Latest AJC Article

[CBAreject]

Did you intend this pun, Diesel?

As a hold 'em lover, I find it very funny.

[CBAreject]

Sekou has been dead wrong before. He is obviously wrong about the Zaza contract in this same article.

It would not surprise me if he is wrong about the picks, too. I would expect that we trade the Bos/LAL pick + a future unprotected, but I would be surprised if the 2007 pick is only top 3 protected.

No way we have given them two of our own picks. No way.

[jaywalker72]

Don't forget we can't trade our own pick two consecutive years.

If we trade it in 2007, then the earliest they can cash in #2 is in 2009.

Trading future picks are always risky...but trading 2 potential mid rounders for Johnson seems fair.

[Admin]

though, we will still have our own and in 2007 can lose our own pick. It would be nice to have some clarification on this issue though because as CBA said, Sekou has been wrong before.

[Nicholasp27]

well if it's a tournament, then depending on the blinds and the chip stacks and if u are first in the pot, then you are praying for jj in case your steal is called

[NickJYD]

Isnt it possible its protected for more than just the top 3 and Smith was stating that having it protected in 2007 insures that wed get one of those 3 studs if we were terrible again? I dont think Sekou knows the protection on the pick and this sentence is unclear just like the Zaza contract is unclear.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

An injury here, a lack of player development there and we have (actually PHEONIX has) say the fifth most lottery balls. Actually, with the youth we have, coming from a 13 win team, one with even less in the form of a big man, I put our playoff chances at 50%/50% at best next year. This is a bad deal.

You do not get casual with your first rounders during a 13 win year.

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Unless the pick is protected significantly better than reported or unless we can send any 1st rder allowing us to make a deal for one, this is a BAD deal!

W

---

I am totally with you Walt. I hope that this is more erroneous reporting by the man who brought us the explanation that the Hawks could have gotten the #2 and #3 picks this year if only the Lakers had made the playoffs. Protecting our own pick only through the top 3 in 2007 is a recipe for disaster and could end up making this a terrible trade. This pick better be lottery protected through 2007 and maybe only top 6 protected in 2008.

[Diesel]

Actually 2 Jacks, JJ = Josh/Josh...

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Protecting our own pick only through the top 3 in 2007 is a recipe for disaster and could end up making this a terrible trade

---

Recipe for disaster?

I hope that we can see this Hawks team in the playoffs by 2007. That's just the bottom line.

Don't you know that Phoenix was negoitating a SNT deal with Boston for Pierce and with N.O. for Magloire?

There are several things that can be said. Maybe we spent too much on JJ..

However, one thing I won't say is Regret...

[AHF]

Recipe for disaster:

Trade for Lorezen Wright and don't protect your picks. Primary player lost?

Amare Stoudemire (picked one spot after the Hawks' pick)

Trade for Glenn Robinson and don't protect your pick.

Player lost?

Travis Ford (picked with the Hawks pick)

I expect the Hawks to be in the playoffs in 2007 but I am not so foolhardy to know that things don't always go the way you plan. Essentially giving up 3 mid-round first round picks should have been enough to land JJ. Giving up a potential lottery pick in the VERY strong (based on projections) 2007 draft would be a bad idea.

[Final_quest]

There is definitely a risk involved, but you have to take the risk....from BK's perspective. The GM has to produce by 2007, especially one who is responsible for bringing in every player and coach. BK wiped the slate clean and by 2007 he has to show results. Using a 2007 pick is like gambling with the house's money for BK.

I could see him lasting if the Hawks just miss the playoffs in 2 years, but if we are one of the ten worst teams in the league he is out the door. BK can talk about building the right way, but the GM has to see results to keep his job.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Recipe for disaster:

Trade for Lorezen Wright and don't protect your picks. Primary player lost?

Amare Stoudemire (picked one spot after the Hawks' pick)

Trade for Glenn Robinson and don't protect your pick.

Player lost?

Travis Ford (picked with the Hawks pick)

I expect the Hawks to be in the playoffs in 2007 but I am not so foolhardy to know that things don't always go the way you plan. Essentially giving up 3 mid-round first round picks should have been enough to land JJ. Giving up a potential lottery pick in the VERY strong (based on projections) 2007 draft would be a bad idea.

---

It's too easy to be happy about the deal now (when the loss of the pick is likely 2 years away) and cry foul later. As reported this is just plain a bad deal. It doesn't mean we won't skirt giving up a lottery pick, but the possibility of averting giving up a lottery pick is not enough. It shouldn't take Glenn and Lo to learn this, but considering we have suffered these two moves, I question why people are as apologist as they are.

Say it with me now, a 13-win team does not have the luxury of being cavalier with its picks!

W

[Guest Walter]

Babcock had the same rationale and we paid for it, TWICE!

W

[Guest Walter]

Top 3 protected 2 years from now with a 13 win team is too risky! AT BEST we should expect 10 win improvements per year as is. That's still lottery! An injury, lack of development of just one of our youngsters, the continued failure to adequately man the center position, Al Harrington leaving for nothing, etc. all could d@mn us to the lottery, perhaps even the high lottery. A BAD move as reported, plain and simple.

W

[Blunt91]

Walt I think by 2007 season we should have enough "young" players on our team, so losing a pick then might not hurt us as much. I am just glad it is protected in 2006 because I think we need 1more draft of selecting young talented players, and then the year after that we should look for seasoned veterans to add to the team.

[Traceman]

The alternative may have been (and likely WOULD have been)to completely whiff on a guy we REALLY wanted in free agency. AGAIN. Joe Johnson is no Lorenzen Wright. Lorenzen was never supposed to be more than a backup to Deke. JJ is supposed to be our best player. There are no rewards without risks for us at this stage of the game. BK HAS to take caculated risks if he hopes to bring this franchise back to respectability. If JJ can play PG as effectively as BK apparently thinks he can, I think we STOLE him.

[falc82]

Yes but the players in 2007 are suppose to be special, and its a draft that runs very deep. I wonder if we were to acquire another 1st rounder from another team if we could substitute that into the deal rather than ours. Is it any two lotto protected 1st? Say we deal for the Spurs pick, could we then send the Suns that pick and the LA/Boston pick?

The Robinson deal hurt a lot. At the time Babcock figured he was that missing piece so why put protection on a pick that we were giving up since he built an ''awesome team that will no doubt win and be in the playoffs'' at least in his mind anyways. I'm sure he never though that we would end up with a lotto pick and the #8 pick overall, but Babcock was a man who traded the #3 pick in the Shareef deal along with those 2 high 1st (and yes one was Amare) for LoWrong..and the Grob disaster. BK is a better GM than Babcock if all he does is wake up in the morning.

It does hurt if it is only top 3 protected in 07 just like the Grob one was top 3 protected in 03. That could really undermind this whole rebuilding project because the players in that draft will be special.