Jump to content

Packfill

Squawkers
  • Posts

    3,922
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Packfill

  1. I think they are similar physically - same size, similar athleticism. As far as their skill set, Al has the better inside game. Marvin appears to have the potential to be the better perimeter player. He is like Luol Deng, good at many things, not great at anything. Now, obviously that translates into a good player but since the Hawks already have some well-rounded wing men in Chill and Smoove I would rather focus on a position of need - center or point.

  2. I don't like that team at all. No way I trade Al for just Jason Williams - there is a reason he sits in the 4th quarter. Also, Marvin Williams is the same player as Al, so might as well keep Al and draft a good point guard. Kwame is soft so the Hawks interior defense will still be weak.

    But I like Chill and Smoove in the starting lineup!

  3. I think the big difference between Childress and the success he had versus Kwame and his struggles is that Childress has the mental fortitude to endure a tough stretch and the mental accumen to learn and develop his game. Kwame is just not motivated and lacks the drive to succeed.

  4. Is Marvin Williams any different then Al Harrington? Marvin has talent and potential but he is not an uber athlete in the JSmoove mold nor does he have a fully developed outside or inside game. He may develop but Al may continue to improve as well (think about the improvements Jermaine O'Neil made between his first and second year with the Pacers, or the improvements made by Chauncey Billups, Lary Hughes, Brad Miller and other players after 4-5 seasons in the league - and none of them came straight from High School).

    To me, I rather keep Harrington. People write him off as if he is a bad player, will not improve, or does not fit with the Joshes. I think all those assumptions are untrue. He may not be a superstar but he is a quality starter, especially when paired with a solid big man.

  5. I don't undervalue Al, I would actually prefer to keep him as I think he is needed for his offense and leadership. If the hawks get a big man then his rebounding deficiency is an absolute non-issue, especially when Smoove and Chill are good rebounders.

  6. I agree with Pathway, Chill has the ability to mature into a solid sooting guard.

    Plus, as long as the Hawks get a big man that can rebound and provide some inside presence (whether it be Bogut, Dalembert, etc.), then I like the lineup of Chill, Smoove and Al at the 2,3 and 4. I don't think any of the three exactly fit the mold of any of the three positions but collectively I think they will provide what is needed, particularly if one of the three can become a solid perminter shooter.

    The only positions I see the Hawks throwing money at in free agency are center and point guard.

  7. 1. First Round: Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

    2. Free Agent: Samuel Dalembert.

    3. Second Round: Bruiser big man along the lines of Eric Williams or Torin Francis.

    Simple formula: Paul or Williams make every player on the Hawks roster better, create easy scoring opportunities and can knock down a jumper when needed. Dalembert improves interior defense and rebounding.

  8. I hope you guys are right about Bogut, but from my unexpert perspective he just does not possess that intimidation factor which almost every great center had. Going to a game watching Ewing, Robinson, Mourning, Shaq and the like you could tell that their very presence on the floor influenced the may the oppositions team played - whether it show up statisticly or not. You could feel it just being in the stands. This was true in college and in the pros. They just had an aura about them.

    Bogut to me does not have that aura.

    Maybe my standards are too high. I still think he will be the first pick and I think he will have a good career. But, I am not sure the "ruthian" numbers people are suggesting will be any more meaningful then the 20/10/2 that an Elton Brand puts up, or the 17/8/2 that a Ilglauskas puts up - meaning that they are not a harbinger of future playoff glory. They are good, but they do not make players around them better the way Shaq or Robinson did.

    If the game has changed then it has changed to become a "guards" league where a Nash or Kidd like point guard, despite their flaws (Kidd=bad shooting; Nash=lack of athleticism), are more important for success because they make everyone on the court better.

  9. Quote:


    Those guys that were content to "mix it up" did it because that's all they had. They weren't good scorers, passers, etc. They were big and were paid to focus on rebounding, defense and "mixing it up".

    There is no shortage out there of guys like that out there. One sided players who happen to be tall. But teams don't want that anymore. All the way down to the college level. The game today demands more athleticism and more skills than a lot of those old guys could offer.

    The only player that comes to mind that offers a similar skillset to those old players would be Ben Wallace. But Ben is much more athletic than any of those guys. If he weren't he would probably not have made it to the level he has in todays game.


    Are you saying Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Parrish, Kareem, Malone, et al. are not talented/athletic enough to play?

    That is dead wrong.

  10. Quote:


    As of right now, we draft Bogut is what we do. Until someone steps up in the workouts and forces the spotlight on themselves, we take the only really good center prospect out there.

    You can talk all day long about him not being a strong shot blocker or not having good lateral quickness. But the guy has the skills and drive to instantly become a top 5 center in this league, if not better. So at worst you have a player at the position that only 4 other teams can claim to have better. That's at the worst, if he didn't develop, which is unlikely. At best you end up with a guy that becomes the 2nd best center in the game next to Shaq, who's not going to be around too much longer.

    You aren't going to match that with anyone who is available via free agency. Until a draftee comes up who clearly offers those same advantages, we'd be dumb to not to take him.


    The question is, given the declining talent level at the center position over the past decade, is having a top five center better then having a top 10 point guard?

  11. Will being a “top 5 center” in the NBA in three years really mean anything? When you think about it, not really. Shaq may very well have retired by then, which leaves the current crop of “top” centers including Yao Ming, Brad Miller, Zydrunas Ilglauskas, Ben Wallace, Marcus Camby and Jamal Magliore. Wallace really isn’t a center but I will include him. Amare plays center for the suns, but he is definitely not a true center and thus I will not include him. Duncan, on the other hand, is a center so add him to the list. So that leaves us with 7 guys so far: Duncan, Ming, Wallace, Miller, Ilglauskas, Magliore and Camby. What about young up-and-comers who have a chance to break into the elite group? I guess Eddie Curry is a possibility, but I am not sure who else – Dalembert? Kamen? Mihm? I don’t think you can label either Emeka Okafor or Tyson Chandler as centers.

    All I am saying is that it is a far cry from 8-10 years ago when you had legitimate battles in the paint between guys like Shaq, Mourning, Ewing, Hakeem, Dikembe, and Robinson (with second tier guys like Siekely, Smits, Tarpley, Divac, Duckworth, etc.) or 12-15 years ago when you had some of the previously mentioned guys plus Kareem, Parrish and Moses Malone (plus guys like Lambier, Sikma, Walton, Joe Berry Carroll, etc.)

  12. I am torn between Bogut and Paul. I am not sure either will be a "superstar" but I have more hope that Paul turns into a Steve Nash type difference maker then Bogut turning into a "Shaq" or "Duncan" like difference maker.

  13. I am with Weez on this, that line-up does not look great defensively. I would not sign Damon Stoudamire for a bag of pretzels let alone multiple millions of dollars for a number of years. Stoudamire is light years removed from his best seasons and far from and ideal fit for the Hawks. His production will only decline as he continues to age.

    If I am not mistaken, next year Greg Oden, high schooler, has been talked about as a potential number 1 pick (although he may not be as good as advertised). The year after that is O.J. Mayo, who is supposed to be the next LeBron.

  14. How could I forget!

    Also, Shawn Bradley was the 2nd pick in the draft ans supposed to revolutionize the NBA. Not to mention lottery talents like Eric Montross, Luc Longley, Michael Doleac, Tony Battie, Lorenzen Wright, Samaki Walker, Vitali Potapenko, Bryant Reeves, Felton Spencer, and Will Perdue!

×
×
  • Create New...