Starting at SMALL FORWARD...JOSH SMITH

They Call Me Cash · Post #1 » by **They Call Me Cash** » Wed May 7, 2008 8:31 pm

What's so good about Marvin that he deserves to start at SF over Josh Smith.. before you answer.. I know the reasoning behind it, but I'm talking about the 2008-2009 Season..

Josh does everything better than Marvin except knock down a consistent jumper (which he improves every year). I hope we bring in a new HC that sees this. If this were our lineup, we would be more than competitive:

PG: M. Bimbo/ Acie
SG: JJ/ Chills
SF: Josh/ Marvin
PF: Al/ Solo
C: ???(Kwame/Diop?)/Zaza

I'm not sure if all that would work under the cap, but am I the only that would rather go in this direction instead of trading away our young stars for who knows what.. Maybe we get rid of Bibby..

NDaATL · Post #2 » by **NDaATL** » Wed May 7, 2008 8:39 pm

Our team would be worse. We'd be the worst shooting team in the league by far and teams would continue to pack the lane, double JJ and force us to make open jumpers which we can't do.

And this is coming from probably the biggest Marvin hater on this board. Trading Marvin is what we need to do, and get a defending 3pt shooter. If we keep Smith and Horford, they have to play as the PF/C because we HAVE to be able to shoot. Otherwise Smith needs to go.

They Call Me Cash · Post #3 » by **They Call Me Cash** » Wed May 7, 2008 9:00 pm

I'm being optimistic in the sense of Josh Smith developing a consistent jumper and a much better 3-ball this offseason.. it's not like it can't happen..

I'm with you tho, I like him as the PF and Horford as the C.. this thread was really directed at the Horford fanatics that feel he should be starting at PF and think we should trade Smith.

conleyorbust · Post #4 » by **conleyorbust** » Wed May 7, 2008 9:12 pm

Besides the "fit" problems, our team would be worse because Kwame/Diop aren't as good players as Marv is and moving Horford to PF with a no offense player moving into center would only help Horford on D IF he does indeed guard PFs more effectively than he guards Cs.

Anyway, if you want to make Smith a SF, for now the best thing you can do is hope that he can improve his jumper and play a guy with a good shot at center (Andersen/Okur type of guy). That way you can let Smith and Horford do damage in the post and have the spacing to do so consistently.

JoshB914 · Post #5 » by **JoshB914** » Wed May 7, 2008 9:43 pm

Josh Smith is a very good PF in this league already. Why would we want to move him to a position where he's less effective?

conleyorbust · Post #6 » by **conleyorbust** » Wed May 7, 2008 10:04 pm

JoshB914 wrote:Josh Smith is a very good PF in this league already. Why would we want to move him to a position where he's less effective?

People are under the impression that Horford would double his scoring average at PF because in the NBA you have to guard the guy who has the same titular position as you...

As I've pointed out, unless you have a center who is bigger and more of a post threat than Horford, he will still be guarded by centers a la Carlos Boozer, Al Jefferson, and Amare Stoudemire in his breakout year.

JoshB914 · Post #7 » by **JoshB914** » Wed May 7, 2008 10:05 pm

we lose far more moving Smoove to SF than we gain from moving Al to PF. We just need a nice backup C in here so we can move Al to the 4 and Smoove to the 3 when the matchups are in our favor.

conleyorbust · Post #8 » by **conleyorbust** » Wed May 7, 2008 10:10 pm

JoshB914 wrote:we lose far more moving Smoove to SF than we gain from moving Al to PF. We just need a nice backup C in here so we can move Al to the 4 and Smoove to the 3 when the matchups are in our favor.

indeed

LL Cool Scott · Post #9 » by **LL Cool Scott** » Wed May 7, 2008 10:17 pm

Don't get too caught up in position names. We basically play with 4 perimeter players and 1 post player offensively. I think we'd be better off with another post player to take some defensive/rebounding burden off Horford. Marvin might thrive off the bench anyway, maybe it would take some pressure off him to live up to all his hype and expectations. We clearly need another post player for defensive rebounding, and if moving Marvin to the bench or trading him is the answer - I'm all for it.

td00 · Post #10 » by **td00** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:14 am

LL Cool Scott wrote:Don't get too caught up in position names. We basically play with 4 perimeter players and 1 post player offensively. I think we'd be better off with another post player to take some defensive/rebounding burden off Horford. Marvin might thrive off the bench anyway, maybe it would take some pressure off him to live up to all his hype and expectations. We clearly need another post player for defensive rebounding, and if moving Marvin to the bench or trading him is the answer - I'm all for it.

IMO LL, Marvin isn't going to be coming off the bench based alone on his draft slot. He isn't giving way to anyone unless Smoove takes his place.
Other than that, we will have to trade him to satisfy him if he doesn't start here. This is a prediction going forward.

markdeez33 · Post #11 » by **markdeez33** » Thu May 8, 2008 5:48 am

I would've loved to see the Kings add another big man in the Bibby trade!

I know the Hawks didn't want to take on another albatross contract, but Brad Miller would've looked so nice in a Hawks uniform in my opinion. He can hit the open J and he's a heck of a player. Hell I would've loved to have seen Mikki Moore or even Justin Williams, the Hawks need another big man.

tbhawksfan · Post #12 » by **tbhawksfan** » Thu May 8, 2008 7:33 am

I really hope we can bring in Andersen. I think he'd fit well.

He becomes the first big off the bench and Horford and Smoove can slide down and we're big.

If we still have the MLE, I'd go for a back up defensive BIG also.

conleyorbust · Post #13 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:07 pm

LL Cool Scott wrote:Don't get too caught up in position names. We basically play with 4 perimeter players and 1 post player offensively. I think we'd be better off with another post player to take some defensive/rebounding burden off Horford. Marvin might thrive off the bench anyway, maybe it would take some pressure off him to live up to all his hype and expectations. We clearly need another post player for defensive rebounding, and if moving Marvin to the bench or trading him is the answer - I'm all for it.

Actually Smith and Horford are above average defensive rebounders for their positions (PF and C respectively). The problem is that our backup bigs are Zaza Pachulia who is a solid offensive rebounder but a very weak defensive rebounder, and Marvin Williams who is an adequate defensive rebounder for a small forward but a very weak one for a power forward.

Add in there that our backup SF, Childress is one of the 5 worst defensive rebounders for his position in the league and you can see why we aren't a great defensive rebounding team.

The NBA is built on matchup problems and once Horford starts playing more aggressively on offense we should have matchup problems at both frontcourt positions because Josh can beat any PF off the dribble from the high post (ask KG) and Horford should be able to do the same. Since they both can defend their positions, we should leave them as the starting frontcourt.

NDaATL · Post #14 » by **NDaATL** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:13 pm

conleyorbust wrote:Add in there that our backup SF, Childress is one of the 5 worst defensive rebounders for his position in the league and you can see why we aren't a great defensive rebounding team.

Childress doesn't spend all of his time at SF though, he plays a lot of PG/SG as well. That can affect rebounding. Regardless, we need to rebound better though.

conleyorbust · Post #15 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:39 pm

NDaATL wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Childress doesn't spend all of his time at SF though, he plays a lot of PG/SG as well. That can affect rebounding. Regardless, we need to rebound better though.

Thats true, Chil's defensive rebounding is around the top 20 for point guards but bottome 1/3 for shooting guards right above Joe Johnson.

Bibby had a great defensive rebound rate but that was offset by Law who had a really bad one.

My point is that we have more than adequate defensive rebounding in our starting frontcourt. However we probably have the worst defensive rebounding in the league out of our backup bigs and we don't get enough out of the rest of the roster to make up for that.

We do have a top offensive rebound rate and credit for that goes largely to Childress who is top 5 among SFs for offensive rebound rate and plays waaaaaaaaaay more minutes than any of the guys above him.

It would be nice if he were a middle of the pack rebounder in both directions instead of a top 5 offensive - bottom 5 defensive rebounder.

tontoz · Post #16 » by **tontoz** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:46 pm

Childress spends most of his time at sf.

http://www.82games.com/0708/07ATL8C.HTM

If he spent much time at pg he would probably average more than 1.5 assists per game.

NDaATL · Post #17 » by **NDaATL** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:49 pm

tontoz wrote:Childress spends most of his time at sf.

http://www.82games.com/0708/07ATL8C.HTM

If he spent much time at pg he would probably average more than 1.5 assists per game.

Chill does spend most of his time at SF, but I think he spends more time than the 82games stats suggest on the site at the other 2. Those 82games position stats are very often wrong, for the 06-07 season they have Marvin spending most of his time at PF, with Smith mostly SF. There are many other examples that I've seen browsing through the site.

conleyorbust · Post #18 » by **conleyorbust** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:59 pm

NDaATL wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Chill does spend most of his time at SF, but I think he spends more time than the 82games stats suggest on the site at the other 2. Those 82games position stats are very often wrong, for the 06-07 season they have Marvin spending most of his time at PF, with Smith mostly SF. There are many other examples that I've seen browsing through the site.

The point I was making was that our starting frontcourt is more than adequate in terms of defensive rebounding.

As far as Childress and his defensive rebounding deficiences. He's 6'8 with long arms and he gets fewer defensive rebounds per game than Mike Bibby. I don't think people realize that Chil plays half an hour every night and manages only 2.6 defensive rebounds.

NDaATL · Post #19 » by **NDaATL** » Thu May 8, 2008 3:14 pm

conleyorbust wrote:The point I was making was that our starting frontcourt is more than adequate in terms of defensive rebounding.

They are, but they have to devote themselves to it all the time. The Celtics POUNDED us on the glass at home. Rondo/Perkins/KG/Powe got many offensive rebounds against us in Boston it was terrible. We had many letdown games this season with rebounding, very inconsistent. Smith is the X-factor, some games he'd pull in 10+ then the next game he'd have 4 rebounds.

As far as Childress and his defensive rebounding deficiences. He's 6'8 with long arms and he gets fewer defensive rebounds per game than Mike Bibby. I don't think people realize that Chil plays half an hour every night and manages only 2.6 defensive rebounds.

I agree, he should definitely be better, I was just pointing that out

.

tontoz · Post #20 » by **tontoz** » Thu May 8, 2008 3:21 pm

NDaATL wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Chill does spend most of his time at SF, but I think he spends more time than the 82games stats suggest on the site at the other 2. Those 82games position stats are very often wrong, for the 06-07 season they have Marvin spending most of his time at PF, with Smith mostly SF. There are many other examples that I've seen browsing through the site.

Childress' assist numbers argue that he doesn't spend much time at the point. And considering our starting 2 is second in the league in minutes played that doesn't leave much time at the 2 for Childress.