File under "incredible."
For players averaging at least 35 minutes a game, Al Horford leads the league in shooting from 16-23 feet at 48%. Guess who is last? Actually don't guess. Just know. Because you already know.Yes, Josh Smith at 28%. In an attempt to kill any positive about Al Horford drilling, Josh attempts 2.9 of these shots a game. Horford 2.2.
This sums up something. I am not sure what, but definitely something.
almost 2 years ago
hawksdawgs
127 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
My mouth is on the floor
I mean I knew that his misses are far more than his makes when he’s not directly around the rim, but to see it laid out like this is baffling and infuriating at the same time. The only logical explanation can be that he REALLY, REALLY believes in his jump shot. You cannot put any other logic to it. As I’ve said before, it’s “mind-bottling.”
Bet it hit the rim!
Women lie, men lie, numbers don't lie
Watching Bobby Cox pick boogers since 1995
by a hooter's baby on Mar 29, 2010 9:31 PM EDT reply actions
That's our Josh Smith
He’ll learn. Even if it doesn’t seem like it
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
I doubt it
Kid has been playing basketball his whole life, so the chances of him developing a good jump shot are pretty slim.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
Agreed
But that’s not how I read that.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
I really wasn't talking about him learning how to make jumpers
And I think I heard Josh started playing ball when he was in high school
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Never say never.
I believe Josh can develop a jump shot. It’s just not gonna be as easy as the rest of the stuff that he can do. He’s gonna have to work for it.
by DPhenomenal1 on Mar 30, 2010 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Agreed
Hense why I didn’t say never, simply that it would be slim. Hey, it’s his game and his career, so by all means he should do what he feels is the best for him. Smoove and I will just have to disagree on what we feel is the most productive use of his talents, haha.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
I dare someone to post a link to that article on his website at jsmoove.net.
Lol!!
Bet it hit the rim!
you, my friend, deserve a
+1
Watching Bobby Cox pick boogers since 1995
by a hooter's baby on Mar 30, 2010 12:06 AM EDT up reply actions
yeah, i know
just never really liked that song. They play that song three times a day on some stations
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
I actually like it
but it is heavily rotated on the radio stations around here. I guess because he’s a local product.
Bet it hit the rim!
File under incredibler...
Not to be a downer but…: Al Horford also leads the NBA in the percentage of his shots that are assisted from 16-23 ft. And he’s 4th in % of shots assisted from 10-15. 3rd from <10ft.
Josh Smith: % of shots assisted: 16-23ft- 4th in the NBA, 10-15ft- 1st, <10 ft 5th.
What’s the problem here? Our big men can’t make their own offense, our point guard is Mike Bibby, and our other guards LOVE shooting. When those other guards miss their shots, we call for our coach’s head and say our players choke.
Really, we should be honest with ourselves and blame it on the fact that Smith and Horford can’t create their own offense. Horford is a great shooter/ Smith is a terrible one, and our only shot at making the finals is for JJ and Jamal to shoot us there. In sum: the NBA is the wild west, we have two sharp shooters and a ton of guns. (and a horse shooting guns in the corner, which no one seems to think is unsafe)
That’s not why. The guards just don’t give up the rock to Al unless he’s in position to make a shot. He doesn’t get many chances to create his own shot because Jamal and Joe are too busy dribbling and throwing up fadeaway 18 footers.
Maybe
Without differentiating the assists, it’s not fair to make a blanket statement that they can’t create their own offense. I have seen plenty of Horford-to-Smith dimes and plenty of Smith-to-Horford dimes, so how can one assume that the guards are the only ones making those assists?
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
Or maybe,
Our big men our TOP 5 in the NBA in % of their shots which are assisted. That’d be a valid critique if they were only top15 or something, but the top 5, I thought, would automatically be considered statistically significant.
Maybe it’s just significant to me because I’ve been arguing this for awhile. The Horford and Smoove assists happen, for the most part, in quarters 1-3 … then our offense stalls in the 4th because that type of offense isn’t sustainable based on their skill sets. Those assists mostly come from fast breaks, which doesn’t happen as easily when defenses (and offenses) tighten up.
That is not true
Most of the front court assists I’ve watched happen during the half-court offense not on the fast break because we are not a fast break team. The offense most definitely does not stall in the 4th quarter because of the inside game, it stalls because we settle for early shot clock jumpers by the guards and dumb ISO’s.
I can’t believe anyone still questions this and if you can’t see it by now then there’s nothing I can do to help you.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
Josh Smith and Al Horford have routinely showed
an ability to hit about half their shots on post ups near the basket. almost all of those look pretty ugly and mechanical. 50% is better shooting than Joe Johnson and Jamal.
and anyone and I do mean anyone could create that 18 foot shot for Horford. Not many centers are going to guard him out there. And almost any guard in the NBA can at least bring a defender over. They might not have any ability to finish, but with the rules for hand checking, the unique skill in Al’s jump shot is his jump shot. not the pass that gets it to him.
anyway the point of the post was to say not to get into this debate again
but to say how ridiculous is this stat? answer, very ridiculous.
We actually never finished this debate...
unless you’re still checking your numbers.
Also, with the rules for hand checking, it is much more effective to have a guy drive to a basket rather than shoot a jump shot in the 4th, especially when the numbers (% of shots assisted) show that that player is completely incapable of taking advantage of the hand checking rules.
the only person that does not take advantage of hand checking rules
is joe johnson. he never goes to the line…ever. al horford and josh smith do.
mostly Josh.
Josh makes it to the free throw line more than anyone on the team at least that what it seems like. So it would help if he would work on his free throws. This would help the team out a lot more than throwing up jump shots.
by DPhenomenal1 on Mar 30, 2010 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
to talk about assist ratios
between guards and centers is lunacy.
Al Horford probably gets three or four chances a game to create his own shot. is that because he can’t do it? Maybe. but Joe gets 12 chances easy. comparing percentages makes no sense. also, Al Horford is hitting 56% of his shots…overall. it makes sense to get him the ball more. that is not an indictment on anyone. it just makes sense.
You might be right in general, but not when
THEY ARE TOP 5 REGARDLESS OF DISTANCE … TOP 5, that’s not a number, that’s a comparison. Compared to every other center and power forward in the league, our center and power forward are #1 and #2 in the league in needing help to score the basketball. That is signifcant to me. I guess I’m the lunatic.
getting an assist is not needing "help"
does Josh Smith “need help” for an alley oop dunk? sure. but what you really need is Josh Smith.
i am saying it is lunacy to compare percentages of Al Horford to Joe Johnson.
1. Joe Johnson gets far more plays called for him to create
2. Passes up open shots to penetrate and create on his own.
you can’t compare the two.
As far as comparing to centers
1. the percentages are not that far off. every center but two are above 50%.
2. Al Horford again does not get many opportunities. For instance David Lee is 2% points less. He gets FIVE more shots a game.
3. When Al Hoford does his own moves and gets fouled, those don’t count as shots, but they help the team.
Can you get alley-oop dunks in the 4th quarter?
It’s not really a viable option.
Joe Johnson gets more plays, more shots.
He takes bad shots.
He still shoots a better percentage. But you are TOTALLY right that the stat doesn’t include And-1s, valid critique (see what I did there? Admitted someone else was right? Sure I was being sarcastic, but it’s a step forward for this conversation).
the alley oop thing was to critique your idea that getting assited buckets
means you needed help. for every CP3 making Tyson Chandler look better than he is, there are lots of versions that are the other way around. assists are an overrated stat. not because they are unimportant, but because they only talk about one side of a two way conversation. the finisher often has just as much to do with the assist as the passer.
Zaza is not going to help point guards. even if that point guard is Chris Paul. Chris Paul and Josh smith…different story.
and no, Joe Johnson does not shoot a better percentage from the field than Josh Smith or Al Horford.
and if you want to argue
that Joe Johnson should get the most shots during the game or in the fourth quarter I will gladly admit that you are right.
but you are arguing Al Horford should get less shots because his shots come from assists. and no, i don’t agree with that logic. nor do I agree that the Hawks offense is better the less shots Horford and Josh get.
Versos Orlando, from Rosen.
“In addition, the Hawks’ isolations lacked any inside presence whatsoever. Smith posted up six times resulting in two swatted shots, one turnover, a missed layup and a pair of fouls that led to his scoring three points.
Williams was 0-for-2 in the low post.
Horford had a shot blocked and scored a short jumper.
That’s a total of only five points generated by 10 post-ups. Not exactly championship-caliber production.
Indeed, Smith’s dramatic game-deciding dunk to the contrary, the difference in the game was Atlanta’s perimeter shooting — 7-for-13 from beyond the arc, led by Bibby’s shooting 4-for-5 from out there."
I’ll give you this…that’s with Howard in there. But he had foul trouble and sat out a fair amount, so you’d expect better production at least when he’s on the bench.
If you were the coach and an assistant handed you numbers like this, how would you structure YOUR offense?
i would start by demanding those 2.9 Josh Smith jump shots
go to Horford.
I would run more.
I would demand better ball movement and player movement.
in no way is saying Al Horford demands more shots a critique on anyone specifically. if you want to argue that there are no bad shots so be it. and i don’t care if they all come in the first three quarters.
but the reason Joe comes up so much in this conversation is outside of the Josh Smith jump shot thing. Joe Johnson discourages the other three things.
i admit that the Hawks need Joe Johnson. I love Joe Johnson. I think he makes Horford and Josh better. I think he is the best shot maker. I think he makes things easier for them. But the fourth quarter offense is not good. the first quarter offense is not great. things could be better. a lot better.
and the answer (at least to me) is not to super size Joe. it is to change other things. if you think other things won’t work or you think this offense is at its full potential, we just agree to disagree. I don’t think other things have been tried with any consistency to know the first and the second means huge parts of this team should be blown up. and if you say we need a new coach, that is what we are debating right now. change in coaching strategy.
People are calling for an offense that is not viable...
Our offense is top 5 in efficiency BECAUSE those guys don’t get the ball more.
We are going to win over 50 games this way. However, people, REALLY LEGITIMATELY, want to start giving the ball inside more. Obvious cons: Our playoff competition’s biggest strength is on the interior.
Dwight Howard, and Cleveland’s 8 power forwards/Centers/Lebron. Those guys will eat Horford/Smith alive defensively, not to mention the fact that they will also pick up even more fouls (welcome to the bench AL!).
This is what you want, effectively, because the only teams that I think can beat the Hawks are the Magic and Cavs.
seriously?
1. the defense’s main weak spot is perimeter and transition. find someone that thinks differently and I will gladly listen. certainly, Horford on Howard is not a good matchup, but the first three games were won by Orlando in large part because Vince Carter, Anthony Johnson, and Jason Williams drilled.
2. The Hawks are so efficient because they are so good at not turning the ball over.
3. You just said the Hawks are efficient because the two most efficient players on the team don’t touch the ball. explain to me the logic behind that.
this is not a black/white issue. it is not a every time Josh smith gets the ball it is an indictment on Joe Johnson. it is not saying Joe should start taking 15 shots a game. a team is better with diversity. a team is better when a guy who can create mismatches looks for the easy bucket.
Plus, Dwight Howard is going to get in foul trouble if you attack him. Al Horford shooting his 18 foot jumper is going to make him come out of the paint and allow guards to penetrate. These are not bad things.
Seriously ... you can't read.
1. Our OPPONENT’s strength is their interior defense. That happens to be our greatest strength DEFENSIVELY as well. Presently, our greatest OFFENSIVE strength is our perimeter/fast break offense (where the Assists come from!)
You want to give our front court more looks on OFFENSE, which I say will hurt our DEFENSE because 1) our main competition has great interior defense, 2) that will necessarily hurt our greatest DEFENSIVE strength. The Cavs can throw 6 different guys in to DEFEND Al and Josh, but they can’t do that to SCORE against them. That’s why things should stay the same.
2) The Hawks don’t turn the ball over because the guards don’t force the ball inside (logic is fun! works both ways!)
3) The Hawks are the most efficient team because our players that can’t make plays don’t try to, rather, they make shots when they are open. You want them to make more plays and are assuming they will keep their percentages, that won’t happen … except for Josh maybe.
Attacking Howard SEEMS like a GREAT idea, but I’m not inclined to believe that the Hawks can actually win a playoff series against the Magic by forcing the refs to put Howard on the bench. I’m guessing they aren’t going to do that. And I’m guessing that attacking Howard will more likely lead to 5 blocked shots/ 15+ rebounds a game.
sorry about the interior defense thing. misread that
but since Al Horford and Josh Smith don’t turn the ball over when the DO have it, you can’t say we turn the ball over very little because they don’t get it a lot. It is not based in fact. It is based in projection and you projecting things that are not based in fact.
the logic that the Hawks are efficient because the more inefficient guys get more shots does not makes sense. If that is not your argument, correct me specifically on that last sentence. i get that Horford and Josh are assisted on more of their buckets, but I would roundly support Joe allowing more of his buckets to come from assists. You know from ball movement, player movement, and inside out play. Maybe then he would be as efficient as the front court. it is not about knocking Joe. It is about making the team better.
and back to the original point of this post. Al Horford hits that jumper, a jumper that is either always available or that brings the center out of the paint, more often than Joe hits from the field 45% to 48%. If Joe can find shots that are always available or create openings for other players, than I say go for it. And he does that on some shots, and that is why he is good and why he gets lots of shots. But certainly not all of his shots do that and some of those shots would be better going to the more efficient players.
in the end, until Josh Smith and Al Horford prove that on 18 shots a game they would be less efficient than Joe Johnson, I will say it makes sense to get the more efficient guys the ball.
Your projections are valid but mine are not?
By using the fact that we have a great ast/turnover rate in your argument that our bigs should see the ball more, you are implicitly assuming that our rate will not get worse by forcing the ball inside more. It’s not unreasonable to project that our ast/TO ratio will be hurt if we try to get our PF/C the ball more beyond when they are wide open. It’s actually a fact. Therefore, my “projection” WAS based on fact.
Your summarization of my argument: We are efficient because the more inefficient guys get more shots. First off, how unfair are you going to be, really? Second, my argument is that our offense is efficient BECAUSE our less efficient offensive players (not just fg%, but getting one’s own shot skils, etc) are maximizing their offensive potential by scoring when they get good looks (on assisted plays) and our scorers (Joe and Jamal) have missed some and made some, but overall have shown that they are our best chance at winning games.
On “the point of your post,” the ast/fg numbers show that our “most efficient guy” gasp might have a little Marvin in him, and might not be as aggressive as he should be. He’s getting the ball plenty. He needs to do more on his own.
You keep talking about our jump shooters getting good shots
That’s just not true. They take bad shots more often than anyone needs to. They’re only good shots when they go in and what can’t be disputed is that their shots go in less than the shots of Al and Josh. Like Barkley says, You don’t live by jumpers, you die by jumpers.
@cocoqt81
first, Al Horford turns the ball over much less than Joe Johnson. Even when you consider usage, he is no more turnover prone than Joe. Josh Smith DOES turn it over more. But the amount more is so minuscule shot by shot, it is ridiculous. if Al Horford and Josh Smith got two more shots a game, they would turn the ball over one extra time every 20th game or so.
i don’t think that is going to kill the offensive efficiency.
so what I was saying was if something, that does not affect turnovers in any even minor way, can help offensive efficiency by the projections. why not try it?
your projections are not based on fact because you are overstating them. you can’t say Horford and Josh should not get the ball because the offense would be less efficient, and then when I say turnovers are the reason the offense is efficient now, not Joe Johnson, you say centers and power forwards would increase those turnovers and that is why they should not get the ball. if that is your reason, you are wrong. the positives of their offensive play, would far out weigh the extra turnover every second or third week.
again, you act as if these are whole sale changes. they are not. they are four to eight possessions a game. it is tweaking. i am not even saying it would work, but the PROJECTION of the stats say that it would.
Al Horford
is deadly efficient. That’s his greatness. Of course I don’t dispute that. You’re like a politician saying you support education by even talking about it. I think Al Horford’s offensive progression should not be forced. It should, and will, happen naturally.
Therefore, I think you’re 1/20th extra turnover PROJECTION is crazy. So, that’s our impasse. Sucks to be on the wrong side of the +1/20th TO line.
If all you are arguing for is 1 or 2 shots from 2 players, then what are you even arguing? My god. Unless those 1-2 shots are inside 3:00 min (which would be insane), it just means you actually want to keep the offense the same.
Everyone is in favor of more ball movement and open shots, but the ball movement has to start with JJ/Jamal penetration because Bibby is our PG and Horford/Smith can’t be trusted to get their own shot consistently.
i am just arguing for 4 shots a game
to go to Al Horford and Josh Smith within the flow of the offense and those four shots to come from Jamal Crawford and Joe Johnson’s shots that are forced and bad. and those four shots can be assisted. that is ok by me.
as i said 10 times, it is not taking away Joe’s isolations or keeping him from shooting or driving. it taking a few highly inefficient shots and putting them into efficent situations. and he does not take some horrible shots. usually more than two a game.
your right it is not that big a deal. which is why i don’t understand your stern disapproval of it. but you are wrong if you think it would make no difference. because it would. it would make the Hawks better.
and on the turnover thing. four more shots a game when you turn the ball over combined 4 times a game, it would not be ridiculous to say it would take a long time to get to one full turnover statistically, but i admittedly made up the 20 game up.
Feeding Smooth or Al is a win win. Why not persue any shot that has a 50% chance or more.
PS steals make up for missed jumpers.
by RivBoatGambler on Mar 30, 2010 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions
File under "haha"
FG % from within 10 ft: Al Horford: 48% (almost 50!), Josh Smith: 38% (not close to 50!), AND JOE JOHNSON 51% !!!!
Guess what percentage of Joe Johnson’s shots from <10 ft are assisted? 18%. OK. So, maybe I’m making too much of it, or maybe I’m exactly right and people are spewing misinformation without clicking on the stat they linked to in the first place.
To save you the time. JJ also has a better shooting percentage from 10-15ft as well. What was the point of the post again?
the point was to say our offense
allows a guy who is worst in the league from a certain spot to shoot more shots than a guy who is best in the league.
it never had anything to do with Joe Johnson
so don’t say I link to something without checking it. thank you.
I'm not saying you didn't check it for your purpose ...
Just for not other purpose. Especially when you say, AND I QUOTE, “an ability to hit about half their shots on post ups near the basket. almost all of those look pretty ugly and mechanical. 50% is better shooting than Joe Johnson and Jamal.”
You are operating under a false premise. Those shots are “pretty ugly” because they are bad, and sadly, don’t come close to 50%. But, why is there a problem if JJ is hitting 50% or shooting a better percentage on difficult shots than Horford shoots on easy shots inside the basket. That might also explain why JJ doesn’t feel the need to pass it to those people.
Or I’m crazy, ast/TO ratios don’t matter (for anyone else in the league also … the people they are being compared to, they didn’t have to be top 5). and we must get the ball to our 3rd and 5th best offensive option more.
you are not taking into account the 33% of shots at the rim that he makes and that are not assisted.
and at the rim is highest shots total.
Combine that with 48% from inside 10 feet and that makes up most of the shots he creates. which is over 50%.
on the other hand, Joe shoot 5 shots a game from 15-23 feet (half of Horford’s total) and only hits 41%. and he “creates” 70 % of those without assists.
again, I am not saying Joe does not help Al. I am just saying getting a guy who hits the most shots on the team, draws fouls, and is willing to pass seems like a good thing.
So should we now
begin to question why Joe doesn’t take more shots within 10ft??
I don’t understand how you can make a big deal about a Center scoring most of his buckets on assists. He’s at the mercy of the guards except when he or Josh creates a turnover. It’s really not a big deal. The main point is Al should be getting more shots and now apparently we should chastise Joe for taking long jumpers too. ;) Except that it’s not breaking news that a player would hit more shots the closer he is to the goal. It’s called a high percentage shot for a reason.
@cocoqt81
by Co Co on Mar 30, 2010 11:07 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Every other C and PF in the NBA gets their shots assisted...
evidence of nothing (apparently) it just happens the most for Horford and Smith.
since assists are the end all be all apparently
it should be noted that Josh Smith leads all PF in assists by a large margin. sucks for people that benefit from those assists that those shots actually make them worse…..
If JJ is shooting within 10 ft
It’s probably a layup. Smooth and Al would be posting up against a defender.
I'm genuinely amazed
you’re making sharing the ball sound like a bad thing. I know that’s not your intent, but that’s how it’s coming off. This team is better when the ball moves. Jump shots come and go so when they’re not falling it would be nice if we utilized the players who make most of the shots they take. Joe is not great at creating contact and getting to the line so when the fall away stops falling and he continues to shoot it anyway in the playoffs, they’re going to be in trouble. I’d rather lose games knowing the team tried to get the easiest bucket possible, as opposed to willingly enduring a shooting drought brought on by the guards.
@cocoqt81
by Co Co on Mar 30, 2010 11:25 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
My point is that...
in our current offense, the best jump shooters are getting the best jump shots. That’s what those number PROVE. Our offense is as efficient as it could be based on our personel. That is my argument.
If we change our offense, we’ll be taking away what makes it great. That’s what you are ultimately arguing for. My argument has been mis-summarized too many times to count at this point, I’d recommend looking at my intial posts.
No it hasn't
We hear what you are saying and we are telling you we think you are wrong. I completely disagree that our offense as it currently is has reached its full potential. I fully believe that if we played more inside-out basketball and ran more ball movement based half-court sets, that this offense would be even better, so much so that our defensive issues would become irrelevant.
You logic, as failed as it is, would mean that Cleveland should not let Lebron shoot as much as he does, that the Lakers should keep the ball away from Kobe, and that Orlando is better off offensively by not involving Howard. When the Hawks let Horford and Smith run things, that’s when we are the most efficient. When the offense devolves into the ISO-Joe show, ball movement, player movement, the entire offense becomes stagnant, predictable, and easily defended. How you fail to see this after watching it for the last three years is baffling.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
What I've seen for the last three years...
has been a team with an offense that is capable of making the finals. It complements the defense perfectly. Giving the ball to Al Horford is a mistake because you are all overrating his offense. He is a good shooter, he moves well, can dunk. That’s all I’m sure of.
I don’t know who this “we” is you speak of, but they are entitled to their opinion. I’m only saying that that Al Horford/Josh Smith efficient offense that you cite is a result of their play in quarters 1-3. Those quarters, I call, “the regular season.” The 4th quarter, I’ll call. “the playoffs.”
Your best offense when the game slows down, our best way to get a shot, is for JJ or Jamal to make something happen. Drive and pass or shoot, whatever’s available. Obviously, I support everyone trying to get open, haha. I’m not a communist. I just think JJ or Jamal need to be making that decision. I don’t want to see Horford trying to blow by Dwight Howard in a key situation. At all. That’s what it boils down to.
It doesn’t boil down to .. “so you think contested shots are the best shots … YOUR INSANE” I mean how is that productive? I’m not boiling peoples arguments down to the absurd, people with an actual argument don’t have to do that. It wastes too much time.
“the best jump shooters are getting the best jump shots.”
Most of Joe’s shots are contested. I don’t consider those to be the “best” jump shots. Sorry.
@cocoqt81
Let me rephrase that:
Our best jump shooters/shot creators are getting the most important shots.
Regardless of the isolated that for Horford that is the topic of this post, Joe Johnson and Jamal Crawford are our best shooters, this cannot be argued.
who is arguing that?
unless we are talking about from 16-23 feet than we can actually say Horford is the best. because he is…in the league.
which is all i was saying. that shot is always available. he should take it more.
Oh, so you are arguing for the mythical...
5 open jump shots. That shot is not always available. It might be available, one time, for one game, in one series in the playoffs. I’m all for giving him that. And I’m all for giving him the ball when he has an open jump shot. I’m for that with every player except for Josh Smith and Zaza.
I just don’t think that’s available, only in your dreams. The reality says our offense is going to stay the way it is because it’s the only legit option with the players we have and their skill sets.
Wrong
The reality says that it will stay the same because Woodson and JJ will continue to isolate because that is the only offense they know. And I think you are mistaking JJ and JC being the best three point shooters for being the most efficient shooters. Those things are not equal.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
'We' refers to the logical people on this site
And it’s not singularities that we are debating here, so it’s not simply Horford > JJ or vice versa. However, you freely admit to Horford and Smith’s offensive efficiency through the first three quarters, then say that we should stop going to them in the 4th because that is the best way to win. You are a drater, there’s just no other way to explain it. The Hawks community, not just on this one site, has been lamenting our 4th quarter inefficiencies all season long and yet here you are claiming that those things are really the best way to win. No, wait, you’re right, I think I am insane because my mind just melted trying to comprehend your logic.
It has been well documented the issues we have in the 4th quarter, especially as it relates to scoring. The large successes provided by the front court through the first three quarters is routinely undermined by the horrible decision to stop going through the front court in the 4th quarter in favor of slow, methodical, predictable, isolations involving not only JJ, but also JC. How many times does that style of offense have to cost us double digit leads or halt progress being made coming from a deficit in the fourth quarter before you accept that something isn’t working?
Getting away from the assist topic entirely (like this hasn’t done so already), here are some numbers for you. Let’s take a look at pts/att (points per attempt) and see what the four players who contribute the most to our offense look like. First, total pts/att which includes all 2pt, 3pt, and FT attempts.
JJ – 0.81
JC – 0.77
JS – 0.89
AH – 1.04
Now, pts/att minus FT since these occur during stoppage time, can’t be assisted, etc.
JJ – 0.80
JC – 0.76
JS – 1.00
AH – 1.12
Looking at these numbers it’s easy to see that our most efficient scorers are Smith and Horford, and that is considering that they have only taken eight (8!) 3pt attempts combined. That is indisputable fact and attempting to argue otherwise is just illogical.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
Let me explain how you are wrong, again:
YOU SAY: However, you freely admit to Horford and Smith’s offensive efficiency through the first three quarters, then say that we should stop going to them in the 4th because that is the best way to win. You are a drater, there’s just no other way to explain it.
I SAY: The reason I say that is because our fast paced, fast breaking defense/offense, which works in quarters 1-3, does not work in quarter 4 because the game slows down, and posessions are more important. Everything slows down. As it will in the playoffs.
I WANT: Our current offense is for Jamal and JJ to create for themselves and others.
YOU WANT: “Rational people” want to create a whole new fourth quarter offense based on ball movement. Let’s call it the Princeton offense (haha, that WOULD be ideal for you people, wouldn’t it).
EVERYONE WANTS: The fast breaking offense we have in quarters 1-3. The fast breaking offense in quarters 1-3 is necessarily unavailable because the style of most NBA team’s offense in the 4th qt (especially the CAVS).
So, it’s either the status quo, or we do something unnatural. By doing something unnatural for our offense, we are going to lose one of the best things about our team: ball control. We get huge blocks/steals/momentum on defense, but we don’t lose it on offense. This is very important. We need to maintain. We will survive. Ain’t no mountain high enough.
That's not really right.
The offense in qtrs 1-3 generally involves fewer isolations, more post-ups, more JS at the high post, and more movement from all players.
The thing that is run in the 4th qtr is more isolation-heavy with lots of screens (which rarely result in passes to the wide-open screener).
There is no such thing as a “fast-break” offense. It would be nice if the Hawks kept a quicker pace, i.e., recognized that the reason they win is because they get more shots by offensive rebounding and not turning the ball over. The problem is that willfully slowing down by walking the ball up, over-dribbling, and running more iso sets defeats the Hawks’ very own advantage.
And it’s possibly the biggest reason Woody is a shitty coach.
You're right...
I mean that the fast breaking in those quarters leads to a free flowing-type offense. We lose that in the 4th, and I’m against forcing it.
This is why I
don’t like the team resorting to the Joe Show in the fourth quarter. It seems to me it would be best to get the opposing team in the penalty in the fourth so that any time they foul you, you get a trip to the free throw line. Joe sometimes avoid contact and seems to prefer jump shots. As someone probably already mentioned, driving is probably best in crunch time.
by DPhenomenal1 on Mar 30, 2010 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Not getting to the FT line is a major problem...
But I don’t think getting the ball inside really helps us. Horford just doesn’t get to the line, unless he’s getting fouled on a lay up or dunk, it seems like. Crawford and Marvin need to make that happen A LOT more.
That’s a much better strategy than, get Horford the ball IMO.
per 82games.com
Horford draws a foul 14.2% of the time
Marvin- 11.6
Joe- 6.1
Jamal- 9.6
Josh- 18.6%.
the best people to get to the line are Horford and Josh.
The play in chaos...
Your powers of persuasions are strong, but your manipulation of stats is FAR too transparent.
The costs involved with getting Horford those extra foul shots (TURNOVERS) decreases the already lesser value of Horford as a 75% foul shooter. Jamal and Marvin are statistically significant because they actually play on the perimeter (THATS WHY I PICKED THEM).
Horford does not turn the ball over very much.
and other than that, I don’t follow your response.
you said getting the ball down low does not help the FT problem, but the guys that play inside draw fouls at a much greater rate.
This is pointless
he is hell bent on making the argument that Joe and Jamal should be the primary options to score even though the numbers tell a different story. We want a balanced offense that doesn’t implode in the 4th quarter. He wants us to basically take our chances with jump shots falling throughout the playoffs. If Joe’s shot isn’t falling, we don’t deserve to win anyway. Let’s just agree to disagree.
@cocoqt81
Coco...
You want a mythical perfect offense and you don’t explain how it can happen without sacrificing our team’s greatest strengths. Go ahead and lay out YOUR idea to fix the team, avoiding blanket statements, and actually ADD something to the discussion. Rather than simply characterize my positions.
Why do you assume
Horford has the hands of Kwame Brown and if they throw it to him more than a few times he’s going to start fumbling the ball all over the place? What are you basing this increased number of turnovers on?
@cocoqt81
Wow...
That’s actually something I would never say. It’s funny that you are summarizing me that way.
Horford has GREAT hands. I think the passes into Horford, by non-PGs, will necessarily cause turnovers. My main concern is Horford’s post moves. I’m not confident they are at a level that can take us to a championship. That’s my problem.
omfg
That is exactly what you have said multiple times. Holy f*&^ing shyte man, you are so contradictory that even Kriss Kross is confused.
At this point, you are either trolling (very effectively I might add) or you have absolutely no clue as to what is really taking place on the court. All of us have pointed to countless numbers that easily dispute every single claim you have made thus far and yet you continue with this farce.
To everyone else, continue to encourage this fool at your own risk.
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
Oh Jesse...
That’s where you are wrong. I’ve stated my opinion numerous times, but I’ve had people butcher my argument, creating sub arguments, that has confused everyone.
I tried to be as clear as possible about when I was saying something new, and when I was just trying to show how I was being misinterpreted.
My point is pretty clear, I thought, that I think the offense is basically as efficient as it’s going to get until Horford shows that he can create his own shot. It isnt my fault that you are intellectually lazy (ie didn’t read everything, which I have taken the time to do).
To call me a troll is truly ridiculous. I’m on these boards trying to have an argument about the Hawks with Hawks fans. I made some very valid points that were completely disregarded by people who claimed to be rational. If you are rational, you don’t mind trying to reason things out.
It’s so unproductive to jump on a single word or misstatement in a free flowing discussion, to do so hinders the conversation. That’s what happened numerous times. People lost sight of the big picture argument. But whatever, if I wanted intelligent discussion, I would have gone to Hoopinion. I obviously just wanted to fight with people that are, for the most part, clueless.
Really?
The Hawks don’t turn the ball over because the guards don’t force the ball inside
It’s not unreasonable to project that our ast/TO ratio will be hurt if we try to get our PF/C the ball more
You’re right, I didn’t read that in your comments at all. I have read all of your comments and I, as well as others, have given your empirical data that clearly illustrates how most of your opinions are not based on fact and are wrong. You have yet to make a single valid point imo and combined with flatly refusing to acknowledge the data presented to you implies that you are either trolling or being completely ignorant of the truth.
I presented to you very easy to read points per attempt numbers that represent the basis of offensive efficiency for four players and you have completely ignored them. In fact, I would be glad to post TS%, eFG%, etc for those same four players and I am willing to bet that not only will those numbers effectively show that Horford is a more efficient player than JJ, but that you will also ignore those so as to continue this futile argument of yours.
But, no, you’re right. I’m intellectually lazy because I’m the one running around to five different stats sites looking at data and presenting data that supports my points. Yep, we’re the ones that are clueless. The 4th quarter isolations actually contribute to a more efficient offense…
"Big Ten can have this challenge. Duke loses, we all win..."
-Marcus Ginyard, G - UNC
You are actually hilarious.
The only “stat site” I used was the original link on this post … check it out. It’s really difficult to argue when 10 people are making baseless accusations against you.
Anyway, my point is that the Hawks have those efficiency numbers because of the current offense, if we change the current offense, those numbers will go down because we will be forcing things.
Those quotes are exactly what I mean, I’m sorry you can’t understand the concept. I think our current offense gets Josh Smith and Al Horford the ball in good positions to score. There are not 5 extra easy plays during a game, which you seem to believe. Those 5 different plays are potentially dangerous because 1) Al and Josh are not that skilled one-on-one 2) Instead of passes, Joe holds the ball, and gets a shot, our current offense involves 0 turnovers for those 5 plays.
It includes some missed shots, but that’s where Josh and Al come in. That’s our offense. I like our offense. You want to pass more. We don’t have a point guard. Our current shoot first guards are assisting our big men on a very high rate of their made baskets already (where I used stats). If anything, those big men need to do it on their own. But they can’t. So, I say let’s be honest about our player’s skill sets and maintain the status quo. It’s our best chance to win a championship. That’s all I want.
By the way, the Hawks coaching staff agrees with me. It’s probably the way Billy Knight invisioned the team. A bunch of 6’8 guys rebounding misses. But I’m a crazy person.
/Troll signing off.
Getting the ball into the hands of the player
with the highest fg% shouldn’t be a mythical concept. That’s just common sense. It’s like if someone said, hey if you do this you have a 45% chance of living, but if you do that you have a 56% chance of living. Which one would you roll the dice on? And it’s not like Josh and Al are unwilling passers. Throwing the ball inside and forcing the other teams defense to actually have to defend can’t be a bad thing. They have shown they are willing to pass out of a double team, something Joe is very much hesitant to do himself. Letting one player dribble the ball for 15 seconds only to end up shooting over 3 people is not my idea of a good offense. Oh and Al is a literal All Star. He shouldn’t be an afterthought.
@cocoqt81
Getting the ball into his hands wasn't the mythical concept...
The mythical concept was that he would be open when the passes came. I would also argue that it is a mythical concept to think he could beat a defender consistently to get his own shot.
Horford is hardly an afterthought in our offense, and he was an all star because of his defense and rebounding, not because of his offense. You want to annoint him a superstar, but he’s not ready for that offensively. He’s ready everywhere else.
This is not about annointing Al
this is about the fact that he has shown with limited opportunities, he stil makes his shots. We are just curious about what kind of numbers he could put up if they actually ran plays for him. Al is treated like a dirty work player. Period. If you watch the games at all, you know that. They don’t go out of their way to get him shots, if he doesn’t rebound their misses he’s pretty much screwed.
@cocoqt81
If I watch the games I'd know Horford is a dirty work player?
Thanks for clearing this whole mess up for me. I mean, if I’m arguing about the Hawks all day, can we at least assume I care enough to watch the games? YOU ARE PAINFUL.
Again...
Horford doesn’t turn the ball over because he doesn’t do anything outside of his comfort zone. When he does that, turnovers will come. Forcing him the ball will also cause turnovers. You’re logic equates to Horford maintaining his %s with increased usage and ignores the fact that it’s not easy to get the ball into the post, especially without a PG.
So I guess your argument
Is more or less on the lines of physics. Cause these numbers basically say that Horford and josh play down low where all the action is. But Joe actually gets more FTAs per game.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
no those numbers say the opposite
Josh Smith draws a foul almost twice as often Joe Johnson per shot attempt.
I meant to clerify that Joe gets more than Al Horford not more than Josh
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Joe doesn't take the techs every time
And Horford has to get the ball lower in the paint to post up or be wide open for a jump shot. Al has to work on different moves for his game to warrant post touches.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Horford DOESN'T DRAW FOULS
That’s the problem. In utopia he might, but not in the NBA. He gets fouled if he gets past his man, he can’t do that alone.
he does draw fouls. over twice as often as Joe Johnson.
and everyone gets fouled when they get past their man, unless they are REggie Miller or Jamal Crawford. that is why people foul.
Our jump shooters are getting the best shots????
Are you serious? I’m not even going to try to reason with you if you think contested jump shots are the best shots this team can get. Have a great day. ;)
@cocoqt81
by Co Co on Mar 30, 2010 12:14 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
Buzzsaw, you're making way too much out of the assist numbers
For several reasons.
Centers do not bring the ball up the floor. Therefore, if Horford is open from 16-23 feet, he has to have the ball passed to him. Getting open without having the ball in your hands is a SKILL, not a deficiency as you suggest. He’s good at catching the ball and shooting it from that distance. It doesn’t take a brilliant PG to take advantage of this.
Moreover, you’re suggesting that his ranking on AST% in the league suggest he’s among the worst in the league at creating his own offense-which is insane, because you’re focusing on like, 20% of Horford’s TOTAL shots, but whatever. Still, there’s a lot of centers in the top part of that scoring bracket because centers don’t generally dribble and handle the ball at 16-23 feet. And if just 5 of Horford’s makes hadn’t been assisted-that’s 5 over the entire season to date from that range-he’d drop all the awy down to 86%, down below Antawn Jamison.
In his baskets at the rim, which is really what you should be looking at for Al Horford-since it’s where he’s most efficient, and gets most of his shots-on those, both Al and Josh are still above the league average in AST%, but they’re below the likes of Aldridge, Boozer, Gasol (both of them, actually) Bynum, Stoudemire, and Tim Duncan. So they’re just as effective at creating their own shots as, well, a large segment of the league’s best bigs. You know, Dwight Howard also has an above average % of his buckets assisted. But that’s not crazy, because guards do more ball-handling than bigs. And this isn’t at all definitive about shot creation, which CAN happen by players without the ball. it’s tough to believe, when you watch Atlanta’s fourth quarter offense, but it’s very true.
Additionally, the more these numbers indicate low numbers for guards and high numbers for bigs, that doesn’t mean those guards are better at shot creation. JJ ranks just behind Kobe Bryant in AST%-he’s not better at shot creation. He is, however, in a much more guard dominated offense than Kobe. He’s within 5 spots of LeBron James, and those two are lightyears apart in terms of shot creation. And of course, Dwight Howard is well behind JJ, but that says nothing about his shot creation, which is as good as any in the league, but he’s a big who doesn’t handle the ball a lot, so he has to have the ball passed to him.
Your argument is straw and feathers.
I think we all have to admit....
That all the players on the team have a purpose.
Al Horford’s game is all-around except for posting up. His footwork has to be better and anybody who’s watched the games know this. Like I said in a previous post, the third quarter offense in the Orlando game was the best I’ve ever seen all year….in fact all the time the starting five have been together. A lot of it was because Horford was drawing out Howard with his jumper from dribble penetration. It was beautiful.
Josh Smith’s post game is better than Horford’s but he’s not that strong, maybe that’s why the inside game isn’t there much. But still he makes it to the foul line…..if he doesn’t hang out at the three point line.
Marvin can do a lot of things, offensive and defensive, but is inconsistent from game to game. Let’s be honest he’s been playing more like bench player and in his career right now he probably is.
Joe, Bibby, and Jamal, let’s just cluster them up. They are great shooters. Jamal and Joe are great spot up and rhythm shooters but not off screen shooters. Bibby is a great off screen shooter. The key word here is shooter, but collectively they are not the best finishers around the rim which hampers them from getting to the foul line. This thus makes the opposing team’s defense relax because the inside pressure is minimum.
Inside offense from Josh and Al are needed, but Iso’s at any level are detrimental unless there is motion in the offense that helps create better shots. When our players play to their strength, that’s where we’re most dangerous.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Rec'd
I think Jamal can get to the rim and finish with an +1 right there behind Smoove.
Bet it hit the rim!
I'm just gonna list the things you misinterpreted:
1) I’m comparing him to the rest of the league … either those numbers show 1) He’s already getting the ball enough (FOr the record: If somone has open jumpshots available, I’m in favor of those. I want more of those. I’ll order 5 more open jump shots per game. I’m pretty sure that does happen though, and Horford passes it.) or 2) He needs to do more on his own, like take two dribbles, and not let someone get the assist. You guys know what an assist is right? It means, he didn’t have to do much on those plays. Relative to the league average for PF/C’s the difference is significant.
2) Your are reducing my argument to the absurd. I don’t think Horford is the worst in the league at making his own shot. The standard I’ve been talking about is Joe Johnson’s (surprisingly efficient no?) offense. That is our best offense when the game is on the line, and in the 4th quarter. If Horford can get open, he’ll get the ball, because he makes shots. He just can’t make his own shot as well as JJ. That’s the point. It’s actually funny that you cite Dwight Howard because he, like Horford, can’t make his own shot. He’s just better than Horford at finishing close because he’s enormous. The Magic are good because they have 3pt shooters and a horse that gets every rebound and put back. We currently have the same dynamic (Nice tip in!), I want to keep that dynamic. Stan van Gundy is smart. They went to the finals. They beat the Cavs. That’s what we need to do.
3) Your last point is completely true and points to our ultimate problem which I’ve agree with: our superstar isn’t as good as their superstar. JJ gets the same type of shots, but doesn’t make them as consistently (because they aren’t as good). But our superstar is a gunner who can make any shot on the floor. I love that. Don’t take that away from me. He needs to be max-player-get-your-own-shot- and-let-Al/Josh-clean-it-up JJ (worst name ever)… for us to win.
Also
There’s a piece on the SB home page called the Chris Bosh conundrum. It’s a really good read. There’s a paragraph about Joe Johnson that I strongly agree with.
@cocoqt81
by Co Co on Mar 30, 2010 2:32 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
You agree that JJ will never win a championship?
That’s what I’ll assume until you are less cryptic. I completely disagree with that statement. I think he is absolutely the type of shot maker that wins games/championships. I guess that’s where we differ. Congrats on having the vocal majority behind you that is just realizing, this year, that JJ is a special player. Thanks be to Lebron for being a FA in the same year as JJ.
I agree that Joe
will be overpaid this summer and that the reason the team is better is because of Josh and Al.
@cocoqt81
I agree that everyone believes that
There’s a lot of guys that are over paid. And that the only players who deserve a max contract is Wade, Lebron, and Kobe (even though Kobe wasn’t going to win a championship without Gasol and Bynum) Which one of these guys will win a championship without a big man?
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Al has shot much better from the outside lately
We need to feed him and fan him – this will open up the paint for the driving guards and give us a better chance at rebounds if the opposing center has to move out to guard Al. If Al becomes our #1 option and draws double teams – I see our effeciency FG% for the rest of the team going up.
number one option?
His post up game has to improve. He has to be dominant in order to get that label.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Exactly.
He needs to do it. It’s not like he doesn’t touch it enough to take it to the basket more. He needs to show he can do it before we start designing game plans to run through him.
So you like the JJ ISO as a better option?
There is a reason why JJ does not get many assisted shots. His like the black hole. The ball movement slows. The team slows down. Feed a big – get a win. The more we do it the better we play.
by RivBoatGambler on Mar 30, 2010 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
JJ is not a black hole
I don’t know where you or anybody else gets that from. He leads the team in assists.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
Wow!!!
When I first saw this post earlier this morning, I thought it was a rather light-hearted, ha-ha kinda post. Ummmm not so much now. Where did we go wrong? Lol!!
Bet it hit the rim!
This is my thing
I agree that the numbers say Josh and Al should get it more. I want them to get it more in IDEAL positions. If Josh took it stronger with one or two dribbles he’d be indefensible because his post game is much improved. If Al had better footwork and a few shot fakes he’d be dominant. But they both rely on jump hooks too much on post ups
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
I agree with that.
But – If we had better guard play, Al, Josh and even Marvin would get the ball in more IDEAL positions more often.
by RivBoatGambler on Mar 30, 2010 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions
I understand that
Ball movement is what makes a championship team. I know jump shooting too early in the clock has been a problem but not as mush as people put out here. Isolations across the board have killed offensive production.
Atlanta will win a championship....someday
well i am out
thanks for the lively conversation.
it made me look up lots of stats and info that I thought all supported my case but obviously not supported well enough.
at the very least, let us hope Josh Smith stops taking jump shots. right? anyone? big hug?
cheers.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Peachtree Hoops
Related FanShots on Peachtree Hoops
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
