BK had most 4 year draft capitol of any GM...EVER?

[Packfill]

At the end of the day, the Hawks drafts will only be as good as the team is. If the team fails to make it to the playoffs (hopefully this season but without a doubt they better make it by next season) then it was a waste of draft capital.

Basically, this is BK's last stand. If the team stinks and wins 30-something games and misses the playoffs then he is gone (assuming the inept ownership can at least do that).

[exodus]

Quote:

---

When you look at the big men Atlanta could have picked it isn't like they had a shot at Oden or could have taken Howard, Okafor, Aldridge, etc

---

I agree, which is why i would rather have Portlands picks. I also wouldn't mind having their current GM.

In hindsight Jefferson would have been a good pick at 6 but i don't think anyone ranked him that high at the time so it would be hard for me to say BK passed on him. Biedrins would make a nice hindsight pick at 6 as well.

Then again if the draft was done over Josh Smith would probably be considered a top 6 pick.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

For example, you included Atlanta 2008 first round pick in your analysis but left off Portland's. That makes no sense since it makes no difference if you trade a future pick or not if you are measuring draft capital. Frankly, that Portland pick is more valuable than the Atlanta pick, IMO.

---

We've already traded and invested the 2008 pick's capitol in this year's team. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

W

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

At the end of the day, the Hawks drafts will only be as good as the team is. If the team fails to make it to the playoffs (hopefully this season but without a doubt they better make it by next season) then it was a waste of draft capital.

Basically, this is BK's last stand. If the team stinks and wins 30-something games and misses the playoffs then he is gone (assuming the inept ownership can at least do that).

---

BK should've been canned years ago, but other than that I agree.

[Packfill]

I agree that BK should have been fired already. That said, if the team doesn't make the playoffs, and he is signed to a new contract after this season, then it will be a further blight on this franchise.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

For example, you included Atlanta 2008 first round pick in your analysis but left off Portland's. That makes no sense since it makes no difference if you trade a future pick or not if you are measuring draft capital. Frankly, that Portland pick is more valuable than the Atlanta pick, IMO.

---

We've already traded and invested the 2008 pick's capitol in this year's team. This is not a difficult concept to grasp.

W

---

This isn't a difficult concept to get either - you aren't asking about actual results. You are asking about draft capital. If you take into account results we are on a whole different discussion. When you ask who has the best draft capital a 2008 Atlanta first round pick is equally relevant as a Portland 2008 first round pick. There is no way logically to separate the two.

Draft capital = the picks available to you and the players available at those picks.

Use of draft capital does not equal draft capital.

If you examine Atlanta draft capital from 2004 - 2008, you have to look at Portland draft capital over the same time period to make any kind of comparison in terms of measuring who had the best picks/assets at their disposal. Otherwise you are just juryrigging the pool for one side to fail much like you would if you compared draft capital for San Antonio v. draft capital for Phoenix and then you examined Phoenix's picks from 2007 through 2010 (because they traded their 2008 and 2010 picks) but only examined San Antonio's picks from 2007 since San Antonio hasn't traded a future pick.

(You also left off other picks that Portland had. See swatguy's post.)

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

This isn't a difficult concept to get either - you aren't asking about actual results. You are asking about draft capital.

---

I'm not talking about next year's team or the team 10 years from now. I am talking about this year's team. The fact that our future draft capital is mortgage for THIS YEAR'S TEAM does NOT involve Portland's team next year. If you want to compare the Hawk's draft capital invested THIS YEAR verses the Portland draft capital invested NEXT year, then fine, but I am not comparing the draft capital investment of a team year that is off in the future.

Quote:

---

There is no way logically to separate the two.

---

I just did.

Quote:

---

(You also left off other picks that Portland had. See swatguy's post.)

---

I don't believe I did. I mistakenly listed their drafting of Foye at 7 and trading for Roy at 6 as a drafting of Roy at 6, but I don't believe I missed a pick.

W

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

I agree that BK should have been fired already. That said, if the team doesn't make the playoffs, and he is signed to a new contract after this season, then it will be a further blight on this franchise.

---

Yeah I know, even though it shouldn't have come to this. Without a retarded ownership this problem would have already been salvaged.

[Final_quest]

Quote:

---

C A P I T A L

---

From Wikipedia:

Not to be confused with Capital. .

Capitol may refer to:

A seat of government, including:

Capitoline Hill in Rome, Italy (from which the word capitol derives)

United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.

State capitols in the United States

Capitol of Puerto Rico in San Juan

Capitole de Toulouse in Toulouse, France

Capitolio Nacional in Columbia

Capitolio Federal in Venezuala

El Capitolio in Havana, Cuba

Capitol Hill, the name of districts in the United States and Canada

Capitol (board game), a Roman-themed board game

Capitol (TV series), a U.S. soap opera

Capitol Air Lines, a U.S. charter airline in the 1970s and 1980s

Capitol Cinema/Theatre, a number of former and current cinemas or theatres located throughout the world

Capitol Corridor, an Amtrak railroad corridor

Capitol Records, a U.S. record label

I've corrected this before with no impact. It wouldn't bother me if Walter didn't misuse it over and over, and if he didn't try to so hard to come across as the smartest guy in the thread. I guarantee he's used his self invented term in well over 1oo posts.

In finance and accounting, Capital generally refers to financial wealth, especially that used to start or maintain a business. Got it W?

[TexasPete]

I have never gotten on anyone for spelling or grammar because mine isn't always perfect and this board is not the place for it. But Walter uses the word so much I figure he should at least know how to spell it.

He loves the word, uses it in every other thread.

[sturt]

Bottom line, BK has had some great opportunities in terms of draft slots.

Whether it has been the greatest array of opportunities by a single GM in a concentrated period of time is, at first, interesting, but in the bigger picture (... as I've cited here: _sturt_'s earlier reply to W ), it really is not.

What's more, right now, today, at this hour, it doesn't really matter a hill of beans, since no other GM has drafted a cadre of All-Stars with their picks, either... in fact, there's only been LeBron, Carmelo, Bosh, Wade, Josh Howard and Dwight Howard (, who, fwiw, reports were saying at the time BK was working day and night at trying to obtain).

So, that means, since his ascension to the Hawks throne in April 2003, there have been zero... yeah, zero... all-star game participants missed by Billy Knight in drafting.

You say, "So what. That will change eventually."

Yes, that will change, but let's be consistent, shall we????

As long as some are saying "what have you done for me lately" and considering Chil, MWill, and SWill in that light, it begs consistency to acknowledge that no player that BK passed up has distinguished himself as a player at that level... and it goes without saying, no HoFers.

The big picture? Essentially, "It's the CHAMPIONSHIP, stupid."

To wit, no one was complaining in Los Angeles after they'd won in 1982 that, in the previous draft, they'd selected Mike McGee one pick ahead of Larry Nance... what would THAT have meant to a team who was playing either Kurt Rambis or an aging Bob McAdoo at PF????... how many championships might have been won, if not for that horrendous oversight in the 1981 draft?... Few care. Showtime had their time in the spotlight because they had Magic, Worthy, and Kareem, plus a number of good-not-great players surrounding them.

Year after year it's proven that it takes a couple or three great players and a group of solid others to accomplish that, not five superstars. Recently, teams have even won with arguably only one superstar Sometimes, indeed, it IS good enough to get a good enough player and not take a chance on a player with a lower pre-draft basement who may ends up contributing nothing (... an argument much more developed in the cited post).

[exodus]

Quote:

---

The fact that our future draft capital is

mortgage

for THIS YEAR'S TEAM

---

If it was mortgaged that means it was used. The value of a pick before it is used and after it is used are completely different.

if you are looking strictly at the picks and their value you are better off not including 2008 anyway.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The fact that our future draft capital is

mortgage

for THIS YEAR'S TEAM

---

If it was mortgaged that means it was used. The value of a pick before it is used and after it is used are completely different.

---

No, the value of a pick to THIS YEAR'S TEAM is "completely different" when it was traded for a player two years ago or hasn't even been used yet. THAT is "completely different" for THIS YEAR'S TEAM. When I use the word "had" to describe the time frame of BK's draft pick capital, what exactly are people missing. HE USED THE PICK ALREADY! Portland hasn't. Get real peeps.

W

[exodus]

Quote:

---

HE USED THE PICK ALREADY! Portland hasn't. Get real peeps.

---

It doesn't matter. If you are strictly talking about draft capital only the comparison of the available picks is valid. It doesn't matter how they were used or when. A different GM might have used them in a different way.

Phoenix traded their 2008 and 2010 first rounders for cash. If you were comparing draft capital between the Hawks and the Suns through 2010 would you include those picks for Phoenix or exclude them since they were used?

[exodus]

When I made my original statement in the first post keep in mind i was also referencing the picks BK had in Memphis.

[Swatguy]

Quote:

---

Bottom line, BK has had some great opportunities in terms of draft slots.

Whether it has been the greatest array of opportunities by a single GM in a concentrated period of time is, at first, interesting, but in the bigger picture (... as I've cited here:

_sturt_'s earlier reply to W

), it really is not.

What's more, right now, today, at this hour, it doesn't really matter a hill of beans, since no other GM has drafted a cadre of All-Stars with their picks, either... in fact, there's only been LeBron, Carmelo, Bosh, Wade, Josh Howard and Dwight Howard (, who, fwiw, reports were saying at the time BK was working day and night at trying to obtain).

So, that means, since his ascension to the Hawks throne in April 2003, there have been zero... yeah, zero... all-star game participants missed by Billy Knight in drafting.

You say, "So what. That will change eventually."

Yes, that will change, but let's be consistent, shall we????

As long as some are saying "what have you done for me lately" and considering Chil, MWill, and SWill in that light, it begs consistency to acknowledge that no player that BK passed up has distinguished himself as a player at that level... and it goes without saying, no HoFers.

The big picture? Essentially, "It's the CHAMPIONSHIP, stupid."

To wit, no one was complaining in Los Angeles after they'd won in 1982 that, in the previous draft, they'd selected Mike McGee one pick ahead of Larry Nance... what would THAT have meant to a team who was playing either Kurt Rambis or an aging Bob McAdoo at PF????... how many championships might have been won, if not for that horrendous oversight in the 1981 draft?... Few care. Showtime had their time in the spotlight because they had Magic, Worthy, and Kareem, plus a number of good-not-great players surrounding them.

Year after year it's proven that it takes a couple or three great players and a group of solid others to accomplish that, not five superstars. Recently, teams have even won with arguably only one superstar Sometimes, indeed, it IS good enough to get a good enough player and not take a chance on a player with a lower pre-draft basement who may ends up contributing nothing (... an argument much more developed in the cited post).

---

Are you sir suggesting, that for the past five years (take a deep breath now), BK has been amongst if not the best Draftmaster in the NBA?

[drzachary]

I don't provide a mathematical solution because there isn't one to be found. You're just assigning arbitrary numbers to what is essentially a judgement call.

I actually agree with you: Atlanta has had many, many draft assets, and not made the best of them. In fact, they could be -- are, in your opinion and mine -- the worst team in a decade in this regard. However, the numerical game you're playing is downright silly and just clouds the issue.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

HE USED THE PICK ALREADY! Portland hasn't. Get real peeps.

---

It doesn't matter. If you are strictly talking about draft capital only the comparison of the available picks is valid. It doesn't matter how they were used or when. A different GM might have used them in a different way.

Phoenix traded their 2008 and 2010 first rounders for cash. If you were comparing draft capital between the Hawks and the Suns through 2010 would you include those picks for Phoenix or exclude them since they were used?

---

Does it matter when you are talking about your pay check whether you already spent it on a credit card purchase? Yes. You've already used the value of your paycheck. Can't double cash it. It's still was your money you spent.

Good grief.

If we traded ALL of our draft capital each and every year, what we got for it would still be the products of our draft capitol.

This is just a farce that people would argue against this notion.

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Phoenix traded their 2008 and 2010 first rounders for cash. If you were comparing draft capital between the Hawks and the Suns through 2010 would you include those picks for Phoenix or exclude them since they were used?

---

Yes, I would, particularly to judge a GM's performance with them. They aren't likely high picks and it wasn't a good deal for them but they chose to and did use them...NOW to either better or unburden their team. This year's team reflects that trade. No other way to look at it. It's not like they still have those picks, right?

W

[exodus]

Quote:

---

If we traded ALL of our draft capital each and every year, what we got for it would still be the

products of our draft capitol.

---

Dude you should never try to argue with AHF. He is absolutely right here.

The products of our draft capital are the players we acquired in the draft or through trades by using our capital. Look at the title to the thread. If you are talking about the products of our draft capital then you are saying that Chill, MW, Shellhead, etc have greater value than any combo of players drafted and/or traded for in 4 years using draft capital in history.