Sothron

If it means anything I do enjoy reading your posts MrH even if we don't always agree.

If we can get someone with the Pacers pick then yes, Godawgs21, then I will concede we at least got something for Harrington than nothing. I don't know if it was the best deal we could have gotten but if you look back at threads during the summer I already gave BK slack for being handcuffed by the ownership squabble. That certaintly hurt what we could have done with Al if we didn't have that situation to deal with.

You are too nice a fellow to incur the attentions of one. I remember back on the old espn.com days I had one stalker who called me "Softron" for the obvious sexual insult and he only posted to flame or attack me. Oh well. At least I've got experience with this.

Please. You have not posted anything on this forum except to stalk my posts and try to flame me when you get a chance. I just wish you had the guts to post this under your real screen name so when you get this alias banned for flaming/stalking your real screen name goes down with it.

I don't expect you to own up to it though.

Not bothering to humiliate yourself further by refuting my post I see. I don't blame you. When you can't even read and understand English and its brought to your attention I would feel a little sick to my stomach myself if I were in your shoes. You sit back and search back God only knows how many posts to try and get some flame material on me, it gets blown up in your face and now you want to admit you were COMPLETELY wrong.

Typical troll behavior.

And as much as you like to bring up other posters for who knows what reason you'll notice more than one spoke up for me in another thread. I know you can't understand English very well but the text below my post is called a signature. That signature (or sig for short) gives you my complete internet history in terms of the Hawks. I have been a Hawks fan since my dad took me to games to see Fast Eddie Johnson the [censored] pedophile and I've been a die hard Hawks fan since I was literally old enough to walk. Same with ALL the sports teams in Georgia.

So don't even begin to question my committment to this team. I honestly at the time of that post did not remember if BK had been here since 2001 or 2002 or 2003. Which is why I ASKED how long he had been here to give BK appropriate credit or discredit for what he had done.

If you want to play nice and agree to disagree, that's fine with me. I don't have time at work to play paddy cake all day long and dig up posts or scour the internet for "sources" as you obviously do. If Knight has a team that finally makes the playoffs then I will give him credit for that and will reassess my judgement of his overall performence. I am not insane enough to ignore winning seasons because I don't like the job they had done on specific issues or players.

If you want to show you aren't a troll then start posting on this site without flaming or stalking me in the process. As it stands now I firmly believe you are nothing but a troll account and until evidence proves otherwise I will not change that opinion.

Ditto with Knight.

Kupo.

Wow I feel so warm to have someone here using their troll alias to stalk me.

Let's bust your crap out yet again. Owning you is becoming a second job at this site. I just wish you had the cajones to do this under your real screen name. You know if you did you would get banned from the site under the new "Play Nice Guys" rules sticked at the top. Gutless wonder.

"yep guess we should fire him for all 7 of those years, oops only been there 3."

Did you miss the part in my quote where I was ASKING HOW LONG he had been here? My quote:

"When you have a general manager in what six years? seven? that can't put together a team that can surpass thirty wins more than deserves firing."

It should be obvious to anyone with the intelligence above an empty beer can that I was questioning how exactly he had been here. Was it six year? seven years?

You DO know what a question mark signifies, don't you? Of course if you don't then my including one in the preceding sentence probably confused the hell out of you.

Next:

"Last week you were in favor of the old Babcock days lol"

You REALLY need to work on your reading comprehension. I was pointing out that people defending a general manager who can't even field a team that wins thirty games a year should have accepted a general manager that churned out several 50+ win teams at an even more diehard level. Nowhere in that post did I say I was in favor of the old Babcock days.

Read much? Oh wait, I ended that with a question mark. Don't be confused cupcake!

Next:

"Yep sorry that bottom 5 GM led us from nothing to hope for something."

Meh. Knight has never had a team win more than thirty games in a eighty two game season. Under anyone's definition that has to fall under the category as "bad". If the Hawks finally do something this year then I'll consider adjusting my opinion on Knight. Happy now? Oops sorry about the question mark cupcake!

"Then he was the 2nd worst GM in the league."

More reading issues from our friend the troll stalker.

What I ACTUALLY said: "There's at least twenty general managers in the NBA I would list above BK without breaking a sweat. The only GM I can categorically put below Knight is Isiah Thomas.

Reread that. I never said he was the second worst GM in the league. I said the only GM I can CATEGORICALLY put below Knight is Thomas. That means there can be OTHER PEOPLE below Knight but only Thomas is DEFINITELY behind Knight.

On to the next lie:

"I guess every other GM that passed on Ellis should be fired too uh? I guess since BK is the only guy in all 4 drafts to get starting talent, without missing one, yep he should be gone.

I remind you of other GM drafts."

Where did I say Knight should be fired only for passing on Ellis? My quote actually read:

"So at what point of passing over better players does BK need to reach in order for him to be fired? What's the magic number here? We've already seen Paul, Felton, Deron, Roy, Foye, Gay, Ellis, Deng, Igoudala (sp?) and who knows who else in just the last two seasons.

Knight will remain as long as the Atlanta Spirit is fighting wtih Belkin. Which may last until next season."

I pointed out several players Knight passed over. I also asked what was the number of players he passed over TO BE fired. I also said that Knight will remain in Atlanta as long as the AS is here. So where is he getting fired in my post cupcake??

Next:

"Too bad thats 2 years."

Well ya got me on this one cupcake. Its two years and not one. I'll give you a cookie on that one to show I'm not really such a bad guy.

Next:

I'm not sure what you were trying to show after this since you apparently had some copy and paste issues. Considering your difficulty reading English I can understand why the task of highlighting and copying and pasting can be difficult though.

Try harder next time. I also wish you had the spine to post under your real screen name instead of an alias you made two years ago and never bothered to post with until you decided to stalk me on this forum. I welcome the chance to just completely own you, as I have done yet again, but I wish we could see the real you and not the winter you.

Kupo.

His hatred of BK for Knight's refusal to swap gossip with him as Babs used to do is just too much. Everyone here knows my feelings about BK but I don't think he's anywhere close as bad as Ford makes out.

My point was actually proven. You said Childress couldn't start for any team, now he can start for 3-4 teams, then he can't start for any team, now he can start. Its like watching a tennis match played by one guy. You jump from one side to the other. Its comical.

It can easily take two years or more to settle the ownership fiasco. Another incorrect statement from you. The legal process involves multiple appeals from all sides and the likely legal intervention of the NBA and NHL against Belkin. You have no idea what you are talking about if you think this situation can't easily last two or more years. If Belkin drops his suits (or the AS) then it could potentially take less but the AS is budgeting around a very long legal fight. Key note: the current people in charge of the Hawks pursestrings are budgeting for a very long fight with roster restrictions put in place not only by the luxury tax but by the courts rulings.

Talk about not doing homework. I suppose in 116 posts in two years you must have missed the whole legal and court battles. But you aren't someone's troll alias.

In 2008 we will have to deal with having to resign both Joshes with an eye in 2009 to keeping Zaza and Marvin. Now call me crazy but if Zaza keeps progressing I'm going to guess that in the day and age when stiffs like Dampier get max salaries (or close to it) that Zaza is going to command at least 10 million a year and that's not including inflation. With inflation that's probably 13 million a year. We can't give Josh and Josh deals around 9-10 million a year and still expect to keep Zaza. We also would then have to include resigning Joe Cool in 2010. Or Marvin and Shellhead.

That btw does not include: signing some mid level (or higher) exception contracts for free agent(s) that gets BK's eye. Or making a trade that could get completely skew our payroll situation. Or having to give a second round pick mid level or more money to retain them if one of them comes along and earns it.

At some point in 2008 or 2009 or 2010 these young players and potential draft picks who pan out are all going to be getting real starter's money. And unless something drastic happens with our ownership this team won't pay the luxury tax. So for you to sit there and tell me its totally unrealistic to be apprehensive over rather or not we can keep the two Joshes is just insane.

One last point: this is just dollars and cents. If our team does not start to win games then I sincerely doubt either of these guys are going to take money to stay on a losing team in bench roles if another team can offer a better team and starter's minutes and roles. My worry is not just about the salary cap. Its about the mindset of two guys in their twenties who could leave for better pastures.

I'll repeat one last time for posterity's sake: I actually hope you ARE right about this. I'd like to keep both guys. I just don't think we can. We can keep debating hypothetical scenarios in two years time if you want but nothing you say or conjecture will change that apprehension.

I miss Ted owning the Hawks and Braves very, very much.

We all know the deal with Belkin. If he wins he is going to run this team on a shoestring budget. He didn't have enough money in three separate times (Celtics, Bobcats, Hawks) to buy a NBA franchise and nothing has changed in that regards. He doesn't have the resources to run a team which is the main reason Stern back in the original legal fights sided with the Spirit group.

You have 115 posts in two years and I would guess that easily 40 of those posts have come from trolling, I mean, debating with me. So yes you'll forgive me if I think you are someone's troll alias on this site.

Let's get back to your crap.

The Hawks in case you missed the memo are in an ownership squabble that can easily last another two years beyond this. The Hawks in case you missed the memo are not in a position to pay the luxury tax. The Hawks in case you missed the memo are not in a position to be able to resign ALL of our young talent.

So what kind of money do you think Chill would take to stay here? The 1.12 or so exception? Between JJ, Claxton, Zaza, Marvin and Shellhead that is not going to leave much room for Smoove and Chill. Toss in Lo Down if he's still here or whatever guys we have to flush out the roster and I can *easily* see a scenario where we are forced to do a S&T with one or both of the Josh's. Now you may think that is a fine scenario and who knows, perhaps you could be right.

But that does not change the reality that it will be very difficult if impossible for the Hawks to keep both of those guys. Especially when you consider the ownership fiasco.

I have not seen any other poster on this site, from Walter to the anti-Walter in KB21 disagree with that opinion. Except for you.

And just for a closing thought for you cupcake: if Chill keeps up this play for the rest of his rookie contract he will be one of the hottest FA commodities on the market. Period. Care to disagree with that and add post 116 in your two year tenure?

Thank you for the compliment. Thanks to my favorite stalker people here may get the impression that I am 100% against this team which is insane. Any older poster here should probably remember me from other sites and knows I care about this team a great deal. I disagree with some of Knight's decisions but I am not slamming the entire team because of it.

As much as I don't like the pick of Shellhead at #5 I really do hope the kid becomes a great Hawk that we can build around. Being a fan of a team, a real fan, means more than being 100% homer or 100% hater.

You wanted "sources" to verify what I had read and heard. I did a quick search online and unfortunately alot of the better draft sites have already removed their early mocks. The ONLY times you see Shellhead being considered at #5 or even in the top ten is when news of the promise was leaked. Apparently BK isn't as impervious to the media as he thought.

You again show your inability to read. I brought up Luther and said LAST season he started or played significant minutes at both the 1 and 2. The Rockets signed Bonzi as an upgrade to Luther for this season. If Chill had been available then don't you think they would go for him? Hell even WITH Bonzi on the team don't you think they would go after Chill if they could?

You are dodging the question again. You are the one who disagreed with me that Chill could easily start for a number of teams in the NBA. In fact you said he could not start for any team in the NBA. Then later on you disagreed with me about Chill and said he was a GREAT pick and you would take him over other players in that draft that ARE STARTING NOW. So which is it cupcake? Which side of your mouth do you want to argue from today, 11/16/6? Either Chill is good enough of a pick to start for other teams, and thus reduce our chances of keeping him OR he's just a glorified role player who couldn't start for ANY team in the NBA.

Pick a side and stick to it. Its almost comical to sit here and watch you own yourself in thread after thread but the way you keep coming back is enough to make it worth a chuckle of my time.

And I just have to add here...whose the one who told you guys about Knight's relationship with Ford and the media? Oh that's right...me. Whose the one who told you guys in the summer about Harrington and the ownership situation because he has sources inside the team? That's right....me. So you'll forgive me if I find your attempts to impugn my credibility as something bordering laughable.

And just to be fair there is a lot of criticism that Knight gets that is fair and not just from ruffled feathers from media guys who don't have the pipeline that Babcock was. Even people on your "side" of this argument have said on this site (and others) that Knight has made mistakes.

Are you KB21 posting under a new username here?

Walter, you know I agree with you. I liked Shellhead if we could have traded down and gotten him at the right spot. But not where we took him.

A source for what? Be more specific.

Your depth charts are WRONG. Period. I don't know if you watch any games besides the Hawks but watch other teams and tell me with a straight Josh Childress couldn't start for at least 15 teams at either the 2 or the 3. The only reason you won't agree with that is because your internet warrior emo feelings might get hurt. Oh noez!!

Get ready to go emo in your blog:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/bask...aft1/index.html

Gee where is Shellhead in SPORTS ILLUSTRATED first mock draft pre-BK promise? You can't say SI is some "obscure" sports reference can ya? Let's see! Is he five? six? seven? eight? nine? ten? eleven??? Wow can you say twelve!

SI again closer to draft after the "promise" was leaked:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writ...raft/index.html

Read the blurb about Shellhead: "No promises have been made, but he's a solid big man ready to contribute; could drop out of lottery if Atlanta doesn't grab him."

Reread that. He was projected right before the damn draft to FALL OUT of the lottery if the Hawks didn't grab him!

Now to be fair and impartial some mocks looked like this:

http://www.sportsline.com/nba/story/9459496

The ones that had Shellhead in the top ten had him going 8 to Houston or 9 to GS. No one had him going to Boston that I saw. I can't even honestly think of a reason why Boston would draft him other than as a contingency of a trade going down with their big men.

And about Houston: http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/teams/hou/depthchart

I don't know why you keep bringing up Luther Head but last season he was playing 28 minutes a game either starting or spending significant time at either 1 or 2. I'd rather have Chill over Bonzi Wells any day of the week and I think if you asked JVG he would say the same thing.

I have not flip flopped once. YOU are the one who cooked up a lie and tried to pass it off as something I said (I note you still never apologized for that but I forget emo internet board warriors are above apologizing for lying) and then said that Chill essentially wasn't good enough to start for ANYONE in the NBA and would basically be lucky to stay a Hawk. What.the.[censored].ever. You then did a 180 and said Chill was a GREAT pick for us not just good but GREAT and you wouldn't have wanted anyone else besides him.

So which is it mr. flipflopper? You either think Chill is better than guys we KNOW are starting for their teams no matter which website you look at OR you think he's basically a role player off the bench whose never good enough to start.

You can't have it both ways. Or you can but you can expect me to call you out on it.

I keep bringing up facts like this if you need more "sources". Oh yes here's a few more just for fun. Remember that time when I said most media guys consider BK a horrible gm?

http://www.hoopsvibe.com/nba/nba-articles/...rs-ar35523.html

Look at what they say about his worst transaction. I think someone told someone about this?

http://www.hoopshype.com/general_managers/billy_knight.htm

Someone else not named Chad Ford is not a BK fan:

http://www.blackathlete.net/artman/publish...cle_01287.shtml

You know, I can keep going here, but now that I think about I'm really struggling to find ANY positive view, story or blurb about Knight from people who cover the NBA. Even Chris Paul said during the Team USA stuff this summer he was shocked the Hawks didn't draft him. BK is one of the main reasons those guys take shots at the Hawks all the time because the man's record is so putrid in his career it defies any kind of defense.

You bring facts? Kinda like your starting lineup rosters that were completely wrong? You mean like that? Or when I told you that there are at least 3-4 teams and I mean at LEAST 3-4 teams that would start Chill and the facts showed I was right?

You mean like that?

If you want to bring it to me you need to up your game. Big time. All you are doing is regurgitating every pro-BK argument that was on this board and at other sites long before you started to post on the internet. If you can't see how BK has mishandled three drafts, three offseasons and virtually every trade he's made then I (honestly) pity you. You can sit there at your work comp and play internet warrior all you wish but it does not change the fact BK is considered, easily, one of the worst GMs in the entire NBA by the media and other teams.

And btw draft express and nbadraft.net, the most widely regarded draft sites on the net, both had Shellhead as a mid teen pick. All of the media and scout people had him in that range. Boston saying they would have taken him when they already have Al Jefferson and Perkins and just traded for Theo and already had Kandi man is so absurd I don't even know how to respond to it. Its about as believable as that one GM whose a buddy with Zeke who said they would have taken Blackmond if he didn't. Yeah. Right.

I've never said Shellhead is a bad player btw. All I have maintained is that we could have gotten him for a lower value and he is a replacable commodity. Lo Down is doing exactly what we need and we didn't waste the 5th pick in the draft on him. Crazy world eh?

I have never said Foster was garbage or NBDL material. Far from it. He's a very good hustle player and rebounder. He's not someone I would start since he has zero offensive game nor is he really that good of a low post defender and he's no block threat but he'd get the minutes he's getting from the Pacers from me.

I just think, and I don't think this is asking too much here, to have more than that from a #5 pick in the draft. We could have traded down and still gotten Shellhead and I would be fine with correctly using a resource for a product. Mismanaging your resources when you are a team like the Hawks is not smart. I don't care if Shellhead leads the NBA in rebounds per 48 minutes or his EPR rating is the best in the league. We could have gotten more from the resource that was used to get him.

And you are not getting my point at all that I have explained several times at this point. If we wanted to address needs we should have drafted Deron Williams, who I might add no one here wants to talk about for obvious reasons, Chris Paul or Raymond Felton in 2005. That would have filled a real need for us. Then in 2006 if we wanted to draft another need we could have still traded DOWN and drafted Shellhead. He was a mid teen first rounder at best on everyone's draft board until BK made his idiotic promise to him...without even working him out or anyone else around that pick to see if they were worth it.

Lo Down is providing the kind of gritty interior D that we need. I have never disagreed that getting post defense and rebounding was not needed. I posted in another thread somewhere that Al Harrington is not a good low post defender and his subtraction alone helps our team defense. That point has been proven correct.

But we could have addressed an even more glaring need (IMO) in 2005 by drafting a franchise point guard. Then we could have still signed Lo Down or traded down to still draft Shellhead or drafted someone else or traded the pick. We had ample chances to do more than what BK did and that is even WITH the ownership fiasco in place.

But you wouldn't trade Duncan for Foster would you?

So just so you are on record, son, you would trade Tim Duncan for Jeff Foster? I mean its SO OBVIOUS how great a player Jeff Foster is because he hustles a little and grabs some boards. It SO makes up for his TOTAL lack of offense, passing and blocking.

Want to compare Shellhead or Foster's other numbers over 48 minutes to other players? I'm sure there's NO WAY guys like KG and Duncan beat them out in other areas. That would be like not doing any research before making a post that made me look like an idiot.

You heard it here first on hawksquawk folks: Jeff Foster is the GOAT because he avered 9.2 rebounds one season for 25 minutes a game or so.

Yes, Jeff Foster is someone I know I spend nights dreaming about in my little Soth bed to have on our team. I'm sure Spurs fans would trade Duncan in a heartbeat for Foster.

Weren't you one of the cats who said Walter and I shouldn't hold Shellhead's horrible offensive numbers against him? So now after Shellhead finally had one good game of 15 rebounds that one game shoots him up a list that true studs like Jeff Foster and Roberts can dominate?

Its either one or the other. How many points, btw, did Shellhead have last night? And what was his shooting percentage?

And I can't forget about Lawrence Roberts, that BEAST. You are so right man. When two Hall of Fame players like Jeff Foster and Lawrence Roberts are ahead of our #5 pick in the draft it makes total sense now.

Yes, he's 16th on some off the wall stat sheet. Wow. Color me impressed. Look at some of the names above him on that list. True franchise players all. I know where *I* was when I watched Jeff Foster play!

I am also disappointed. We gave great defensive effort in the 3rd quarter (that includes Shellhead for those keeping count) and yet we eased up in the 4th. I won't even comment on the refs because they just handed them the game on that last shot. I watched the tape and replay on that seven times and I still don't see where Joe Cool fouled him.

If we want to make that next step into a playoff team then we need to win those kind of games. That makes two out of three losses that we should have won and let slip.

That's funny, coming from the guy who intentionally changed a quote of mine to try and attack me but got called out on it and never had the "testicular fortitude" to admit you got caught or even do the proper thing and apologize.

If you read my post instead of glossing over it I said that drafting Shellhead as a "need" when the prior draft we passed over MUCH, MUCH, MUCH better "needs" for "potential" made no sense whatsoever. If BK kept the same idea then we would have drafted someone OTHER than Shellhead for "potential". Do you understand now?

We could have STILL went out and got a tough guy inside like Lo Down for almost nothing. You don't waste #5 picks in the draft because they can maybe bang a little, hustle a little and do nothing else of note on the court except make horrible jump shots. That is the point I'm making. Why draft for "need" in 2006 with LESSER talent when in 2005 we passed over "need" with BETTER talent? Its just silly stupid.