bigtime Hollinger Hawks hate

[Johnnybravo4]

The thing that is hilarous is that he totally discounts the natural growth of Smoove, Marvin, Chills, Zaza, Salim or even Jojo. Success in sports is not always a linear equation where Ax + By =C. Sometimes there is addition by subtraction, other times you have exponential growth. Just because we lost our "second best player" doesn't necessarily mean that we are a worse team.

[gsuteke]

addition by subtraction is my line

i like yours though. i am looking for "exponential growth" this season

[TheDude]

hollinger is just another tool who will eat his words.

[bootsybug]

hollinger is another reactionary pinhead who has no vision.

[lifelong]

I don't think Hollinger has a reason to hate the Hawks more than any other team out there. I think he's just calling it like he sees it, and we can diagree with him. There's no subjectivity to his PER figures. He says they're based on a uniform formula used for every player. The reality is that we're in for a tough season and our guys will have to play well above most people's expectations for us to reach .500. This could happen, but I don't think you'll find ANY nba writer or pundit who say anything much different about the Hawks than what Hollinger said at this point in time given our offseason acquisitions (or lack thereof) and the performance of the players on the roster last season.

[Traceman]

young guys are VERY difficult to project because the sample size of under 21 guys is so small. When part of your formula for projecting what Smoove, D Howard and other young guys will do is partially based on what Chandler, Curry and Kwame Brown did at the same age, the outlook is bound to be somewhat less than optimistic.

[AtLaS]

Did y'all actually look at the rankings? Smoove not in the top 50 SF's? Zaza not in the top 50 C's? That's rediculous regardless of their projections or age.

Just look at some of the players that are ranked ahead of them.

[terrynoonan]

I've said both of those things about Al.

Just having him off the roster makes us better and exponential growth is coming because of it.

Smoove or Zaza were easily our second best player and by my math Al was our worst player.

I.E.- He did more bad things every night than anyone else.

[Traceman]

If you look at their projected numbers, he would have Smoove as around the 20th best SF and around the 30th best PF. He would have Zaza as around the 20th best Center.

[bootsybug]

Quote:

---

I don't think you'll find ANY nba writer or pundit who say anything much different about the Hawks than what Hollinger said at this point in time given our offseason acquisitions (or lack thereof) and the performance of the players on the roster last season.

---

lifelong, to say the hawks would only finish .500 if they played in the SEC is simply hate. i guess he was trying to be funny, but you can't take anyone who takes such an easy and cheap way out seriously.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

I don't think Hollinger has a reason to hate the Hawks more than any other team out there. I think he's just calling it like he sees it, and we can diagree with him. There's no subjectivity to his PER figures. He says they're based on a uniform formula used for every player. The reality is that we're in for a tough season and our guys will have to play well above most people's expectations for us to reach .500. This could happen, but I don't think you'll find ANY nba writer or pundit who say anything much different about the Hawks than what Hollinger said at this point in time given our offseason acquisitions (or lack thereof) and the performance of the players on the roster last season.

---

Maybe you should think about your own opinion every once and a while and stop settling for his half @ssed comments and thoughts. Anybody that has seen his best player in the league rankings would know he is f*ll of shyt.

I'm tired of ESPN, their broadcasters, shallow thoughts, and lastly, I'm tired of them talking about TO all the time. He isn't a good enough player anymore that he deserves so much hype.

If though I sometimes I talk smack about the players I wouldn't say that ZaZa and Smoove aren't top 50 players at their positions.

[Sothron]

I like Hollinger but his comment about the SEC was out of line. The fact he trumpeted his own witticism later shows he has no respect for the Hawks or the players we have.

I do agree that we got rid of Harrington for basically nothing.

[lifelong]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I don't think Hollinger has a reason to hate the Hawks more than any other team out there. I think he's just calling it like he sees it, and we can diagree with him. There's no subjectivity to his PER figures. He says they're based on a uniform formula used for every player. The reality is that we're in for a tough season and our guys will have to play well above most people's expectations for us to reach .500. This could happen, but I don't think you'll find ANY nba writer or pundit who say anything much different about the Hawks than what Hollinger said at this point in time given our offseason acquisitions (or lack thereof) and the performance of the players on the roster last season.

---

Maybe you should think about your own opinion every once and a while and stop settling for his half @ssed comments and thoughts. Anybody that has seen his best player in the league rankings would know he is f*ll of shyt.

I'm tired of ESPN, their broadcasters, shallow thoughts, and lastly, I'm tired of them talking about TO all the time. He isn't a good enough player anymore that he deserves so much hype.

If though I sometimes I talk smack about the players I wouldn't say that ZaZa and Smoove aren't top 50 players at their positions.

---

I'm not the one acting like a bloodthirsty lunatic just because the mighty Hollinger said some bad things about our team. My point, which you obviously missed completely, was that this guy is just another NBA pundit voicing his opinion. Plus, he happens to plush these PER ratings based on a super secret formula that is evidently objective and uniform for every player in the league. Our franchise is obviously going through a rough time right now, and will get ripped on by NBA pundits. This is just like the ESPN guys who dump on the Arizona Cardinals for their futility the last 20 years. Who cares? Hawks fans (and Cardinals fans) just need to chill and take their medicine because the pundits aren't going to be nice to us and will continue to hate on us until we start winning. Winning is the only thing that will change it.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

the pundits aren't going to be nice to us and will continue to hate on us until we start winning. Winning is the only thing that will change it.

---

While I agree mostly, I don't believe the pundit's unfavorable response is merely a response to losing. It is a response to many questionable, mostly Homer Simpson-like personel moves. Had we drafted Paul, traded Al for Darko (or simply gotten something of real value for Al) and not looked like a lame franchise while doing it, gotten Roy or Foye this year, and/or other decisions there would be alot more favor shown towards us. It's hard to take us seriously when we trade the MIP, pass on ROY once, and likely pass on ROY of the year again within 12 months no matter how you spin it. Winning could solve that, but it will take more than mediocrity. BK has taken a highly unconventional path and it appears one to nowhere of importance. Had he not taken this IMO wrong path we would be seen more favorably. Since he has, it will take more than just winning a mediocre amount to change the tide of public opinion as the grudge against this "plan" isn't that it won't win some games (as we have certainly acquired enough capitol in picks and cap space to acquire enough talent) it's that it won't win enough to matter and subsequiently win games that matter. BK's attitude towards the media and fans doesn't help.

W

[lifelong]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

the pundits aren't going to be nice to us and will continue to hate on us until we start winning. Winning is the only thing that will change it.

---

While I agree mostly, I don't believe the pundit's unfavorable response is merely a response to losing. It is a response to many questionable, mostly Homer Simpson-like personel moves. Had we drafted Paul, traded Al for Darko (or simply gotten something of real value for Al) and not looked like a lame franchise while doing it, gotten Roy or Foye this year, and/or other decisions there would be alot more favor shown towards us. It's hard to take us seriously when we trade the MIP, pass on ROY once, and likely pass on ROY of the year again within 12 months no matter how you spin it. Winning could solve that, but it will take more than mediocrity. BK has taken a highly unconventional path and it appears one to nowhere of importance. Had he not taken this IMO wrong path we would be seen more favorably. Since he has, it will take more than just winning a mediocre amount to change the tide of public opinion as the grudge against this "plan" isn't that it won't win some games (as we have certainly acquired enough capitol in picks and cap space to acquire enough talent) it's that it won't win enough to matter and subsequiently win games that matter. BK's attitude towards the media and fans doesn't help.

W

---

I can't really disagree with that, but I do think that if (and a big "if") the Hawks approach 40 wins this year and Marvin turns into an all-star or future all-star caliber player, then the pundits will start saying "wow, look at the Hawks, that Billy Knight was patient, he had a long term plan and blah blah blah" and will completely forget that they ripped on us less than a year earlier.

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

the pundits aren't going to be nice to us and will continue to hate on us until we start winning. Winning is the only thing that will change it.

---

While I agree mostly, I don't believe the pundit's unfavorable response is merely a response to losing. It is a response to many questionable, mostly Homer Simpson-like personel moves. Had we drafted Paul, traded Al for Darko (or simply gotten something of real value for Al) and not looked like a lame franchise while doing it, gotten Roy or Foye this year, and/or other decisions there would be alot more favor shown towards us. It's hard to take us seriously when we trade the MIP, pass on ROY once, and likely pass on ROY of the year again within 12 months no matter how you spin it. Winning could solve that, but it will take more than mediocrity. BK has taken a highly unconventional path and it appears one to nowhere of importance. Had he not taken this IMO wrong path we would be seen more favorably. Since he has, it will take more than just winning a mediocre amount to change the tide of public opinion as the grudge against this "plan" isn't that it won't win some games (as we have certainly acquired enough capitol in picks and cap space to acquire enough talent) it's that it won't win enough to matter and subsequiently win games that matter. BK's attitude towards the media and fans doesn't help.

W

---

I can't really disagree with that, but I do think that if (and a big "if") the Hawks approach 40 wins this year and Marvin turns into an all-star or future all-star caliber player, then the pundits will start saying "wow, look at the Hawks, that Billy Knight was patient, he had a long term plan and blah blah blah" and will completely forget that they ripped on us less than a year earlier.

---

Well, this franchise has done some stupid things, but calling the Hawks the worst team (why would they be worse this year than last year?) and calling ZaZa (Not even a favorite of mine)not even a top 50 center (if that's what happend)is crazy.

but all these guys are so much alike that it's easy to confuse some of the comments.

[Popeye]

He said that ZAZA is not a top 50 center in the league right now?????

I don't think there are 50 centers in the Nba, damn.

what a Douchbag!!!

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

He said that ZAZA is not a top 50 center in the league right now?????

I don't think there are 50 centers in the Nba, damn.

what a Douchbag!!!

---

Somebody on here said that it was in one of his rankings.

[AHF]

Again, guys his rankings are not designed to say that he believes player x is better than player y. They are a purely statistical analysis that is designed to compare players with similar statistics at similar ages and predict future statistical performance (i.e., PER) based on those similarity scores.

You do have to question the value of such an analysis that concludes that Chuck Hayes predicted to have a higher PER than Dwight Howard.

Just take it for what it is worth. Hollinger isn't try to say that those rankings are anything but his statistical predictions of PER for 2006-07. He isn't trying to claim they are meaningful player rankings or that they are fantasy rankings or anything like that.

[mudderfudder77]

Did any of you guys even read what he wrote before you started pissing and moaning?

These numbers are based off of past performances by similarly aged players. They're not going to translate for everyone and he admits that. Players like Josh Smith and Dwight Howard are too good too young for the numbers to really work for them, but the numbers are reasonably accurate for most players. And thats what he is trying to do. The longer the sysytem is around and the more data he has to work from the more accuarate it will be in future seasons.

As for the hawks hate, has even one single publication, forecaster, or preview shown you guys any love? What do you expect? I went through 6-7 years of last place predictions for my Bulls. Until you can win no writer is going to go out on a limb when it is much safer to pick the Hawks to lose.

And he's right - you did get rid of your second best player (last year) for nothing. It might be addition by subtraction, but until the teams prove it there is no reason to believe it. M Williams looks good in SL and pre-season but until he starts doing it when the games matter you've got to expect no one is going to go out of their way to praise the Hawks.

I like your team (although I have serious question about the last couple drafts) but I think even .500 is stretching it. Why should he be praising a team not likely to make it to .500 and a GM who by most accounts has passed up better players in the last couple of drafts?