TheNorthCydeRises

SMH.The stat geek sites need to stop. If they're not going to properly look at how new players may play on a new team, instead of just transferring their numbers from their old team to their new team, you can't even take this serious. The Pacers may be the most solid top to bottom team in the conference, yet they're going to finish 8th? Knicks finish ahead of the Celtics? Lakers the 4th best team in the West? Not even going to talk about us at #2.

He literally does everything better than Lou Williams, and is more skilled at his age, than JJ was at that same age. http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx09_zUJTkk If Ferry could come into the 2013 - 14 season and put together this lineup PG - Teague G - Harden ( who would essentially be the PG/playmaker ) F - free agent/draft pick PF - Smith ( or Jefferson/Milsap ) C - Horford And still have Williams, Ivan, and Jenkins to bring off the bench, I would be happy going into 2013, with the Hawks just needing a decent backup big man ( who is better and more consistent than Zaza ). You say that Harden is JJ 2.0 I'll say that Harden at the MINIMUM is JJ 2.0. That means he has the potential to be even greater than what JJ was.

Teague is a restricted free agent next year, along with Ivan. Teams can go right after these guys and offer them contracts if Teague and Ivan aren't offered extensions by the Hawks. The Hawks do have the right to match any offer for those guys, which is good for us. But the Hawks may choose to just offer both guys the Qualifying Offer ( 3.47 million for Teague . . . 1.2 million for Ivan ). If they accept that QO, they then become unrestricted free agents in the summer of 2014. Mike Scott is a 2nd round pick, which means his 2nd year isn't guaranteed. The Hawks have to pick up his team option on his 2nd year in order to bring him back. The same goes for Deshawn Stevenson. So the only contracts that are set in stone going into next summer are: - Al Horford: 12 million - Lou Williams: 5.225 million - John Jenkins: 1.259 million ************************ As for your projected targets, I agree that James Harden has to be the guy the Hawks go all out to bring here. I don't think we have any shot at Howard or Paul. I'll also include Bynum to that list. But I see Harden in a JJ-like situation when he was in Phoenix. The Thunder aren't going to offer him a MAX deal, and will try to get him at a cheaper price. But if Harden has a season like last year, teams are going to go all out ot get him. The Hawks need to be in that mix for Harden next summer. The thing working against us in the Harden sweepstakes, is that OKC can still use their amnesty clause on somebody. And that somebody will definitely be Kendrick Perkins and his almost 9 mill salary in 2013 - 14. If they amnesty Perk, that will give them enough room to sign Harden at or near MAX level, and just fill Perk's spot with a scrub center. As long as the Thunder aren't terrified of paying the Luxury Tax, that may be the route they go.

JJ in preseason: * 13.5 ppg - 2 rebs - 4 asst - 1.5 stls . . . 50% FG - 42% 3FG * has 0 FT attempts * 12 of his 22 total shots so far have been 3s * has an "Assist of the Night" http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwxTmi9g0U Marvin in preseason: * 11.8 ppg - 3 rebs - 1.8 asst - 1.5 stls . . . 54% FG - 63% 3FG - 86% FT * leads Jazz in FTs made ( 12 ) and 3 ptrs made ( 5 ) * has scored in double figures in each of the 4 preseason games They're doing OK I guess.

You may have a point. Or maybe the huge Joe Johnson fans see this going into next summer Major free agents in 2013 that will be highly sought after next year - Dwight Howard ( unrestricted ) - Chris Paul ( unrestricted ) - Andrew Bynum ( unrestricted ) - Josh Smith ( unrestricted ) - Al Jefferson ( unrestricted ) - Andre Iguodala ( early termination option ) - Monta Ellis ( early termination option ) - Stephen Curry ( restricted ) - Tyreke Evans ( restricted ) - Ty Lawson ( restricted ) - James Harden ( restricted ) - Brandon Jennings ( restricted ) The players in RED are guys that I see getting a MAX contract from somebody. Hawks under contract in 2013 - Al Horford - Lou Williams - John Jenkins Outside of the current team all of these players are on, here are the teams with "cap space" that the Hawks will be competing against: - Charlotte - Cleveland - Dallas - Detroit - Houston - Milwaukee - Minnesota - San Antonio - Utah If you're Danny Ferry, what is your sales pitch to entice 2 of these guys to come ( or stay in Josh Smith's case ) to Atlanta, and not stay with his current team, or go to one of the teams listed above?

No excuse for him not getting that many shots, now that JJ is gone. But Drew is going to try to play 11 guys like he did last year, and give shots to people who really don't have any business shooting in the first place.

Once again, according to NBA.com - Garnett . . . 6 - 11 . . 253 lbs - Bosh . . . 6 - 11 . . 235 lbs - Pau Gasol . . 7 - 0 . . 250 lbs - Aldridge . . 6 - 11 . . 240 lbs - Duncan . . 6 - 11 . . 255 lbs - Amare . . 6 - 11 . . 245 lbs - Horford . . 6 - 10 . . 250 lbs - Smith . . 6 - 9 . . 225 lbs But Horford and Smith want to play the same way . . and Al doesn't get enough touches on the offensive end ( or isn't assertive enough on the offensive end ). Al and Smith are too finesse, and not enough power. In this smallish lineup, we need both of them to be more power type players, and leave the finesse to the guards and wing shooters.

Just to drive home your point about the "Detroit Model" PG - Billups . . 6 - 3 G - Hamilton . . 6 - 7 F - Prince . . 6 - 9 PF - R. Wallace . . 6 - 11 C - B. Wallace . . 6 - 8 And when your 6 - 8 guy was the toughest guy in the league and Defensive Player of the Year that season, because he was a dominant rebounder and shot blocker, it's almost like he was really a 7 footer. As for KG, we couldn't do anything with him because he would simply shoot right over the top of our players. As you correctly pointed out, his length in the post and in the midrange in that series, made him virtually un-guardable. Even on the final Boston possession in Game 6, it was KG basically shooting right over Josh from about 12 feet out to seal that game. But to me, the biggest issue with Josh and Al isn't really their size . . . it's their toughness. Add to the fact that they both basically play the same finesse style of game, it doesn't separate their skills enough as offensive players. I've always compared the Hawks with Smith and Horford, to the dilemma that Golden State had with Monta Ellis and Stephen Curry. There was no doubt that both guys were very talented. But they needed one of them to be bigger, and play differently, in order to make that combo really work. They were both 6 - 3 and smallish type PGs ( weight wise . . both were under 190 lbs ) who were quick as hell, but neither could handle a good 2 guard who was taller and bigger. And they both took the same type of shots on offense. And that's basically the situation we have with Al and Josh. They're going to be fine against most frontlines in the league. But as soon as we play a team that has a guy who can score in the post, or get physical with us in the post on defense, we'd always run into problems. In the past though, we could kind of rely on our wings and backcourt guys to limit the production of the guards and forwards of other teams, when we played dominant post players. Now, we may not have that luxury at all, because we are so small in the backcourt. And even with this trend of PFs playing C, almost all of those PFs are very skilled from 18 feet and in. They not only can score on you in the post, they can take you out to 18 feet and score on you from out there. - Garnett - Bosh - Pau Gasol - Aldridge - Duncan - Amare All of those guys are 6 - 11 or taller, according to NBA.com's measurements. They may be "listed" as PFs, but they're all legit Center length type guys. Then you add the 10 or so good "legit" centers in the league, and you kind of see what the problem is.

Ivan is like a cross between Charles Oakley and actor Terry Crews. That's a good thing.

And what were the "basketball reasons" again? And go ahead and dismiss the power that gilbert's e-mail may have had on Stern, when he accurately laid out the reason why the Lakers were going to make out like fat cats once again in a lopsided trade. Gilbert was one of the main ringleaders in the owner's lockout of the players. That dude had major pull amongst the rest of the league's owners.So Stern is going to undercut his own GM in New Orleans, and kill all the work the Rockets and Lakers did, because the deal was unfavorable to the Hornets?Even you're not that dang gullible.Just because the league didn't have a formal vote on the trade, doesn't mean that they didn't hear the cries of the owners loud and clear. But go ahead and believe some generic statement from the league, when everyone else knows the truth.

Northcyde simply tells the facts. http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7333285/los-angeles-lakers-deal-acquire-chris-paul-off http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=ys-nba_dan_gilbert_email_lakers_hornets_trade_120811 No sense in telling lies about the situation.

Once again, what is YOUR SOLUTION? You haven't given one ounce of a plan of what you would've done. Sounding like Mitt Romney and Obama. What Ferry did, was trade off a 6 time All-Star for 5 dead roaches and a future dead roach, and couldn't even get their best young player ( Marshon Brooks ) in the deal. Then he trades off Marvin for Devin Harris, a deal that we HOPE will turn out well for us, but the logjam at PG might backfire, and make Devin less effective than what he can be. And heck, we trade Marvin and hope his replacement(s) can be a better fit at SF than he was. Hopefully it will work out. But there's a reason why most fans see a GAPING hole at SF these days. And it's because of the 2 moves Ferry made. Ferry didn't improve this team, he simply got rid of bad contracts in hopes of improving them for the future. The Sixers, on the other hand, improved their team IMMEDIATELY, even though they let go of 3 of their top 4 players. The Magic screwed themselves, by holding out hope that they could persuade Howard to stay. Him accepting the player option gave them even more hope. But the Hawks should've stepped in BEFORE that, and offered them a deal that they would've been silly to refuse, if Howard really wanted to leave Orlando. And hell, at that time, if we wanted to use Howard OURSELVES as a trade chip, we would've had the option to do that last season The (( bleep's )) chess, it ain't checkers. But you're over there playing UNO with Mike Gearon Jr, when he should've been chess with the rest of the league. But nope. He and the other owners were too worried about significantly going over the Luxury Tax line, when teams who are willing to do any and everything to win a title, laugh at that L-Tax . . at least for a season or two. http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=54uUrHK5Efk http-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q46P234Pj3A Once again, who cares what Chris Paul wanted? Did he have trade veto power? From everything I saw, Chris Paul decided to take his player option after Chauncey was signed, not refuse to go to the Clippers before Billups was signed. Chris Paul may have had his desires of what teams he wanted to play for, but he had no real power to dictate what team the Hornets traded him to. It was up to the Hornets to get what they thought was the best possible deal for them. If another team offered them something, and were willing to take on Paul just for one year ( in hopes they could convince him to stay ), the Hornets could've traded him to that team. He vetoed the trade because the league's owners felt that once again, the Lakers were getting a Hall of Fame caliber player and making them better, without giving up little or anything in return. LOL . . his veto had nothing to do with what the Hornets got. That veto was all about preventing the Lakers from getting Chris Paul for basically swapping him for Pau Gasol. And that initial trade actually illustrates my point. Houston's plan was to acquire BOTH of the Gasol brothers. The reason they were willing to part with all of that talent, was to entice Marc to sign with Houston to play with brother Pau. And they still made a big time run at Marc right before last season, with that MAX contract offer they gave him. Who cares about the cupboard being bare, when I would have newer and possibly better items to put in the cupboard. So you wouldn't trade Josh + Al for a healthy Dwight Howard . . . even without a future commitment from him? That's fine. But teams that think like that, will never go anywhere.

No one wants to play for the Bobcats because they are sorry from top to bottom . . . period. So if you're the Bobcats, you have to MAKE somebody come to you and play, not wait on someone to choose you to play for them. And the Hawks must do the same, because the perception of our franchise isn't much better than what the Bobcats are . . . and we've been in the dang playoffs for the past 5 years. This was your sentence though It's not always about where the team is, small/large market. If you have the money they will come. It just so happens the Hawks will have the money... The money isn't the main factor. Where a team is, and the perception a player has of that franchise, has more to do with where he'll go, than how much a team can offer him. Especially when you talk about star and veteran players.

If you make that trade before the 2011 season, and we gave away Smith + Horford + 2013 1st round pick for Howard and Jason Richardson ( because part of that Dwight trade would have to be to take a bad contract off of them ). Hell, I even throw in Jeff Teague since you mentioned him . . this is the 2011 Atlanta Hawks PG - Pargo G - Johnson F - Marvin PF - Ivan . . ( who could average 10 ppg - 7 rebs if he got starters minutes and played alongside Howard ) C - Howard 6th - Zaza 7th - Richardson 8th - McGrady 9th - Sloan ( because he probably makes this team without Teague here ) . . no Willie Green 10th - Radmanovic That team right there is no worse than the squad we threw out there last year. That team still makes the playoffs. And if Howard goes down with that back injury, we're now a lottery team that has a chance to pick a nice young talent. If we still got to keep Teague, this is your team PG - Teague G - Johnson F - Marvin PF - Ivan C - Howard 6th - Zaza 7th - Richardson 8th - Pargo 9th - McGrady 10th - Radmanovic And as history has now shown, we would've had the ability to trade off BOTH Joe Johnson and Marvin Williams if need be, to completely destroy the team and rebuild it from the ground, up. If Dwight leaves after one year, that's cool. You get a huge trade exception from him leaving, and use that to possibly sign a decent free agent. If not, you let his money fall off the books, and you're still better off financially than you were. ******************** The whole purpose of acquiring young talent, is to first see if they can develop into something special. If they can't, you trade them off to see if you can bring in better talent, even if it's one player. The good to great teams know this. It's crazy. We saw Philly part with their longtime borderline All-Star wing ( Iguodala ), their aging but best big man ( Brand ), and their top scorer from last year ( Williams ) . . . and they were able to replace them with Nick Young, Jason Richardson, and the big prize . . Andrew Bynum. At least the Hawks did get a decent player from the Marvin trade, although Jazz fans aren't crying at all about the Marvin for Devin swap, seeing that they really like Marvin over there. They got nothing from the JJ trade, outside of the expectation of "cap space". And we'll see what happens with Josh Smith after this season ( or maybe as soon as the All-Star break ). The reality of the NBA, is that teams who are scared to take risks, and don't make the right moves, are the teams that will constantly fail . . or never reach their potential.

You know good and well you can't compare football to basketball. And even the Falcons had to go through something dramatic: - the jailing and release of the franchise QB most people in that city flat out loved ( Vick ) - the Bobby Petrino coaching fiasco - being sorry enough the next year to be in position to draft their future franchise QB in Matt Ryan with the #3 pick in that draft - bring in a guy who had NEVER been a head coach before in Mike Smith, and have that work - and acquire a stud RB in Michael Turner, who honestly should still be with the Chargers right now And they STILL haven't won a playoff game in 5 years. Hopefully things will change this year. But don't act like the Falcons had this grand plan to stardom. They basically had to have everything crumble from the Vick era, to be in position to do all of the things that they've done now. They have made good moves since that turmoil though, can't take that away from them.

So what is YOUR SOLUTION? Because MY SOLUTION is to MAKE a player come to ATL, whether his butt wants to come here or not. And if we have to sell off talent for a 1 or 2 year rental for a superstar, so be it. That would be better than the path we're on now. You know good and well that we're not winning jack (( bleep )) with Al or Josh as our best player, just like we weren't winning anything with JJ as our best player. So at some point, an organization simply has to take a risk. Trade your assets and try to bring in a player who could have a bigger impact on your team, than the talent that you give up. A healthy Dwight Howard OR Chris Paul > Josh Smith + Al Horford The fact is that the Hawks should've made a move for one of those players BEFORE the 2011 season, not during it. You give the Magic an offer that they can't refuse. Smith + Horford + 2013 1st round pick . . for Howard and one of their bad contracts ( Turk or J-Rich ). If they wanted more, you give them more. If you're talking Chris Paul, you give the Hornets an offer they can't refuse. Smith or Horford + Teague + 1st round picks Yeah, if emptying the cupboard gives you a chance to finally get a superstar player, then you empty the damn cupboard. LOL @ saying that Stern wasn't interested in receiving talent, when they got Eric Gordon, Chris Kaman, an expiring contract, and a 1st round pick. He got a decent center, an potential All-Star combo guard, and because they were still sorry, ended up getting the #1 pick in the draft in Anthony Davis. Meanwhile, the Clips got a PG that totally changed the path that team was on, and made them a legit playoff caliber squad . . who might be even better this year. You stay on this "small ball" path to stardom . . . while I would've tried to make the biggest splash possible. And if it failed, hey . . I got ping pong balls to possibly draft an impact player.

Taking a risk means that the Hawks go to Orlando or New Orleans before the start of last season, and basically tell them . . . "whatever you want, we'll give it to you. Just give us Dwight Howard or Chris Paul." And once you get that superstar player, make the necessary moves to QUICKLY bring that team up to contender status. Because after that Chicago series, it was painfully obvious that neither JJ, nor anybody else on this team was good enough to get us to the next level. So you simply take a risk to get to that next level, even if it meant parting with good young talent for a 1-year rental for a superstar.

Well if money is an issue, why aren't the Bobcats making the playoffs? They have money AND top notch draft picks, and still can't get a superstar caliber player to go there. Cap space is hella overrated. Players simply have to want to go to your team. And if a team wants that player bad enough, they can MAKE room to bring him on. Honestly, a lot of you have been straight up duped into believing that one of the main problems here in ATL, were overpaid players who couldn't quite live up to expectations. That wasn't the reason. The reason was that we didn't have a superstar player, nor was our top 8 guys good enough to compete on an elite level. Having a bargain basement coach doesn't help either. Building a championship caliber team is about a lot of things. And to be real about it, it's not really about the amount of cap space you have, but more about the risks you're willing to take and what lengths you're willing to go to build a winner. Not once during the last 7 years did the Hawks just say . . (( bleep it )) . . we're going all out to try to bring a title to ATL. And they never took a risk on bringing in a player that may or may not have fit with "the core". ( unless you count Jamal Crawford ) Building a championship caliber team is also about LUCK. The great organization that Danny Ferry comes from, San Antonio, had never won an NBA title before they drafted Tim Duncan. And the ONLY reason they were even in position to draft Duncan, was because David Robinson had a back injury and only played in 6 games during the 1996 - 97 season. Sean Elliot ends up getting hurt too. So who ends up leading that team? A 37 year old Dominique Wilkins. But that team was ultra sorry without David and Sean, ( Nique missed 19 games as well ) and they only win 20 games. They get the 3rd most ping pong balls . . win the lottery . . draft the consensus #1 pick that year in Tim Duncan . . and the rest is history. They went from a franchise who had never played in an ABA or NBA Finals, to winning 4 NBA Championships in the first 10 years they had Duncan. That wasn't the result of cap space or having money. That was simply being lucky as hell, and getting the #1 draft choice in a draft that had arguably one of the top 15 players of all time in it. And STILL having a Hall of Fame caliber big man to play with him for his first 5 years, which helped mature him and keep him humble.

The problem with Lou ( and this was a problem last season, especially in the playoffs ), is that although it's great he went 8 - 9 FTs in 28 minutes, he also missed 6 of his 7 field goal attempts. That means that if he isn't getting the calls ( like he didn't get the calls in the Boston playoff series ), his effectiveness has the potential to be affected big time.Today he scores 10 points1 - 7 FG ( 7 possessions in which he got his shot off )8 - 9 FT ( 4 trips to the line + an and-1. If you count the and-1 as a separate possession, that's 5 trips to the line )2 turnovers ( 2 more poessions )10 points / 13 possessions = 0.77 pppThat's not nearly as bad as it could be on 1 - 7 FG. But if he just shot 3 - 7 FG, you're looking at 14 to 16 total points on 13 possessions, which definitely makes him more efficient.Lou shot 4 or more FTs in 64% of his games last year, which is pretty damn good. That's pretty much Josh Smith like from the guard position, in fewer minutes.On the flip side, Lou shot 40% or less from the field in 1/2 of the games he played in. That kind of shows his schizophrenic nature as a shot maker.Since Harris was brought up . . .- shot 4+ FTs in 37% of his games last year- shot 40% FG or less in 38% of his gamesThe big thing with Williams and Harris this season, is going to be their Usage rate. Lou got #1 scorer type usage last year in Philly ( 27.4% ). Harris usage dropped dramatically last year from #1 scorer type ( 25.2% ) to #4 or #5 type scorer usage ( 19.5% ).I truly believe that at some point this season, Al Horford is going to start complaining about how he is used, or how many touches he's getting. If the guy is once again shooting well over 50% FG, but are seeing 3 or 4 guys getting more chances to score, we may see a what would be called a "selfish side" of Horford.And with Josh getting top billing these days, I wonder how many shots he's willing to give up as well to the new guys.Honestly, I'm just watching and following the preseason to see if the guys we have on the squad, can do what they're billed to do. Can the defenders defend and the shooters shoot?Team wise, we won't know anything about the Hawks until the season starts, and the rotations are set.

Josh isn't stupid. That's why he's not going to take an extension. That's potentially like a 30 mill difference.

Well. . . Deshawn apologized to Williams after Deron called him to say that he wasn't talking about Deshawn. Here were some of his tweets. "I Talk 2 My X Teammate 2Day And He Told Me That He Wasn't Talking About Me And They Mis-Print What He Said......" Stevenson tweeted Friday. "So I'm A Real Dude And Want 2 Say Sorry 2 Dwill For Spazzing And A Real Dude Would Say Sorry! So Sorry Dwill "Takes Alot 4 A Man 2 Call A Man And Tell Me The Truth!! I Respect That!!"

A Marc Gasol - Horford - Smith frontline would be damn good here. Of course, Smith's outside shooting would be a liability, but we could effectively split time at SF/PF with Smith, and PF/C with Horford. I'm not an advocate of playing Smith at SF . . unless our interior frontline could dominate the boards and gobble up offensive rebounds. Gasol + Horford could do just that, when Smith gets jumpshot happy.SF - Smith ( 20 ) - Korver ( 18 ) - James/Tolliver ( 10 )PF - Horford ( 24 ) - Smith ( 14 ) - Ivan ( 10 )C - Gasol ( 30 ) - Zaza ( 10 ) - Horford ( 8 )But I agree with the point Swat is making. It's not like the NBA lacks centers. It just lacks top of the line, franchise type centers. But guys like Marc Gasol, Greg Monroe, and Roy Hibbert would do wonders for this team. A true legit center would give the Hawks the flexibility to go big, or small, depending on the matchups or opponent. Right now, we have no choice but to go small.

I thought you said you weren't comparing people, just the offensive style. - We're smallish like Golden St - We're going to let our guards dictate tempo like Golden St - We're going to try to play extremely fast like Golden St - We're going to use dribble penetration and kick-outs to set up our shooters like Golden St Maybe a better comparison is the 2011 Golden State Warrior team, with David Lee on it. They were still a top 5 team in Pace, but didn't play as fast as the 2010 team

Is Mike Jenkins more like Voltron or Bennifer. You know, when you combine 2 or more things or people to make one thing?

And this game may illustrate what is to come. Yes, the offense by the Warriors is great, but they can't stop the Lakers. Warriors shot 48% FG and 43% from 3 ( made 13 threes ). But the Lakers shot 56% FG, terrible from 3 ( 30% ), but shot and made 34 of 42 FTs. Golden State was 12 - 13 FTSo would people rather see 110+ point games and lose to good teams? Would that make the Hawks more worthwhile to watch, even if they lost the game?