RealGM

I Know we been to the Playoffs with Bibby at PG,But I think our Best strength is Crawford at the 1 and Bibby backing him up Because Crawford can pass and create and we focus on Offense anyway so why not have 2 of the Best offensive players (Joe,Crawford)on the court at the same time thats 20ppg each.I watched Ben gordon at Detroit,They use him the same as Crawford but why waste that instant offense on the Bench in the beginning of games?

PG:CRAWFORD 19PPG,5APG
SG:JOHNSON 21PPG,4RPG
SF:WILLIAMS 9PPG,5RPG
PF;SMITH 14PPG,6RPG
C:HORFORD 11PPG,11RPG

agree..... espeically as good as Crawford's PG skills have been thus far. he is clearly more willing to play defense and pass than Bibby

The question is how effective would our second unit now be with two 6'1" players and then the 6'5" Mo Evans forming the 1,2 and 3

Bibby
johnson
Williams
smith
horford

Crawford is not a pg

I think this is a very weak analysis. If you think that Crawford is good because he can ''pass and create'', and that you actually think that he can do that better than Bibby, you're dead wrong. His strength is to score. Period. We traded for him for his scoring abilities, not his pg abilities. Because those are almost nonexistent in Crawford. Just because you dish a few assists, does not mean you make you team better. On the opposite, Bibby might not fill the stat sheet like he used to do, but he DOES make everyone else on this team better. Actually, Smoove said himself earlier this month (I think). He said that it's really when Bibby arrived that all the players clicked together.

Oh, and for the Gordon argument? Is he's playing off the bench, it's actually because Detroit wants to match his scoring abilities with the team's second unit to make him more efficient. Same goes for Crawford here.

mr_grabb wrote:I think this is a very weak analysis. If you think that Crawford is good because he can ''pass and create'', and that you actually think that he can do that better than Bibby, you're dead wrong. His strength is to score. Period. We traded for him for his scoring abilities, not his pg abilities. Because those are almost nonexistent in Crawford. Just because you dish a few assists, does not mean you make you team better. On the opposite, Bibby might not fill the stat sheet like he used to do, but he DOES make everyone else on this team better. Actually, Smoove said himself earlier this month (I think). He said that it's really when Bibby arrived that all the players clicked together.

Oh, and for the Gordon argument? Is he's playing off the bench, it's actually because Detroit wants to match his scoring abilities with the team's second unit to make him more efficient. Same goes for Crawford here.

have you even been watching preseason???

MaceCase wrote:The question is how effective would our second unit now be with two 6'1" players and then the 6'5" Mo Evans forming the 1,2 and 3

i'm pretty sure it is going to be a 8-9 man rotation.... not 10. if Woody does his job, he will have a combination of Joe/Marvin, Joe/Jamal, Jamal/Marvin on the floor at all times.

who starts the game and who ends the game? just like with Flip ending most games last year, the last five minutes is pretty much going to be Al/Josh/Marv/Joe/Jam

Harry10 wrote:

mr_grabb wrote:I think this is a very weak analysis. If you think that Crawford is good because he can ''pass and create'', and that you actually think that he can do that better than Bibby, you're dead wrong. His strength is to score. Period. We traded for him for his scoring abilities, not his pg abilities. Because those are almost nonexistent in Crawford. Just because you dish a few assists, does not mean you make you team better. On the opposite, Bibby might not fill the stat sheet like he used to do, but he DOES make everyone else on this team better. Actually, Smoove said himself earlier this month (I think). He said that it's really when Bibby arrived that all the players clicked together.

Oh, and for the Gordon argument? Is he's playing off the bench, it's actually because Detroit wants to match his scoring abilities with the team's second unit to make him more efficient. Same goes for Crawford here.

have you even been watching preseason???

Who cares about preseason? Unless you were at a preseason game the only thing to go off of is box scores and we all know how overrated pure stats can be.

Crawford doesn't have bad passing skills, but his most effective attribute is his scoring, so having him next to Joe doesn't make us a better team all the time. Bibby is a guy that runs our offense well, distributes, and knocks down open shots. There will be plenty of times where his services will be needed more than Craw's and I don't think there is a clear cut "better player" between the two in terms of making us better.

This team is far better with Bibby on the floor than without him. That's not even debatable. How anyone could follow this team pre-Bibby until now and think that we're better off with him on the bench....is just beyond comprehension.

The real question is who will be on the floor in the last 2 minutes of close games. I believe our crunchtime 5 will be Bibby, Johnson, Crawford, Smith and Horford.

pretty sure Sund and "Tiger" Woodson know the same thing. MIke is the glue.

JoshB914 wrote:

Harry10 wrote:

mr_grabb wrote:I think this is a very weak analysis. If you think that Crawford is good because he can ''pass and create'', and that you actually think that he can do that better than Bibby, you're dead wrong. His strength is to score. Period. We traded for him for his scoring abilities, not his pg abilities. Because those are almost nonexistent in Crawford. Just because you dish a few assists, does not mean you make you team better. On the opposite, Bibby might not fill the stat sheet like he used to do, but he DOES make everyone else on this team better. Actually, Smoove said himself earlier this month (I think). He said that it's really when Bibby arrived that all the players clicked together.

Oh, and for the Gordon argument? Is he's playing off the bench, it's actually because Detroit wants to match his scoring abilities with the team's second unit to make him more efficient. Same goes for Crawford here.

have you even been watching preseason???

Who cares about preseason? Unless you were at a preseason game the only thing to go off of is box scores and we all know how overrated pure stats can be.

Crawford doesn't have bad passing skills, but his most effective attribute is his scoring, so having him next to Joe doesn't make us a better team all the time. Bibby is a guy that runs our offense well, distributes, and knocks down open shots. There will be plenty of times where his services will be needed more than Craw's and I don't think there is a clear cut "better player" between the two in terms of making us better.

.... did you even watch today's game???

Harry...what was the point of singling out that particular part of his post?

^^^ Haha. I don't even know what he is trying to say. But I guess that is normal.

Bibby's not a bad PG and he's done well for us, but he's not making "everyone else on this team better." Not by a long shot. Look at the shots he takes - and the shots Joe takes - and compare them to the # of shots that Smoove, Horford and Marvelous are taking. For every one nice pass Bibby makes to our frontcourt there're 5 times he and Joe play catch between themselves and end up with one of them taking a jump shot.

We don't NEED Bibby: we simply need a good player in his spot. Anthony Johnson, for crying out loud, looked good for us - when his health allowed. Maybe y'all remember his good games.

I'd love to see Crawford at the point -- to see how our fastbreak could look. And while Crawford's not known for his defense, I'd like to see how a longer PG would make our defense look. I'd also like to see how Woodson's isolation-based offense would look with Crawford taking the ball one-on-one and then kicking out to Joe. I think that'd actually run better than Joe doing the dribbling and Bibby spotting up.

^^^ I agree that Bibby is replaceable. But how is he not making the team better? Our record with him speaks for itself.

Josh, the claim I was disputing was that Bibby was making "everyone else on this team better." You're arguing he makes the team's record better. I believe that ANY decent player would do that for us, considering we were playing substandard players at PG before Bibby.

But this is the 3rd season of Bibby and I've yet to see him make ONE player better. Our frontcourt is wonderfully talented but he's not getting the ball to any of them. The lack of passes into Horford, especially, bothers me, but Marvin's not getting much, either. Smoove gets his shots by going out and taking the ball.

Our offense reminds me of a high school all-star game, where the guards take all the shots, trying to impress everyone, and the big men get nothing. Unless you want to blame Woodson entirely for that, Bibby gets some of the blame. He's supposed to be the PG, after all.

I'm not sure but it is with JC on the court.

The question in my opinion (spurs fan but hawks season tix holder) is who will sit Bibby or Marvin.

During the playoffs I watched Joe get doubled and when he passed to Bibby, Bibby could not capitalize enuf on gettting left open or having a man run at him. Bibby has very little game (game is the ability to create scoring oportunities for yourself or others) He really only has a jumpshot.

Very often Bibby was/is chased off his shot and has nothing off the dribble and Marvin/Mo had very little game either if the first pass went to them. Either way Josh usually wound up taking the shot and getting criticized


Crawford changes all that because NO ONE can stay in front of him. As a result the double teaming of Joe will be much less effective because Joe passing out of a double with JC on the court will lead to a good shot always.

With Crawford on the bench Woody can determine who is the best 5 for that night.

parson wrote:Josh, the claim I was disputing was that Bibby was making "everyone else on this team better." You're arguing he makes the team's record better. I believe that ANY decent player would do that for us, considering we were playing substandard players at PG before Bibby.

.

Bibby has never been that type of PG and is even farther from it now.
The Hawks best PG is JC and he's not a real playmaker but his ability to penetrate and break defenders down coupled with have more talent around him than ever before makes him an effective contributor from the PG position.

The passes JC throws Bibby could make if he was able to get to the spot, but he can't.

wizardg wrote:

parson wrote:Josh, the claim I was disputing was that Bibby was making "everyone else on this team better." You're arguing he makes the team's record better. I believe that ANY decent player would do that for us, considering we were playing substandard players at PG before Bibby.

.

Bibby has never been that type of PG and is even farther from it now.
The Hawks best PG is JC and he's not a real playmaker but his ability to penetrate and break defenders down coupled with have more talent around him than ever before makes him an effective contributor from the PG position.

The passes JC throws Bibby could make if he was able to get to the spot, but he can't.

this is exactly what i have been saying over a year ago, when ever lame nba fan was blaming Jamal for being on a bad team.