Wretch

Could you increase the time available to modify a post? Or give topic originators the ability to delete their own posts? That'd be swell...!

Who's left? That's probably the biggest problem. If there were someone out there instantly recognizeable, with drawing power, I'd say go for it. Though, I think we missed the boat on that last summer when SO many guys were available - and a few weeks ago when the Celtics picked up Doc. I'm not thrilled about the choices either - except the Czar. I wouldn't say he's in a discount bin with many other coaches like him, and I certainly wouldn't say there are guys like him available right now. I like Fratello because he's not a coach that is limited to one style of basketball. His stint with the Hawks had success with different types of Hawks teams; he went to Cleveland and coached those guys to a respectable record - while eliminating their weakness and playing them to their strengths. To top it all off, he's not a machine; nor does he have an inflated ego. He's not going to let anyone walk over him, and at the same time he's not overbearing. His knowledge of the game is respectable and he doesn't over-analyze it (ala Doug Collins). I think he's the man for the job. I enjoyed his Hawks teams from the 80's and I believe he could come in and get results. Personally, I don't know how important a name is to our franchise. We're going to be very young in the next few years. I believe more important to having a recognizeable face on the sideline is actual coaching ability. Teaching our young guys to play the NBA game from the ground up and, most importantly, getting our club to play solid defense. For knowledge of the game, personality, and even noteriety - I think Fratello best satisfies the criteria. Next, closely, would be Del Harris or maybe Daly...and if management doesn't have designs on either of these guys, then Musselman is my man. I wouldn't be upset if he was tops on our priority list.

Thx!

Pretty simple huh? Personally, I've been less than thrilled about some of the names that are being thrown out. I'm sure these guys can coach, but IMO our new group needs to make a statement. Pick a guy with credentials, talk to him, hire him. But it seems to me that BK can't do anything without taking 6 months to think about it... We'll probably get a technical foul during the draft because our selection time will run out...and we'll have selected no one. Anyway... My vote is for the Czar. Old school, knowledgeable, quite capable, and charismatic.

Dang...Dang...Dang... I'll see if I can modify the poll...

Pretty simple huh? Personally, I've been less than thrilled about some of the names that are being thrown out. I'm sure these guys can coach, but IMO our new group needs to make a statement. Pick a guy with credentials, talk to him, hire him. But it seems to me that BK can't do anything without taking 6 months to think about it... We'll probably get a technical foul during the draft because our selection time will run out...and we'll have selected no one. Anyway... My vote is for the Czar. Old school, knowledgeable, quite capable, and charismatic.

I think he would have been the difference. They played up to LA's level, and better to take a 2-0 series lead; so, it's obvious that they've got what it takes. Though, you have to think that with Jackson in the lineup, those games that LA eeked out or closed out late would have been much closer or even won. Think about all those open looks that Horry, Devin Brown, and Turkoglu were getting...and missing. There were critical possisions throughout the series (and not just late in the games) where a 3 pointer would have changed the momentum and the course of the game. Were it Jackson taking those 3's...or even just handling the ball...I think those shots get made. San Antonio should have paid that man; or at least compromised to see if he could sustain it for another year or so. The joke was on him last summer, but Jack got the last laugh.

But both of Duncan's shots were complete BS! I give him more credit for his last shot than the one he banked of the glass from the top of the key...

This seems like a one shot deal to me. If the Wolves are going to get passed anyone to get to the championship game, they'll need Spree. I don't think Cassell and KG will be enough. Yet, I don't think Spree is going to continue to be as fast or effective in the next 2 or 3 years. This is their chance and I think if they blow it, that's it. About the Spurs... I just don't enjoy watching them play EC teams. A) They are going to stomp them and B) if the EC team doesn't have a lot of guns, then it's going to be a crawling, defensive, blogfest. Also, lots of good players never get that elusive ring...Duncan's got two, so I don't feel sorry for him. Not only that, but I'm sure that he'll add another one before it's all over. I'd like to see the Kings win it all, but I have a feeling they'll go down like the mid-90's Suns. Them and the Mavs are pretty much in the same boat. Until they can figure out how to stop people, then they'll continually be blasted out of the playoffs. I don't think either team beats these Lakers or the Spurs in a 7 game series and it'll pretty much stay that way. I don't feel sorry for Malone or GP. In fact, I think it's kinda cheesy that they're riding on what Kobe, Shaq, and Phil built. Maybe not GP, so much as Malone - but I don't think a championship ring adds anything to their resumes.

That's what they were talking about on the Spurs board. They didn't have that picture, but someone must have noticed. On a side note, I think it's kinda stupid that the NBA uses instant replay to review the last shot of a game - and yet, they rely on a human's judgment to sort out tenths of seconds on the shot clock.

Although it could be possible, I read over on a Spurs messageboard that Duncan's shot actually went through the net with .7 seconds left in the game; and regardless, it looked like the clock started moving as soon as Fish got the ball. If anything, the Spurs should be concerned about the 1st 3 quarters of their play - and all those wide open looks they were blowing that let the game come down to 1 possession.

But I REALLY don't want to see anymore Spurs basketball passed this point. It's great to watch them do battle with other WC teams, like a contrast of styles. But I don't want to see them playing in the final series of the season - against Detroit, NJ, or Indiana I like the Lakers, but it wouldn't matter who the Spurs played from this point forward. I'd be rooting against them. Personally, I'm pulling for the TWolves to win it all. I'd like to see them and Indiana in the championship series. That would be a refreshing change. I like what I'm seeing from Miami too. I love seeing turnaround stories in the NBA and it looks like Wade and Odom are the real deal. If Caron completely comes to form, then these guys will be a threat to do something. They're too inexperienced to handle anything beyond the conference semi's, so I wouldn't want to see them surprise Indiana...but next year, I'll be in their corner... If they're not playing us that is...!

Now... Just one more win and NO MORE THREAT OF SEEING THE DAMN SPURS IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME!!!! !!!!*whew*!!! Does ANYBODY feel me on that!

So we don't really know what his on court or on camera presence is. We all know that he's a nice kid, but we don't know that he doesn't have any charisma. Duncan isn't without a personality, he just doesn't have a forceful personality. ...and you don't have to be tough or flashy to have a forceful personality. You just need charisma. If you can sell a smile, then you have marketability. Watching a Tim Duncan commercial (of the 3 or 4 that he's made) you get the feeling that someone is hovering over him pulling strings. It just doesn't look genuine. He plays with emotion on the court, but his personality just doesn't project itself. His persona is calm and FOCUSED on basketball. I've seen Howard talking and the kid's got charisma. He can sell himself and he can probably sell a product. It is faith that he'll have a hard time selling because people don't want to hear it. It will take a company that is willing (doubtful) to give their product some religious and representation some really creative and artistic vision to get it across.

I never even thought about it that way. Not only that, but perhaps Doc didn't want to coach the Hawks either...? I think it's safe to say that if the organization wanted Rivers here, Stotts would have been let go right at the end of the season. Perhaps even much sooner.

There are so many questions surrounding Dwight's value to the commercial market, but whether or not he has game will be one of the biggest determining factors in Dwight Howard's marketability. The other is whether or not he has a personality. If he's trying to market his faith, he will only succeed in other-worldly currency. Selling shoes, burgers, or gear won't be hard at all. Creative marketing can spin anything... If they can successfully market LeBron as a "basketball" savior, complete with hoops church, choir, and "good book", then they can work with Howard. No question. As a matter of fact, I could see a commercial...where he walks into a dark, abandoned, run-down gym with the windows boarded up...filled with hissing, unsightly, wicked creatures that tell him he doesn't belong there. ...and as he battles them on the court (ala Vince Carter vs. the "raptors"), he slams the basketball against the boards over the windows, breaking them out, bringing the light in...which causes the demons to scream and shrivel. Religious undetone, marketable concept, with the general public clueless that Howard's making a statement. That kind of thing works, but there are also standard athelete presentations where he doesn't have to do anything but look sweaty and demonstrate physical ability. In the end it will come down to two things...if he's got no game and/or personality, then he's got no commercial, no marketability, and no fans.

It's possible! This would be a situation that I'd trade up for. Use JT/17th/Boris/2nds/whatever without overdoing it, but if we could come away with both of these guys...? I'd go for it.

We are in a very flexible position right now. We don't know what kind of team we're going to be in 3 or 4 years...probably not even next year. We don't have to draft based on need. Besides, the Hawks need help everywhere and we've got nothing but open roster spots to fill it in. Why not just keep our picks...? No matter where they land? We definitely need a PF or a Center. We're looking at Kobe or TMac as FA's, so obviously we're in the market for a swingman or 2 guard - even if we retain Jackson, Sura, or both. And I don't think there are many of us who would argue about drafting a true point guard... ... I am inclined to believe that we'll be drafting in the top 3, but I'm not going to go into the whole "is it real/fake" debate again. Regardless, we've still got a pick in the better part of the draft. And with so many hssr's declaring, I have a feeling that there will be A LOT of "sleeper" talent that gets scooped up in the middle to late 1st round. IMO, this isn't the year to be trading up in the draft. This is the year to have multiple picks. I hope BK sees this and that our owners don't have ideas to do otherwise.

...and it was a 4 game sweep by Utah, followed by a rocky start the following season, before he was let go. They had every one of those players too, except for Ceballos - who I'm not sure about. Additionally, Kobe was not a rookie. He was in his second season just beginning to break out. They traded all of that talent away, brought in Glen Rice and Phil Jackson and suddenly, BOOM. Del's a good coach for a young team though. He'll teach and he'll let them get out there and make mistakes. I just don't know about his defensive intentions... I think Fratello is every bit the coach that Harris is, I know he can adapt to any situation, and I know he could teach team defense. I pray that they are not judging him on that bogged down team up in Cleveland. I wouldn't want him to come in and do that with our young guys; but I'm sure he would adapt to whatever the owners want. I'm happy with either situation though. Either is an upgrade from Stotts and I prefer them both to Byron Scott.

I hope the owners are taking a serious look at Fratello. I know they want a wide open, up and down the floor, style of basketball...but unless you put a team out there that can play serious defense, we're going nowhere. Just like the Mavs. I know the first thing Fratello would do coming into Atlanta - and that's teach these guys (or what's left of them) how to play defense. I don't want it to be our trademark, but I don't want to see us become the Mavs of the EC either.

It is WAY too early to call this one done, or even speculate about it. I think the only people who are worried are Malone and GP. *LOL* They'll be surprised, to see how well the team takes off right before their eyes. But until they lose game 3, it's still a series in my eyes. On the matter at hand... I don't think it really matters whether LA wins or loses this series. There is not enough room on that team for Kobe and Shaq (regardless of how many other stars they sign). I think one of those guys needs to go, and I believe Kobe knows it's him. Coming to Atlanta? Not to rebuild you can count on...and East or west probably makes no difference to him - dude just wants to win. It's the competition drives him. Put a team out there and hire the right coach, and maybe we've got a small chance. Otherwise...

Can't say that I blame them. I don't think he should be fired based on performance; but, then again, he never really impressed me. I'm sure he'll get another chance though. I think it comes down to Fratello or Scott as the popular choices amongst us; which means the Hawks will go with Collins, Carlisimo, or Karl. Seriously, I would like to see the Czar - an old school coach who knows the game. He's got personality and has proven that he can coach some damn basketball. I've heard too much about Byron Scott and his attitude/ego problems. The last thing I want to see is guys that are supposed to be our future riding pine for half a season. I'd take Muss over him too, but I think he'll be in Golden State for at least another year.

If you really want to enjoy the movie that is.

Quote: Also, you're really not adressing what I mentionned about a needed change of perception of the franchise. If we keep the same coach, re-sign a few players, get a few FA's, people will see us as the same old lowly hawks. WE NEED A NEW IMAGE AS BAD AS WE NEED ANY PLAYER OR COACH. That's what new management needs to adress by firing stotts. Don't feel bad, he'll get a job elsewhere like Kruger did. Well...because I agree with you here. WE NEED A NEW IMAGE. I think bringing in a new coach would do that; I've already said as much. I also believe that we've missed the boat on the guys who could really do that. I would like to see Fratello come back, but that may even be percieved as (like Jay Walker says) "been there done that." At the same time, people don't even know who Stotts is. Like much of anything that has to do with the Hawks, they don't care. So, if he really has something to bring to the table...then he could very well be a part of this new image makeover. ... Quote: To me those statements are contradictory. There are better coaches out there. Just about every one out there. If we didn't have a coach, I'd be looking exclusively at bringing in someone with instant credibility. We've got a guy, who's been here for a while...that has more experience than some of the guys looking for a chance. He's been through as rough a storm as it gets...he's still standing, but barely. That, to me, gives him a leg up on anyone other than someone with instant credibility. Quote: I'm saying bring a veteran coach who knows how to teach and motivate to help our young players gel and develop. Just about any of them will do (except Wilkens). I'm sure coaches will be getting fired too. Why is it that we have the coach with the longest tenure in the conference when it's stotts?? Agreed. At the same time though, keeping Stotts on for a little while longer gives the rest of the league a chance to hand us a better coach. Letting Rivers slip into Boston's back door has really prolonged the situation. Is there someone who could be brought in that would be better than Stotts? No doubt. Are they available now? That's questionable. I'm not interested in Byron Scott and his ego or stubborn substitution pattern. I don't think he'll mix well with the rebuilding effort. I think the Czar can and I think Rudy T could...if he were healthy and willing to coach. I don't feel sorry for Stotts. I liken him to an unproven draft pick. Maybe he'll turn out good, maybe he won't. My gut tells me when it comes down to it, that we'll end up replacing him anyway - so go forward with him, draft as we please, and if he doesn't show us anything...adios. I think we could commit to him as much as "hey, show us what you've got. Things have settled down, show us that you are a leader." I don't think we give him the same amount of leeway as we would a Larry Brown, Paul Silas, or Rivers. However, another mid season coaching change is not cool. If we go with Stotts, we take him through next season, with the same group of players whether he struggles or not. I don't believe that he DESERVES to be fired; but the organization deserves stability and a good coach. If it's Stotts, then so be it. If we bring in a veteran coach that can get it done...I've got no problem showing Stotts the door.