RandomFan

This is correct. Except for the part about Wilcox doing the wheeling and dealing and that Bud simply has to sign off on it. Like most sports organizations these days, it's a collaborative effort. The Coach, the GM, the personnel guys, the salary cap guys, they all debate these players and possible moves until they get on the same page and reach a unified group decision. If push ever came to shove, then yes Bud (or Ferry before he was exiled) would have the final say-so. But this is something that from all reports from many different organizations that simply never happens. If they can't get on the same page, they debate until they do. This is why during Bud's recent interview on 92.9 when asked what has changed since he's been promoted to the acting president in Ferry's absence? His response was not much has changed at all. He was already sitting in on all the meetings and discussions before Ferry left. He said there were a few minor more additions to his time requirements handling some things; but for the most part his participation level hasn't changed much because he was already a full participant to begin with. The extra responsibilities Wilcox has taken on are simply doing a lot of the legwork that Ferry was doing and the administrative roles required of a G.M.

Agree. He'd be one of the top backup PGs in the NBA on most other teams. It's unfortunate for him that he has Teague and Schröder in front of him here. I do wish he could get more playing time, but oh well. At least we have some amazing injury insurance.

No, it most definitely is not. A person is not the same thing as an idea or a comment. This is a very, very big problem in this country where people are unable to grasp the distiction between criticism of their idea and criticism of them as a person. People are entitled to courtesy and consideration. Ideas are not. Ideas either stand up to criticism, or they are eschewed. Calling an idea a half thought out pile of bs does not equate to calling the person that said the idea a half-thinking bs artist, as you wrongly imply. If, for example, I tell you that you're political conclusions are silly for reasons X, Y, and Z, I am not criticizing you and calling you silly, I'm criticizing your political conclusions and calling them silly. Why would I not be comfortable in that worldview? It's the only worldview that people should be comfortable in...

I didn't see another thread that this seemed appropriate in, so just dumping it in here. It's not worthy of its own thread, but I thought it was an interesting little nugget, especially with the continued Pero bashing.

Moe Harkless is on the block apparently, and not for a lot in return. He'd be less an impactful player for us this year, but more of another young developmental wing player. 6'8" with great athleticism and some defensive ability. Needs to be taught how to shoot much better (hello Bud) and play less reckless (he's a 3 inch taller version of Baze minus a little athleticism and defense). Still just 21. http://fansided.com/2015/02/17/orlando-magic-will-trade-maurice-harkless-minimal-return/

Then allow me to rephrase. It was a smart-ass, half thought out, pile of b.s - that was written. That's not a personal attack; it's an attack on the substance written (or lack thereof). Deepity is a phrase coined by the philosopher Dan Dennett. It's probably the wrong context if you want to get technical, but I haven't been able to use the word in far too long!

Remind me again how many NBA Champions over the last 10 years were even in the top 10 in rebounds per game? The 06 Heat and the 09 Lakers, that's who. 2 out of 10. Allow me to point out the obvious: 8 of the last 10 NBA Champs have not been in the top 10 in rebounding. Do you care to revise that first statement? If it really mattered to you who was holding up trophies, you wouldn't still be banging your head against a wall soapboxing for a stat that is one of the least important indicators of championship pedigree. How do you continue to miss the obvious that the team is sacrificing rebounds in order to be better in other areas?

We can agree to disagree. And while some things in basketball don't change, that doesn't mean rebounding importance is one of them. Most of the relevant data suggest exactly the oppostie. I'm not questioning anyone's right to disagree; simply taking the time to point out where I think those disagreements are illogical or unfounded. You question our playoff credentials, that is your right. We'll agree to disagree, because I don't. One of us will be proven right in a few months. I guess it's easier for some to forget the Indy series last year than others? I seem to remember our game translating to the playoffs pretty well, even in the 1st year of the system, missing our best player, and missing a few new wing defenders. But we'll definitely find out.

Wow, even ESPN wrote an article about it and it's the top story on their NBA page. http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12339721/former-mayor-andrew-young-says-let-general-manager-danny-ferry-rejoin-atlanta-hawks ATLANTA -- Civil rights leader and former Atlanta mayor Andrew Young on Tuesday told an Atlanta television station that Danny Ferry should be allowed to rejoin the Hawks organization in his capacity as general manager. Asked by WSB TV's sports director Zach Klein whether Ferry should lose his job, Young responded, "Hell no." Hawks GM Danny Ferry took a leave of absence in September, but former Atlanta mayor and civil rights activist Andrew Young wants to see him return. Ferry took a leave of absence from the Hawks on Sept. 12 after a recording of him making insulting comments about Luol Deng on a conference call was made public. Since Ferry's departure, Hawks coach Mike Budenholzer has presided as the head of basketball operations, with assistant general manager Wes Wilcox also active in day-to-day proceedings. On the call, Ferry characterized Deng as a player who "has a little African in him," and added, "He's like a guy who would have a nice store out front and sell you counterfeit stuff out of the back." Young said that were he the decision-maker in the Hawks executive offices, he would've encouraged Ferry to stay on. He added that he doesn't believe Ferry is a racist. "No more than I am," Young said. "That's a word that you cannot define, 'You are a racist.' You can't grow up white in America without having some problems. You can't grow up black in America without having some subtle feelings." The Hawks did not weigh in on Ferry's status on Tuesday. "The Hawks don't comment on individual stories," said Garin Narain, Hawks' vice president of public relations. Days before the recording of Ferry became public, an email written by Hawks owner Bruce Levenson in 2012 surfaced that expressed concern that the sizeable presence of African-American spectators at Hawks games was problematic for the franchise. "My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a significant season ticket base," Levenson wrote. The Hawks' ownership group, led by Levenson, has put the franchise up for sale. NBA commissioner Adam Silver said on Saturday that the process "is moving along on course." Since the controversy, the Hawks have been one of the NBA's nicest surprises, compiling a record of 43-11 prior to the All-Star break, including a 19-game winning streak and a perfect January. They lead the Eastern Conference by 6 ½ games over the Toronto Raptors. Four members of the Hawks' starting five were selected to last Sunday's All-Star Game. Young has been a prominent presence in Atlanta for more than 50 years and was a close confidante of Martin Luther King Jr. In 1972, Young became the first black congressman elected to the U.S. House of Representatives since Reconstruction. President Jimmy Carter appointed Young as the nation's Ambassador to the United Nations in 1977, after which Young was elected as Atlanta's mayor in 1981 and again in 1985.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12273986/how-golden-state-warriors-built-nba-best-defense This is a really good read about our likely Finals opponent if we can make it that far. It talks a lot about defense and some things that pertain to a lot of the discussions we've been having around here. Such as: They have a lot of similarities to us, so as I was reading this article I kept thinking of how it could be talking about the Hawks too.

Ha, never thought of it like that but it is amusing. Next statue should just be "Hawks starting 5." =D

Gonna chalk this one up to the old parable about leading a horse to water, but can't make them drink. It's obvious that some people refuse to see the truth until a championship trophy is being waved in their face. So be it.

And if this wasn't comparing apples to oranges, that might seem amusing. But as it stands, thats only a snarky half-wit deepity.

Rebounds are just not as important as they used to be. It varies from team to team how important they are. But for our style of play, they rank very low. We lose games when we shoot poorly - that's pretty much it. We give up inflated rebounds in those games because the other team obviously gets more chances at a rebound when we miss more frequently.

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2015/02/17/hawks-coach-mike-budenholzer/ thats the direct link to the interview, with a bit of a writeup also.

Agree. And if it's Webber's group, we're all screwed. He's going to be the guy to come in and try to fix what ain't broken.

Rebounding, ah yes. You're talking about the least important correlational major statistic towards winning games. Let me say that again for emphasis since I guess a lot of people still don't realize this: Rebounding is the least valuable statistic that determines wins and losses. I would think everyone would be well aware of that after it has been talked about to death for the last week here. Let me also say it again, that we ignore offensive rebounds in order to get back on defense, which obviously lowers our total rebounds per game when comparing us to other teams. When you only factor in defensive rebounds, we are around 11th in the NBA last time I checked. Yes, we could be better rebounding the ball on the defensive end. Bud is constantly talking about this. I even heard him on 92.9 today talking about it. They were asking him about the rebounding issue and a possible need for another big. Bud said once again, emphatically, that he really likes the bigs we have and would go to battle with these guys every day of the week. You could tell Bud is getting sick of this question because he really stressed how happy he is with the guys we have. He also said that the way our team plays schematically that rebounding has to be a total team effort; and that it is something that we continue to work on and try to improve on (like he says about everything). I guess I'm just going to have to keep saying it, but what we gain from the bigs that we currently have more than outweighs what we lose in rim protection and rebounding. I don't see what is so hard to grasp about this concept? We've got the best record we've ever had at this point in the season...seems to me what we are doing is working pretty darn well!

Even if we had a "rim protector" I highly doubt that would ever change under Bud. Darvin Ham: To me, the defensive element of getting back and getting our activity and energy there is crucial. In my opinion, the rim protector thing is a little overrated. As long as you’re moving and doing your work early, we’re able to compensate. We have a systematic defense where if a guy gets broken down from the perimeter, there’s going to be a guy out to help there. And when that guy knows he’s going to have help behind him, he can come early and get into a good position. A charge is just as good as a blocked shot. Or verticality and protecting the net is just as good as a blocked shot. When that guy comes to help, that guy knows there’s someone else getting back to take his man off the glass. And then that guy back knows there’s someone else in help position to support if we have to close out on a perimeter shot. Systematically, our guys have the utmost confidence. Coach Bud has done a great job hitting home and establishing our defensive system with practice and film. You look at the rim protector thing, some of these teams with these quote-unquote ‘rim protectors’ are the teams giving up the most points in the paint just because they’re relying on that one guy to stop whoever’s driving in there. We don’t want to be like that. We want to score like a team and defend like a team. If you look at it, it’s worked out pretty well up to this point. http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2015/02/13/eisenberg-how-do-these-hawks-compare-with-the-2004-pistons/

OK, let’s try to get this message to reach home another way then. Whether you agree with Coach Bud or not, do you admit that he believes we don't need another big man? I mean, he's the one that said this after trading Payne: “The reality (of the trade is) the depth of our bigs and having multiple young bigs that we feel strongly about and managing how those young bigs can have opportunities and emerge,” Budenholzer said. Payne was traded because we don't have time to play all the Bigs we currently have that need playing time. Does that sound to you like a man who thinks we need another big man? Whether or not you agree with that assessment is irrelevant - it doesn't matter. What matters is that you have to actually acknowledge Bud does not think we need another big man. If you don't accept that statement, you're pretty much calling Bud a liar? Once you come to the conclusion that the man in charge of adding players to this team feels that way, then the conversation for adding a big man is for all intents and purposes over. We have Brand and Moose that would be getting playing time instead of Pero if Bud actually believed that Pero wasn't getting the job done. Obviously since Pero is still playing, Coach doesn't feel that way. I'm sorry that you don't agree, but I think you'll reduce your stress level if you allow yourself to admit that the guy who knows way more about basketball than either of us feels like Pero brings something to the floor that he wants out there.

Then take it up with Coach Bud. He's the one that loves Pero.

Why don't we just end this thread with the reminder that Bud just said the reason he traded Payne was because there already weren't enough minutes to go around for the bigs we have. We're not adding another to the mix; not unless you think Bud was just lying and it was all because Payne just sucks (not likely). I can't see that changing unless it's a situation just too good to be true and we simply can't pass it up. That's not Amare, BTW. If we add someone it's likely going to be a wing, like Horford said we need.

I can haz statue??

And still be sitting there cockblocking Ferry's possible return.

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics_nba/boston_celtics/2015/02/celtics_could_learn_from_atlanta_s_team_dynamic This is a good article that partly focuses on something we don't talk enough about when considering adding new potential players to our roster: making quick decisions and quick reads. Most of this, if not all, is stuff we've all heard over and over again. But I thought the emphasis on not only good decisions with the ball, but quick-good decisions with the ball was worth talking about more. This made me think of another potential reason for the Payne trade. It makes me think that one of these possibilites are probably accurate: either Payne demonstrated that he might not ever "get" Buds system and be good enough on those areas; or he was so much farther behind Muscala in these areas (and maybe even what they've seen from Tavares so far) that he was likely never going to move past those guys for playing time. The people that keep complaining about Pero, obviously this is part of his game that Bud must appreciate that goes beyond the traditional stats that people see. I like how Bud mentioned Baze and Thabo both as still a work in progress. You would assume Baze would fall in this category since he's so young and inexperienced. But that an older vet like Thabo is still showing room form improvement there is nice.

Speaking about that, I don't know if anyone else saw this posted 2 days ago about Millsap: Sounds like there wont be much of a (hometeam/good team) discount from Millsap that many of us were hoping for. Of course, this could all just be posturing on his part to make sure the Hawks don't lowball him and he gets a respectable offer. I guess we'll find out soon enough. I love me some Millsap and want him back here; but if he's going to be asking for top dollar, then I might be inclined to throw a max contract at Marc Gasol first just to see if we could lure him here. He's one of the very few bigs that could play in our defensive scheme and still do what we like on offense, and at a true 7 feet tall. I still hope things work out with Millsap though - you don't want to fix what's not broken unless you have no choice.