Packfill

Jackson is a good player, but he has horrendous shooting percentages even on a team with other offensive weapons.

Harrington is a starting forward on most teams in the league. Whether he is power forward or small forward is not as big an issue as whether a player is a "point" guard or not.

I also don't think he has to be compensated for on the defensive end. If the Hawks had a point guard who could at least slow down drives into the paint and a center who was not invisible Harrington's defense is not a great liability.

I don't think Al is a superstar by any means but he is a solid player who, coupled with Smith and Childress, provides the Hawks with a nice young foundation upon which to build.

I agree with you. Everyone wants to run off Al. I like him. I think the Hawks can be very successful with Childress, Smoove and Harrington starting at the 2, 3 and 4 - regardless of which actual position each plays. The key obviously is bringing a decent center and quality point guard. For this reason I am leaning towards hoping the Hawks draft the best point guard available - whether that be Williams or Paul.

This will be an interesting off-season for the Hawks. Currently in the NBA there does not seem to be one single formula for success.

Teams like the Lakers and now the Heat are successful because they have a truly dominant big man and a multi-talented athletically gifted wing. That is an impossible forumla to copy because Shaq is one of a kind. The same could be said of the Spurs with Duncan. Only difference being that instead of a truly great wing they have a collection of players that fill out the picture.

Detroit, is an interesting paradigm in that there is no one dominant player. Ben Wallace is the closest but his dominance is somewhat limited in that he brings little to the table offensively. That said, his defensive prowess certainly allows the team to succeed without a true superstar offensive weapon. The Pistons are a well coached, opportunistic team that gets contributions from multiple sources, but really everything revolves around defense.

Phoenix this year, and the Nets in years past thrive because of the brilliance of their point guards. Make no mistake, Nash and Kidd unquestionably elevate their teammates level of play. Both teams have talented athletes on the wings, but the point guard play sets the tone for those teams.

So you have three pasic paradigms of success - truly dominant big man, defensive team approach or truly gifted pass-first oriented point guard.

In the draft, at this point the top two to three picks are likely Bogut and Deron Williams and Chris Paul, if he is in the draft. Bogut certainly looks to be an excellent center prospect, question is - is he a dominant big man or just a very good big man? Is he more Duncan or more Brad Miller/Z. Ilglauskas?

Is Deron Williams or Chris Paul a Jason Kidd or Steve Nash type point guard?

If Bogut is considered the next Duncan, you take him, no questions asked. If not, then you get to the question of how good are Williams and Paul. If either is a Kidd/Nash, you take that player. If neither is at that level, then you are back to Bogut even if he is not the next Duncan.

I like him alot as a prospect, but I don't think he is a defensive monster in the making. Okafor was a defensive monster in the making at UConn, but he is still working on that at the NBA level.

He does have some nice skills, excellent athleticism and good size.

Lindros at the time was considered a once in a lifetime prospect, Bogut is not. I highly doubt any player would refuse to come to Atlanta. Infact, Atlanta would likely be an attractive destination for many because of its new south cosmopolitan vibe. Heck, if someone is willing to go to Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, Charlotte, New Orleans, Toronto, or Memphis they are going to be willing to go to Atlanta.

Rome was not built in a day. It is not realistic to believe that the Hawks can sign Hughes, Dalembert and Chandler.

Bogut is a great prospect but, for this Hawks team, I think a combo of Deron Williams and Dalembert is a better fit then Bogut and FA point guard. Dalembert would give the hawks some much needed defensive presence in the paint and Deron Williams reminds me of a Jason Kidd/Steve Nash franchise point guard that makes everyone around him better. Williams could do for Chills and Smoove what Kidd did for Kenyon and Jefferson, and what Nash is doing for Stoudamire and Marion.

I rather bring Anderson over for a try then get another second roub pick.

I would be more then content if the Hawks could come out of the off-season with Deron Williams in the draft and Dalembert as a free agent. If they could somehow add Frye too, that be awesome.

Kwame stunk when MJ was there too.

Again, you cannot have a team with all first and second year players starting - particularly when at least one of those players is not old enough to buy a beer.

Harrington remains the teams best offensive performer. Smoove, for all his athleticism, does not have a well developed offensive game. He can get some points yes, but he is not the type of guy that can create a shot for himself at this point.

I still think Harrington has not maxed out his potential and the Hawks are in a good position to see if he improves over the course of next season - if so, then he deserves a big contract. He probably won't get anything close to max money even with a big year - and by big year I mean something slightly north of this year . The Hawks will still have plenty of money to spend as both Childress and Smoove will be two years away from free agency.

I second the knee tendonitis being very painful. I had it my freshman year in college. I was a college runner, so all I had to do was run straight ahead but the tendonitis kept me from running and my coach held me out of a meet because of it.

I don't understand why everyone is down on Al. The guy is a good player - not great mind you - but a good player nonetheless. He has a great attitude. Plus, he is still young and has a chance to improve. I do not believe it makes sense to put together a team of all rookies and second year players - you need someone who has been there and done that. Al, while not an old grizzled veteran, has been in the league for a number of years and has demonstrated some ability to lead the kids.

I agree that Okur has a comparable skill set, but he is probably the "floor" as far as how ogut's career plays out. At the top range, I would compare him to Brad Dougherty - good offensive player, solid rebounder, but nothing exceptional defensively.

Villanueva reeks of "wasted talent due to poor attitude."

Doesn't really matter what you call the prep-to-pro contingent. Also, 2004 is deeper then 2003, without question, but there is no one in the 2004 class that is like Lebron.

I have also been very impressed by Deron Williams in the tournament.

If I were North Carolina I would play a big line-up of Felton, McCants, M. Williams, J. Williams and May and see if Luther Head or Deron Williams can handle one of the Williams boys - it would be a huge size advantage for NC.

I don't think most people would agree with your narrow interpretation of what constitutes a high school class. My more inclusive definition, which I believe is the how the term is traditionally used, is much more practical becomes it defines all players of a certain age. This way you can compare them versus their true peers. For example, if Marvin Williams someday surpasses the basketball exploits of Dwight Howard, he will be remembered as the greatest player from the 2004 high school class.

I meant 1988, sorry. I don't think you can look at a high school class and rate it based solely on who went pro right away, and not include players that went to college.

If you look back, Alonzo Morning (stronger more physical Dwight Howard), Billy Owens (highly touted do everything forward - think Marvin Williams), Shawn Kemp (super-athletic big - bigger Josh Smith), Stanley Roberts (massive low post scoring machine - bigger Al Jefferson)and maybe others would have been top 10 picks. Mourning and Owens appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated, so they were hyped. Look at the 1988 draft, the Clippers would have had to make the same decision as the Magic this year - proven Collegian fresh off a national championship (Manning/Okafor)versus potential laden highschool prospect (Mourning/Howard):

1988 NBA Draft

--------------

1st Round

---------

1. Danny Manning Kansas LA Clippers

2. Rik Smits Marist Indiana

3. Charles Smith Pittsburgh Philadelphia

4. Chris Morris Auburn New Jersey

5. Mitch Richmond Kansas State Golden State

6. Hersey Hawkins Bradley LA Clippers

7. Tim Perry Temple Phoenix

8. Rex Chapman Kentucky Charlotte

9. Rony Seikaly Syracuse Miami

10. Willie Anderson Georgia San Antonio

11. Will Perdue Vanderbilt Chicago

12. Harvey Grant Oklahoma Washington

13. Jeff Grayer Iowa State Milwaukee

14. Dan Majerle Central Michigan Phoenix

15. Gary Grant Michigan LA Clippers

16. Derrick Chievous Missouri Houston

17. Eric Leckner Wyoming Utah

18. Rickey Berry San Jose State Sacramento

19. Rod Strickland DePaul New York

20. Kevin Edwards DePaul Miami

21. Mark Bryant Seton Hall Portland

22. Randolph Keys Southern Mississipi Cleveland

23. Jerome Lane Pittsburgh Denver

24. Brian Shaw UC Santa Barbara Boston

25. David Rivers Notre Dame LA Lakers

The best high school class ever was 1998, the class that produced Alonzo Mourning, Christian Laettner, Billy Owens, Shawn Kemp, Stanley Roberts, Chris Jackson, Malik Sealy, LaPhonso Ellis, Don McLean, Chris Mills, Anthony Peeler and Derrick Martin. Obviously, not all of these guys became superstars but Mourning, Laettner and Kemp all achieved all-star status, but the depth of the class is truely impressive.

I think either of those scenarios works. My personal preference is to draft Deron (thought I don't think I would do so with the number 1 pick) and sign Dalembert, because I thinke represents the potential for better interior defense versus Bogut. I realize this is the far riskier approach, because Dalembert and the other restricted free agent centers will be difficult to obtain, but I think it really fits the teams present make-up best.

I don't know if I like the trade. If the Hawks are lucky enough to get the first pick then might as well take it, which probably means Bogut. Follow that up with signing someone like Jaric or Watson at the point.

If the Hawks do not get the first pick, then I think Dalambert does become BK's free agent target and the Hawks pick goes for a guard - either Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

Absolutely no chance the Hawks sign 4 free agents - if they could sign one of Dalambert, Hughes, Swift and Jaric they will be lucky.

Also, Swift is soft so I would rather have Al. Al is the better player and his offense is important.

I don't like any of those trades.

Right now Al Harrington is far an away the best offensive option for the Hawks. He is the only one who consistently can create a shot for himself. Chills and others will likely develop in time, but for next year the team still needs a reliable scorer.

Saying that JR will never match Josh in rebounds or blocks is meaningless. They are totally different players and play different positions. JR is a shooting guard. Josh is either a small forward or power forward - it is unclear yet which he will be more proficient at because his size suggests small forward but his game suggests power forward. Of course the bigger player should get more rebounds and blocks then a smaller player.

Saying that Josh's ceiling is much higher then JR's is because of rebounds and blocks is like saying Dwight Howard's ceiling is much higher then Lebron's because he can block shots and rebound better then Lebron.

Again, I have no idea which will be a better player but I strongly disagree with a general statement that Josh Smith has a higher ceiling then JR Smith solely because of blocks and rebounds - especially when we are comparing forward to a guard.

Why do you believe that JR Smith cannot become a good defender? The guy has the athletic ability. Obviously he will never be the shot blocker that Josh is, but Josh is not an exceptional defender yet either - other then the weakside blocks which at times comes at the expense of opening up his man.

Again, I am very pleased with Josh Smith's progress and believe, in time, he will become a good player. The reality of it is that he needs a lot of work. The same is true of JR, he needs a lot of work. Josh Smith could become the next Kirilenko or Shawn Marion, or he could become the next Darius Miles or Kenny "Sky" Walker. JR could become the next Ray Allen or Mitch Richmond, or he could become the next Ed Gray or Ron Mercer. Time will tell.