khaos7

Typically, it has been an ownership thing. When the Braves and Falcons have had solid ownerships, by and large they are able to attract names. Remember in 1993, the decision for the Braves was between Maddux and Bonds. Bonds wanted to come to ATL. However, the Braves opted for pitching. Terrell Owens and Randy Moss have said they'd be open to coming to the ATL. A Rod probably would have came to ATL. However, Texas simply threw him more money than (understandably) the Braves would shell out. Whether the Braves and Falcons decided to pull the trigger on these names is another story. However, it was public knowledge that they didn't mind coming to the "A." I used the word typically at the beginning because for whatever reason, the Hawks have had problems attracting the big name. Even when Ted owned the team, we never had the huge big name beat down the door to sign here. A washed up Moses Malone and Dikembe are the only names I can think of that the Hawks signed in FA that could grab a few headlines. Joe Johnson was a 4th option for the Suns attempting to make a name for himself. With the Hawks (the ASG's version) I believe it's both ownership and the historical perception of the team. I believe players look at us and say this team is a second round ousted team at best. And historically (recently that is) that is true. The low priced real estate is an attraction. However, they can live here in the off season without wearing our colors.

I think we'll be worse for a number of reasons: 1) We're implementing a new offensive and defensive system. I believe we'll have more turnovers (last year we were towards the top of the league on the positive end of the turnover to assist ratio) than we had in years past when we really protected the ball and we ran a ton of isolations. Also, we'll be playing more man to man, which won't allow Al and Josh (and Joe to a degree) to mask some of our glaring weaknesses on defense. 2) While we addressed coaching, we didn't address personel. If you go back to my older posts, you'll know that I'm not a Woody supporter. I thought is was one of the problems with this team. The key word is one. I have a hard time believing Woody was the only reason why this time got blown out and gave up leads in the 4th quarter. I believe that some of the players on this roster should have been held accountable for the last two playoff debacles. Perhaps Drew will get more out of them. Maybe the new systems will make them play harder. I don't know. The only thing I can go by is what I've seen up to this point. 3) The Eastern Conference has improved. Gimme games such as the Wizards (with John Wall) will become increasingly harder. Pesky teams such as Chicago (with Boozer), a healthy Bucks team and the Knicks (who gave us fits with a rag tag bunch last year and have added Ama're ) have gotten better. We all know what happened down in South Beach. And Orlando is still Orlando. And do we really expect to sweep Boston a third year in a row? Given all three variables, I believe we will still be a playoff team, but I think this roster has tapped out on its potential. One man's opinion.

I won't lie; I am a bit disallusioned. Yes, we have talent (Smith, Johnson, Horford, Crawford). That said we have glaring holes (for me the biggest is at the PG position) that we either 1) haven't addressed or 2) we have our hopes pinned on things that are uncertain (Teague/Drew's offense). I think I'm justified in saying I would have liked my front office to have done more in the offseason after being swept and losing by the largest point margin in playoff history. While I'm taking a wait and see approach on Drew, he's still an unproven until he proves something. I'm not as concerned with Horford being undersized at the five. 1) He was an All Star at the position 2) Although he gave up size, he was faster than most 5's, giving him an advantage, 3) Other than Howard, Yao and perhaps Lopez, I don't know of too many bigs that dominated him. What has me disallusioned is we failed to upgrade our perimeter defense. Howard kills everyone. However, we got burnt a lot a ton by open 3 point shooters. We only have one true SF on the roster (Marvin). I know JJ can slide over sometimes, but we're burning him too much as it is. Also, we got burnt by quick penetrating point guards. Bibby is old and Teague is unproven. Lastly, the teams around us are improving. We barely beat a shorthanded Bucks team and they gave us fits. I'm not a GM, but given those variables, I believe moves should have been made. Nobody on this team should have been untouchable. I don't think we should have blown the thing up. However, this fanbase needed to see that this team was trying to win a championship. I just don't believe the ASG will ever be in that business.

I get that you can't base it off four game. My opinion is based off eight games. Four against Cleveland and four against Orlando...two second round losses of epic portions two years in a row. Those games aren't just games. You win and you compete in the semi finals. I could also lump the lackluster efforts we showed against Miami (games we lost we lost in blow out fashion)and an undermanned Milwaukee team in the first rounds. I'm not saying we should make Chris Crawford type snap judgements. However, I am saying that Woody wasn't totally at fault and we should have tried to upgrade a few positions (SF, PG, and the bench). Who is to say Teague will pan out? And if he doesn't, is Bibby all of a sudden going to be able to penetrate and guard his man? Marvin has been in the league now for five years. At what point do we say "he is who is" as opposed to "he still has potential?" And whose to say the bench will improve? Granted, one could say Woody didn't run plays for Marvin, develop players and utilize his bench. I'd counter by saying some of those guys didn't maximize their opportunities when given opportunites. I don't think the players are totally to blame and Woody should be absolved from blame. However, at the end of the day, I believe the two year postseason sample we have would suggest both players and coaches should have been addressed. Unfortunately, the ASG can't address it's part in the entire deal.

I understand that finances drive a lot of what we see. I get that. It's frustrating because finances seems to have a higher priority than basketball. If that weren't the case, how could letting Woody go (and replacing him with Drew) be the only move this organization makes in the offseason, worth note? You can't sell me that Woody was solely the blame for what we saw in the Spring. There should have been some player movement. However, to the naked eye, it seems like the ASG/Sund is making Woody the fall guy for the Hawks failures. Of course we know better. We know money (and to a lesser degree love for the core group) has played a hand in all this. However, this summer would suggest Woody was the blame. And, as much as I wanted him gone, I think that the way this thing has played out with Woody playing the price is wrong.

^^^That's a real good take on things and I completely agree with your assessment of Woody. What's sad to me is that it appears that only Woody was held accountable for bad play. We all know that behind the scenes, there are other variables at play.

My brother and I had a conversation this weekend about the lack of offseason movement. We both feel that bad contracts and tight purses are the main reasons we didn't make any major additions to the roster. Neither one of us believe that the ASG is as enamored with the core group as they'd what us to believe. We think they have pieces they'd like to trade (ie Bibby's contract) that no one will bite on. However, we figured the ASG can't come out and publicly say the aforementioned variables above are the reasons we still have the same roster that was unceremoniously swept out the 2nd round two years in a row (this second time by a record margin). Aside from resigning Joe, the only major move that Hawks made was resigning Woody. Sund and Company said we needed a new voice. Thus LD was promoted. So, if we go STRICTLY off the offseason moves (or lack thereof), Sund stating "we like our core", the fact that Woody was dismissed, and everything we've heard out of Sund's/the ASG's mouth, are we to believe that Woody is the reason this team flopped so miserably? Mind you, I'm only using things that Sund has said and moves he's made. In sum, it would "appear" that they are pushing all the blame on Woody. -Not the players lack of heart -Not the holes they have in the roster I was one that thought Woody should have been fired/let go. I still maintain that was the right thing to do. However, I don't believe he should be the scapegoat. This offseason would make it appear that the ASG thought he was the ultimate blame. We know they are tight in the pockets and have lost millions of dollars. That said, we know its not good business for them to state that's the reason they haven't been active this offseason. Thus, intentionally/unintentionally Woody is the only person being held accountable for the Hawks issues. That's flat out wrong.

Although I know it is still young in the free agency season, it's frustrating to me that players have been taken off the board that could have been good additions to our squad at the MLE. At this point, given our cap space, the only moves we can make are Shaq (at a reduced price), busts/washed up players (Kwame Brown, Kurt Thomas), cheap guys for the end of the bench (RandMo, Jason Collins) or a trade (which I don't see happening because Sund insists he likes our "core"). After the debacle against Orlando, just switching to Larry Drew isn't enough. After two str8 blowout sweeps in the 2nd round, two years in a row, the status quo isn't enough. I hope Sund surprises us with a big trade. Otherwise, we know the ASG isn't going to let him spend into the luxury tax.

^^^At the end of the day, it is an ASG issue for a few reasons. #1, to use your chess analogies, don't play the chess game if you're only familiar with the rules to checker. When the ASG bought these teams, they were deemed by the league as being capable of handling the responsibilities of ownership. You're not off base in the sense that they are trying to make things more affordable for the JJ deal. However, the lack of free agency movement coupled with other decisions made by this group doesn't give many of us confidence they will make the necessary moves to make us true contenders.

Man, I couldn't stand George Steinbrenner! After the Braves lost to his beloved Yankees in 1996 and 1999, I hoped for the day they would meet up again and the Braves would pound them for the trophy. That day has yet to happen. And although I can't stand the Yankees, I've always wanted a transformational leader like George running my favorite Atlanta's sports team: the Hawks. I know, I know. It's easy to say, "I want a George like owner" to be "the Boss" of my team. After all George spent money on his teams...lots of it. If he wanted A Rod, he got him. If he wanted Teixeria, he got him. I know the counter arguments too. George was meddlesome. You think Billy Knight had problems with Belkin, what would have happened if George was his boss? I know he made things tough on Torre. I also know how stupid he and Billy Martin looked. I know about his episode with Dave Winfield. I also know he bought the most storied franchise in baseball, the Yankees. Thus, he inherited a brand that had success. All those things aside, I wish the ASG could mimic the one thing George provided to his consumer base. Confidence. No matter how crazy his decisions were or how evil he made the organization look, no one questioned his desire to put a real winner on the floor. He found created ways to generate income (the Yankees network) to pump money into the team. Profit or saving money weren't his only goals. George wanted to win and he wanted to win badly. And he was willing to spend to win. And for fans, that was comforting. Even when the Yankees had some rough times. Nobody wanted to run George out of New York or question his insatiable desire to win. Ask Clipper fans if Donald Sterling has ever shown the same. George's fanbase had confidence that their owner wanted to win as badly or moreso than they did. And so, here we are during the Hawks Free Agency period. We just gave Joe Johnson a max deal. Clearly an indication that the ASG wants to spend money to win, right? Or is this a way to make the team look attractive to a potential buyer? A 53 win team is a more desirable acquisition than a 25 win team. After trading Childress away for a trade exception and 2nd rounder, sending the 31st pick away for cash and stating they are willing to spend over the luxury tax, provided it will make them a contender (only to stand pat and keep a team together that was embarrasingly swept out of the 2nd round two years in a row), this ownership group has failed to secure the confidence of it's fanbase once again. And now rumors spread that the Hawks are out of the Shaq sweepstakes, not because he's a bad fit, but because they don't want to spend luxury tax dollars. One could argue, if this rumor is true, that it is a prudent business decision in this economy. However, hearing they don't want to spend the money along with the plethora of other things on their resume (court battles, rumors of cheapness and teams being on the market, not willing to spend on an established coach) only helps to subtract from the little bit of capital they were able to garner from the Hawks becoming a legit winning team. Arthur Blank hasn't won a thing, yet he has the confidence of most of his consumer base. Yes, spending money does make a difference. However, most ATL fans (I'd venture to guess) believe that he wants to win. They know that Ted Turner wanted to win. Mavs fans know that Cuban wants to win. Pats and Steelers fans believe the less flamboyant Rooneys and Krafts want to win. The Hawks/ASG have spent money. See Josh Smith. See Jamal Crawford. See Joe Johnson. See Mike Bibby. However, no one has confidence that they are willing to make over the top moves. Who knows. Maybe Sund will use the trade exception and 3 million earned from the draft day trade and flip that into a valuable piece. Perhaps, but that's not the issue. The issue is most fans don't have the confidence he will because of past behavior exhibited by the ASG. And at the core, that's the biggest issue and a huge reason we can't fill Philips up. Steinbrenner gave Yankees fans hope. The ASG leaves their fans scratching their heads.

The truth be told (and not too many people want to hear this) but the Hawks are in a tight position. It's easy to say the ASG won't spend the money. However, giving JJ a max deal says otherwise. $120 million is nothing to sniff at. There are a number of issues that are preventing us from being a true championship contender in my opinion, and spending/not spending the MLE isn't at the core. 1) The lack of season ticket sales/low attendance. It's hard to commit luxury tax dollars when you don't have a strong paying fanbase. 2) Incorrect moves on draft day. Not to beat a dead horse, but you have to pick the write players during draft night. Suppose San Antonio missed out on Tim Duncan? LA didn't trade Vlade for Kobe? Obviously, many will suggest Paul/Deron should have been or Tim/Kobe. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule like Boston. However, they used their draft asset (Al Jefferson) and flipped it in the form of Kevin Garnett. We still have this option at our disposal because of the talent we've stockpiled (Josh Smith, Al Horford, Marvin Williams, possible Jeff Teague and Jordan Crawford) 3) Making wise moves in free agency. We can dispute the JJ max deal all day. But, with the team we put out on the floor last year, we were a 3rd seed. Why risk taking a step backwards? You think Philips is empty now... That said, the deals Bibby and Marvin received are questionable. Without them, we'd have more cap flexiblity to get bigger named players. Which leads to my final point 4) Attractability Many have argued that while Atlanta is a place stars what to live, they don't want to play here. You never hear the Hawks named as an organization that does what it takes to win. Even if that is not true, if that is the way we're perceived, that's a whammy against us. So, spending the MLE doesn't promise us anything. I think another poster put it best; it doesn't help unless it is coupled with other moves. That said, bring Shaq here may help issue #1). He's in decline. However, he's still a spectacle. I don't know if he's worth the possible locker room division he could bring. That said, dollars would follow through jersey sales and increased attendance. The Hawks have problems attracting the non-basketball aficionado like my wife. She knows very few Hawks players. That said, the idea of Shaq coming to the A intrigues her.

After his divorce from Shaunie, he's probably a little lighter in the pockets...

Stagnant? Nope. Tied up by ownership? On certain issues, perhaps. I can't get mad at him for not going into the luxury tax. It's not his money to play with. However, it's what he does with the money he's allowed to spend (Marvin and Bibby's contract) that I question. He's a decent GM.

Yes, Marvin was drafted before JJ was signed. But it was floated out there that the Hawks was interested in JJ's services, namely as a point guard. Marvin's potential, JJ's capability to play the point and Chris Paul's height all factored into the decisions.

Honestly, it is very difficult for me to separate Marvin Williams and his productivity and Joe's max deal from this Childress trade discussion. Flow with me on this... I, for one, never felt Childress had a fair shake at a starting role. Remember, Childress and Josh Smith came into the league listed as small forwards. During his first year, Chills played a little three and two. However, his position wasn't truly defined because 1) the cupboard was bare; players played where needed and 2) Billy Knight wanted a team of long athletic wingmen. Enter Joe Johnson and Marvin Williams. Going into the 05-06 season, the thought was Marvin was a potential superstar and Joe could play point guard. Thus, Paul and D. Williams weren't drafted and Childress was slated to play the two to exploit his length. So the starting line up was slated to be. Joe-PG, Chillz SG, Josh Smith SF, Al Harrington PF, and Zaza C. As it turned out, it was determined that Joe wasn't a good fit at the one, despite Billy Knight's dream line up. Thus, Joe was pushed to the two and Tyrone Lue was the starting point guard. The odd man out was Childress. Woodson felt his best fit was a spark off the bench. After all, Josh despite his bad shooting, Josh Smith was a major talent and the # 2 pick was spent on Marvin. Al Harrington wound up being traded and the four spot was alternated by Shelden Williams and Josh Smith. Childress played a little 3 and here and there (mostly when Joe got injured). Still he didn't secure a starting job. The losing season landed us in the lottery again and we landed Al Horford. We trade Shelden, Lue, and Anthony Johnson for Mike Bibby and he becomes our pg, Horford surplants Zaza as our starting center, Smith is firmly postioned as our four and Childress is our sixth man. Despite his unhappiness, the thought was he was better able to come of the bench than Marvin, because he was an energy guy. He proved as much during the Boston series, being arguably the most consistant guy in the series. Knight resigns and Rick Sund comes aboard. Sund tells Childress to find a deal. Whispers emerge that Chillz feels he hasn't had a fair shake at becoming a starter and he pulls a trump card: he signs with Greece. Marvin is inked to a long term deal the following year and Joe is given the max the next. The Hawks cap situation makes it impossible to bring him back. Just looking over the history of this thing, it is apparent to me. IMHO, no two players have more to do with Childress being gone than Joe and to a larger degree Marvin. Joe not panning out at the one led to a chain of events which squeezed Chillz out of the SG position. His max deal made it impossible to resign him. That said, Joe is an all star. The lack of competion between Marvin and Childress is what bothers me most. It seems as if Marvin was given a starting role and Childress never had the opportunity to surplant him. Truth be told, if Childress is better than Marvin, or vice versa, it's not by much. That said, Woody never allowed these guys to duke it out to prove who was better. What could be said about Childress was he did the little things. Marvin has yet to carve out his niche. All three guys have a chance to prove themselves this year. Marvin will finally have a coach who may draw plays for him. Joe was given the max and has to prove he's better than what we saw against Orlando. Childress will go to the Suns, an offense that could exploit his strengths. For Hawks fans, the issue isn't whether Childress will be better than Joe. That's not up for debate. Joe is an All Star. Childress is not. We all must hope for is Childress has less of a positive impact on the Suns than Joe or Marvin does for the Hawks. Otherwise, some of the questionable decisions made in the past that made it possible for Chillz to leave will come back and slap us in the face.

I sorta agree with Rick Sund. The PF position has evolved a ton. Now you have guys like Dirk, Rashard Lewis,Bargnani and Antwan Jamison playing the four along with bangers like Al Jefferson and Zack Randolph. These guys can pull Al away from the paint, thus making him less effective. On the other hand, Josh is better suited to go out on the wing and defend the "new Power Forward" that the league features. The question becomes, if you move Al to the four, will he still be as effective (All Star Caliber) there? Lets not forget the seven footers (Duncan and Gasol) that play the four. None of us know for sure what will happen should Al move. What we do know is Al made the All Star team as a five. He was able to exploit mismatches. Yes, playing against Dwight Howard makes him look bad. However, Howard has that advantage most nights. And, truth be told, it was our perimeter defense that killed us the most IMHO.

The headline on RealGm is misleading. When read in full context, Horford is unsure whether he'll work on an extension with the Hawks this year or try FA. His uncertain is not centered around whether he wants to stay with the Hawks.

Chasing after JJ has put us in a terrible situation...we all know that by now. With Wade and Lebron playing games back and forth with Chicago and NY, JJ has us on hold. We throw all our chips on him and let Salmons get away. If he wants to go to NY or Chicago AND is willing to take less money, we get nothing in return. They have no sign and trade assets that would help us and the best replacement (Salmons) is off the market. A third team would have to get involved and JJ would have to be a willing partner. At the end of the day, Sund should have kept all his options open. Sure, Salmons isn't on par with JJ. However, he could have made up for some of his productivity. At the end of the day, we may be left with nothing.

A part of me believes M.Cunningham's sources. Number one, the ASG knows that the fans are split (and I'm being generous with that assessment) as to whether we should keep Joe. This situation isn't comparable to what happened with Kovy and the Thrashers. Most Thrashers fans wanted Kovy back. Hawks fans...that's to be determined. I believe the ASG is offering him the max because either 1) there is a trade in the works. SnT. A trade involving another Hawks players to appease Joe (Smoove?). A trade would be in the works. or 2) Rick Sund/Larry Drew have convinced these guys that Joe is worth the max for their team and it will be hard or impossible to replace his productivity considering the cap situation.

Al's comments could have very easily been directed towards Marvin also. You have to get rebounds from both your forward postions. And lets not kid ourselves, Marvin has not held his own on the glass. True, we need a true five. But the fact of the matter is, they are hard to come by and the few teams that have them are not giving them away for free.

I said this back in November...if there was ANY sign that Joe was unhappy, we should explore trading him before the trade deadline. I wrote this because of his reaction after the Laker loss and the fact he turned down the contract extension before the season. Now my fears may be coming to pass. He could leave and we may not get anything in return. I felt then and I feel now; we should have explored the trade market for Joe. It made good business sense. 1) at that point the Hawks were in control 2) they didn't HAVE to trade him, but they could have explored what was out there in return for his contract and 3) Joe wasn't untouchable. I woudn't try exploring trades if this were Lebron or Wade (true cornerstones). However, this was JJ. I thought we should have initiated some conversations. I know, some people didn't want to disturb the chemistry on the team. That said, it was worth checking to find out what was out there. The Hawks had leverage. Now we don't have that nor do we have cap space.

Let's keep it real. Kenny is mad because he really felt he should have become the Hawks GM. That simple. He's talked on the radio (before Sund was chosen) about how the Hawks needed an identity. Thus, he said that was something he'd bring (he was on 790 the Zone). For him to say no Hawks deserve to go is ridiculous. Jon Barry has beef with Woody. They traded barbs via radio last year during the playoffs. Honestly, both Barry and Smith let their histories with the team interfer with objectivity.

Man, real Hawks fans deserve to see what we're seeing. It's crazy to hear other fanbases say, "They are a top four team in the East" "They are one of the best team in the East" or simply "they are a good team." Although I enjoyed the Mookie/Smitty Hawks, I haven't been this excited about a Hawks team since Nique's days. Right now they are playing an exciting brand of basketball. We actually have an identity now. We run the floor. We're long and athletic. After Stotts, Kruger, Rider, Babcock, the infamous lawsuit, conceding BK, trading JT, Rasheed for a day, playoff guarantees, 13 win seasons, bad draft picks, Speedy, and tons of losing, THIS FEELS GOOD.

Boy, I can't stand Pierce. He's a sucker to the 10th degree. That said, he's two years removed from a championship, so his opinion is worth something...but not much. That makes me want to thump Memphis all the more.

Interesting take from Paul Pierce after the close game between Boston and Memphis on yesterday: "They're right on our heels, man," Pierce said. "If they grow together and continue to play together, they'll be right there. "It's unfortunate that they're in the Western Conference. If they were in the East, they would probably be a top-four seed right now." Interesting take. My question is, if Cleveland, Orlando, Boston and Atlanta are the top four teams, in Pierce's mind, who goes down to five if he believes Memphis would be a top four team in the East? lol! I could make the case they are better than Miami. Thus, they would be a top five team. They thumped them the other night. We'll have our work cut out for us. Zach has given Josh Smith fits in the past. They have weapons.