John Collins: What went wrong, what went right, next steps...

[NBASupes]

I want everyone to give their personal opinions. 

I was always one that said, trade JC. It had nothing to do with his personality or leadership skills which are real. Everything has to do with his defense which has massively improved since I started bitching about it years ago. 

He really impressed me with his yearly improvement but I always wanted to trade him because I didn't see him as a player who can help a contender. I was eventually right as usual. It had everything to do with the thing his supporters get on Hunter but not understanding this is why I like Dre. Defensive versatility. If you don't have it as a big man or especially a big wing, you have to be 10x the offensive player to make up for it. Sadly, JC wasn't. 

That said, JC added range to his 3, he added range to his mid-range jumper as well as a nice turnaround J. He was a lethal flash flair and roll or flair and pop PnR option. He really improved his team defense to the point he became key for us defensively which is a far cry from young JC who was a step slow on D way too often. Probably the most improved Hawk since Josh Smith but like Smith, his best role on a legit team is likely as a 6th man at best. 

When you lack defensive versatility, you are limited. Smoove lacked it and JC lacked it. Smoove could only guard 4s as JC. Both struggled with the more talented 4s and both were built like big wings but had no first step, had limited lateral quickness, and both has some offensive issues that impacted them. Where Smoove had some self-creation and playmaking skills, he had a poor shot selection, poor hands, and a poor feel for the game. While JC had elite movement skills for a big, he had limited self-creation, limited vision, and limited passing skills, and if spacing was taken away, he was a limited offensive player making his greatest strength, nullified. I still think JC is a much better player for a legit team than Smoove but Smoove was probably better in a general situation than JC is just because he's not as team dependent, at least till his athleticism got shot. 

I actually think 2nd contract Smoove wasn't anywhere close to as bad as 2nd contract JC economically. That said, JC can still redeem himself. Go to a team with a lot more spacing and ball movement or player movement. I think the defense will always remain the main issue even if he's not a negative on that end, actually a plus but teams really need defensive versatility from big wings and bigs. Dallas is likely to lose Kyrie, I would call and see if Atlanta has an interest in trading JC for mainly a TPE. I would likely have more interest in Capela but Atlanta will want A LOT more than a TPE for Clint. Indiana with Haliburton and Turner is a great fit and they have the money as well. I would reach out to Atlanta about JC. I could see some teams' interest which fit JC a lot more than currently Atlanta does. Atlanta just has too many options at the 4. Okongwu if we get a stretch 5, Bey, and JJ, all of them can really play and help us play winning Basketball. We just don't have the need for him anymore which we did two years ago.

  

 

[theheroatl]

If an opportunity arises to use our players are trade bait to upgrade the roster the priority of players to trade is:

1. JC
2. Hunter
3. Capela

 

That's after watching years of development in these players.

Edited April 10, 2023 by theheroatl

[NBASupes]

Just now, theheroatl said:

If an opportunity arises to use our players are trade bait to upgrade the roster the priority of players to trade is:

1. JC
2. Hunter
3. Capela

100% on JC, we all can see it. It doesn't take a high BBIQ fan to see it. 

100% no on Hunter. As I've explained many times, defensive versatility is the most critical trait needed for a big wing and he has that as well as anyone in the NBA. So it's a hard no for me. Unless you can come up with an upgrade like Bridges, I would be willing to listen, sadly, Brooklyn won't. 

50/50 split on Capela. I wouldn't move him unless there was an upgrade on the way. I don't love the idea of starting Okongwu at the 5. Offensively, it makes sense, defensively, I have questions. His metrics against backups where he's generally always superior aren't the same against starters where the gap is much better around the league. I am still convinced OO is a long-term 4 who needs to play with a stretch 5. 

[Final_quest]

JC was always a conundrum, still is.  I think we bet and lost on him.  There are much worse players and contracts, but it will be interesting to see what moves we make this off season. 
As we've learned with JC it's difficult to trade him and improve the roster.  With the expansion of the cap his salary starts to look something like average starter money.  This season was a disappointment with Collins, point blank.  

[NBASupes]

56 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

JC was always a conundrum, still is.  I think we bet and lost on him.  There are much worse players and contracts, but it will be interesting to see what moves we make this off season. 
As we've learned with JC it's difficult to trade him and improve the roster.  With the expansion of the cap his salary starts to look something like average starter money.  This season was a disappointment with Collins, point blank.  

I think it makes him less valuable but that's just me

[Gray Mule]

IF?  If we trade JC, then we must replace him with another player.

If we trade him for what we believe is a better player for his position we must sweeten the deal to make it desireable to the other team.  If we do this, who do we add to make the deal?  It must be someone good, not someone down at the end of the bench.

Note:  Be careful what you wish for.  You may get it.

I sure would hate to swap players with another team, giving them JC and another player, thinking that we really improved our team, only to find that, no, we're worse now than before.  Sometimes we don't appreciate what we have until it's gone.  Then it's too late.

Am I saying, "Don't trade JC."  Not at all.  Just be very sure you can live with the results, whatever you do.

[ShooterSays]

I'm not going to go and pull the stats, but it feels like JC's trajectory shifted when we got Clint. He was a walking 20/10 double-double and a border line all-star. Just don't think they mesh on the offensive end. It's hard when the thing you do best...is literally the only thing Clint can do on the offensive end.

[NBASupes]

11 minutes ago, ShooterSays said:

I'm not going to go and pull the stats, but it feels like JC's trajectory shifted when we got Clint. He was a walking 20/10 double-double and a border line all-star. Just don't think they mesh on the offensive end. It's hard when the thing you do best...is literally the only thing Clint can do on the offensive end.

Yep but even then, I thought it was fools gold on how we were using JC. A winning team wouldn't use him like we were doing. 

He needed to be an offensive movement specialist, we spammed him as a 1/5 PnR threat. It was hell on bigs, especially when he had shooters like Ersan at the 4. Of course, our defense was the worst in the NBA

[Diesel]

I don't think JC is a problem.  I think our Use of JC is the problem.  6'9 235... you won't find a better size for what he does unless you can get your hands on Markkenan or Porzingis.   I think the problem is scheme.   i wouldn't move JC until I heard from Snyder to see what he planned on doing with the position.   If he wants to leave the position as a 3 and D like position, then yeah, I would move JC.   If he could come up with something that puts JC in the midrange, I would opt to keep JC.  In this instance, scheme means a lot. 

The thing we have seen in JC this season is him working through injury.   Finger and foot are issues that will effect your game.   I think lately, we have seen that we can start games going to JC and he responds.   Then Late in games, it's as if Nate Calls in plays and we totally forget about JC.   Or we revert to sending him back outside. 

One thing that the GOAT (Micheal Jordan) said about 3 point shooting and why he didn't partake.... He said, that when you become a guy who shoots threes, you find yourself hunting the three point shot... and eventually, you stop playing the inside game.   MJ said that he mastered the Inside game and it didn't make sense for him to invest into shooting threes because it would take away from what he mastered.  It wasn't his preferred style of play. 

Well, that's what we see with JC.   The more he stands on the 3 pt line, the more he is moved away from something that he does very well.   It's the failing of the modern game. 

 

 

 

[Final_quest]

17 minutes ago, ShooterSays said:

I'm not going to go and pull the stats, but it feels like JC's trajectory shifted when we got Clint. He was a walking 20/10 double-double and a border line all-star. Just don't think they mesh on the offensive end. It's hard when the thing you do best...is literally the only thing Clint can do on the offensive end.

I think he is being underutilized a bit, but why do you think the rest of the league doesn't seem to value him like a 20/10 player?  Teams have had multiple opportunities to make us an offer that says they want to make Collins a featured starter.  He doesn't draw that kind of interest.  

[Diesel]

5 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I think he is being underutilized a bit, but why do you think the rest of the league doesn't seem to value him like a 20/10 player?  Teams have had multiple opportunities to make us an offer that says they want to make Collins a featured starter.  He doesn't draw that kind of interest.  

Part of it is his salary.  The other part is our asking price. 

We can't just give away JC.   Getting a midround first for him is a moronic move.   I think that the rest of the league does see us misusing him and are waiting for us to get desperate because we've been stupid enough to leak that we're looking to move him.  If they felt that we valued him in any capacity, then they would meet our trade demand... no problem.   However, if they see that we're gung ho about trading him, they will keep offering that mid first rounder with protections.. so that we can give him away for nothing. 

It's clearcut.  Even our playing him and showcasing him doesn't change the years of "we want to trade him" from the front office.  

BUT..

Now that we have a new coach and a new front office, the message can be changed.. i.e. we can forecast him as an integral part of what we plan to do ... and not put him on the blocks.. and eventually, teams will ask about him. 

 

[NBASupes]

2 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I don't think JC is a problem.  I think our Use of JC is the problem.  6'9 235... you won't find a better size for what he does unless you can get your hands on Markkenan or Porzingis.   I think the problem is scheme.   i wouldn't move JC until I heard from Snyder to see what he planned on doing with the position.   If he wants to leave the position as a 3 and D like position, then yeah, I would move JC.   If he could come up with something that puts JC in the midrange, I would opt to keep JC.  In this instance, scheme means a lot. 

The thing we have seen in JC this season is him working through injury.   Finger and foot are issues that will effect your game.   I think lately, we have seen that we can start games going to JC and he responds.   Then Late in games, it's as if Nate Calls in plays and we totally forget about JC.   Or we revert to sending him back outside. 

One thing that the GOAT (Micheal Jordan) said about 3 point shooting and why he didn't partake.... He said, that when you become a guy who shoots threes, you find yourself hunting the three point shot... and eventually, you stop playing the inside game.   MJ said that he mastered the Inside game and it didn't make sense for him to invest into shooting threes because it would take away from what he mastered.  It wasn't his preferred style of play. 

Well, that's what we see with JC.   The more he stands on the 3 pt line, the more he is moved away from something that he does very well.   It's the failing of the modern game. 

 

 

 

I gonna be honest with you. I agree with none of this. 

How is he not the problem? Bro, he can't defend more than one position and when he goes against the better 4s, he gets cooked. That's something every team is tracking and watching. Make it make sense. 

As for his size, that's not that impressive for a 4. For a big wing, yes but that's not even ideal for a 4. You want a 6'9 245. You want more bulk. I honestly don't think JC been 235 since the PEDS. He's more around 225 or that's what he confirmed to the athletic when his boy was there. 

Lauri is 7ft and KP is 7'3. Those are optimal 4s size wise. Ideal 4 size is Horford, Okongwu, or AD, Randle. Optimal is Siakam, Giannis, KP, Lauri who's more like JJ where he's a 3 on D but a 4 on O. 

I don't see hand and foot issues this year. He looked fine to me and his metrics don't scream shooting flaws. I see rhythm flaws but that's directly due to Murray, not hand or foot issues. 

I have zero clue what you are talking about for MJ.

That's due to our spacing issues. Murray needs more space to operate. Sadly, JC and Trae got knocked for it. Whereas Murray knock is from Clint and his Anti gravity. 

11 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I think he is being underutilized a bit, but why do you think the rest of the league doesn't seem to value him like a 20/10 player?  Teams have had multiple opportunities to make us an offer that says they want to make Collins a featured starter.  He doesn't draw that kind of interest.  

Defense is why the NBA doesn't value him as much. Offensively, there are teams who know they can get a lot more out of JC than Atlanta is doing right now. 

[NBASupes]

2 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Part of it is his salary.  The other part is our asking price. 

We can't just give away JC.   Getting a midround first for him is a moronic move.   I think that the rest of the league does see us misusing him and are waiting for us to get desperate because we've been stupid enough to leak that we're looking to move him.  If they felt that we valued him in any capacity, then they would meet our trade demand... no problem.   However, if they see that we're gung ho about trading him, they will keep offering that mid first rounder with protections.. so that we can give him away for nothing. 

It's clearcut.  Even our playing him and showcasing him doesn't change the years of "we want to trade him" from the front office.  

BUT..

Now that we have a new coach and a new front office, the message can be changed.. i.e. we can forecast him as an integral part of what we plan to do ... and not put him on the blocks.. and eventually, teams will ask about him. 

 

His price tag isn't anywhere near this high. Based on the last I've gotten and even the most recent trade rumors, they just want rotational players in return, nothing like picks involved. 

His salary definitely is an issue and it was one that's on Atlanta. They could have matched an offer to JC but they wanted to overpay him as he was crying about taking the tag and being a UFA next year. Trae started bitchin and Atlanta got scared. They were just coming off of the ECF and didn't want the negative press.

2 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Part of it is his salary.  The other part is our asking price. 

We can't just give away JC.   Getting a midround first for him is a moronic move.   I think that the rest of the league does see us misusing him and are waiting for us to get desperate because we've been stupid enough to leak that we're looking to move him.  If they felt that we valued him in any capacity, then they would meet our trade demand... no problem.   However, if they see that we're gung ho about trading him, they will keep offering that mid first rounder with protections.. so that we can give him away for nothing. 

It's clearcut.  Even our playing him and showcasing him doesn't change the years of "we want to trade him" from the front office.  

BUT..

Now that we have a new coach and a new front office, the message can be changed.. i.e. we can forecast him as an integral part of what we plan to do ... and not put him on the blocks.. and eventually, teams will ask about him. 

 

His price tag isn't anywhere near this high. Based on the last I've gotten and even the most recent trade rumors, they just want rotational players in return, nothing like picks involved. 

His salary definitely is an issue and it was one that's on Atlanta. They could have matched an offer to JC but they wanted to overpay him as he was crying about taking the tag and being a UFA next year. Trae started bitchin and Atlanta got scared. They were just coming off of the ECF and didn't want the negative press.

[swanlee]

I'll give him a year under Snyder and his finger being fixed before I'd trade him, we have more issues and more players to sign before JC is an issue

[Diesel]

7 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

How is he not the problem? Bro, he can't defend more than one position and when he goes against the better 4s, he gets cooked. That's something every team is tracking and watching. Make it make sense. 

He's not the problem because if you take him off the court, we're still bad. 

 

We have a losing record without JC.  But it's more than that...   In the wins without JC... notice our 3 pt%...  In most of those cases, we shot the lights out.   Notice, we don't change what we do when JC isn't on the floor.   So that means that for us to win, we have to have great 3pt shooting.   JC is not the 3 pt% guy.. Markennan and Porzingis would be...  

BTW, it's laughable that you say that Markennan and Porzingis are optimal size 4s int his league.  Really?  7'3" optimal for the 4?

GTFOH.

 

 

[NBASupes]

3 minutes ago, Diesel said:

He's not the problem because if you take him off the court, we're still bad. 

 

We have a losing record without JC.  But it's more than that...   In the wins without JC... notice our 3 pt%...  In most of those cases, we shot the lights out.   Notice, we don't change what we do when JC isn't on the floor.   So that means that for us to win, we have to have great 3pt shooting.   JC is not the 3 pt% guy.. Markennan and Porzingis would be...  

BTW, it's laughable that you say that Markennan and Porzingis are optimal size 4s int his league.  Really?  7'3" optimal for the 4?

GTFOH.

 

 

I don't believe no one is saying JC sucks or is ass. I think I've stated that JC is actually a plus on defense and does help us as a team. 

But if you want to know why the demand isn't meeting the req. It's because teams want PFs who can defend multiple positions or they need to be offensive stars. Optimal size means at the max. Ideal size means what teams are looking for. 

I would love to have you on my pod. I would so much love to have you as a guest. 

Edited April 10, 2023 by NBASupes

[Diesel]

7 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Optimal size means at the max. Ideal size means what teams are looking for. 

Again, I don't have a problem with Definition.  I have a problem with your application of the definition. 

If he was ideal size, why has Markkanen been traded three times.   I would also argue that Porzingis is too big to play PF because he can't guard forwards.   Not ideal.

[Plainview1981]

On 4/10/2023 at 9:07 AM, ShooterSays said:

I'm not going to go and pull the stats, but it feels like JC's trajectory shifted when we got Clint. He was a walking 20/10 double-double and a border line all-star. Just don't think they mesh on the offensive end. It's hard when the thing you do best...is literally the only thing Clint can do on the offensive end.

Collins is a player that can put up big numbers on a bad team with not many options, but he will look more so so on a team that gets more talent. That has been my stance on him for years. And I don't feel wrong about having that view.

Collins was a C- at best this year.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Plainview1981

[JayBirdHawk]

Per Snyder:

Quote

Ahead of Game 5, Hawks coach Quin Snyder talked of the Hawks’ need for nimbleness in the playoffs when it came to rotations. Snyder warned that Hawks needed to make sure that the Celtics’ rotational adjustments did not affect theirs, and at times they would want to initiate the changes.

So, Snyder said he told Collins that he would sub in Hawks forward Saddiq Bey if the Celtics went with a smaller lineup. If he wanted to force the Celtics to play a bigger lineup, he would keep Collins in.

During the Hawks’ outing in Game 3, Snyder rolled with Bey for the entire fourth quarter, and Collins played only 21 minutes in the game. He shot only 3-of-7 from the floor and 2-of-6 from 3. Throughout all of this, though, Snyder has encouraged Collins to continue playing with confidence and to stay aggressive.

“To our guys’ credit, that’s not always easy,” Snyder said. “And from my standpoint, those are really hard decisions. And you never know, you don’t get them all right. You just do your best. And I think guys are supporting each other in those situations, that is what matters the most, particularly in this environment because it does become matchup oriented.”

 

John Collins’ sacrifice through playoff series pays off big in Game 5 win for Hawks (ajc.com)

[cam1218]

John is an enigma because of his leadership and things we don’t see on the court. Whatever happens, I’ll either miss the guy and actively root for his career or hope Quinn has a better plan for him if he stays. I think he is underutilized with what we run, but we aren’t changing our offense to make John Collins fit. Game 5 though, you see him step up and I could tell it was a “I’m not ending my Hawks career in Boston” moment.