The Hawks have attempted to fill their gaping hole (with Kirk Hinrich's injury) at backup point guard by signing Jannero Pargo, a 32 year old who was last a useful player in the NBA in 2008. As you might expect, the Hawks still have a gaping hole at backup point guard. I suppose Pargo could exceed my expectation, but lets take a quick look at why I think Pargo is a bad signing, as opposed to maybe keeping one of Donald Sloan or Brad Wannamaker instead.
First reason is shot selection. Jannero Pargo's best skill as an NBA player is that he is a shot creator, which has some uses when you are a bench player. However, his favorite type of shot is the 16-23 foot jumper, which is the number one shot the Hawks need to move away from, as its the least efficient shot in basketball. The Hawks attempted the 2nd most shots in the NBA from this distance last season, and their offense will continue to be league average as long as that continues. In addition, Pargo's 42.9% true shooting percentage is just awful, as he is not a good 3 point shooter, not does he get to the line very much. Basically, he is a chucker, and an inefficient one. He will have games when the shots go in, but many more when they don't.
2nd reason is that he isn't really a point guard. His assist rate fell all the way under 20% in 2010, which is an awful number for a guy who is going to be running the one. As long as he is playing with Tracy McGrady, this might not be a huge issue, as TMac is a willing and able passer of the basketball who can create for others. However, there will be many games when McGrady either can't go, or will be completely ineffective because of his balky knees, and the idea of Pargo initiating the offense for the bench unit makes me shudder.
Lastly, his defensive numbers were weak in all facets, which Michael Cunningham covers in his short blog post about it on AJC.com. So with all of this knowledge, and the fact that they will probably have to pay Pargo more as a veteran than they would one of the kids, why did they make this signing. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Veteran experience only matters if said veteran has game. This applies to Jerry Stackhouse as well, who hasn't had anything left for about 3 years and is still going to get a chance with the Hawks. Brad Wanamaker was rated 37th overall by John Hollinger in his pre draft ratings, and he is a guy who can play both guard positions, defend, rebound, pass, and draw fouls. His one drawback is he isn't a great shooter. However, that can be learned and developed, and he is cheaper anyway. Since the Hawks are pushed up against the glass regarding the luxury tax, why, why, why, must they always throw away opportunities to develop a young asset for the minimum? He may not develop into anything, but at least there is a chance. With Stackhouse and Pargo, we already know they can't play.
No comments:
Post a Comment