Interesting conversation in the game last night.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Babcock's worst decision in that era was hiring Kruger and when he hired him he said many times, both in public and private, that Kruger's hire was a make or break decision for his tenure as general manager. Sadly it was a break.

---

That was a very bad decision but a lot of GMs have hired college coaches who failed. His failures in the draft are unprecedented in NBA history.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

His failures in the draft are unprecedented in NBA history.

---

However, Babcock wasn't so arrogant as to promise SW anything or do it without trying him and others out 1st. THAT level of incompetence is purely Billy Knight.

W

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

His failures in the draft are unprecedented in NBA history.

---

However, Babcock wasn't so arrogant as to promise SW anything or do it without trying him and others out 1st. THAT level of incompetence is purely Billy Knight.

W

---

I agree that Knight's decision not to work out picks was indefensible, as we have discussed in the past. I just can't tell you how much I hated watching Babcock draft. It was like flushing money down the toilet. It should not have been that hard to find a decent SF somewhere in the first round of the draft.

(As I have also said, Babcock did a much better job with trades and FA than he did in the draft.)

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

I agree that Knight's decision not to work out picks was indefensible, as we have discussed in the past.

---

My quick defense of this: why let a miniscule sample of data, none of which is a real game, trump the observed body of work over a player's career?

Not that I've really examined the history of the draft, but I think relying TOO heavily on workouts is all too common (Kwame, Darko.)

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I agree that Knight's decision not to work out picks was indefensible, as we have discussed in the past.

---

My quick defense of this: why let a miniscule sample of data, none of which is a real game, trump the observed body of work over a player's career?

Not that I've really examined the history of the draft, but I think relying TOO heavily on workouts is all too common (Kwame, Darko.)

---

It is indefensible in my mind for two reasons:

(1) You scout the players in the draft better when you work them out rather than making a decision without this information

I agree that you should rely heavily on the games someone played in college but bringing them in to workout is an additional source of information from which you can make a more informed decision. You can run players through skill drills that aren't necessarily illustrated in college play. For example, Shelden was in the low post his entire career in Durham. If he was actually able to consistently hit a mid-range jumper it would affect his value. Since he wasn't asked to do that, it won't show up in the game footage and could best be tested prior to the draft in a workout.

Working out other players who could be considered with the pick for whom there is less game footage is even more valuable - guys like Thomas, Bargnani, Sene, etc. When you elect not to work out anyone you are also risking passing up on one of these players who could turn into the next Kobe, T-Mac, Josh Smith, etc.

(2) Working Players Out Is Good Business For Future Transactions

Even if you don't intent to draft someone like Randy Foye or Brandon Roy, you want to work them out to make a positive impression on those players about your organization and its interest in them. When they are FAs in a few years or when they are subject to being traded, this gives you some personal interaction with them both to better assess the player and to sell your organization to someone who is choosing their next team.

IMO, working people out should be a mandatory part of the draft process for our team.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I agree that Knight's decision not to work out picks was indefensible, as we have discussed in the past.

---

My quick defense of this: why let a miniscule sample of data, none of which is a real game, trump the observed body of work over a player's career?

Not that I've really examined the history of the draft, but I think relying TOO heavily on workouts is all too common (Kwame, Darko.)

---

You can't be serious!?!

Dr. Z, your defense of BK is gut busting. BK was right not to get all the information he could because he couldn't possibly weigh the information appropriately?!? Moreover, he KNEW this and that is why he didn't get all the information he could.

Your "defense" of BK ends up being a much worse criticism of him.

You weigh everything piece of evidence appropriately. You don't deny yourself any evidence because it requires you have enough good judgement to accurately weigh it next to other evidence.

Frankly, based upon SW career I knew he'd be an NBA role player AT BEST, so I don't know whose career you were looking at. Workouts for me would have been his opportunity to demonstrate he was a 40 picks worth better than Milsap and/or Craig Smith. For Roy and Foye? Can you play Pg for us if it's still in doubt what's your talent level and trade value?

Imagine how helpful all that information would have been. Instead, we have to cater to our GM's inability to appropriately weigh the evidence. Hog wash!

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

(2) Working Players Out Is Good Business For Future Transactions

Even if you don't intent to draft someone like Randy Foye or Brandon Roy, you want to work them out to make a positive impression on those players about your organization and its interest in them. When they are FAs in a few years or when they are subject to being traded, this gives you some personal interaction with them both to better assess the player and to sell your organization to someone who is choosing their next team.

IMO, working people out should be a mandatory part of the draft process for our team.

---

What other positive PR do the Hawks get. If we want to get on a FA list we have to break down misconceptions built up by the press and that starts with ahtwever personal relationship we can form. Even if it's just a personal meeting. Just indefensible.

W

[drzachary]

You're right. My (in my opinion, very valid) idea that workouts are overvalued doesn't mean they aren't valuable. You convinced me.

[Sothron]

Its hard to pick All-stars when most of your first round picks were in the late teens or in the twenties. We all know Babcock was a horrible drafter but his ability to put together teams and keep them together was outstanding. Knight isn't even the corn on the bottom of Babcock's foot.

[exodus]

There are some things that you can't learn from watching games that have a huge impact on a players pro potential. For me the fact that Shelden's standing reach came in at 8'8" (4" shorter than Marvin) should have excluded him from consideration at #5. Reach is a huge factor when playing the 4/5.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

Was that a joke? Please tell me it was a joke. A blind monkey missing arms and legs could do better than Knight.

---

13 wins

26 wins (despite terrible start after tragic death on the team

27+ wins (despite losing 2nd leading scorer and being injured all year long)

Im not saying he's the best GM in the league but he isn't the worst.

Now if those records were reversed, then maybe so.

But since we do have a bright looking future, some of that has to be the GM.

You can say Smoove and JJ were no brainers. Then again we did have to make a trade to get that Smoove pick, and it did take some guts making that JJ move.

Marvin and Shelden? Yeah judge them after their first years as a starter where neither were healthy all year.

I'll see you on the BK bandwagon in a couple of years when these two are helping Smoove, JJ, and our rookie phenom PG lead this team to a playoff run.

[Sothron]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Was that a joke? Please tell me it was a joke. A blind monkey missing arms and legs could do better than Knight.

---

13 wins

26 wins (despite terrible start after tragic death on the team

27+ wins (despite losing 2nd leading scorer and being injured all year long)

Im not saying he's the best GM in the league but he isn't the worst.

Now if those records were reversed, then maybe so.

But since we do have a bright looking future, some of that has to be the GM.

You can say Smoove and JJ were no brainers. Then again we did have to make a trade to get that Smoove pick, and it did take some guts making that JJ move.

Marvin and Shelden? Yeah judge them after their first years as a starter where neither were healthy all year.

I'll see you on the BK bandwagon in a couple of years when these two are helping Smoove, JJ, and our rookie phenom PG lead this team to a playoff run.

---

Save this post and get back to me when Knight gets fired. He is one of the worst general managers to ever destroy a NBA franchise. The only pick he ever got right in four years was Smoove. He has killed this team by routinely passing over much better players and believing his 6'9" teams of tweener guards/forwards can somehow win in the NBA.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Its hard to pick All-stars when most of your first round picks were in the late teens or in the twenties. We all know Babcock was a horrible drafter but his ability to put together teams and keep them together was outstanding. Knight isn't even the corn on the bottom of Babcock's foot.

---

I didn't say All-Star.

I said competent SF. He couldn't even draft a starting quality player in a decade of drafting outside of Jason Terry (1 for 4 in the first round that year). Augmon was primarily a sixth man in his career but I could also give Babcock that one (although he was also a lottery pick). Babcock picked an unprecedented amount of first rounders who just washed out of the league after their first contracts.

[Sothron]

And again, no one disagrees about his drafting. However his win/loss record not only dwarfs Knight but makes any comparison laughable. People forget or are too young to remember the many good moves Babcock made for this franchise.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

And again, no one disagrees about his drafting. However his win/loss record not only dwarfs Knight but makes any comparison laughable. People forget or are too young to remember the many good moves Babcock made for this franchise.

---

It is dissappointing that the Nique deal blew up so badly and ended up as his legacy for many people. He did some great moves transitioning this team from the Doc/Moses/Willis, etc. era into the Mookie, Smitty, Deke era. If he could have added talent to the team through the draft he would have been a very good, albeit not perfect, GM.

[Diesel]

If we get the #1 pick and we work out both Durant and Oden twice and on each occassion, they have bad workouts... But we work out Noah and he comes in and has 2 monster workouts and even destroys both Oden and Durant one on one...

Does that mean with the first overall pick, the Atlanta Hawks select Joakim Noah??

Hell No!!

We would respect Noah... BUT the basketball community would make us the laughingstock if we don't take the players who they have crowned as the future.

Disagree??

[Johnnybravo4]

Keep in mind we haven't drafted an All Star in over 20 years. We have to have the worst draft history of any team ever.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

If we get the #1 pick and we work out both Durant and Oden twice and on each occassion, they have bad workouts... But we work out Noah and he comes in and has 2 monster workouts and even destroys both Oden and Durant one on one...

Does that mean with the first overall pick, the Atlanta Hawks select Joakim Noah??

Hell No!!

We would respect Noah... BUT the basketball community would make us the laughingstock if we don't take the players who they have crowned as the future.

Disagree??

---

Given the talent difference between players like Oden and Noah, I totally agree that the workout is useless except as a marketing tool if you are picking between them.

If you are stuck between Durant and Oden, though, you may notice some things that give one player an edge over another. For example, if Oden hits 41 of 45 NBA 3pt attempts that shows you something you didn't know and may push you to select him over Durant if you evaluated them as equal prospects based on the game footage. With Oden you could also see how well his wrist has healed and he may be able to do some things he couldn't a month or two before. There is still some real value to be taken from a workout.

What the individual workouts would be most helpful for are sorting out between a number of comparable players. You aren't so much looking for who has a good day as you are looking for who has fundamental flaws in their game that are difficult to correct or who can do things that you haven't seen them do in the games.

I agree that individual workouts are not the be-all, end-all for a player but turning them down is like turning down a week's worth of game footage that you didn't have on the guy.

You aren't going to nix or select someone based on a few games from their career but you want to see every game to get the most complete picture you can.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

If you are stuck between Durant and Oden, though, you may notice some things that give one player an edge over another. For example, if Oden hits 41 of 45 NBA 3pt attempts that shows you something you didn't know and may push you to select him over Durant if you evaluated them as equal prospects based on the game footage. With Oden you could also see how well his wrist has healed and he may be able to do some things he couldn't a month or two before. There is still some real value to be taken from a workout.

---

As BK once said, they get a full complete Physical for every player in the draft. He explained that when talking about a player (I believe Roy or Aldridge) with a bad foot. SO the need for a look at the wrist is moot. As a GM or scout, you already know that if the doctor says it will be fine..even if it's only 30% today, you will have to trust the Doctor's word.

However, Let's say you do have Durant and Oden. Let's say you are the Hawks. Our Biggest Need is a defensive big. What's the purpose for the workout again? The workout is mainly just a show to the fans that Hey we're doing something. I think the only value a workout has is when you're down in the mid draft to the 2nd round and you have those players who you haven't had a chance to scout.

However, I'm sure that BK had scouted Roy and Shelden personally more than once and had seen the footage of their play more than once.

As Bruce said, Shelden was drafted to play a certain position to fill a certain need. The same would be true of choosing Oden over Durant. Sure Durant has all the press, but when you consider our need and the fact that franchise Centers don't grow on trees, we'd be stupid to pass him up because of a WORKOUT?

Babcock used to go through these serious workout sessions and pick guys who sucked eggs..

So again, what's the value of a workout?

[TroyMcClure]

Quote:

---

What's the purpose for the workout again?

---

You know, to actually watch him play basketball.

You talk about NBA live so often, you should understand that you need to actually watch a guy up close. Maybe talk to him while he's shooting, etc. Get inside his head a little. You notice little things when you are 5 feet from someone.

But hey, BK sucked as a player and never helped or understood how to make his teammates better. His actions as GM further validate to me that he was probably a selfish offensive player with little or no understanding of defense and a team concept.

So the better answer is - Why would it matter if BK saw him up close? It's not like he know anything.