Official Game Thread: Hawks - Bucks

[Sothron]

The attendance was bad way before(for years) the "tank" started. Those 50 win teams weren't exactly drawing good nimbers. Also the Spurs did tank the year Robinson got hurt and drafted arguably the greatest PF that's ever played the game. The "Spurs way" will probably look a lot different when that big cog is no longer playing.

Same here. It always kinda makes me chuckle when you see people espousing the Spurs way as if it is some magical elixir when it still depends on superstars to make it work.

[DS17Fanboy]

Went to this game with my son and it was about 60% to 70% empty. Now I know the Bucs are awful, so hardly any fans of the opponent showed, but seeing such an empty stadium after such a long road trip was demoralizing. I started thinking to myself, "How do the player's feel about coming back to an almost empty stadium?" How did Korver feel when the announcer congratulated him on his 3 point streak and you could almost hear the crickets chewing on popcorn in the corner? If I'm a player about to resign, besides the money, why would I want to stay in Atlanta? Certainly not to see empty seats or to tank and lose games. As the game was starting my son was actually worried that the Hawks might leave Atlanta because no one was supporting them.I'm not bashing the pro-tankers as I know most of the tankers have the Hawk's best interest in their heart, but after seeing our current attendance it helped me realize how bad this tanking idea is hurting our fan base right now. Who wants to spend their own time and money to go to a game if they believe the coach and/or players are not giving their all? How many young Atlanta fans are jumping onto the Heat bandwagon to never return while we tank our way to success? I spoke with a Hawk membership representative a couple of weeks and he told me the upcoming Heat game is sold out. I'm willing to bet when I go to this game I'm going to be surrounded by more Heat fans than Hawk's fans at one of our own home games.Earlier this year before our 1 win in 14 games losing streak I kind of fell into the tanking idea, but by the end of it I saw how much damage the idea, whether it was happening or not, was doing to our franchise. Tanking is by no means a guaranteed ticket to success. The Cavaliers have had 5 top five first round picks since LeBron James came into the league and they still aren't any good. Now to put this into perspective the Spurs have not had one top five pick during that same timeframe. I mention this discrepancy simply to say, "Maybe tanking is not the best way to build a franchise." Losing and driving away fans while hoping for a shot at a stud to save the franchise is not as a stable way to grow a franchise as cultivating fans with wins and making good sound trade, draft and signing decisions.Now for the positive part of my Hawks/Bucs game experience. In the fourth quarter when the Hawks starting turning on their offense and defense what little bit of fan base that was there started really getting into the game. I found myself high-fiving fans next to me and when Teague made his dunk near the end, everyone went berserk! My son and I had a blast even though it was against the sad 13 win Bucs, because we won. In short I believe basketball is like everything else in life that doing things the right way is how you come out ahead, not through shortcuts or cheating the system. I hope we win every game this season!Go Hawks!

Nice write up there mate and I relate to what your saying.

Im curious, what are ticket prices for a game like that?

[Gray Mule]

Someone please explain things to me about this tanking thing

because I don't really understand it.

There are 7 teams east and 7 teams west that will not make it into

the playoffs. If the Hawks slide into this loser group and are #14,

does that not mean that we get the 14th pick? Sure, we're in there

with a chance to drop down to a lower pick, but with no guarantee

that we go lower than # 14.

Now, if we're the worst team in the playoffs, would we not be # 15

when it came time to pick?

If this is all true, we gain 1 place in the draft. Is there THAT much

difference in # 14 and # 15? Enough difference so that it's great

to deliberately lose games and alienate your thin fan base?

Is there 14 super stars in this year's draft? No? Then why do it?

Just because we end up on the losing side of these numbers, what

chance do we have in landing that super star everyone talks about?

The last time we had one of the top picks, Hawks drafted Marvin Williams

and the fans here, almost everyone, complained until he was gone,

led by Diesel. Sure, it's a different draft and ours is a different front office,

but still there's that big chance of failure. All drafted players do not live

up to their expectations.

PLEASE EXPLAIN SO THAT THIS OLD, SIMPLE MINDED, MOUNTAIN BOY CAN UNDERSTAND!

[Guest]

Someone please explain things to me about this tanking thing

because I don't really understand it.

There are 7 teams east and 7 teams west that will not make it into

the playoffs. If the Hawks slide into this loser group and are #14,

does that not mean that we get the 14th pick? Sure, we're in there

with a chance to drop down to a lower pick, but with no guarantee

that we go lower than # 14.

Now, if we're the worst team in the playoffs, would we not be # 15

when it came time to pick?

If this is all true, we gain 1 place in the draft. Is there THAT much

difference in # 14 and # 15? Enough difference so that it's great

to deliberately lose games and alienate your thin fan base?

Is there 14 super stars in this year's draft? No? Then why do it?

Just because we end up on the losing side of these numbers, what

chance do we have in landing that super star everyone talks about?

The last time we had one of the top picks, Hawks drafted Marvin Williams

and the fans here, almost everyone, complained until he was gone,

led by Diesel. Sure, it's a different draft and ours is a different front office,

but still there's that big chance of failure. All drafted players do not live

up to their expectations.

PLEASE EXPLAIN SO THAT THIS OLD, SIMPLE MINDED, MOUNTAIN BOY CAN UNDERSTAND!

@Gray Mule - I think the 14 lottery teams are weighted by their win/loss record. We currently have the 13th worse win/loss record league wide. Two teams out west (Minny and Phoenix) that have better record than us will not make the playoffs so they'll be in the lottery. We make the playoffs - we get pick #15. No playoffs - currently #13. So the more losses we have if we are in the lottery, the higher the pick.

Edited March 14, 2014 by JayBirdHawk

[Hawkeyes007]

Same here. It always kinda makes me chuckle when you see people espousing the Spurs way as if it is some magical elixir when it still depends on superstars to make it work.

I didn't state that the Spurs are not a "magical elixir", but a franchise that is ran very efficiently. A mix of great coaching, committed players and good personnel decisions. Remember, not all the Spurs superstars are first overall picks. Tony Parker was 28th overall, Ginobili was 57th overall and Stephen Jackson was 42nd overall. I'm stating that teams like the Spurs stay competitive by doing things the right way not purposely flopping for a gamble at a top pick.

[Hawkeyes007]

Nice write up there mate and I relate to what your saying. Im curious, what are ticket prices for a game like that?

Pretty cheap this year, about 16 dollars a piece for center court in the 300 section.

[ViperXX79]

I didn't state that the Spurs are not a "magical elixir", but a franchise that is ran very efficiently. A mix of great coaching, committed players and good personnel decisions. Remember, not all the Spurs superstars are first overall picks. Tony Parker was 28th overall, Ginobili was 57th overall and Stephen Jackson was 42nd overall. I'm stating that teams like the Spurs stay competitive by doing things the right way not purposely flopping for a gamble at a top pick.

And without Tim Duncan the Spurs aren't the dominate force they have been.

[DJlaysitup]

That is just the NSA tinkering with things. It's how you know they've made a change in the Matrix. (Been happening to me too btw)

LOL...in an new NSA press release:

"The NSA (in partnership with the CIA) is publishing the largest "Recipe website" of all time!

Tired of not having the best recipe for sweet potato pie at Thanksgiving? No worries! Come to our NSA website and get the best recipes from Grandma's across the South and Midwest.

Having trouble making a good "home-made" BBQ sauce? Have no fear! The NSA has all the BBQ sauce recipes from top contest winners at the click of your mouse.

...and as a special attraction...not sure if your wife is screwing around on you? Just send $10 and a self stamped addressed envelope and we will tell you everybody who is screwing around in your area code.

Don't miss out!

The NSA...here to help!

(not responsible for possible terrorist actions that may take place while we are accumulating recipes).

Edited March 15, 2014 by DJlaysitup

[TheNorthCydeRises]

The attendance was bad way before(for years) the "tank" started. Those 50 win teams weren't exactly drawing good nimbers. Also the Spurs did tank the year Robinson got hurt and drafted arguably the greatest PF that's ever played the game. The "Spurs way" will probably look a lot different when that big cog is no longer playing.

They averaged over 16,500 a game in 2010.This year, we're barely over 14,500 a game in 2014.If the average ticket price is $50 a game + $10 in concessions, that's $60 per person.2000 × $60 = $120,000 lost per game in 2014 compared to 2010.$120,000 × 41 home games = 4.92 MILLION lost

[ViperXX79]

They averaged over 16,500 a game in 2010.This year, we're barely over 14,500 a game in 2014.If the average ticket price is $50 a game + $10 in concessions, that's $60 per person.2000 × $60 = $120,000 lost per game in 2014 compared to 2010.$120,000 × 41 home games = 4.92 MILLION lost

So what's your point?

[Sothron]

I didn't state that the Spurs are not a "magical elixir", but a franchise that is ran very efficiently. A mix of great coaching, committed players and good personnel decisions. Remember, not all the Spurs superstars are first overall picks. Tony Parker was 28th overall, Ginobili was 57th overall and Stephen Jackson was 42nd overall. I'm stating that teams like the Spurs stay competitive by doing things the right way not purposely flopping for a gamble at a top pick.

And without Tim Duncan, the number one pick in the draft, they don't win any titles. The Spurs model both starts and ends with having a superstar.

[DJlaysitup]

And without Tim Duncan, the number one pick in the draft, they don't win any titles. The Spurs model both starts and ends with having a superstar.

Actually it started with having two superstars. Sometimes we forget how good David "the Admiral" Robinson really was. For many years he was the "man" and Duncan was his understudy. They had twin towers - Robinson a full 7 foot and strong and athletic and Duncan 6-11, 1/2 and very skilled.

You don't get that kind of combo unless your star gets hurt for a year - which Robinson did - and you tank a bit - and you get lucky in the next draft. Those deals are one in a thousand.

Funny story about David Robinson (I was at Navy Supply Corps School (Athens) right after he was there)...he "supposedly" came in as a 6-6 freshman at the Academy..(more likely 6-8.or 9 probably). The Academy had a height restriction at the time (but the rule probably got bended a bit for him).

Word was that Robinson grew 5 inches between his freshman and sophomore year but I talked to guys who knew him at the Academy and they said he was huge as a freshman.

Anyway he was raw and wasn't heavily recruited. Plus he was smart and wanted to be a Navy Officer.

CAREER AVERAGES:

21 points and 11 rebounds...and he won a league MVP award in 1996.

Edited March 15, 2014 by DJlaysitup