Our starting five is probably intact.

High 5 · Post #21 » by **High 5** » Sat May 10, 2008 6:53 pm

Read my post earlier, I gave Bibby credit for opening up JJ a bit. (but it could have be a coincidence, we'll never know) We still played under .500 basketball, nothing to get excited about. I'm saying Bibby hurt us about as much as he helped us making him an average PG.

JoshB914 · Post #22 » by **JoshB914** » Sat May 10, 2008 7:01 pm

I disagree, we played .500 basketball when we were not a .500 team before Bibby came in. So while you're right it's nothing to get excited about, we did play much better with him. I think a lot of that had to do with his veteran presence, we were sorely lacking leadership all season and he gave it to us.

I can see why you call him an average PG, that's fine. But seeing people calling him a scrub and wanting Law and Salim to play over him seems a little far-fetched to me. Because Bibby helped us much more over 30 games than either of them did all year.

tontoz · Post #23 » by **tontoz** » Sat May 10, 2008 8:16 pm

But I felt he is better than Hinrich, Mo Will, Fish, and Alston. So agree to disagree there.

And you call us homers when we talk about Acie. Mr Pot meet Mr Kettle.

Try posting a Bibby for Hinrich trade on the general board. They would laugh in your face.

So while you're right it's nothing to get excited about, we did play much better with him.

We also played the Knicks 4 times after he got here. It wasn't like we were beating the Spurs. Our schedule was easy.

Look at his numbers against teams that actually played D. In the two games against Philly he was 5-24. Against the Spurs he was 1-11 with 5 assists and 4 turnovers. Against Boston..... ugh.

And in our big showdown game with Indy he was 0-8.

evildallas · Post #24 » by **evildallas** » Sat May 10, 2008 8:31 pm

It is tempting to see how good Bibby and Joe can play together over a full season. It is also tempting to hope that Bibby comes back fully healthy.

However, because Bibby is no longer playing at a level equal to his contract (I think that is a fair statement), it is best to see if his expiring contract can fetch us a very talented veteran from a team looking to rebuild. If it can't can't then we ride out his contract year and hope he plays unbelievable trying to secure another deal. At that point in time are we able to work out a deal equitable to both sides or does he walk?

Likewise it is also tempting to wait and see if Marvin reaches the next level. It would be sad if he blows up elsewhere. However, it is sensible to think ahead to the end of next season and the financial realities then. How much better must Marvin play (on both ends of the court) to receive an extension starting at a conservative $8M per year (a figure I picked based on his qualifying offer)? When you figure that Josh Smith will be under contract, Childress might be under contract, and new deals would be coming for Joe Johnson and Al Horford in the years to come, a long term commitment to Marvin Williams isn't a no brainer. Is he a core player or complimentary player? You also have to wonder is Marvin more valuable in trade right now or after another year if comes to that?

These aren't easy questions, but they need asked and answered this summer (whatever the answers may be). It is possible and sometimes correct to ride contracts completely out, but I would hope that it is done intentionally and not as the result of indecision.

EddyCurryJoshSmith0502 · Post #25 » by **EddyCurryJoshSmith0502** » Sat May 10, 2008 11:08 pm

CWell wrote:u don't put 14 mill guys on the bench but u do TRADE THEIR SORRY BUTT.We're only set at 3 starting spots if we resign Smoove.SG,PF and C is set.Acie needs to start at PG and we need to trade Marvin and find a new SF.

THANK YOU SMART POST MARVIN IS A MAJOR PROBLEM FOR THIS TEAM HE NEEDS TO BE DEALT.

MikeRice · Post #26 » by **MikeRice** » Sun May 11, 2008 2:28 am

Give Bibby a chance to lead this team for a full season... He's still only 29 years old, I wouldn't say he's quite washed up yet. Yes, he had a bad series against Boston there is no excuse for that but I feel like Marvin is the player that really kills us. I feel like we are a much better team when Childress is in for Marvin simply because Childress shoots a high percentage and doesn't need the ball to score. I also don't feel like Marv hustles and is to inconsistent once he gets down on himself. Granted I've never been a fan of Williams maybe I'm just biased but I feel like it's time for Marvin to go...

_BBIB_ · Post #27 » by **_BBIB_** » Sun May 11, 2008 9:54 pm

JoshB914 wrote:BIbby- above average PG
JJ- Great SG
Marvin- Average SF
Smoove- Good to great PF
Horford- Good C

Our starting 5 is fine. We aren't going to win a title with it, but if we can get some vet bench guys and utilize Rio and J-Rich more next season I think we can definetely win 45 games.

If we retain Josh Smith and Acie Law takes over at PG, we CAN win a title with our projected starting lineup of the future.

There isn't a player in our future lineup that doesn't at least have top 10 potential at their respective position

JoshB914 · Post #28 » by **JoshB914** » Sun May 11, 2008 9:57 pm

Well you think Law is going to be a lot better than I do. That's all there is to it.

gurpilo · Post #29 » by **gurpilo** » Sun May 11, 2008 10:53 pm

EddyCurryJoshSmith0502 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

THANK YOU SMART POST MARVIN IS A MAJOR PROBLEM FOR THIS TEAM HE NEEDS TO BE DEALT.

How can you say a 21 year old SF has finished his credit on a developing team. Marvin has the potential to become a star SF, he has all the tools. He has improve all the years and was having a good season until Bibby arrives, he has less plays now but will find the way to improve again this season.

And about the playoffs, here are some numbers:

Marvin: 11,4 ppg, 4 rpg shooting 0,42% at 28 mpg
Smith: 15,7, 6 rpg shooting 0,398% at 34 mpg
Bibby: 10,3 ppg, 3 apg, 3 rpg, 0,313% at 36 mpg

So Marvin killed us right? And Smith is our future star right? You want to compare Pierce and Garnett numbers?

If he would have had more minutes and half the balls Smith had, what would have been the numbers?

CWell · Post #30 » by **CWell** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:20 am

no Marvin does not have star potential.He does NOT have the tools and it's pretty obvious.He barely has starter potential.No star has ever looked like him.With his clumsy,uncoordinated non basketball playing azz.He just doesn't have it and I give every young player plenty of time but if they don't have the natural skills to play the sport it becomes obvious they won't become much.In a few years Stephen A. Smith will be talking about Marvin just how he did with Kwame Brown.He just cannot play the game of basketball.

conleyorbust · Post #31 » by **conleyorbust** » Mon May 12, 2008 2:54 pm

JoshB914 wrote:
3) The TEAM got drastically better with him on the roster, even when he wasn't playing well.

Being a good leader is subjective. He's a pretty quiet guy, I liked that he took the heat in Boston but he isn't a guy who is getting in people's faces if they are slacking. He has a very high bball IQ so he might be a "lead by example" type but he isn't the vocal leader we lacked.

The team didn't really play "drastically" better. We went from 22-28 to 15-17. Our schedule was softer too. I'd say we played a little better, he was certainly an upgrade but the fact that shouldn't make him immune to criticism.

I wouldn't mind moving him for an upgrade but if we kept him I'd hope that Acie got a little more burn.

High 5 · Post #32 » by **High 5** » Mon May 12, 2008 5:46 pm

CWell wrote:no Marvin does not have star potential.He does NOT have the tools and it's pretty obvious.He barely has starter potential.No star has ever looked like him.With his clumsy,uncoordinated non basketball playing azz.He just doesn't have it and I give every young player plenty of time but if they don't have the natural skills to play the sport it becomes obvious they won't become much.In a few years Stephen A. Smith will be talking about Marvin just how he did with Kwame Brown.He just cannot play the game of basketball.

He averaged like 18 points on 50% shooting for a good bit of the season. I'd say he can play basketball.

Post #33 » by **HMFFL** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:27 pm

CWell wrote:no Marvin does not have star potential.He does NOT have the tools and it's pretty obvious.He barely has starter potential.No star has ever looked like him.With his clumsy,uncoordinated non basketball playing azz.He just doesn't have it and I give every young player plenty of time but if they don't have the natural skills to play the sport it becomes obvious they won't become much.In a few years Stephen A. Smith will be talking about Marvin just how he did with Kwame Brown.He just cannot play the game of basketball.

Your a character. Marvin has had a very consistent FG% since he came into the league and it continues to improve. While I would like to see him do more on defense, averaging just over 5 boards per/game is a very respectable number, and considering he's playing beside Josh/Al. Not really sure how you can knock Marvin like this when he has so much potential and his game clearly gets better every year.

CWell · Post #34 » by **CWell** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:47 pm

HMFFL wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Your a character. Marvin has had a very consistent FG% since he came into the league and it continues to improve. While I would like to see him do more on defense, averaging just over 5 boards per/game is a very respectable number, and considering he's playing beside Josh/Al. Not really sure how you can knock Marvin like this when he has so much potential and his game clearly gets better every year.

I just don't see it.I'm the type that supports any young player while everyone bashes them but I just don't see it in Marvin.He don't got it.

JoshB914 · Post #35 » by **JoshB914** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:32 pm

Everyone loves that 15-17 record, we lost our last two games because no one gave a crap. We were a .500 basketball team with Bibby, we were six games under .500 without him. That is a pretty big difference.

And then why talk about the "easy" schedule? Have we forgotten the absolutely murderous stretch we went through after the All Star break when we first had Bibby? I don't think the schedule was any different at all, it was just a little unbalanced in that we went through an extremely tough part at the beginning and an easy part at the end.