TheNorthCydeRises

Quote: Harrington and Walker were guys rounding out our roster. The more capable our young guys have become the less we see vets here getting playing time. AJ didn't take time away from any young guys because unfortunately we don't have any at that position. What he is saying is true. This is why Delk, Barry, Googs, Slava couldn't get off the bench even though they might have been superior to the guys who were playing at the time. And its why we don't trade for decent veterans with inflated contracts. I fully expect at least one of AJ, Speedy, Lue to be traded. Actually, you could make the case that Walker's presence actually stunted Harrington's development as a player here with the Hawks. I was all for Al getting the chance to be "the man" here. I thought that he and JT would make for an interesting duo. But BK traded JT and Hendu the first chance he got, to acquire Walker. If it worked, BK would be hailed as a genius becaue Walker still had talent at the time, even if he did have the 2nd worst shot selection in the league ( #1 is Jamal Crawford ). If we dramatically improved, Walker probably signs an extension with us, and the Hawks are back in the playoffs. LOL . . but I think most hardcore b-ball fans knew that Walker being the leader and "go-to-guy" on this team, wouldn't work at all. So if it didn't work, BK could always say that the Walker deal was made because he was an expiring contract and an easy way to get JT and Hendu's salary off the books a full year early. And that's what the deal accomplished. And it gave us enough money to go after JJ. But by doing that, he killed Al's chance to possibly be "the man". LOL . . then he did it again with the JJ deal. Remember, Al was still a young guy when we acquired him ( 24 ) So now, I guess he's fully committed to giving the Joshs and Marvin every opportunity to develop, without bringing in somebody that can possibly take major minutes away from them. We'll see if that holds true with this draft.

Quote: http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-bl..._to_make_1.html Sounds to me like BK is quite a jerk. Also i found something wierd about this quote below. "But for the long term good of the franchise it’s hard to take on a big contract like that for a short time because you could stymie the growth of your young guys, and you could also limit any other opportunities you might have because of the [salary] numbers involved." Didnt we do that with anthony johnson? No . . because AJ's deal isn't a big contract. The 2.8 million that AJ will make next year is nothing. It's when you combine AJ's 2.8, with Lo Wright's 3.2, with Lue's 3.5, and Speedy's 6.3 million next year, where it becomes a problem. But AJ's number by itself still only makes him the 8th highest paid Hawk on the team next year. ( 9th, if Josh Smith signs an extension this summer ) What BK is talking about, is doing something that I think he should do ( if it became available ). And that is go after a Jason Kidd, even though he's owed another $40 million over the next 2 years. Add Jason Kidd to this team, and we're immeadiately in the playoffs barring an injury to him. It's also a quick fix to the PG problem and the perimeter defense problem. But at the same time, you're only looking at him being here for 2 years, unless he signs an extension for far less money. And you're probably looking at giving up one or two of the young players that BK covets, before he knows what his true ceiling as a player is. If Kidd coming here didn't work, we're not only screwed, we're probably in borderline luxury tax land while being screwed, with no way to upgrade the team until Kidd leaves. Plus, you would have the prospect of JJ definitely leaving the year after Kidd's contract ran out. It's kind of the situation that Jersey has found themselves in for the past 2 years. BK is definitely a dude that could care less what anybody thinks. When you read this article, you wonder if he still doesn't have the utmost confidence that the combo of Lue, AJ, and Speedy can get it done here. If that's the case, he'll say no to a PG when the draft comes around.

Question: If the three PGs are off the board, who do we take at #11? A lot of people on this board think that Critt is a top 10 talent. If he moves into the top 10, we could very well see the 3 PGs go before our #11 pick. If it's a choice between Critt and Hawes, BK might take Critt . . if anything, for PR purposes. Nothing like taking the local college star that everybody likes, to revitalize interest into the season. But as a player that could make an immeadiate impact, Hawes may be the guy on OUR team NEXT year. I say that because Hawes could beat out ZaZa for the starting C spot, easier than Critt could beat out Speedy, AJ, or Lue for the starting PG spot. Woody loves his vets. So if Conley and Law are gone, I could see BK leaning either way. People might not like the Hawes pick, but he's an immeadiate upgrade over Wright and may be a more sound offensive player than ZaZa already. Defensively, we'd still suffer in the middle. But the middle would have a solid offensive threat in Hawes. Conley vs Hawes . . give me Conley Law vs Hawes . . give me Law Critt vs Hawes . . ish, flip a coin, and I could live with either pick.

Here's mine: 1) Boston - because the NBA needs Boston to be back in the spotlight in the Eastern Conference. They'll take Oden and try to revitalize their franchise. 2) Charlotte - they'll get it because Jordan is part of their organization now. What better way to repay him for growing the popularity of the NBA in the late 80s and throughout the 90s, by giving him the #2 pick, so that he can take Durant. 3) Memphis - usually the team that has the best chance overall, doesn't fall out of the top 3 once the lottery results come out. Memphis has been in this position before, and has never landed the #1 pick. Do they take Hibbert to add a center to their roster? Or do they take a big gamble, and take Conley at #3, so that they can truly play the uptempo style that they want to play? I say they go with Conley.

But it was a bad deal that Indiana made though Walter. Most people said that in the beginning, even though the deal looked like it would work for Indy. I didn't see anybody saying that the Golden St. side of that deal was bad. The vast majority of "experts" loved the deal for G. State. Like I said Walter . . go post on a RealGM board, and see if the Minny fans agree with you. If they do, post a link of the convo, saying where they would agree to the deal. You talk about one tiny aspect of a deal, like deals aren't broken because of one tiny aspect. You don't like my idea because anything I suggest isn't good enough for you . . because it disagrees with the Walter "grand plan" for the Hawks. ************ My idea if we got the #3 pick? Try to package Marvin + fillers ( the expiring contracts of the PGs ) and the pick to bring an established player here . . a player that another team has given up on. Not a prospect. Give me a player that I know that can play. A Zack Randolph. A Rashard Lewis. A Jason Kidd ( if the Nets decide to blow up everything ). Heck, I'd rather have a deal in which we'd land Lamar Odom here, instead of Bynum. Put Odom at the 3 . . keep Smoove at the 4 . . and the Hawks rapidly improve, even without a decent big man. Odom could essentially play the point forward for us, and make the entire team better, especially JJ. But I choose to be realistic, and not live in some fantasy trade world, where every deal I suggest would be feesible AND accepted by the other team. The real world isn't like that. So this is what I would do. At #3 . . I'd take Hibbert At #11 . . I'd take Law Simple as that. Now if someone wanted to make an offer for Hibbert + marvin + one of the PGs, for a good veteran player, I'd listen. If not, I'll role with Hibbert and Marvin. PG - Speedy ( or Law ) G - JJ F - Marvin F - Smoove C - Hibbert But of course, you wouldn't like that because you don't think Marvin will improve. So be it. It's like I've said many times before. It's more important for the core of this team to dramatically improve ( JJ, Smoove, Marvin, and possibly Chill ), than to hope that whoever we bring in here, will put us into contention. I don't see any regression in JJ, Smoove, Marvin, or Chill. If we kept all of them, that's just fine with me. And I'd have no problem rolling with Hibbert as our "project" center. And I have every bit of confidence that Law could easily be the PG for this team right off the bat, if need be. Now disagree with my plan. I have no problem with it. But you go post your ideas on the boards that you're trying to trade with, and see if they agree with you . . or laugh you off of their board. Simple as that.

Quote: Coach, I agree with the essence of what you're saying... Becuase it's true.. but there's one thing you're really missing... THE HYPE MACHINE... The Hype Machine was hard at work in the 2005 draft... Marvin and Bogut had the benefit of being two of the most hyped players in the history of the draft. The hype machine said that Marvin was the next James Worthy and that Bogut was better than Bill Walton. The Hype machine had people believing that Bogut bested Tim Duncan in the Olympics?? And Bogut helped out his own cause by talking tough... People thought that John Wayne had put on basketball shoes... But Marvin takes the cake. What did he do to deserve so much hype?? Nothing. Coming off the bench and being the right size propelled Marvin into the place where he was. The prognosticators (especially fans) tend to float to what they can't see and don't know more than what they can see and do. Chris Paul and Deron were the best prospects coming out of that draft, but the hype machine made Paul look too fragile for the game and made Deron seem too fat. It seems like they were running around calling him fatboy. So, I think the Hypemachine would have eventually chipped away everybody but Oden and Durant. Although Conley Jr. is getting the hypemachine ride this year. He'd probably be picked 5th. There's definitely something to that Diesel. ESPN has way too much power these days, over who becomes a star, and who they WANT to become a star. We've seen it in other spots, especially with young talent. - LeBron ( who they were right on ) - Michelle Wie ( who we haven't heard anything from in about a year. Maybe she'll concentrate on actually beating other women to get that fire to win, instead of just settling to make the cut on the men's tour ) - Freddy Adu ( the supposed savior of American soccer even at 14. Adu may be an average player at best on the MLS circut. ) - Sebastain Telfair ( next to LeBron, he probably got the most hype coming out of high school. ) - Maria Sharapova ( since she beat Serena at Wimbeldon 3 years ago, I don't think she's even won another major, even though most of the top women tennis players have been hurt off and on for the past 3 years ) But the NBA is definitely guilty for hyping up and even tearing down certain players. It's my hope that some of these teams will actually BELIEVE THE HYPE, and pass on Law in the top 10. But if you go by who are the best 10 players in this draft, Law is definitely in the top 10.

LOL. All you need is a BK latex mask with some real hair on it, and we couldn't tell the difference. This fan base would be calling on Al-Queda to bomb the Hawks headquarters, if we took Thaddeus.

I should've read the entire thread, before posting my comments. Diesel and Atlas pretty much summed up everything I was thinking. I could've saved about 30 minutes of typing. Walter needs to stop making these NBA Live type trades, in which he can make a deal and have the computer just immeadiately accept it because it fits under the cap.

Quote: The deal involved us getting rid of not-so-speedy Claxton. If you can't argue against the proposed deal, make up your own strawman deal to tear down. Suddenly Speedy's contract, MW, and 3rd pick in a draft where Pfs will remain at 3 for Bynum, Foye, and Radman becomes "a #3 pick and a #2 pick for Bynum". Now isn't that clever nonsense. W But this is always your problem Walter. You propose deals that sound good on paper, but never really consider why the other side would even make a deal like that. Speedy had his worst year as a pro, and was chronically injured. Now tell me who will make ANY trade for him right now? If anything, you wait and see if Speedy can get healthy, produces a little, THEN trade him when his value is higher. But as of right now, no sane GM in the league would trade for Speedy, and that contract. It's the same reason why Minny can't get rid of guys like Hudson and Jaric, and even Mike James for that matter. Who in their right mind would trade for those guys, with the amount of money left on their contracts? Unless Speedy improves to the level he was 2 years ago, he's going to be a Hawk for the next 4 years, whether we like it or not. That's just reality. Now we can cut him before then, but it still doesn't do us any good cap wise. I tell you what Walter. Go to the RealGM or ESPN boards, and post your trade on the Lakers and the T-Wolves board. See what response you'll get from their fans. Don't cry to us because we disagree with your elaborate, but unrealistic schemes. Post on their boards, and see if THEY agree with you.

Quote: You guys are just plain silly. Bynum is a stud WHO PLAYS A POSITION OF NEED. Foye can be a great playmaker next to JJ. AND THE DEAL IS PLAUSIBLE AND CAN GET DONE! Yet, you guys hem and haw and want 6 RPG Hibbert over Bynum (are you [censored] crazy!?!) and laud the play of MW as if he's worth a top 8 pick now, even though we have three other forwards, 2 of them lottery. But most importantly NONE OF YOU BK AND ASG FANS HAVE A SINGLE CREDIBLE IDEA OF YOUR OWN AS TO HOW TO SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVE THIS TEAM! I potentially solve BOTH our positional needs with a great prospect in Bynum and a very good one in Foye using a redundant player in MW and a 3rd pick we would have to reach with to fill our needs, I don't cost us our 11th pick, and you guys just make asses of yourselves. What's new? Northcyde, the new GSUteke. GSUteke, the new KB. KB, the new ? W You obviously see what you want to see Walter. Just because I'm not 100% behind your trade idea, doesn't mean that I wouldn't be totally against it if it happened. I could see why the Hawks would do it . . even if I wouldn't personally do the move. I think I explained that pretty thoroughly in my original post. That "stud" you talk about, can't even beat out Kwame Brown as the starter, on a team that desperately needed good play in the middle. Bynum does show flashes of greatness every once in a while. But he is a very inconsistent basketball player, especially on the defensive end. That's why a Hall of Fame coach like Phil Jackson opted to play Kwame, instead of Andrew. Now . . if you don't agree with that, write Phil an e-mail and tell him how much of an idiot HE is for not playing Andrew. If he were such a "stud" and a gamechanger, he would've played a lot of minutes against Amare in the Phoenix series. But the fact is that as of right now, Kwame Brown is the better player on both ends of the floor, even if his upside is very limited, compared to Andrew's upside. And when you say that Foye CAN be a great playmaker, you obviously haven't seen much of Minnesota play this year. What sets Foye apart from most guards, is that he's a pretty good defender, and can play AND defend both guard positions. Most importantly, he can score either via the open jumpshot, or by taking the ball strong to the hole ( ala Ben Gordon ). But as a playmaker? Please. I watched a ton of Minny games this year, mainly because I wanted to see how my boy Trenton Hassell was playing this year. Foye got a lot of his assists the same way that JT used to get his assists . . by passing to jumpshooters who caught and shot the ball to give him an assist. It wasn't like Foye was penetrating in the lane, drawing people to him, then kicking the ball out to a shooter or finding someone under the basket for an easy dunk. When Foye goes to the hole, he's a lot like Ben Gordon in the fact that he's looking to score, not create for others. Look at the numbers Foye put up in April, by far his best month as a pro in just about every category. 15.4 ppg 3.5 rebs 3.8 assists 3.1 turnovers 53% FG 50% 3FG In the previous 5 months, Randy shot 41% FG - 22% 3FG ( March ) 41% FG - 50% 3FG ( February ) 39% FG - 35% 3FG ( January ) 48% FG - 30% 3FG ( December ) 42% FG - 29% 3FG ( November ) That's what Randy would bring to the table, although I seriously doubt that he could shoot both 50% from both the field and from 3-point range. He'll be more around the 45% FG and 37% from 3, which is dang good for a young guard. But up until April, he showed no indication that he could play that well at all. As people have said before, Foye is a lead guard, not a playmaking PG. But he can play both guard positions, making him a value to any team picking him up. But to try to say that he can be a "great" playmaker, is so far from the truth, it isn't even funny. What he can be, is a Mike Bibby type playmaker, with the potential to be a Baron Davis type scorer. But even that is probably another 2 - 3 years from happening, considering the state of the T-Wolves these days. Maybe we should chalk up Foye playing so well in April, to the fact that he was playing against NBDL talent, much like some of you say about the numbers that Shelden put up in April. As far as Hibbert goes, I think that offensively, Hibbert is a much more polished player than what Andrew is right now. The guy is pretty graceful around the basket, can hit about 70% of his free throws, can hit a mid-range jumper, and is a pretty good on the ball defender. Unlike Josh Smith, he isn't a good defender only because he can block a few shots. Hibbert is a good defender because he can block shots and play man defense. When Oden and Hibbert went head to head against each other, Hibbert didn't back down from Oden one bit, and got his offense. And Oden didn't manhandle him either. It was a pretty good matchup against the 2 best centers in college. And we're not even going to talk about the game Hibbert had against UNC the game before. Hibbert isn't going to be a scrub in the NBA, and he may be better than Bynum right now. We won't see that, until they go head to head though. Neither may live up to be great centers, only serviceable ones. If the Hawks aren't going to transform themselves into a running team, give me Hibbert instead of Bynum. And for that matter, give me Law instead of Foye, because I trust Law as a playmaker and as a shooter, much more than I trust Foye. PG - Law ( or Speedy ) G - JJ . . Salim F - Marvin . . Chill F - Smoove . . Shelden C - Hibbert . . ZaZa I'll take that squad going into next season. You can take yours. Argue all you want on which combo would be better for us next year. You can't prove a thing, because we'll never know. It'll all be just speculation. And I know Walter. Marvin nor Shelden nor anybody else on this roster will improve next season. So in your eyes, this is a failure. To each his own. (( tossing the ball back to you, so you can do your childish namecalling once again ))

Quote: When did Andrew Bynum become such a great player that it would cost the Hawks Marvin Williams, a far better player, AND the #3 pick in the draft to get him? KB . . I agree with you. That's why I wouldn't do the deal. But if the Hawks were that desperate to get a center, that's probably what it would take to get one here, if they felt that Hibbert at #3 isn't as good of an option as Bynum. From our perspective, it'll basically be us giving up the #3 for Bynum . . and giving up Marvin in order to clear some room for Chill, Smoove, and Shelden to get 30+ minutes a game, even if all are healthy. If this team is so unbalanced, a move like that will instantly balance out the team. It's a gamble that I'm not willing to take, because I'm not convinced at all that Bynum can even be better than Eddy Curry, let alone be a dominant center. But I could see why the Hawks would do it. PG - Speedy . . Law . . Lue/AJ ( until traded or contracts expire ) G - JJ . . Salim F - Chill F - Smoove . . Shelden . . Solomon C - Bynum . . ZaZa . . Wright Chill is solid, and we know what we get from him. His upside isn't nearly as great as Marvin's though. Right now, Chill is the better player until Marvin becomes a more consistent player. Smoove is still growing and has a chance to be an all-star caliber player at the 3/4 combo spot. It's also has been cited many times on this board that Shelden produces when he actually gets major minutes. Moving Marvin may free him up as a guy who can get major minutes at the 4 and the 5, while not compromising the floor time of Smoove, who could easily move to the 3 in a Smoove - Shelden - Bynum frontcourt. I wouldn't make the trade, because I don't believe in trading young talent with potential, for more young talent with potential ( especially when the talent we're trading for is younger than what we already have ). I'm all for a Marvin/Chill/or Smoove trade, if it will bring us an established veteran player who we know that can play. But I definitely see why the Hawks would do it. And it would only be a bad move if Bynum turned out to be a complete bust or didn't develop past the level of a Mark Blount ( who isn't bad, but nowhere near great ).

Quote: Wright scenario: G - Crittenton G - Kobe F - Odom F - Wright C - Brown Marvin or Brewer ( 6th man ) Forget Brewer being the 6th man. He's not on the team if the Lakers take Wright. So Marvin would be the 6th man.

Quote: First, given our contract signing restrictions not allowing us to sign or trade for a player with > 4 years on his contract without unanimous approval from the owners, we cannot expect to trade away a player for cap space (i.e. Speedy) AND sign a max FA. No max FA of worth will sign for 4 years or less. PERIOD. Thus, with the 3rd overall pick we should look to either draft a player, draft a player and trade, or trade the pick. I suggest the following listed as trade scenario # 3807190 at realgm.com 1) Hawks trade the #3 pick, Marvin Williams, and Speedy Claxton, all to Minnesota and get Bynum, Foye, Radman, and Cook. 2) The Lakers trade Lamar Odom to Minnesota and Bynum, Radman, and Cook to Atlanta and get Garnett. 3) Minnesota trades Kevin Garnett to LA and Foye to Atlanta and get the #3 pick, Marvin Williams, Odom, and Speedy Claxton. Obviously, they rebuild with the 3rd and 5th picks this year, MW, and Odom. This deal could easily be tweaked to send Lue to LA. Possibly SW and JC instead of MW if that's what it takes to make the deal work. Anyhow, the lineup would be Bynum/ZaZa JS/SW/Cook JC/Radman JJ Foye/Lue or AJ We draft whomever with the 11th pick. Basically, I think a 3rd pick is to Minny's liking if they decide to trade Garnett and rebuild. LA want's Garnett. Bynum and Foye fill our two needs perfectly and very well respectively. We have a high pick to spare. W Decent trade. And one thing about Foye. Foye CAN play the point, but that isn't his ideal position. So we're running the risk of putting a "young" JT-like player at the point, hoping he can develop into an efficient one. He's a scoring PG, not a playmaking one. Right now, he's just decent at that position, with decision making being his biggest problem while playing PG. He's had his biggest games in Minny, when he's able to be the main option with the reserves, or when KG tosses the ball out to him for open jumpers. What Randy can do, is defend PGs. And that would definitely be a benefit for the Hawks. It's funny though. You're completely against Law, compared to the other 2 PGs, but Foye and Law are pretty comparable players, when it comes to offensive play. The exception being that Law is a truer PG than Foye, and a far better playmaker. Foye is the better defender though. But I think you're making this way too complicated to get Bynum here. I wouldn't even make Minny part of the deal. ( Note: As bad as BK is villified on this board, he'd be dealing with arguably two GMs who have done a worse job than him . . McHale and Kupchak. So any deal involving the three of them would be "interesting" to say the least. ) Here's what I would do, to try to pry Bynum away from them. I could only do this if Corey Brewer keeps rising on the draft board. Atlanta trades: Marvin + #3 pick to Lakers LA Lakers trade: Bynum + Maurice Evans + 1st round 2008 If Kobe is definitely in a "win now" mode, they need to start acquiring people that can help them "win now" . . right now. If you add Minny into a deal, they're more than likely will want Bynum, because everyone already knows what Odom will bring to the table. Bynum has "upside" that the Lakers can sell teams on, in which that team can sell to their fan bases who need a center ( like us ). Odom doesn't. You already know what you'll get with Odom. That's the main reason why you keep Minny out of the deal. But this is what you sell the Lakers on. If they take Marvin and the #3 pick, they'll have their choice on how their roster can look for the 2008 season. Frist option: You can go extremely athletic, and take Brewer with the #3 pick. ( Note: the triangle offense doesn't require you to have a playmaking PG . . just one who can guard the other teams PG, and one that can knock down open shots. If push came to shove, Kobe or Brewer have the ability to bring the ball up the court and guard both guard positions. ) Lineup: G - Kobe G - Brewer F - Marvin F - Odom C - Brown 2nd option: You can address the center you just lost, and take Hibbert to take his place. G - Farmar G - Kobe F - Marvin F - Odom C - Hibbert 3rd option: If you want to keep Odom in the starting lineup, and bring Marvin off the bench as a hired gun, take Brandan Wright. G - Farmar G - Kobe F - Odom F - Wright C - Brown Marvin ( 6th man ) ** And there's a reason why I would ask for the Lakers 2008 pick, instead of their #19 pick this year. You would do that in order to essentially give the Lakers three 1st round picks this year. The Lakers have to be sold on the fact that Marvin + the #3 pick, could give them enough athletic talent to get them past a team like Phoenix, and give Kobe the adequate help that he needs. That may be enough for them to let go of Bynum. And you would do it in order for the Hawks to have a 2008 draft pick in the 1st round. ( A pick that we would lose, if we got the #3 pick this year ). Even if it's a pick in the 20s, it's still a 1st round pick. And here's what some of you Hawks fans would HATE. I would sell them on the fact that they ( the Lakers ) could also acquire a young PG waiting for them at the #19 spot. Guess who it would be? Now . . let's go back and redo those lineups, with the Lakers getting that young PG at the #19 spot. Brewer scenario: G - Crittenton G - Kobe F - Brewer ( or Marvin ) F - Odom C - Brown Hibbert scenario: G - Crittenton G - Kobe F - Brewer ( or Marvin ) F - Odom C - Hibbert Wright scenario: G - Crittenton G - Kobe F - Odom F - Wright C - Brown Marvin or Brewer ( 6th man ) For the Hawks, we'd basically sell "less" our soul to get Bynum, and PRAY TO GOD that he pans out immeadiately. Evans is just a filler to make the numbers work, with his contract expiring after the 2008 season. And the 1st round pick would at least give the Hawks a pick to work with in the 2008 draft. But we'd be basically selling our soul, just to get a center. Hawks lineup. G - Speedy ( or Law ) G - JJ F - Childress F - Smoove C - Bynum Bench: G - Law . . Lue . . Salim . . AJ ( or Speedy, if not the starter ) F - Evans, Solomon, Shelden C - ZaZa, Wright We would've addressed both the needs at PG and at C with this, but in turn, possibly given the Lakers two potential All-Star players ( Marvin and Brewer ), with the remote opportunity of them drafting a 3rd guy who might develop into a star in Crittenton. We'd still have our expiring contracts to work with ( Lue, AJ, Wright ), to possibly make another move with to get a veteran player here. And we'd be assured to have a 1st round draft pick in 2008. This means that Bynum BETTER be as good as people think he can be, and not just a "run of the mill" center. Personally, I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't do it because I would rather trade Marvin for a more established player ( lol . . like a Lamar Odom or a Zach Randolph ). And this Hawks lineup would be interesting as well . . if we wanted to run, and go extremely athletic. G - Speedy G - JJ F - Brewer F - Marvin F - Smoove But if this team ( and the fan base ) really wants a center that bad, the best way to go about it is to sell the Lakers on the fact that they could essentially acquire the #2 pick in the 2005 draft and the #3 pick in this year's draft, to significantly upgrade their team.

Quote: For some reason, I think the coach actually likes Marion more than Amare. Plus, I heard the owner is really cheap. Durant is cheaper than Amare. Come on Van. That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard on this board in quite a while. Marion is the odd man out in Phoenix, especially since they signed Diaw to that laughable contract. At some point, he's going to have to be given a chance to earn that money. The Suns would NEVER make it to the Finals, if they traded Amare. Amare at least keeps that team competitive for the next 5 years, regardless of what happens to Nash health wise. As far as Shawn goes, he only has 2 more years minimum in Phoenix. That is, if he doesn't opt out after next year. I know personally that Shawn isn't necessarily happy with the non-recognition that he gets in Phoenix, with Nash and Amare always in the spotlight. And he's been a lightning rod for Phoenix fans in that past, for his playoff disappearances. If Phoenix gets knocked out tonight, don't be surprised if the Suns don't try to deal Shawn in the offseason.

Quote: If we get the second pick, I think we should trade it. How about the second pick, speedy, lo, for Amare Stoudamire and our 1st round pick in 2008? Phoenix get Durant and unloads Amare's contract. With the 11th pick, we just pick up pg. I would even add ZaZa. Let's face it, Durant is a great player. But, I like Amare even more. He fills our immediate need for an inside presence. If we get the #2 pick, we should at least TRY this lineup, to see how it would look. PG - Speedy ( or Law ) G - JJ F - Marvin ( or Durant ) F - Durant ( or Smoove ) F - Smoove ( or Shelden ) Most of you guys want this team to run, and seem to be in love with the Phoenix/Golden St./Memphis style of play. Well, this is the lineup to do it with. You run that lineup out on the court, and see if people can guard us offensively. I've always said that if we can't find an adequate guy to put in the middle, that Smoove could very well be that guy that ends up at the 5 spot. Play him as a very athletic 5, and hope his "on the ball" defense becomes more solid. Even if this lineup doesn't start games, we'd definitely see that lineup in the game at some points, if we acquired Durant. We'd have to be a scramble defensive team that plays a lot of zone, but this lineup could get away with it. Athletically, there would be very few teams that would match up with us. If the lineup didn't work, we could always trade away a few guys before the trade deadline ( or even as early as Christmas ), to get a possible big man to fill out the lineup. But you DON'T trade Durant, without seeing what you possibly have first. And you DON'T trade any of our kids, until we could see how that lineup could possibly benefit us.

ATL vs UTAH ( head to head this year ) Game 1 in Atlanta 12/20: ( Utah 112 - Hawks 106 ) Head to head matchups: Deron vs Speedy - Deron: 13 points ( 5 - 11 FG ) . . 9 assists . . 6 turnovers . . 0 steals - Speedy: 12 points ( 5 - 9 FG ) . . 8 assists . . 2 turnovers . . 6 steals JJ vs Fisher - Fisher: 18 points ( 6 - 8 FG ) . . 1 assist . . 2 rebounds . . 1 steal - JJ: 27 points ( 9 - 18 FG ) . . 5 assists . . 4 rebounds . . 2 steals AK 47 vs Marvin - AK: 12 points ( 4 - 7 FG ) . . 5 rebs . . 5 assists . . 2 steals - Marvin: 9 points ( 2 - 11 FG ) . . 1 rebound . . 2 assists . . 3 steals Boozer vs Smoove - Boozer: 13 points ( 5 - 10 FG ) . . 5 rebs . . 4 assists . . 1 steal . . 0 blocks - Smoove: 23 points ( 9 - 16 FG ) . . 12 rebs . . 4 assists . . 3 steals . . 4 blocks Okur vs ZaZa - Okur: 30 points ( 11 - 17 FG ) . . 10 rebs . . 3 assists . . 3 steals - ZaZa: 9 points ( 1 - 3 FG . . 7 - 8 FT ) . . 5 rebs . . 3 assists .. 1 steal Milsap vs Shelden - Milsap: 2 points ( 1 - 3 FG ) . . 2 rebs . . 2 steals . . 17 minutes played - Shelden: 14 points ( 4 - 7 FG ) . . 6 rebs . . 1 steal . . 25 minutes played High/Lowlights - Utah outscores Atlanta 40 - 13 in the 4th quarter to pull out a miraculous win, after Atlanta had played a brilliant 3rd quarter, outscoring Utah 39 - 19. - No Ty Lue, Salim Stoudamire or Josh Childress this game - Utah shoots 56% . . Hawks shoot 47% - Hawks have 23 assists on the night ( 2 total assists in the final 15 minutes ) . . Utah has 28 assists ( 8 assists in the 4th quarter alone ) ****************** Game 2 in Utah 2/12: Utah 102 - Hawks 76 Head to head matchups: Deron vs Ivey - Deron: 7 points . . 9 assists . . 6 rebounds - Ivey: 6 points . . 1 rebound . . 1 assist Fisher vs JJ - Fisher: 14 points ( 4 - 8 FG ) . . 3 rebounds . . 4 assists - JJ: 14 points ( 5 - 14 FG ) . . 1 rebound . . 3 assists AK vs Marvin - AK: 11 points . . 4 rebounds . . 4 assists . . 2 steals . . 4 blocks - Marvin: 15 points ( 6 - 12 FG ) . . 1 rebound . . 2 assists . . 1 block Okur vs Smoove - Okur: 19 points ( 4 - 9 FG . . 9 - 10 FT ) . . 6 rebounds - Smoove: 10 points ( 3 - 12 FG ) . . 6 rebounds . . 3 assists . . 4 blocks Jarron Collins vs Lo Wright - Collins: 3 points . . 5 rebounds - Lo Wright: 0 points . . 2 rebounds Bench numbers Shelden vs Milsap - Milsap: 13 points . . 9 rebounds . . 17 minutes - Shelden: 8 points . . 9 rebounds . . 25 minutes - Speedy ( off the bench ): 2 points . . 2 rebounds . . 0 assists - ZaZa ( off the bench ): 10 points . . 3 rebounds High/Lowlights - No Boozer for Utah this game. - No Lue for ATL this game - Hawks down 50 - 32 at Halftime - Hawks shoot 37% and had 10 total assists in the game Just tossing out some numbers in their head to head matchups this year.

And ex, that's my biggest beef with all of those who are against Law. They've obviously haven't seen him play more than one or two games. Then they get mad when people who have seen Law play, put him over Conley or Javaris. Like that topic about the guards and centers that walter started. How can he honestly project how high or low Law can go, when he hasn't even seen the guy play more than 1.5 games?

Shelden can play the 5 in the NBA . . but only if we commit to being a zone team. Man to man, he'll have problems against good post scorers. In a zone, he can definitely play the 5, because he's a smart defensive player in the paint. The question is, can Shelden keep people honest on the offensive end, if he were to play the 5? That pretty much means that he'd have to consistently knock down that 12 - 15 foot jumper, get 3 - 4 offensive rebounds a game, and occasionally show some post moves to draw fouls. Playing zone though, means that the Hawks would have to be a very good weak side help defensive team. And our guards would have to be smart about when to double down, and when to play a particular zone on the floor, to be able to get back to shooters in time. Shelden's best all-around moment as a Hawk, came in that game @ Denver back in December, when we made that great comeback to win the game. He played the passing lanes perfectly in that 4th quarter. Without his steals, deflections, the great jump ball he forced on Carmelo, and the great up and under move he makes to draw the foul on Camby at the end of the game, the Hawks do not win. If we don't get a big man via the draft or free agency, this may be a moot point anyway. He'll have to play center, at least in a platoon role ( along with ZaZa and Smoove ). Let him play center, and let Smoove roam the paint as his help at the PF spot. If Smoove's man posts him up, and his man is a good post player, run a guard or a forward at him, and let Shelden do what he does best . . secure defensive rebounds. If both improve their "on the ball" defense, you'll see a big difference in the Hawks on that end of the floor, especially when you combine the defensive abilities of a Speedy Claxton, who can come down and strip post defenders of the ball.

Stop changing your argument Walt. I know you're good at that. The fact is that without the injuries, that 04 - 05 Jazz team was well on their way to winning 35- 45 games that year. They were in no way, shape or form a sub 30 game team.

Oh . . and nice touch with the blue font Jsmith.

I know everybody wants a "pass-first" PG here. But PGs like that are only good, if you have shooters surrounding him. It's like coach said in another thread. If you want Conley, you better keep Marvin and any other shooters we have on this team around. With Law, he can acutally be a shooter, as well as a distributor. With Javaris, he can do it too, but probably turn the ball over twice as much.

I always like reading the "sub-thread" arguments away from the main topic. It's like watching an old episode of "24", with Jack tracking down the terrorists as the main storyline, and his daughter Kim bein the sub-plot, being kidnapped by some lunatic or being chased by a cougar. What I want to know, is who should I put my money on? What are the Vegas odds on this matchup?

Quote: It started when 4-1 became 30-52 while teams that didn't have as good a start finished with much better records. In fact, it started before the season started when I and others knew that the team wouldn't compete for a playoff spot (and being only four games back in February doesn't count) ONCE AGAIN. Sure other teams had the horses to be better than ours but that isn't what we should expect from our guys, shouldn't we? After all, we've been the youngest team in the league since...since... Pro basketball and the Hawks aren't my entire life as evidenced by my posting less than 300 replies despite being here since the forum started. I've had my case of myopia as everyone else (the announcement of the SAR trade comes to mind) but when there are bad moves being made by my favorite basketball team, I'm not the one to say 'everything's okay, relax, we'll be good one day, let's wait on the young guys to jell'. I simply have higher expectations than being estatic about 30 win seasons, especially when this 'process' of BK's has taken forever and a day. The fact is that this franchise should be much further along in this 'process' than many will admit to. We should at least be talking about the playoff run we're having or had instead of relying on ping-pong balls to bail out the GM for his jacked up draft picks. If that's being 'negative' or being a cynic, then let it be known then. Spinning excuse after excuse about why our team stinks out loud isn't what this forum is about. It's about sharing our opinions on our favorite pro basketball team, even it isn't what you'd like to read or hear. GAME, SET, MATCH. Dejay. My stance is simple, as well as yours. You blame our woes on management, coaching and ownership. I blame our woes on youth, inexperience and injuries. To me, each side has valid points. The difference though, is that we can't do a thing about the personnel moves that we did or didn't make in the past. But the players that we have obtained, can still improve themselves to the point that we can still get to that next level. We can always play the revisionist history game, and say that this player should've been taken, instead of that player. The question now is . . where do we go from here? People question the talent here, but say that we should be in the playoffs this year, in the same breath. They say the coach is terrible, but give him no credit for putting guys like JJ, Smoove, and Marvin in the best positions possible to maximize their offense. It's not a perfect setup we have here. Firing the coach, just to be firing him, is not the solution to this problem. Blowing up the team AGAIN, just because we didn't get results in 2 years, isn't the answer either. You have to take everything into consideration. To discount injuries as just an "excuse" isn't fair to the current players on this roster. Those injuries have hampered their development as players. And you can't look at this as an 8 year process. If we were to fire both the coach and the GM, and trade off our young talent, the fan base would have to be patient with the new administration, to see if they can get results. And from a realistic standpoint, when you blow up something, you're not going to get results immeadiately. If Woody is fired, your first coaching choice better be a sure thing. You don't want to go through a situation like the U. of Kentucky, which pretty much wanted Tubby Smith gone for about 2 years now. Tubby got smart, and left on his own terms. UK and its fans had pipe dreams about bringing in a Billy Donovan or a Rick Pitino back into the fold. They ended up with Bill Gillespie. For UK fans, they wanted change. But that change may not be in the best interest of the program, seeing that Gillespie coaches almost EXACTLY how Tubby coaches . . which means that the style of play will not change at all, only the coach on the bench. And that fan base better hope that it was Gillespie that took Texas A&M to the next level, and not Acie Law. The same goes for us. We can toss out names like Rick Adleman, Stan Van Gundy, and Paul Silas out there all we want. But if those coaches wouldn't dare come here, we may end up with some assistant coach on a playoff team, who may or may not be ready to step up to the plate and coach an NBA team. In other words, we may end up with Woody again . . but with a different name. Trust the young talent we have here Dejay, and hope they stay healthy enough to get us over the hump next year.

It's vital that Smoove develop some sort of post offense, and leave those 20 foot jumpers alone . . unless he's hot. People talk about Solomon gaining weight, but I'd love to see Smoove come into training camp with an added 10 pounds of muscle, with a few nice post moves to go along with the added weight.

Utah won 26 games. That is true. But it's funny to see WHY they only won 26 games. Take a wild guess at what killed their season. You won't have to think hard. Utah starting lineup at the beginning of that year: PG - Carlos Arroyo ( but was hurt at the start of the season ) G - Gordon Giricek F - AK 47 PF - Boozer C - Jarron Collins Main guys off the bench: F/C - Okur F - Matt Harpring G - Raja Bell G - Howard Eisley G - Keith McLeod ( who took Arroyo's place at the start of the season ) Jazz start the season 4 - 1 ( LOL . . sound familiar ). Actually, they start the season 6 - 1 ( something we should've done this year, if we'd taken care of business at the end of games, but oh well ) Uh oh, McLeod goes down with an injury. No big deal though . . at least you would think. He's just a pass-first PG with decent defensive skills. He'd go to the bench as soon as Arroyo came back anyway. They look to be a soild team in November, posting an 8 - 5 record . . when . . BAM !!!! AK 47, the heart and soul of that team, goes down for the count in San Antonio. The result? Utah loses 19 of their next 22 games. Can't blame the horrible coaching skills of Jerry Sloan for the Utah freefall, can we? Nope. Because Sloan can coach his azz off. And even HE couldn't stop that team from going into a freefall that year. What you can blame is Matt Harpring just not having the all-around skills that an AK 47 has. And when you take a player like that out of the lineup, it has grave consequences. By the time Kirilenko comes back into the lineup in late January, the Jazz have gone from an 8 - 5 team that everyone in the league were surprised at, to a 15 - 29 team that is struggling just to keep their season somewhat alive. Then, in mid-February, Boozer hurts his ankle down in Phoenix. He's done for the year now. The result? Jazz go 9 - 23 without Boozer the rest of the year. Plus AK 47 got hurt again late in March, breaking his wrist in Washington. He's done for the year after that. THAT'S how a well coached Utah team, wins 26 games. In all, Boozer and AK 47 play a total of 92 of 164 possible games between the 2. ( AK played 41 games . . Boozer played 51 ). Raja Bell missed 19 games. Keith McLeod missed 29 games. So between just those 4 players, who were key cogs in the Jazz rotation, you're talking about a total of 120 games that they missed. Hard to overcome that, especially when you're a young team, like the Jazz were 2 years ago. Arroyo got traded at mid season, just in case you were wondering. *********** On the bright side, Harpring, Okur, and Giricek only miss 5 games. For Okur, the Boozer and AK injuries enabled him to take on more responsibility in the 1/2 court offense, and allowed him to develop. For Harpring, it just solidified his position with the Jazz . . be a hired gun shooter at the SF position, that occasionally grabbed rebounds. ************* So in reality Walter, the 04 - 05 Jazz were very much like the 06 - 07 Hawks. An incomplete team with talent throughout the lineup. Unfortunately, injuries derailed any progress that they could make as a team. That year did more to develop individual talent on the Jazz, than team chemistry that translated into wins. *********** Deron's rookie year saw him bounce in and out of the starting lineup. But with the guards that Utah already had there in McLeod and Eisley, it helped Deron ease his way to the role of leader. Deron was nowhere near an impact guard last year. He was solid, and gave the Jazz an extra guard to depend on. And that helped them. Most importantly, the experience that Okur got as being the "go-to-guy" when Boozer got hurt, enabled him to somewhat keep the ship afloat on offense. It also helped that Kirilenko didn't miss many extended stretches in games, and managed to play in 69 of them. Final analysis: Deron wasn't the major reason why the Jazz went from 26 wins to 41 wins. But he probably is the major reason why the Jazz has gone from 41 wins, to potential NBA Finals contender. That, and the fact that Boozer has become the new "Karl Malone." The inside-outside game of Deron and Carlos may be one of the best in the league.