RealGM

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=18799

The title of the article is "Hawks Need To Trade Marvin Williams"

To that I say "Amen." It's not a rumor piece, just an analysis of what Marvin does well and why he needs to go. I agree that it is time to tie picks or other young players around his neck to make him attractive enough to move for another key piece. If he is as popular in the clubhouse as the article says then it might also have the affect of waking up the rest of the roster.

Marvin has negative trade value

I don't know what the Hawks could fetch for Marvin... I can't imagine it would be too much. But I think Marvin has been playing great this month. He is averaging 12 points and 8 rebounds. Thats exactly what we need Marvin to do.

I don't think Marvin is Atlanta's problem. It is definitely the lack of a young point guard who can run and gun with the team.

i would be happy if we could trade Marvin for free. no team wants Marvin, Hawks would be lucky if they could trade Marvin for a second round pick.

the article is moronic, all it does is say what the Hawks should do, and it doesn't give a solution.

the only way the Hawks can trade Marvin is if they trade him for an asset that has a greater negative value, which means, a player with a bigger or longer contract.

Sund needs to trade Marvin and Zaza for cap space in 2013, so that the Hawks can make a play for Dwight, Deron, or CP

The Hawks will have plenty of capspace in 2013 even with Marvin, too bad Dwight, Deron and Paul would of signed new contracts the year before.

A Marvin for Mo Williams swap takes a year off Marvin's contract. Someone like Moon could easily be thrown in to give you a backup SF for the remainder of the season. I know the recent reports center on Sessions, but I think Mo is an underrated playmaker, as I think he could really help get your offense up the court. I also see you guys overpaying to acquire Sessions as he is young and on a reasonable contract.

mcfly1204 wrote:A Marvin for Mo Williams swap takes a year off Marvin's contract. Someone like Moon could easily be thrown in to give you a backup SF for the remainder of the season. I know the recent reports center on Sessions, but I think Mo is an underrated playmaker, as I think he could really help get your offense up the court. I also see you guys overpaying to acquire Sessions as he is young and on a reasonable contract.

Marvin and Zaza for Mo would be great.

Marvelous is not the problem. He scores when we let him, he rebounds, he goes hard to the basket when we give him the ball. he defends well .... his only problem is he doesn't have the ego to be a superstar. Maybe if he'd stayed in school and become "the man" for UNC, maybe if Woodson hadn't thrown him under the bus EVERY YEAR in public for not being Chris Paul (as if Woodson could have coached a young PG if we had given him one), maybe if the team had needed him to take more shots.....

This team needs a PG and a Center. Show me how to trade Marvelous for a worthwhile upgrade at one of those positions and I'll listen. But with Smoove's shot-blocking and recent offensive growth, we're more likely to trade HIM for a PG or a Center. Joe's a traditional SG who can defend his position well. Horford is a traditional PF who can defend his position well. Marvelous is the same thing: a traditional SF who can defend his position well. Notice a pattern? We'd have the makings of a great team defense if we could add a traditional Center who can defend his position well.

The reason I harp about "traditional" players is because the traditional way has the fewest holes, that's why it became the preferred way to play. If we could find a traditional Center, our defense would have no holes. If we could find a traditional PG, our offense would have no holes.

If we could find BOTH, we'd be yearly contenders.

Come on, Sund, Josh Smith (plus) for Andrew Bogut might work.
Josh Smith (plus) for Deron Williams might work.

Jamal Crawford for Dalembert or Kaman or Oden ... or Sessions (plus) or TJ Ford or .....

parson wrote:Marvelous is not the problem. He scores when we let him, he rebounds, he goes hard to the basket when we give him the ball. he defends well .... his only problem is he doesn't have the ego to be a superstar. Maybe if he'd stayed in school and become "the man" for UNC, maybe if Woodson hadn't thrown him under the bus EVERY YEAR in public for not being Chris Paul (as if Woodson could have coach a young PG if we gave him one), maybe if the team had needed him to take more shots.....

This team needs a PG and a Center. Show me how to trade Marvelous for a worthwhile upgrade at one of those positions and I'll listen. But with Smoove's shot-blocking and recent offensive growth, we're more likely to trade HIM for a PG or a Center. Joe's a traditional SG who can defend his position well. Horford is a traditional PF who can defend his position well. Marvelous is the same thing: a traditional SF who can defend his position well. Notice a pattern? We'd have the makings of a great team defense if we could add a traditional Center who can defend his position well.

The reason I harp about "traditional" players is because the traditional way has the fewest holes, that's why it became the preferred way to play. If we could find a traditional Center, our defense would have no holes. If we could find a traditional PG, our offense would have no holes.

If we could find BOTH, we'd be yearly contenders.

Come on, Sund, Josh Smith (plus) for Andrew Bogut might work.
Josh Smith (plus) for Deron Williams might work.

Jamal Crawford for Dalembert or Kaman or Oden ... or Sessions (plus) or TJ Ford or .....

he is also mentally weak, it is very common for him to get into slumps. he is not physical and physically weak, for some one who is taller and can jump higher than Horford, he gets blocked very easily. and Marvin is not clutch.

Harry10 wrote:... and Marvin is not clutch.

What in the world does that mean?

For one thing, when do we ever give him the ball and let him BE clutch? I remember the BOS 3pter last year but that's about the only time we put the ball in his hands at the end of the game.

if we had a clear up grade at the point and center position marvin would be fine as a starting SF. so trading Smoove could be a good Idea. but it would have to be a clear upgrade. Bogut and Sessions or D. Willams and Dalembert. upgrades like that if we were to trade Smoove then you have to do it, or we should do it. so a roster like

D. williams/Bibby
JJ/JC1
Marvin/Wilkens
Horford/Powell
Dalembert/ZAZA


or

Sessions/Bibby
JJ/JC1
Marvin/Wilkens
Horford/Powell
Bogut/ZAZA

would be worth moving Josh Smith. or keep Smooth and try to move draft picks and anyone else but JJ,JC1,Horford,Smoove for someone like Sessions or Nash and Dalembert or Haywood I even like Jason Thompson from the kings.

Let me state one more time that the type of PG and C that you want to acquire aren't available for the assets we have. Elite PGs and Cs are too hard to find and that means you can't trade for them. The exception is when you have an aging vet or a mental case (Kidd, Marbury, Francis, etc). Even then you normally have to have a young serviceable PG to include in the package as well. We don't have that. Either F spot is a much easier to fill and therefore not as valuable in a trade. If you can't get an elite PG or C, then the hole in the lineup created by trading Josh Smith is greater than what you get in return.

The article doesn't need to engage in what if scenarios because it such speculative details detract from the key argument. The argument it makes is that for the starting lineup to be its best, Marvin needs to go to the bench and since he didn't seem to handle that well it was best to move him for whatever upgrade is possible at the weak positions in the lineup which are PG and C. It acknowledges that due to his contract that Marvin isn't as a valuable in trades as he might otherwise be given his physical gifts. It even says bundling picks or young players with him to make a more attractive offer. It may be galling to have to add another 1st rounder to a guy who was drafted #2 overall, but that might be the reality.

Portland fan here. How about Williams for Joel Pryzbilla's expiring contract?

tester551 wrote:Portland fan here. How about Williams for Joel Pryzbilla's expiring contract?

You want another SF when you already have Batum and Matthews ?
Maybe Matthews can play SG, and Marvin PF, but I did not think it would fit.

The problem is that we don't need another expiring, we already have Crawford to stay under the Tax for next year (if the CBA doesn't change a lot or is extended for one year).
It would put us at 57M for next year, so certainly less than the MLE under the salary cap.
The only reason would be to keep Crawford but I am not sure it would be the best thing for ATL.
If the LT start at 70m or more, we could try 7M for Crawford, and a MLE player.

I think I would keep Marvin as a part of a bigger trade instead of dumping him for expiring.
And even if his value is not high, I still think that in a better situation than in ATL, he can produce way more. He's one of few high picks that came in a team where you don't get 1st of 2nd option, so never really have a chance to show all of his potential (except some games where one or two starters were injured, and he shows very good thing in almost each games like that.

IMO, he's worth more than an expiring, unless we could get enough cap space to leave Marvin and Crawford, and sign a 15M player, which is not the case here.

tester551 wrote:Portland fan here. How about Williams for Joel Pryzbilla's expiring contract?

DEAL!!!!