Premium Member sturt Posted June 29, 2006 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 I'm not anti-Williams, and I'm not anti-BK. I just want to ask if BK of 6/29/06 is the same BK that told us a month ago that he always goes for the best player available? BK could be a genius, and Williams could be the next Ben Wallace... BUT all I'm suggesting is that BK, in my humble estimation, did not follow through with his draft philosophy and in fact, strayed pretty far from it. I think most of us would have to agree that the best player available on the board easily was one of the two players selected after #5. BK... you broke your own rule. And I'm disappointed because I was here to defend you for it a month ago, as I know KB did as well. It's a sound philosophy. Obviously, I just hope it works out anyway, but one often pays a price when they extol the virtues of and commit themselves to a good theory, and then choose to ignore their own wisdom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plainview1981 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Quote: I'm not anti-Williams, and I'm not anti-BK. I just want to ask if BK of 6/29/06 is the same BK that told us a month ago that he always goes for the best player available? BK could be a genius, and Williams could be the next Ben Wallace... BUT all I'm suggesting is that BK, in my humble estimation, did not follow through with his draft philosophy and in fact, strayed pretty far from it. I think most of us would have to agree that the best player available on the board easily was one of the two players selected after #5. BK... you broke your own rule. And I'm disappointed because I was here to defend you for it a month ago, as I know KB did as well. It's a sound philosophy. Obviously, I just hope it works out anyway, but one often pays a price when they extol the virtues of and commit themselves to a good theory, and then choose to ignore their own wisdom. Well, even if you don't believe in his way of thinking... When a GM starts to be a hypocrite of himself it doesn't look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoostal Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 good post, I could live with drafting the best player even if we had that position filled, but this is not a wise selection at 5 P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 (something no one would expect from any GM) and the ONLY reason we didn't pay for it with another team trading ahead of us to get SW is because NOBODY WANTED SHELDEN WILLIAMS near that much. What a terrible draft selection. Perhaps worse than Keefe (at 10 not 5 BTW) or Knoncak. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member sturt Posted June 29, 2006 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Good point, W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walter Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Shelden has absolutely NO TRADE VALUE. Nobody trades #5 pick worth for a player like him. Roy? Not only is he a FAR BETTER BASKETBALL PLAYER, and a two-dimensional, versatile one at that, 5 teams would have been clamoring to trade for him. NOBODY wants Shelden Williams people. Nobody. What a fiasco. W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member sturt Posted June 29, 2006 Author Premium Member Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Returning to the point of the thread, nobody wanted SW @ 5. Now, perhaps BK would defend that the pick DID fall within his stated philosophy by suggesting that he could not trade down w/ Houston simply because he was aware of the Wolves and Celtics' interest in SW... that, in spite of the fact that few, if any, would predict that. It's an easy defense to make, but one that is also hard to believe, and he would have to produce some stronger evidence if he wanted to convince anyone... which, BK of course doesn't care to convince anyone else of anything in the first place, so the argument is additionally frustrating for that reason. Related tangent: One wonders how difficult it is to work for someone with such disregard for others' opinions... that can't be healthy for the organization, which of course is so dysfunctional in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packfill Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 If only BK veered from his stated philosophy a year earlier: Chris Paul Joe Johnson Josh Smith Sheldon Williams Zaza Pachulia With Childress, Stoudamire, Lue, Esteban and Solomon Jones off the bench. 45+ win team there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dejay Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Don't remind me, EDS. That team with Harrington would've competed for the playoffs LAST YEAR and would've silenced the likes of Walton who thinks of Diaw as the second coming to Magic, Oscar, and Tiny Archibald combined. I don't care what anyone says, 2 first round picks + $70 million = JJ signs in Atlanta for five years, PERIOD. There's no 'if Paul was here, JJ wouldn't be' crutch to lean upon here. Two mistakes by BK; first of all, he (or someone in the his inner circle) blurted out who he was going after which killed any hopes of leverage to maximize the 5th pick (you don't think the T'Wolves, Rockets, and Celtics wouldn't have been on the phone to give BK SOMETHING back if he'd had taken Roy or Foye?). Then, when he's stated over and over again about drafting upon BPA and not on need because of the overall lack of talent on the roster, he picks a relatively weak draft to go in complete opposition of his own philosophy. If he'd have done the exact opposite last year, we wouldn't even be in position to get Sheldon because our pick would be in the teens. But Simmons or Armstrong wouldn't be too bad, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted June 29, 2006 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 I don't think BK blurted out anything. I think it was blurted out first by Arm Tellem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drzachary Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Quote: I don't care what anyone says, 2 first round picks + $70 million = JJ signs in Atlanta for five years, PERIOD. At the risk of derailing this thread.... that is exactly what we gave up, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Quote: Shelden has absolutely NO TRADE VALUE. Nobody trades #5 pick worth for a player like him. Roy? Not only is he a FAR BETTER BASKETBALL PLAYER, and a two-dimensional, versatile one at that, 5 teams would have been clamoring to trade for him. NOBODY wants Shelden Williams people. Nobody. What a fiasco. W Walter, I used to appreciate your "positional redundancy" posts but now I'm beginning to see through them. If you really believed what you used to post you would be thrilled with this pick. Shelden will OWN the PF position and will allow the Hawks to make a move in a trade to use some of that redundancy to get a better player at the guard spot.IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnybravo4 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Quote: If only BK veered from his stated philosophy a year earlier: Chris Paul Joe Johnson Josh Smith Sheldon Williams Zaza Pachulia With Childress, Stoudamire, Lue, Esteban and Solomon Jones off the bench. 45+ win team there. So what now we will have Mike James/Ty Lue Joe Johnson/Salim Stoudamire Josh Smith/Solomon Grundy Marvin WilliamsShelden Williams Zaza/Este Same difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeti Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Now that I've calmed down. If you look at all the trades and business done last night, it is interesting that Atlanta was not involved in anything even though we have lots of needs and have stockpiled a lot of decent forwards. When we have made trades we don't seem to do well. I wonder if BK has alienated the other GMs as much as he has our fans. Does he operate in a complete vacuum - I was surprised to hear Woody say we need a PG when BK is saying it is not a need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountain_jim Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 I also wondered if BK might have alienated his potential trading partners with his seemingly arrogant attitude. mj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lascar78 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 I highly doubt BK has alienated any GM's. He is very likeable in person. Just because he has a disdain for the media (who constantly mock him) doesn't mean personal conversations with other GM's are awkward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foeteen14 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Sheldon Williams was the best player available at #5. look at his career numbers in the NCAA compared to the other players left, look at the amount of wins his teams have had over his four year career, look at the accolaids he's received, and then look at his size, strength, and skillset as a big man. he honestly reminds me of elton brand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmac13 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 BK has a disdain for the fans and the media..He has a disdain for anyone that might ask him a question..He brings this all on himself. Anyone with any sense knows that when you have a job that thrusts you in the spotlight you have to be able to handle the media..BK is completely inept in that area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foeteen14 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 what exactly do you want from the man? everytime i hear him talk he says what you expect a front office guy to say. it's not like he gonna say, yeah i ivey sucks, and lue cant play D, so were trying to get sam cassell in here to run those two wannabees out of town. or better yet, "yeah, i'm stupid. i knew we had a team full of forwards, but i picked another one anyway. i just can't help it. there's somethin about a 6'8", 6'9" guy that get me all worked up baby. come on guys if you want colorful commentary listen to interviews with nique. cuz BK only deals with black, white, and gray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lascar78 Posted June 29, 2006 Report Share Posted June 29, 2006 Agreed but that has nothing to do with the fact that I'm sure he gets along just fine with all other GM's, and that was my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now