TomSelleck

Compared to what Houston or the Clippers could offer that's a terrible package for Denver.

Joe Johnson has to have one of the most untradable contracts in the NBA now.

If anything ownership has been too generous. They gave too much money to Marvin Williams and too much money to Joe Johnson they can't do anything else.

I don't at all see them extending Jamal Crawford.

The difference is Teague has athletic upside. He only played two years of college ball to Law's four and is fast as crap while Law was slow. Look at Law v. Rondo and they're practically the same players offensively but Rondo had a nice edge in rebounds, assists, and steals, demonstrating a major edge in athleticism, just like Teague.

The difference in those situations is Childress was only 3 years older than Marvin. Both had lots of room to grow. Bibby is 10 years older than Teague. Bibby isn't getting better while Teague still could.

I'm glad to see at least the spirit of competition but face it we've gone as far as we're ever going to go with Bibby. Unless Teague is in the Acie Law category of guys who flat out can't play, he needs to be in there one way or another.

Josh has been in the NBA 6 seasons now. I don't see him ever becoming much more than what he is right now. Horford could be featured a little more on offense, but I don't ever see him averaging more than 18-19 points per game compared to the 14 he averaged in 2008-2009. Marvin is a joke. Jordan Crawford is barely even going to see the floor this season. Teague is the only player with legit upside. If he has a Rondo-style trajectory, the Hawks could be a contender for the conference finals if they got the right match up. If Teague is just a guy, they're never going to be better than a 2nd round sacrificial lamb.

Could each of them add some sort of refinement to their games? Yes. But in the big picture, they are who they are.

The Hawks may be young but the problem is they no longer have upside. Every player of any significance except Teague is already as good as he's ever going to be. So unless Teague is the next Rondo, 53 wins is as good as it's ever going to get.

I agree and this is what I was talking about in my Billy Knight thread the other day. When the ASG let Knight walk in 2008 and kept Woodson, they basically were saying Knight built a flawed team but Woodson did the best that could be expected with those players. Now two years later we more or less have the same players, with a few of them making a lot more money, and the ASG is saying the players are fine the coach needs to get more out of them. Makes no sense to me.

We all understand it was a flawed way to build a team. My only question is why has the ASG and Sund continued the experiment?

Seeing as how the ASG is giving a new coach virtually the exact same team Woodson coached in the hopes he can presumeably do more with them, it validates what Knight did much more than Woodson.

You're the only poster who understands where I was going. To the rest of you, I know why I would have fired Knight. I outlined that in my initial post. He missed too many franchise-defining players in the draft and in general had a poor understanding of how parts of a team fit together. Again, my question is why hasn't Sund and/or the ASG started dumping the players he picked? Why are they paying those players more money than what Knight signed them for?

Alright I forgot his contract simply expired and he was not retained. My bigger question is if ownership had a problem with how Knight was building the Hawks, why has it been two years and they've done virtually nothing to change the team? 5 out of the 5 starters from the the last game of Knight's tenure started the last game of the season two years later.

As fans it's easy to say Billy Knight got fired for drafting players a, b, and c instead of players x, y, and z, and in general trying to build a team of all wing players with no attention to point guard and center. Those are more than enough reasons to fire a general manager, but if you look at what ownership has done since firing Knight, that's not the case. The Hawks ownership and subsequent management has validated virtually every one of Knight's moves. Joe Johnson: Knight traded for him in 2005. Ownership gave him the biggest contract in free agency in 2010. Mike Bibby: Knight traded for him in 2008. Ownership gave him a new contract in 2009. Josh Smith: Knight drafted him in 2004. Ownership gave him a contract extension in 2008. Marvin Williams: Knight drafted him in 2005. Ownership gave him a contract extension in 2009. Josh Childress: Knight drafted him in 2004. Ownership wanted to keep him but the money wasn't good enough. Al Horford: Knight drafted him in 2007. It hasn't been time to extend him yet, but in all likelihood the Hawks will extend him. My point is it has now been over two years since Knight got fired and the Hawks have done virtually nothing to take apart the team that he built. So why did they fire him? The actions of ownership indicate they are perfectly happy with the team he built.

Assuming Teague isn't the next Acie Law and just flat out can't play in the NBA, you at least have to give him the 2010-2011 season to prove it. No one is going to shelf him for good in January.

It's not about Horford against Howard. The Hawks lost because of what the other 4 Magic players were doing. Boston showed the way you beat Orlando is to let Howard and his limited offensive game and loust foul shooting get his and guard all the shooters on the outside.

People think Tiago Splitter is going to be a beast.

The 4 Magic players who sit on the 3-point line beat the Hawks, not Howard.

The two biggest problems with Arenas are 1.) his horrible contract and 2.) he might be done, physically. He hasn't been a legit #1 scorer since the 2006-2007 season. That's an eternity. When you look at wing players who get into their late 20s/early 30s and have injury problems, they never recover. Michael Redd, Tracy McGrady, Alan Houston, you can name tons of them.

Apples to oranges. At the beginning of free agency the Heat had 3 players under contract while the Hawks had 8. It's a little easier to be aggressive that way.

Stephon Marbury made two all star games before Isaiah got him and Steve Francis made three. pass

Are we speculating what Isaiah Thomas would do if he were running the Hawks?