J. O'Neal to Toronto

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

They added Ben Wallace 2 years ago, and got better and swept the Heat in the playoffs. They traded Ben this year as he was utter shite.

The point is that they still got worse because of Ben Wallace's age and declining skills whereas chandler is getting better and better each year!

[Admin]

They definitely made a mistake in basically swapping Wallace for Chandler and also losing PJ Brown in the deal and while he isn't a great player, I think he is a very good influence on the young bigs and would have been good to keep around.

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

JO is going to make Toronto one of the softest teams in the league and don't forget that he will miss at least 20 games leaving Bosh to play center.

I think this is a decent gamble for Toronto. They weren't going to win a championship without making a move and they had two very good point guards. JO isn't what he once was but if he can be healthy for the playoffs he is a very good interior defender which is exactly what that team needs.

If JO bombs this year then they have a huge expiring contract to trade away the next season.

[Admin]

Man if I'm a Toronto fan I am highly skeptical of this move. I wonder if Ford hadn't been hurt last year if they would have tried to trade him to the Grizzlies for Gasol. Bosh and O'Neal together are an interesting front court but neither of them are bangers and I wonder who will be the one doing the dirty work for them. They have one of the tallest front courts in history now with Bosh (6'10), O'Neal (6'11), and Bargnani (7') and Moon (6'8) is pretty tall as well.

Today is a good day to be a Pacers fan. They get out of that monster contract and while Ford is a risk to have a permanent injury it won't cost them nearly as much as it would with O'Neal on the bench injured. If they can get something of value for Tinsley they will be in even better shape.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

They definitely made a mistake in basically swapping Wallace for Chandler and also losing PJ Brown in the deal and while he isn't a great player, I think he is a very good influence on the young bigs and would have been good to keep around.

The biggest problem with the post Jordan bulls is that they have made some poor draft choices and when they did select a good player, they would trade him away for lesser talent and/or aging talent! I think that the hawks so far have done the opposite. We traded away the one dud in Shelden Williams and kept the rest. Why change now?

[Admin]

Agreed, I think that as long as we continue to progress with this current group we should keep them together and build around them by adding ancillary pieces to fill out the bench (coaches and players) and provide leadership.

*Disclaimer - To clarify for anyone that is confused by "continue to progress" I DO NOT mean 1 game improvement as continuing to progress. The team needs to move improve in the EC standings as well as perform better in the playoffs for me to say that we have continued to progress.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

Agreed, I think that as long as we continue to progress with this current group we should keep them together and build around them by adding ancillary pieces to fill out the bench (coaches and players) and provide leadership.

*Disclaimer - To clarify for anyone that is confused by "continue to progress" I DO NOT mean 1 game improvement as continuing to progress. The team needs to move improve in the EC standings as well as perform better in the playoffs for me to say that we have continued to progress.

Agreed! It is probably a safe assumption that the youngest team in last year's playoffs with a rookie starting center can significantly improve without major changes! There were many teams that made significant changes last year like Denver that were no better off than the Hawks. The Hawks lost a lot of close games last years and many of them were due to some bad calls i.e. rewatch that 2nd match up at home against Washington!

Many of the 1st half losses were due to Joe not playing like Joe. Many of the post all star losses were due to hopefully Bibby not shooting like Bibby is capable of shooting and the team wearing down especially Marvin from logging so many minutes. I would definitely add a cheap big man like Theo Ratliff and a shooter that can play the 2 and 3 position. Stuodamire just isn't cutting it! He still doesn't understand how to play team basketball which result in a lot of unnecessary forced shots! Mark my word, Law will be good next year! He sees the floor better than any Hawk and makes great passes.

[Johnnybravo4]

Teams for the most part don't improve linearly without changes. Horford could have a second year slump. Marvin may return with the same game and Bibby may not stay healthy. We can't just assume that we will go from 37 to 45 this year then 45 to 53 the year after. It don't work that way.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

Teams for the most part don't improve linearly without changes. Horford could have a second year slump. Marvin may return with the same game and Bibby may not stay healthy. We can't just assume that we will go from 37 to 45 this year then 45 to 53 the year after. It don't work that way.

Changing your line up doesn't necessarily improve you record either. Charlotte adding J Rich, Denver adding Iverson, Memphis before the Gasol trade, Dallas adding Kidd, Phoenix adding Shaq, Cleveland adding Wallace etc.

[mudderfudder77]

Quote:

---

They definitely made a mistake in basically swapping Wallace for Chandler and also losing PJ Brown in the deal and while he isn't a great player, I think he is a very good influence on the young bigs and would have been good to keep around.

Atlanta fans know as well as anyone what crappy ownership can do to a team. Pax signed Wallace (a mistake) and was forced to trade Chandler in the process - so as not to come close to the lux tax when Kirk, Ben and Deng were resigned.

Signing Wallace was clearly a mistake, but ownerships reluctance to pay out some of the record proceeds they were making compounded it.

In the end Pax chose his coach over Chandler. But I can not absolve Chandler of blame. He never worked out in the off-season, and was a mental midget in Chicago. Clearly, and he admits it, he rededicated himself in NO - and he has said that getting drafted really opened his eyes and he changed how he treated basketball. Still a big mistake though.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

In the end Pax chose his coach over Chandler. But I can not absolve Chandler of blame. He never worked out in the off-season, and was a mental midget in Chicago. Clearly, and he admits it, he rededicated himself in NO - and he has said that getting traded really opened his eyes and he changed how he treated basketball. Still a big mistake though.

So you agree that change for the sake of changing doesn't necessarily improve you team like some poster think. Especially when you are dealing with younger players that will mature at some point!

[frosgrim]

You do realize that the Celtics, Pistons and Heat were all constructed by making major trades to add to what was already in place?

The Spurs are what appear to be the last of the develop internally teams that can win championships, ala the Celtics, Lakers, Bulls, and Pistons of the 80s and early 90s. The most recent champions outside of the Spurs (who do make trades), all won due to blockbuster trades; e.g. Kobe to the Lakers, Shaq to Miami, the entirity of the Pistons (excepting Prince), and now the Celtics. Note that FA had very little to do with these teams building their clubs (the one exception is talked about below). Did they add pieces via FA? Yes. But were their core players aquired via FA, no (see below for exception).

While I completely agree that you don't trade half of your team, ala the Bulls, at some point you have to move players that you drafted due to cap issues. The current Hawks roster has major holes in it and we are fairly limited by our cap. This, to me, means we have to make a trade of one of the core players to round out the roster. This isn't letting every one go, this isn't trading for nothing to get out from under a big contract. Instead, its about identifying where the club's weaknesses lie, and what assests could be moved to fix those problems. For example, if there is a team that needs what Childress brings (energy, garbage buckets (in the McHale sense), and an all around good game) and has a shooter/slasher up for trade, then the Hawks should listen. One of the major reasons the Hawks were so inconsistent this year was HORRIBLE bench play. Adding a scorer to the bench would help this club significantly. We aren't going to find that guy via FA.

So, the notion of standing pat does not match the available evidence for successful teams. Neither does the evidence suggest that you trade half of the players you drafted. There is a critical area in the middle there that the Hawks should aim for.

I also don't think that the team should rely on FA to bring in anything more than a role player. There is only one example in the modern NBA where a FA singning lead to that player being the core player for an NBA championship- Shaq to LA. The Shaq to LA was a really unusual circumstance in that everyone knew that Shaq wanted to play in LA and LA was able to clear cap to get him. Other than that, there hasn't been a FA that has lead to a championship. Just soemthing to consider.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

You do realize that the Celtics, Pistons and Heat were all constructed by making major trades to add to what was already in place?

And what do the above teams all have in common? One hit wonders!

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

all won due to blockbuster trades; e.g. Kobe to the Lakers,

By the way, the Lakers drafted Kobe Bryant

[frosgrim]

Nope, he came over on a draft day trade.

LA was not a one hit wonder.

But if your point is stick with what the Hawks have, then I can't disagree with you more. A move has to be made to even out the roster. The club could win another 4 games this upcoming season with no additions, but at the same time, they could loose another 4. It depends on development, fatigue, and the injury bug. Playing JJ 40+ minutes a night is going to catch up with him. Having a guy off the bench that can take up scoring is critical to next year's success.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

Nope, he came over on a draft day trade.

Semantics! He has never played for another team!

Quote:

---

LA was not a one hit wonder.

Getting Shaq for nothing played a big part in those championships!

Quote:

---

But if your point is stick with what the Hawks have, then I can't disagree with you more.

Didn't say that nor did I imply not adding pieces. Just implied that the core group plays well together and that there is no reason to change at this point in time! Adding a shooter to replace Salim would be a dream come true. Adding a cheap veteran big like Ratliff would make all the difference in the world!

[ATLBob]

Wow, can you imagine a Bulls squad with Chandler, Brand, Ron Ron, Deng/Gordon and Rose. They would need an additional scorer to two off the bench (Gibson?), but damn.

[Peoriabird]

Quote:

---

Wow, can you imagine a Bulls squad with Chandler, Brand, Ron Ron, Deng/Gordon and Rose. They would need an additional scorer to two off the bench (Gibson?), but damn.

This is why you don't trade your young talent for aging veterans or for players with equal or lesser talent especially when it looks as though your current team is finally developing good chemistry!

[ATLBob]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

You do realize that the Celtics, Pistons and Heat were all constructed by making major trades to add to what was already in place?

And what do the above teams all have in common? One hit wonders!

Come on P, are you really calling the Pistons a one-hit wonder. Really? The most consistent East team we've had going?

Dumars has everyone suddenly thinking desperation cause he was honest. He's looking to add an injection, not overhaul. That team will still be one of the best in the East next year.

It's not like the Celtics are gonna suddenly forget how to play next season either.

[frosgrim]

Good grief, I presented the facts and you disregard them to make your "argument". Kobe was traded for after he became petulent about not playing for the Hornets. Its like when Elway forced his trad. Facts are that neither of them played for the teams that drafted them.

What is your point about Shaq? That satement makes no sense without the context. The argument is that only ONE FA in the history of modern NBA has become a core player on a championship team.

Other championship teams are built via critical trades that pair experienced guys with a superstar-like player (e.g. Celtics, Miami, Lakers) or through putting togther a once in a decade team of terrific players (Pistons) coupled with a down team. Furthermore, the one team that was built through 3 great draft picks (Duncan, Parker, Ginobli), still used trades to fill out there roster and get the pieces they needed.

Your idea that the entirity of the core of the Hawks roster can get a championship is not supported by the evidence. Additionally, the Hawks can't do keep this core due to cap considerations. Now we could argue about what the core is, but from what I see the core is:

Bibby

JJ

MW

Smith

Horford

Childress

If you're in agreement with that being the core, then I can't see how one doesn't get traded to fill out the rest of the roster and manage the cap.