VarsitySlacker

The threes are finally starting to fall for us after clanking all game long.

Quote: HERE COMES THE HAWKS SEEMS LIKE SMOOVE IS ATTACKING LIKE CRAZY. He has to make those Free throws missed 2 so far. The entire team has GOT to improve on Free Throws...We're barely shooting 50% today.

You know what's weird? That Hawks don't play a single game on a Thursday this year.

You know, for the first time possibly ever, I agree with Diesel. This game does not hinge on Shelden Williams performing. Yes, Shelden Williams is supposed to be NBA ready. However, you cannot expect him to come in on his first NBA game and blow everyone out. Honestly, I wouldn't even expect that from LeBron James. The fact that he's matched up against Chris Webber makes it all the more difficult - While Webber is not a premier PF anymore, he is still in the upper echelon of them - His experience more than makes up for his knees, and you know no referee is going to give Shelden calls against Chris Webber. If, 15 games into the season, THEN Shelden Williams is struggling, it might be cause for worry. Friday night he matches up against Channing Frye I believe, which should be a fairly good indicator of where he stands. Frye is not a great player, and is still a young player without a reputation. If Shelden can get his boards and his putback points and Frye doesn't put up 15+, it means a lot. In my mind, though, the blame goes on Josh Smith and Salim Stoudamire for tonight. Yes, Salim only played like 7 minutes, but on three consecutive drives he pulled up and clanked a three when we NEEDED the points desperately. Smith pulled the same stuff he tried against Golden State last year. Having a 3 point shot is great, but it should be a fallback option, not your primary shot. Smith is most effective when he plays above the rim, and AI2 is not someone who dwarves him in ability. I'm not going to fault Claxton for not having chemistry with the team yet - It was his first real game playing with the team. It was a bad game for sure, but he has the potential to get better in a week or so when he knows his teammates. There's no need for the panic posts, though. If we look bad against New York, then maybe.

I believe the game against the Grizzlies that he got in a fight with ffriend

I think the whole "name seven big men who are not superstars that are worth their contract" is a bit silly, because outside of the Brand/Duncan/Bosh/Shaq/Howard group, there really aren't that many PF/C types that are good enough to justify paying much more than the MLE. However, in the starved market, every team in the league that doesn't have one of the elite group is forced to overpay (except for the Hawks, who simply don't pay...And see where that's gotten us) As far as whether or not Nene/Lenard is more valuable than the pick, it's really just a guessing game. Had the Hawks got Nene, there would not have been many teams who could have offered a decent contract. However, what is to stop Charlotte from offering him some ridiculous 1 year contract to meet their contractual obligations? Yes, it's possible that Nene doesn't take it in fear of being injured again and being SOL. However, there is just as much of a chance that he tries to boost his market value in a one year contract, and since Charlotte is obligated to spend X amount more money more than their current payroll anyways, it really doesn't hurt them in the long run. We can say that NOK would have signed Nene all we want...But this offseason, they ended up with Chandler instead. I dont' know the details of Chandler's contract, but the way it worked out, who is to know whether or not they would have Nene valued at a higher rate than Tyson? If anything, if Nene played hardball monetarily, NOK could have just gone "Okay, fine, we'll get Tyson Chandler instead of dealing with your [censored]." But other than Charlotte and New Orleans, there wouldn't be any teams (off the top of my head) who would be able to pay as much as 9-10 mil/year. Is Nene worth 9-10 mill per year? Probably not. But he's probably going to be more worth it than the seven people listed earlier in this thread. I value Nene at 10 million over the draft pick. However, I'm sure that the Spirit do not. And by association, Billy couldn't either.

Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: Quote: P.S. i have to give Billy Knight major props for his smartest move as GM of the Hawks, not resigning Al Harrington. where would we be in 2 years if Billy invested $60 million on this guy? that would have been the fatal mistake that caused it all to unravel IMO. Jesus, my grandmother could look at this team for 5 minutes and know not to resign Al Harrington. When two of the team's top three players play the same position, there is no reason to keep another guy who will demand the starting spot at that position. could and did anyone come out on this board 6 months ago and say with iron clad certainty that Billy Knight would not resign Al Harrington? you couldn't. Billy is too unpredictable. Just because I didn't know if Billy was going to (though I hope to God it wasn't even considered), doesn't mean it's, as you said, "The smartest move as GM of the Hawks." If he resigned Al, it would have been his worst move easily. But ignoring a horrible move does not make a brilliant one. if Billy resigned Al "it would have been his worst move easily." However not resigning him wasn't one of his best? they are not mutually exclusive. I think I'll be needing an interpreter to speak with you in the future. Okay, laymans terms: If I walked up to Evander Holyfield (off the top of my head), slapped him, and told him his mother was a whore, that would be probably the dumbest thing I could possibly do. Is the choice not to do that brilliant? No, it's obvious. It's making a wise choice, but certainly not anything spectacular. In the same line, BK should know not to resign Al. It's pretty much common sense. Following common sense does not make a "best move," only a wise one.

Quote: Quote: Quote: P.S. i have to give Billy Knight major props for his smartest move as GM of the Hawks, not resigning Al Harrington. where would we be in 2 years if Billy invested $60 million on this guy? that would have been the fatal mistake that caused it all to unravel IMO. Jesus, my grandmother could look at this team for 5 minutes and know not to resign Al Harrington. When two of the team's top three players play the same position, there is no reason to keep another guy who will demand the starting spot at that position. could and did anyone come out on this board 6 months ago and say with iron clad certainty that Billy Knight would not resign Al Harrington? you couldn't. Billy is too unpredictable. Just because I didn't know if Billy was going to (though I hope to God it wasn't even considered), doesn't mean it's, as you said, "The smartest move as GM of the Hawks." If he resigned Al, it would have been his worst move easily. But ignoring a horrible move does not make a brilliant one.

While I think this has been a poor offseason, I don't really blame BK for it. Had this team signed Sam Cassell, I honestly believe that we have a playoff team. However, Sam-I-Am decided to not follow the money, and stayed with LA. What we saved in $$ with Speedy Claxton, we lost (significantly) in talent. I think Shelden Williams is bound to be a bust, but there is nobody in this draft who would have really fit this team. The player I was clamoring for, Foye, could have worked...Or it could have replicated Joe Johnson in the "I better play SG instead" mold, resulting in more logjam. I would have loved to have signed-and-traded Harrington for Magloire, but that apparantly wasn't in the cards. Replacing Big Stiff Edwards with Lo-Wright isn't earth-shattering, but it's slight progress. At least Wright knows what he's doing, and we didn't give up two first-rounders this time. That's four cases, three of which I didn't like, but 2 of which Billy had his hands tied in. As far as Harrington, he should have been traded at midseason. That's Billy's fault, but this post is about "this offseason," not Billy Knight's year in review.

Quote: P.S. i have to give Billy Knight major props for his smartest move as GM of the Hawks, not resigning Al Harrington. where would we be in 2 years if Billy invested $60 million on this guy? that would have been the fatal mistake that caused it all to unravel IMO. Jesus, my grandmother could look at this team for 5 minutes and know not to resign Al Harrington. When two of the team's top three players play the same position, there is no reason to keep another guy who will demand the starting spot at that position.

If the team goes to the playoffs, then absolutely, BK deserves to get an extension. However, that's a pretty big condtional, because as much as I want to, I don't see the Hawks making the playoffs this year. Maybe this is the team Billy envisioned, and his vision works. However, KB's claim is ridiculous. "He is yet to sign a player to a crippling contract." That's only because 75% of everyone he tries to sign has no interest in playing for the Hawks. He offered the max or near-max to both K-Mart and Damp, and if they had accepted we would ALL be going nuts right now. It's merely good fortune that they didn't. As for his record of good draft picks, he's better than Babcock. This is a huge step of course, but by no means does it mean he's picked perfectly. Boris was a good pick...If Billy knew what to do with him. Obviously he didn't, because his coaching staff attempted to pigeonhole Boris into a shooting PG, which does not suit his game. I like the Chill pick, but with the amount of debate over which of the three players (Deng/Chillz/Iggy) he should have picked, it's 1) Not obvious he made the choice, and 2) Fairly evident that he couldn't have made a bad choice. Smoove fell to him at 17, and it was really a no-brainer to pick him. And we all know the circumstances surrounding the MW pick. Meanwhile, in our implosion, we gave away a more than servicable center in Nazr Mohammed, and were unable (twice) to find our point guard in the draft, the second time because a team who had no use for their pick did NOT want to deal with Billy Knight. While that is more Belkin's case than Knights, it needs to be said. And I STILL don't like the SW pick. Bottom line, if this team goes to the playoffs, then BK did a hell of a job in the face of his skeptics. If it doesn't, however, it can be completely attributed to BK's vision, because there is plenty of individual talent on this team, but it's missing the same key pieces throughout his entire tenure.

I love coming in and seeing Diesel have the same argument with someone else that he had with me a few weeks ago. I guess I'm going to have to spell it out again (Even without my "weak comparisons" that Diesel liked to rag on, and then pulled out comparisons of his own that were equally invalid) Marvin - Had one year of college ball, one year of NBA ball. Shelden - Had four years of college ball. Honestly, I don't remember what I said before, but from what I've seen in summer league, I want to see similar numbers from Marvin and Shelden. Something along the lines of 13/6 for Marvin, and 10/7 for Shelden. And in the future, I expect Marvin's numbers to go up, and Shelden's to stay constant. Give three years for contracts to go, and I expect Marvin to be at 17/7/4 and Shelden to be at maybe 12/8. However, Diesel continues to complain about how we don't hold the same standards to Marvin as we do to Shelden. I'll go on record right now: I expect Marvin's one year of NBA ball to be able to match Shelden's 3 years of (extra) college ball in terms of effectiveness. However, I will not allow Shelden the leniency of a weak first season, because he had those extra three years of college ball, something Marvin did not. If Shelden hits the rookie wall at some point, fine. That happens to most everybody. But he better have his share of games that he gets 16 points or 10 rebounds, and is a focal point of the game. That being said, while I expect it out of him for him to not be a bust, I don't actually expect it out of him. I'll be pleasantly surprised if he averages anything over 8/5.

I think we were all simply ecstatic that the Hawks acquired a bonafide point guard and barely even looked at the numbers, trusting that BK is generally pretty stingy with his budget. Though I honestly believe that Brevin Knight will get close to that amount in an offseason market as well. He's more of a pure point, though he wouldn't push the ball like Speedy (assumedly) will.

Quote: if you took his post as legit you are the only one. in fact it's one of the stupider ones i've seen him concoct in his little corner as of late. as for the other i already apologized. keep up. You obviously haven't been reading Diesel posts for long. A good portion of them have been much more absurd than this. However, even if this post was construed entirely for the purpose of debuting his new avatar, you still gave it reference, and justified his making of the post. Keep up.

Quote: LOL is this thread a waste of Hawksquawk space or what? more spam. No, not really. Your troll, on the other hand, is. I'm far from a Diesel sympathizer, but I did reach the point where I saw that he made a thread, so I automatically looked for your reply. Is Diesel an attention-whore? Absolutely. However, all you're doing by provoking him is feeding his superstar image. Stop.

If watching paint dry is more interesting than reading what Teke writes in response to you, then you must be really bored to give him this little shrine of a thread. Uh Oh, I'm about to become Diesel Hater #4, because I argued with him in a thread.

Quote: BK specifically said about Foyle and Rondo and Williams that we brought them in and took a look at them and just didn't want them as much as we wanted a big. Period. Okay. This is really irrelevant to what I was saying (though I understood why you put it in), I was just making it clear where I stood on the current state of affairs. I understand exactly why BK chose Shelden, and I understand his thought process. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I think signing Speedy offset my disagreement. Quote: I don't think he made his pick based on Shelden being more ready to play OVER Shelden being the right position. Roy was just as ready to contribute as Shelden.. He didn't even get a look. BK made it clear that: 1. He liked Shelden. 2. He felt that Shelden would address our need for a defensive big. Anything after those two points is somewhat moot. I think most people (Not necessarily Squawkers and Hawks fans, but most people) would have crucified BK for picking Roy while we have JJ. Foye being a combo guard is one thing, but Roy (while he has some PG skills) is no more of a PG that Salim is IMO, and we know how that disaster. As for your 1-2 punch, I think you need to amend it to say would "immediately" address our need for a defensive big. Because he's drafted enough projects (Marvin) to have to add another (Take Saer Sene, for example), and would rather have someone that could come in and take the pressure off Zaza in the post. Also, because it just came to mind...Whatever happened to the #5 for #8 and Luther Head trade? Because I would have had no qualms at all with taking Shelden at 8, especially after adding Head to the team. Quote: 2nd, I do feel that you are "bashing" or better yet babying Marvin along if you believe that Marvin's 2 years of experience 1 in NCAA and the other in the Pros playing consistent minutes doesn't prepare him better than an incoming rookie. To sit there and say that you expect and incoming rookie to perform better than Marvin tells me that you don't think much of Marvin. Ask Marvin if he's better than the player he was last year. Ask Marvin if he thinks that he's capped out his potential. For that matter, ask anyone on the Hawks if he's even starting to plateau. Quote: 3rd When did 25 mpg stop being good minutes for a rookie?? All these guys who you guys like to pull out of your --- got 1/2 of that when they were rookies. Now all the sudden Varsity proclaims 25 mpg to not be enough??? Really? That's more than half the game you know? 1) 25 minutes is BARELY half the game. Just for the record. 2) Tracy McGrady, the ONLY guy who I "pulled out of my ass," got 18 mpg his rookie year. That's well over half of what Marvin got. And as accordingly (also accounting for his year of college ball), Marvin had better numbers his rookie year. In contrast, Carmelo Anthony, who you "pulled out of your ass" pulled around 40 mpg if I'm not mistaken. I'd say my comparison was closer in regards to rookie year. 3) My point, which you apparantly missed because you focused on me saying that 26 mpg is not a lot of minutes in itself, is that you are saying that Marvin playing in half of every game in the NBA for one season is the equivalent of Shelden playing (I don't know this for a fact, but am assuming) most of every game for three seasons at Duke. While I don't know the numbers exactly, I'm sure they don't add up.

Quote: First off. My statement was very simple. The only construing done in this whole thread was you making believe that somehow Marvin is on the same level with Tmac. Come back into reality. All I said is that if you truly believe that Marvin is or "projects" into "Superstar" basketball player, then why are you comparing oranges to apples by comparing him to a player who: 1. Played No college ball. 2. IS a SG and not a Sf. 3. Had very little playing time his first year out. My using Melo was simply to use somebody who was supposedly on the same level and get away from your "fool's analogy". I took your analogy as you weakly trying to find a case that would fit your argument. If you truly believed in Marvin's superstardom, then you wouldn't have had so much trouble with me using Melo. However, Melo is not the point. I am not try to compare two clones of a player. I said that in the first post. I'm trying to compare vaguely similar situations: A player who is IMMEDIATELY ready to contribute in Battier/Shelden, and one who is NOT immediately to contribute in McGrady/Marvin. Where he got his experience and how much he got of it is irrelevant, only that neither one had the quantity of experience that would make them immediate stars Quote: THE POINT STILL IS It makes no sense to have expectations of Shelden who has never played a pro game and have no expectations of Marvin who has played one season as a pro. The fact that you try to justify having expectations of Shelden with lower expectations of Marvin is funny to me. Well, which part makes no sense? The "Marvin is a project who was not supposed to be a star immediately" part, or the "Shelden is a solid role player who is ready to step in and contribute immediately?" Quote: Like I said before.. if being on the court in the NBA playing against the best everynight had no benefit to Marvin, then maybe we should have put him in the NBADL for the next 3 years so that he can catch up with Shelden and other 4 year seniors coming into the game. Where did I say that it did not benefit him? You could certainly see Marvin' improvement from the beginning of the year to the end. However, the greatest leap in his ability isn't going to happen in his first year. It's going to happen in his second or third, where he gets consistent, meaningful playing time. 26 MPG isn't exactly a lot of playing time in itself. It's barely half the game for a team that is not good Quote: You say that I'm bashing Marvin. How am I bashing Marvin when all I want is for him to have the same expectation placed on him as is placed on an INCOMING ROOKIE? That part is not the "bash Marvin" part. The "bash Marvin" part is where you took Carmelo Anthony out of nowhere to illustrate how Marvin failed as a rookie. Quote: Varsity, I think you need to look at the situation harder, Consider my last statement, and reconsider exactly WHO is bashing Marvin. Wait, what? I'm bashing Marvin? Oh, okay, my point is null and void. You win, Diesel. Oh, wait. That was pure bullshit. If by "bash" you mean "expecting him to start slow and then pick up his game exponentially," then yeah, I'm bashing Marvin. But you might want to check Webster's on your idea of what the word means. Also, for the record, I didn't want to draft Marvin. I wanted Paul the same as you, and I wanted to trade the 2 pick for 5 and 12 as was supposedly on the table. However, I also understand that, while passing on Paul was not a good move for the franchise, if Marvin develops as he is expected too, then hope is not lost. (Though, really, how many pure SFs become true stars? Marion and Grant Hill are the only two I can think of off the top of my head) On that note, I didn't want Shelden. I wanted Foye. However, BK's logic in picking Shelden is that he was ready to step up and contribute immediately. I remember hearing quotes about him being a "role player from the start." Which is to say, if he is unable to do this, it was a poor move by BK. I'm not asking to be at his full potential at the beginning of his career, that would be asinine. However, I am expecting strong numbers along the lines of Bogut's from last year, because that's at the stage of development that he is at. And yes, Diesel, I am every bit as stubborn as you.

Quote: That's a fools analogy. Let's pick a closer one to our situation. Battier and Melo after his first year in the NBA. Like Marvin, Melo played one year of college ball and came out (after winning the NCAA championship). Like Marvin, Melo was not a first pick overall. Like Marvin, Melo is a Sf. Why not use Mello!! Apply your same questions now? Back to the point. 1 year of college ball in a good program and one year of NBA play (consistent) means something. Furthermore destruction of your weak analogy, Tmac didn't play much his rookie year? Marvin averaged about 26 mpg. Who do you wanna use next? Juanny? Diop? We used the players that I chose for my "weak analogy" because they are of comparable skill levels. Marvin - Was a solid player in college in his limited experience in college, and projects (supposedly) to being a superstar in the NBA. He came in as a project. Nobody expected him to be a savior to the team this year. At least, nobody with realistic expectations. The reason I didn't use Anthony is because he was a superstar in college, and came in directly ready to be a superstar in the NBA. This was expected of him. Shelden - Was a solid player throughout college, and projects to IMMEDIATELY being a solid player in the NBA, and being a constant solid player throughout his career, much like Battier. Nobody (with realistic expectations) expects Shelden to be the next coming of Shaq. Rather, he is expected to continue his college numbers at a slightly lower pace - 15-8 would be a good projection You seem to have the tendency, I've noticed, to turn every argument you make into an anti-Marvin argument. This was originally why people expect more from Shelden than they do from Marvin, which I feel I explained rather well. You then took my explanation and construed it into a way you could compare Marvin to Anthony, something in which I had no intention of doing. If Marvin and Anthony were in the same draft, would I take Anthony? From a talent standpoint, yes. From a coaching standpoint, not at all. Melo is a headcase, and I want no more part of him than I do of Rider again. But that's beside the point.

Quote: Quote: Shelden, on the other hand, came in with 4 years of college under his belt, and has matured his game respectively. Is he a complete player already? No, of course not. But his game is far more complete than Marvin's would have been (seeing as Marvin never even started in college ball). As such, I expect Shelden to put up numbers similar to what Bogut put up this year (12/8). Am I expecting more from Shelden? Yes. Shelden has played 4 years at Duke. IN the same system, seeing basically the same opponents year by year. Marvin played 1 year at UNC. Marvin played 1 year (26 mpg over 80 games) in the NBA. I won't immediately talk about how many games Marvin played against Pro competition vs. what he would have faced in 3 years of college. Because that's a point that should be easy to understand... i.e. THE NBA plays more games per season than College. However, what astounds me is that you forsake Marvin's UNC career... and basically his first year as a pro... but EXPECT greater things from a guy who's never played pro ball? We should have just placed Marvin in the NBADL if there was no benefit to playing him 26 mpg against Pros!!! It's really not that hard to understand. For the sake of example: You have the option of drafting one of two players: Shane Battier or Tracy McGrady (at the age that they were drafted), because they're the ones that I've been using to make my point the whole time. Who performs better in the first year? Battier Who performs better in the second year? Likely Battier, but it's growing closer to a push Who performs better in the third year? Probably McGrady, because he's matured physically and mentally to the point that Battier was at initially, with superior talent to allow better performance. So, following my analogy, we have Marvin in his second year and Shelden in his first. Shelden off the bat has more experience for him. Not necessarily NBA experience, but I think the differential in the 3 years of college ball probably makes up for the number of minutes that Marvin played this past year (yes, I know, NBA competition...Shut up) Therefore, you can expect Shelden to be more matured as a player and not be overmatched as much, because he's been playing against at least high quality teams in the ACC for four years, whereas Marvin played high school ball two years ago and then played against the same ACC teams for one year, and then worked his way into the rotation in the NBA for one year. Shelden has consistently faced a slightly lower bracket of players and dominated, and will be ready for the next level. If you'd prefer I use a baseball analogy, a AAA superstar is going to most likely be more prepared initially for pro ball than someone who makes the jump from class A. Not to say that the class A player is a bust when he doesn't take off running, but he'll take more time to find his comfort zone. Edit: And enough on jumping on Diesel for the Foyle comment. He didn't say "Hey, let's go out and get Foyle for our team!!!" He said, "It would be worth taking on Foyle's albatross contract and him as a servicable player if we were able to gather a collection of players that would be contibutional to our team. I believe Ellis and a 1st is what he asked? I wouldn't do it, but it makes a lot more sense than what a lot of people are asking. Ellis and a 1st is not going to be a net package for Al. Not when the Golden State fans are convinced that Al and Smoove will be the asking price for just Ellis.

Quote: Quote: We drafted Marvin with the knowledge he was going to be a project. The thing is, Marvin contributed more than what a "project" would have. 11/5 off the bench after the All-Star break are good numbers for any age. Still, his rookie season numbers are very consistent with other players at his age. They compare favorably with: Chris Bosh, Trevor Ariza, Josh Smith, Martell Webster, Josh Smith, Loul Deng, Kevin Garnett, Cliff Robinson, Eddie Griffin, and Eddy Curry all took time to adjust to the NBA at age 19. Why would Marvin be any different? I'm not sure if this was intended to rebuke me, but I agree entirely. By drafting Marvin, we (realistically) didn't expect for him to come in and dominate the league. I, for one, was expecting 8 PPG and 4 RPG off the bench. He certainly gave more than I expected, and I was quite pleased with him. However, under the basis of "he came in as a project," I'm expecting much more than that, obviously. At the end of his contract, if he's not averaging 18 PPG and 6 RPG at the least, then I'm going to be very disappointed. Shelden, on the other hand, came in with 4 years of college under his belt, and has matured his game respectively. Is he a complete player already? No, of course not. But his game is far more complete than Marvin's would have been (seeing as Marvin never even started in college ball). As such, I expect Shelden to put up numbers similar to what Bogut put up this year (12/8). Am I expecting more from Shelden? Yes. However, I don't expect him career numbers to jump up much higher than 14/10. In that sense, he is comparable to Shane Battier. He came in as a quality player, and continued a quality player. Not a star, but a quality player. I'd elaborate on the 3 years of college versus 1 year of NBA, but it seems that everyone else has already made my point for me.

The way I'm viewing this, at least. We drafted Marvin with the knowledge he was going to be a project. We knew he was going to be good, but we didn't know when he would fully flourish. Take, for example (and I am NOT comparing these guys) Kobe Bryant and Tracy McGrady. Both came into the league one year younger than Marvin, and both showed flashes of potential in their first few years, but it took them a while to show it. That is why we're hoping for a steady progression from Marvin rather than for him to jump out immediately and be a star. While it does occasionally happen for younger players, it's not the common case. Shelden, on the other hand, was drafted as "a safe pick." This is what ESPN, rotoworld, nbadraft.net, and every other draft coverage has called it. Shelden is not a project, he's a guy who is supposed to come in and contribute every night IMMEDIATELY. If he can't come in and contribute every night, then all prior assessments of him were flawed. And one year of pro ball CERTAINLY does not account for three years of college ball. I don't know where you got that opinion. The maturation of a player is yet to come, as is a good portion of their strength.

I think you guys missed the worst part of this. [i[Larry Harris has stated that he has a number of offers for Jamaal Magloire, any rumors out there about who we could get for him? Sign and trade Al Harrington and Josh Childress AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH And I thought we at HawkSquawk overvalued our players. Asking both Harrington and Childress for your backup center? Riiiight. I do think an Al for Mags trade would be even, since C is a harder spot to fill. But including Chillz tips the scale way too much.

That trade with Golden State would certainly not be worthwhile, but I'd make the switch with Indy in a heartbeat, though I doubt Pacers fans would do the same thing. Yes, Zaza is an above-average center with a below-average contract. He was the steal of the last offseason, and would probably (at least) double his salary on this year's market. However, the fact that he's cheap and good and signed for a few more years increases his trade value exponentially. A lot of time people aren't willing to let go of a good player, preferring to find ways of dumping garbage for gems. While that's obviously ideal, it's not going to happen (Unless we're dealing with Zeke)

Honestly, Dallas is going to be as prone to trading Harris as LA is to trading Livingston - both teams see the point guards as their future. Even with JT locked up long term, they'll move him to SG when it's decided that Harris is ready to start full-time. I think it'd be worth it to see if we could get a combination of Diop and Mbenga/1st round pick for Al if at all possible, though I don't know if Dallas would be willing to trade a young, cheap shotblocking big man for an above-average tweener forward after the ridiculous contract Nene got.