Is Marvin available?

Blazinaway · Post #1 » by **Blazinaway** » Sun Dec 6, 2009 8:14 pm

Hey guys PORTLAND could use a big that can play some SF/PF with Oden now out and all our other injuries, it seems Marvin is out of favor? How about a package centering on Rudy Fernandez and Outlaw (injured) and we get Marvin back?

raleigh · Post #2 » by **raleigh** » Sun Dec 6, 2009 10:38 pm

I was thinking about a Webster/Joel P. swap for Marvin/Zaza before Oden's injury.

Atlanta would want to move Marvin to get bigger, not smaller.

johnny878 · Post #3 » by **johnny878** » Mon Dec 7, 2009 1:55 am

marvin has been garbage this season.

parson · Post #4 » by **parson** » Mon Dec 7, 2009 4:03 am

If any player on our team is deferring to his teammates for the good of the team, it's Marvelous. Whenever we've had a player out, he's come up big for us. Against HOU, when Smoove had foul trouble and Joe's was missing, MW scored 29. However, as soon as Joe decided to dominate the ball in the late stages, Marvelous stopped shooting. A lesser man would've screamed.

Matter-of-fact, the last 3 times Smoove's been out (with either foul trouble or ejection), Marvelous has scored 29, 20 and, last Saturday, posted 15 rebounds. Last season, when Joe was out was when Marvin did his scoring. Whenever one of the other guys is out, he comes up big.

Maybe he's not selfish enough, but whose shots would you take away?

raleigh · Post #5 » by **raleigh** » Mon Dec 7, 2009 2:06 pm

Tayshaun Prince and Shane Battier are the only SF's in the NBA with as many minutes/game as Marvin and lower usage rates.

azuresou1 · Post #6 » by **azuresou1** » Mon Dec 7, 2009 2:22 pm

I don't know how people can be mad at Marvelous when he's given up more than everyone else on the team to make the team successful. You realize that if he was on some garbage team like Sacramento, he'd be averaging, like, 19/7/3 right? And that although we gave him a very nice contract, it's not some albatross of a contract when you look around the league.

theatlfan · Post #7 » by **theatlfan** » Tue Dec 8, 2009 7:02 am

mrhonline wrote:Atlanta would want to move Marvin to get bigger, not smaller.

+1

Rocketsftw · Post #8 » by **Rocketsftw** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:05 pm

theatlfan wrote:
mrhonline wrote:Atlanta would want to move Marvin to get bigger, not smaller.
+1

I always thought Marvin would really thrive with Steve Nash and the Suns. With the Hawks he really is just a good player forced to play average because of Woody's system. Marvin would be a great piece on the Suns, I thought we should have traded him to the them on his draft night.

Horford and Marvin for Stoudemire and Dudley I would do in a heartbeat. Stoudemire would dominate in the East and give us someone to go against Howard the next few seasons. Dudley would basically fill Marvin's role because Woody would use him the exact same way despite being less talented. I look at Dudley similiar to a Stacey Augmon type player.

C-Stoudemire
PF-Smith
SF-Dudley/
SG-JJ/Crawford
PG-Bibby/Teague

Now that team has a serious chance to beat Orlando

Post #9 » by **dms269** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 1:11 pm

Rocketsftw wrote:
theatlfan wrote:
mrhonline wrote:Atlanta would want to move Marvin to get bigger, not smaller.
+1

I always thought Marvin would really thrive with Steve Nash and the Suns. With the Hawks he really is just a good player forced to play average because of Woody's system. Marvin would be a great piece on the Suns, I thought we should have traded him to the them on his draft night.

Horford and Marvin for Stoudemire and Dudley I would do in a heartbeat. Stoudemire would dominate in the East and give us someone to go against Howard the next few seasons. Dudley would basically fill Marvin's role because Woody would use him the exact same way despite being less talented.

C-Stoudemire
PF-Smith
SF-Dudley/
SG-JJ/Crawford
PG-Bibby/Teague

Now that team has a serious chance to beat Orlando

Not unless Amare agrees to an extension before hand.

Even then I am not sure. Amare really isn't a C. Plus Horford is showing great signs of being a very good player. Amare's defense is worrisome as well.

parson · Post #10 » by **parson** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:51 pm

I dunno about all this. Horford would score MORE with Nash and his other positives would really shine. Stoudemire would score LESS with our "offensive scheme" and then his other negatives would really glare. Not saying Horford's better, just that he'd look much, much better with a PG who set him up and Stoudemire would be reduced to playing the game the way Smoove does now - from the perimeter in, creating for himself.

Our defense would be worse, our scoring wouldn't be much better and I don't think Stoudemire's ego could take the lack of inlet passes or pick-&-rolls.

We obviously have chemistry right now. Why ruin it?

parson · Post #11 » by **parson** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:37 pm

I didn't address the Marvelous-for-Dudley aspect because, well, ... duh.