JC unless the market recognizes his actual worth and offers him Tier 3 money instead of Tier 2.   

[AHF]

25 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

It's not that one game delivers a verdict. It's more that last night and a few other games shine a light on the shortcomings of JC (and Clint).  That is, neither player can create for themselves or really dominate a game unless they are being set up by a legit facilitator.  Bogie and Goodwin each had a few assists but neither were able to create offense through their passing to the bigs.  At least not consistently.  JC and Clint both had to work hard just to get a bucket.  When Trae is in the game, he's delivering passes that neither Bogie nor BG can and they allow JC and Clint to feast on easy buckets. 

As this pertains to JC and his value, it is evident that he's not a max value player because his production is largely tied to the abilities of Trae or some other elite pg. JC can't even dominate or take over against a middle of the road team let alone a top tier team unless he has Trae or the equivalence feeding him. 

That said, I agree with @Atlantaholic that the decision should be less about JC's worth and more about how and if the Hawks could potentially replace his production.  Here's how I see the situation.

Tier 1 - Generational player

Tier 2 - Max player (franchise player but not top 5 in NBA)

Tier 3 - All Star player

Tier 4 - Starter

Tier 5 - Bench / Roll player

Tier 6 - Developmental player 

The problem with JC is he is SOLIDLY in the Tier 4 range and we all think he probably should be in Tier 3.  But to me, his absolute ceiling is like Tier 2.5.  So if you give him a max, you are overpaying.  BUT, if you let him walk, you are looking at replacing him with a Tier 4 most probably. 

So if you are the Hawks, you probably just suck it up and accept that you are going to slightly overpay for JC unless the market recognizes his actual worth and offers him Tier 3 money instead of Tier 2.   

You kind nailed it on this one.  Can't argue that he is in the Starter / Tier 4 category this year (don't see a legit case that he should have been an All-Star) and I'd say his realistic ceiling is probably All-Star / Tier 3 by your scale.  I really can't imagine him as a franchise player.  (As an aside, "max" player to me means less than franchise player as a descriptor so I'm rolling with "franchise" instead of focusing on the salary.  Plenty of non-franchise All-Stars have gotten max deals.)

 

[JayBirdHawk]

58 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

It's not that one game delivers a verdict. It's more that last night and a few other games shine a light on the shortcomings of JC (and Clint).  That is, neither player can create for themselves or really dominate a game unless they are being set up by a legit facilitator.  Bogie and Goodwin each had a few assists but neither were able to create offense through their passing to the bigs.  At least not consistently.  JC and Clint both had to work hard just to get a bucket.  When Trae is in the game, he's delivering passes that neither Bogie nor BG can and they allow JC and Clint to feast on easy buckets. 

As this pertains to JC and his value, it is evident that he's not a max value player because his production is largely tied to the abilities of Trae or some other elite pg. JC can't even dominate or take over against a middle of the road team let alone a top tier team unless he has Trae or the equivalence feeding him. 

That said, I agree with @Atlantaholic that the decision should be less about JC's worth and more about how and if the Hawks could potentially replace his production.  Here's how I see the situation.

Tier 1 - Generational player

Tier 2 - Max player (franchise player but not top 5 in NBA)

Tier 3 - All Star player

Tier 4 - Starter

Tier 5 - Bench / Roll player

Tier 6 - Developmental player 

The problem with JC is he is SOLIDLY in the Tier 4 range and we all think he probably should be in Tier 3.  But to me, his absolute ceiling is like Tier 2.5.  So if you give him a max, you are overpaying.  BUT, if you let him walk, you are looking at replacing him with a Tier 4 most probably. 

So if you are the Hawks, you probably just suck it up and accept that you are going to slightly overpay for JC unless the market recognizes his actual worth and offers him Tier 3 money instead of Tier 2.   

 

And as @TheNorthCydeRises pointed out in the game thread - the Capela post ups should have been going to JC.

[thecampster]

Game this one a bit of thought. John is not a Nate big.  Nate might be okay with phasing him out. Nate likes defensive bigs.

[sturt]

[JayBirdHawk]

13 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Game this one a bit of thought. John is not a Nate big.  Nate might be okay with phasing him out. Nate likes defensive bigs.

That doesn't make sense - since Nate took over and before his ankle injury Collins was still getting his touches within the flow of the offense. He was actually getting more post ups.

[sturt]

For some degree of context... and support for alleging that we shouldn't assume what we see at age 23 probably should define what we expect out of a player's career... here's a pair of 23 year olds' stat lines.

Bet you can't guess whose names belong to the stats.

(Yes. Sarcasm, Sheldon.)

 

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, bleachkit said:

You can overpay a guy or let him walk. Letting him walk doesn't help us. Unfortunately, that just how it goes in the NBA. A level stars are underpaid and B level stars are overpaid. 

I actually think this comment nails it.  The max player concept forces teams to pay max salaries to fringe stars.  Probably what creates the super teams.  The true stars have to join together to compete with teams that have 2-3 superstars. 

A few weeks ago everybody agreed Collins had finally won us over.  He plays without Trae, and it's back to doubting him being worth the spend.  

I think we have to spend the money unless someone makes a killer trade offer.  We can't let him walk for nothing.  

Additionally, there is another tier between all star and starter.  Call it fringe all star.  

[REHawksFan]

46 minutes ago, sturt said:

He's certainly not a finished product.  I agree with that.  But if we are giving out a contract based on currently established level of play, he's no higher than a starter level player.  He's not been an all star even if our own fans see him as such.  He's certainly not been a franchise player.  So to pay him as such is to overpay. I think to a certain extent you have to pay him based on what you think he's going to turn into.  

And I agree that we don't know what his ceiling actually will end up being.  Personally, I think he tops out at All Star level just shy of franchise player.  A max contract for that type player is generally if not universally seen as an overpay.  And that's fine.  As my first post alluded, I'm ok with overpaying JC because the alternative is to overpay or pay market for a lesser player. Given the choice, I'd rather have the better player.  

My preference is to pay JC like a non-franchise all-star but I suspect he won't go for that directly from Atlanta.  And thus we are left to see what the market offers him.  

[marco102]

I think we should give John some time to get back in rhythm. I've never seen him fall as much posting up as he has recently.

He was actually on a pretty strong tear before his injury. His defense was better then too.

I don't care if he gets a max or not. It is not my money. As long as the Hawks continue to improve and become championship contenders, I have faith in Travis and whatever decision he makes with John. 

[thecampster]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

That doesn't make sense - since Nate took over and before his ankle injury Collins was still getting his touches within the flow of the offense. He was actually getting more post ups.

Ya, I was spitballin...not saying I knew anything.

[Spud2nique]

22 minutes ago, marco102 said:

I think we should give John some time to get back in rhythm. I've never seen him fall as much posting up as he has recently.

He was actually on a pretty strong tear before his injury. His defense was better then too.

I don't care if he gets a max or not. It is not my money. As long as the Hawks continue to improve and become championship contenders, I have faith in Travis and whatever decision he makes with John. 

The playoffs.

[turnermx]

7 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

The playoffs.

This. I don't see Travis pulling a Pete Babcock and offering John the max based on one game either lol

[kg01]

3 minutes ago, turnermx said:

This. I don't see Travis pulling a Pete Babcock and offering John the max based on one game either lol

Aw yeah, gotta lovehate Chris Crawford.  Parlayed that Knix series to a fat deal. smdh