I was just thinking tonight watching Tony Parker

[Admin]

that if we had someone like that to run the team we could possibly be a playoff team in the east. He just seems to set the whole Spurs team up for winning with everything that he does and I sure wish we had a guy like him running the point. Hopefully we get that player next year.

[Lascar78]

agreed. We still need a big man and a PG in the worst way. Hopefully we'll draft one and sign the other

[Weez]

That's the product of continuity and discipline. Parker and Pop used to butt heads a lot...and Pop kept him on a pretty short leash, often yanking him quickly after mistakes.

They've grown together, Parker's become a better pg because of it...and Pop now trusts him much more than before.

He didn't come in playing that way...

[DJ_Money]

I kept thinking about when we traded Jamaal Tinsley to Indiana, then San Antonio took Parker, then Babcock later admitted that he seriously considered taking Parker before dealing the pick.

[jpierrek]

i remember that night when i was thinking what the heck the hawks were doing. i hated giving up paul gasol, brevin knight, and lorenzen wright or rahim.....and then what the heck was babcock thinking when he gave up tinsley. i was hoping he would play along side of terry. that would of been exciting.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

That's the product of continuity and discipline. Parker and Pop used to butt heads a lot...and Pop kept him on a pretty short leash, often yanking him quickly after mistakes.

They've grown together, Parker's become a better pg because of it...and Pop now trusts him much more than before.

He didn't come in playing that way...

---

And that's the situation the Hawks face if they bring in a rookie PG. It's not the ideal solution to a team faced with so much talent and athleticism, but no leadership at the guard position.

Personally, I would rather make a trade for someone with a little more experience.

[Diesel]

You have to be willing to take the Risk.

Let's look at the good things we have. A PG we bring in won't be the primary ball handler.. I mean we still have JJ who can take the pressure off of a rookie Backcourt PG. However, we have to be willing to bring the guy in. Your flip flopping opinion will send us right down Clipper land. A glut of Sfs with nobody to pass to them. Then we trade for an over the hill PG who really doesn't have a high skill level or would be a player who is contrary to team play.

What are you suggesting..

that we trade for

Marbury?

Francis?

give me a break...

I say we keep what we have because it will be good depth and we pick up a rookie PG and train him on the job like they are doing with Paul and Williams.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

You have to be willing to take the Risk.

---

This isn't about me. This is about a GM who talked his owners into making a risky trade based on the premise that the team would improve quickly.

Drafting a rookie PG and starting him next to a bunch of inexperienced, unsure young players nearly guarantees that the losing will continue in great volume.

That's why Lue was re-signed and is getting heavy minutes. They wanted to have an experienced PG to lead such an inexperienced team.

If you can acquire a stud big man in a trade (not likely), then, by all means, draft a PG. But don't draft a PG expecting him to start AND make the Hawks a winner right away.

[Diesel]

For some strange reason, you want to trade away our most experienced player and only post player for what?? Some mythitical Big man who will come in and be a defensive standout? I'm sure Detroit is in line to do an Al for Ben trade...

Secondly, you want to trade for a second rate PG and Draft a second rate Big man.

That won't work Elgin...

What we need to do is pick up a PG who can be a talent combo with JJ for the next 4 yrs. There will be several Big men available in FAcy.. Hell, we can even get Randolph Morris; I think we are first on his list if you want a young big man.

But to trade Al makes NO SENSE, especially if there's nothing to gain.

to not get a talented PG makes NO Sense. You should have learned that by now...

[mrhonline]

You mean the guy who scored at will for one quarter and then took a trip to Costa Rica for the next three? I like Al and wouldn't mind him returning as a SF, but you seriously overrate him.

(I'm going to ignore the rest of your comments because they're made up. I never said anything about trading Al for scraps. Not one time. I always get a kick out of watching you distort others' opinions. You're quite good at it).

Regardless, what you're not understanding is that the team would not be better off in the short-term with a rookie PG than they would be with a decent PG like Earl Watson. Three to four years from now, a player like Rondo would be much better, but I'm not convinced Knight has the time to wait three to four years.

He's going to want a more experienced PG. The JJ trade should have shown us that.

[Diesel]

First off, Earl Watson is overpaid now.

Secondly, even if we got Watson, we would still need to get a real PG. Watson and Lue are in that same category. Guys who are BUs.

As of right now, both Rondo and Ronnie are better prospects and you can't deny that.

Rondo will be the next TJ Ford but with better rebounding and scoring. Rondo is 6'2, Ronnie is 6'7", Watson is 5'8"... Come on... You harp on defense, yet you want to see us get KILLED. Why do you think Denver rarely play Watson? He was signed in order to be a replacement for Boykins or Miller who they were going to trade... Didn't happen. So now, Watson is bench property and overpaid.