$20M for Jarrett Jack

[Harry10]

He's restricted. If he signed that offer sheet I am fairly certain that the Pacers match in a heartbeat.

I disagree

[KFlight]

Yes I would give Jack that in a heartbeat but I don't think that's enough to get him.

It was enough for Toronto to get him

[evildallas]

I was wrong. Evidently, the Pacers didn't think as highly of Jack as original thought.

[HoopsGuru25]

That sucks. I trust Sund but I would have liked to seen the Hawks show more interest in a younger pg who could provide a little more dribble penetration and defense if we were going to be looking at a 3+ year deal. I figured that there was no way that you could get Jack or Sessions w/o going above the MLE but I was wrong. Hopefully Bibby doesn't decline as much as my gut feeling tells me he will.

[HoopsGuru25]

I think Sund made his 1st mistake with the Hawks by not testing the market when it came to free agent point guards.

[HMFFL]

I think Sund made his 1st mistake with the Hawks by not testing the market when it came to free agent point guards.

When we signed Mike Bibby I wanted the final year of his contract to be a team option, so that was a mistake by Rick Sund, and Kevin Pritchard was wise enough to make the final year of Andre Miller's contract a team option.

Dealing with $5,564,767 and $6,217,617 for the next two seasons is really going to suck.

[HoopsGuru25]

I knew Bibby had nothing left defensively...but even I'm surprised by how bad he's been this season. He's not really old enough for him to be consistently useless against guys like Arroyo,Sergio,and Ronnie Price. Jason Williams came out of RETIREMENT and looks like he has more left in the tank than Bibby.

[HoopsGuru25]

I also think people who don't value a player because he"s not a "true" point guard(like earlier in this very thread)need to catch up with the times. I'll take Aaron Brooks over guys who take care of the ball(as if it's easy to commit turnovers when you never attack the basket)like Duhon and the 2010 version of Bibby.

[D21]

I am disappointed by Bibby this season, but not as much as you.
Lots of time, when ATL is loosing, it happen when Bibby is not on the floor, even when he's making "bad stats" game. That should show a more natural game with him, more than Crawford.

If Bibby poor personnal performance was the reason of ATL losses this season, he would certainly get lesser +/- than the other players in this games, and not be so much high in season +/- with Horford and Smith only being better.
And he's even first if you look at +/- per minute.

For what the +/- is worth, these numbers can't match the a guy responsible of the main problem in a team.

I will stay with my opinion on Bibby: he's a problem defensively, but as long as you defend as a team, it can be compensated by the other 4 players, and it can be effective as long as Bibby can bring offensive advantage higher than the loss in defense.
On his performance, I would have give him nearly the same responsabilities than last season, even with less minutes, but I would have give less to Crawford.

The guy plays well, has some clutch and good options, but the team is too much depending on his performance.

One more stat: http://www.82games.com/0910/0910ATL.HTM
Yes, Bibby produces less than the opposite PG ( 13.9 against 17.4), but gets a +10.8 on/off the court
Crawford production: 20.3 and 17.2 for opposite guy, but on/off the court : -3.1

And it's not due to the fact that he's coming from the bench because he spends most of his time playing with starters.
We are blinded by some of his individual games, bringing some wins.

[HoopsGuru25]

You're just showing why plus/minus is a flawed stat. This is just an observation-but Bibby never comes out the game after Joe in the 1st quarter or comes back in 2nd quarter before Joe...why wouldn't his plus/minus numbers be good?

[D21]

You're just showing why plus/minus is a flawed stat. This is just an observation-but Bibby never comes out the game after Joe in the 1st quarter or comes back in 2nd quarter before Joe...why wouldn't his plus/minus numbers be good?

I am not saying the opposite, but it just shows that Bibby+Joe are playing well together (with 3 other guys ).

You are taking one POV from this situation, but since Bibby is playing less than Joe, and that Joe seems to not get a better +/- without Bibby, how can you conclude that the good +/- of Bibby is only due to that fact that he played essentially with Joe, with Joe having a lower +/- than Bibby ?

Your point is just an example of the different interpretation we can make with this sensible stat.

There is one thing I want to show you:
Bibby and Joe played together 1623min, for a +304 +/-.
Joe played a total of 2400min, for a +318 +/-
Bibby played a total of 1734min, for a +333 +/-

Results:
Bibby without Joe gets +29pts in only 111min.
Joe without Bibby gets +14pts in 777min.

Conclusion:
Bibby can play with the 4 other guys and the team continues to dominate the opposite team.
Joe, when playing with anybody but Bibby, wins only 14pts in 777min.
And it looks to me like something I feel when watching the game, even if I don't like the bad games Bibby has this year.
Yes, you can say that these 111min of Bibby without Joe are played with the best players, while Joe playing more, is playing with the bench guys, but it doesn't change the fact that when Bibby is on the court, the team performs at its best in general.

Don't get me wrong, Bibby is not the best player of this team, it's just that guys like Josh, Al or Joe performs at their best for the team when playing with him.
One more time, I am disappointed with the performance of Bibby, because he could bring more, but there is some more important question, like how to use Zaza or even Evans since Crawford is here, because this is the real problem, not Bibby.
Crawford needs to many balls to perform, and it kills our bench, and this why so many times, we loose if he doesn't make a good personal game. The dependency is now on Crawford, once it was on Joe.
And we can add the fact that Marvin was underperforming, but starts to shows some good games.
Definitely, Bibby is not the main problem, he brings less than before, but it's not what has to be changed first to improve this team. And what can we hope when you know that one of the main weapon of Bibby was his clutch shooting, and now we give all this shots to Crawford. You don't give what is part of his heart in the game, that's not hard to understand why he doesn't look as implicated as he was before.