Packfill

Orlando definitely had no choice in the matter, so they did well to get some value in return. Francis can put up stats but I think he has some limitations as a point guard that can prohibit a team from playing up to its potential. He will probably put up huge stats this year because Dwight will not be ready to carry the load - much like Yao as a rookie - the question is whether he will learn to defer/feed dwight when he matures.

They should make the playoffs but Houston was a much more talented team last year (Francis/Mobley/Jackson/Cato/Yao) than Orlando will be this year (Francis/Mobley/Turkoglu/Howard/Cato), so there is no guarantee. I wouldn't trade Yao and Jackson for Howard and Turk, and I would take Van Gundy over whomever Orlando is trotting out there at coach.

I agree completely. The first team is much better. Would they have had the cap space to sign Turkoglu without the trade?

I think Utah has done a great job of amassing talent, thought it was at a cost. A potential starting line-up of Arroyo/Harpring/Kirilenko/Boozer/Okur with Lopez, Giricek, Snyder, Humphries and Collins off the bench is a solid team - especially since they were considered one of the least talented teams in the NBA a year ago.

He is going to have to get much bigger to play power forward.

Any way you can get some beta from the Hawks camp on this? I think Martin would be good for the Hawks, but since Boozer has now set the market at $68 million it seems Kenyon slots in better at aroun $75 million then a max deal of $85+ million. Also are there any teeth to the rumored Dallas trade? I hope that one is not true.

Saw this on nba.com. He has played in three games for them so far, playing around 20 minutes with decent results: 9 pts, 10rbs 10 pts, 1 rb, 1 blk 6 pts, 8 rbs I think Kyle Davis, who is also on the Hawks summer roster, is playing for another team as well. He had 6 blocks in one game.

Don't get me wrong, I am intrigued by the idea of Ron Artest as a Hawk, just not the starting power forward.

That would be by far the smallest team in the NBA. Artest is a shooting guard or small forward (mostly small forward), he is 6'7" and has no business at power forward - especially if skinny 6'9" Swift is your center.

I would take the gamble with Artest over Harrington. But as ar as Tinsley goes, my impression is that he is not a good defensive player either, so he doesn't fit. I think the trio of Terry/Childress/Diaw could get it done as far as ballhandling and distribution. That trio fits the "versatile" theme Knight is pushing - on any given trip up the court one of the three could serve as the primary ballhandler.

Actually, I think Jason Terry is a better fit for our current projected line-up with Diaw and Childress at the wings because he brings necessary offense to the table and his ballhandling/distribution shortcomings are made up for by the presence of two other ballhandlers, Diaw in particular. Again, if the Hawks don't go big and sign Kmart then I think the smart thing to do is make a play for Etan Thomas and resign Pryz and Collier, then call it a day.

I rather sign a guy like Etan Thomas than trade for Gooden. Gooden is Reef-lite, not as talented and softer on D.

I don't think it would hurt the Hawks too bad because we have nearly $20 million in cap room and outside of Kenyon (who tie up around $11 mill) none of the other available free agents - i.e., a Swift, Thomas, etc. - are going to command much more than $6.5 to start.

My question is this then: Why would the Pacers be able to get by with Terry's ballhandling/distributing deficiencies where as the Hawks can not? Indiana would not have another ballhandler in the line-up if Artest and Jackson start, or Miller for that matter. Maybe Bender, but that is asking alot of him.

Is he signed long-term? Also, does anyone know the contract details of Pollard and Tinsley, or where I can find that information? This trade is interesting. I think it makes more sense if Harrington can actually play the 4, Leaving Diaw and the Smiths to fill in at the 3.

Based on recent contract signings all of those guys are going to get $40+ million contracts. I wouldn't want both Jackson and QRich, one or the other and then let the other wing position sort itself out between Childress/Diaw/Smith/Smith. I still think the greatest need is at power forward and center. Center can probably be taken care of inexpensively with Pryz, Collier or the like. Power forward may be the place to spend the dollars, whether that be Kmart, Swift or Thomas.

Jax is a no brainer for the Spurs at this point.

Boozer is a good player - and I would love to have him on the Hawks - but he does not have the athletic upside or overall defensive presence of Kenyon Martin. I doubt he ever improves significantly on his current numbers but he is the type of hard worker I wouldn't bet against. Imagine a guy like Swift or Kwame Brown with Boozer's work ethic and fundamentals!

The numbers guys like Foyle, Hedu, Camby, Nash, Okur, Alston and Ginobili are getting are crazy. Those $5+ million are the ones, more often then not, that cripple a franchise. I have said it once, I have said it twice, and I will say it again, I would take KMart at the max long before I would take any of these guys at the projected values of the deals they have been offered.

Nobody could win with that team. Paxson is offering window dressing for the fact that two (now three) coaches have been unable to sufficiently develop their young talent. It won't happen without proper leadership. Rose and Marshall are not the type of veterans youn want nuturing young players, they are too me first oriented. At least now they may have some hope that Hinrich, as he gains experience, may be able to lead the Bulls back to mediocrity and beyond. All I am saying is that the Hawks have the potential to be historically bad with out some competent front court players. Remember, at least last year we had Jackson who was throwing down 25 points a game. Without him, who will score? No Sura likely either. Without them, the teams inability to score will almost as tragic as its inability to stop anyone in the paint. I want the young guys to develop, but I think their development will be helped by the addition of a low post presence. Martin is not perfect for this, but he will have to do. His real value is in the locker room and with attitude. Swift may be able to match his production, but unless he has a fire lit under him he will not match Kmart's intensity. Swift would be nice at a reasonable deal, but I would prefer Kmart at 10 or 12 then Swift at 6 or 8.

Cartwright did not have a mandate to win - he had a mandate to develop the young players but got canned because he did not give them enough playing time (although, I think he got the short end of the stick because he inherited a fundamentally flawed roster - i.e., one without veteran leadership). Silas was given a mandate to build around LeBron. Trading for VETERANS Williams and Battie was a deal done solely with the intention of putting veteran leaders around Lebron so that he could develop IN THE PROPER ENVIRONMENT.

Even if childress turns in Tracy McGrady he is not going to win anything without a talented front court. The Bulls and Clippers are great examples of teams which are/were stockpiled with high draft picks and talented youngsters. Neither team, despite 3-4 years worth of development have been able to improve because of the lack of leadership. When I say leadership I mean someone who can show the way on the court and in the locker room. The Buls with Crawford, Curry and Chandler have amounted to nothing as a team and each has underachieved individually, failing to live up to expectations. Over the past several years the Clippers have had young talents such as Magette, Richardson, Miles, Olakawadi, etc. but have not had a winning season because they lack the necessary veteran presence and leadership. No lets look at Cleveland, with young stars Lebron, Boozer, Wagner, etc. They made a playoff run this year because they made a trade for veteran leadership, i.e., Williams and Battie. Indiana turned over a veteran ladden roster a few years ago by getting rid of the Davis' and adding youngsters O'Neil, Harrington, Bender and Tinsley. The team was able to continue to win because the remaining veterans on the roster were able to bridge the learning curve. The Hawks currently have no leadership in place. A good coach can help with the youngsters development, but you also need some on the court that can give someone a kick in the ass every now and then to work harder. Martin could do that for the hawks. I am not suggesting that the Hawks need to win now, or even next year. But by adding the right veteran presence - Martin or someone else - you are establishing a foundation and mental approach to the game which will result in victories two and three years down the road.

Foyle is getting $40, not $18. I would take Foyle for $18 over three years as well. Forty over 5 is a different story, especially given his injury history.

Given the size and length of the deals some of these guys are getting - i.e., Nash, Okur, Foyle, possibly Ginobili, etc. - giving Kmart a max deal is making more and more sense. Final Quest and Weez have correctly pointed out that Martin fills a huge need both on the court and off the court for the Hawks. He gives the team some credibility. The other important impact such a signing would have is its impact on the young players. Without another experienced/talented veteran, the Hawks are going to lose 60+ games next year. That will have a negative impact on the development of our young players. See Chicago Bulls as an example. With K-mart's attitude and defense inside plus Terry's shooting outside, with some timely play by the young guys, the Hawks can at least win 35+ games with something to build on for the 2005-06 season.

Makes $10 million for Kmart seem like a bargin.