Packfill

I think that is a pretty good deal for Chicago. Harrington can play.

Livingston plus either Smith, Humphries or Jefferson would be a great draft.

I don't think it makes alot of sense to get three first rounders. It is nice to have young players to develop but you still need to have a few veterans around to educate.

Relax. Chances are regardless of who the Hawks draft they are looking at the lottery next year. Whether it be Howard, Livingston, Smith, Gordon or whomever, they will be rookies.

I heard reports that the Suns are not convinced Barbosa is the answer at point guard, so a point guard does make sense for them.

I could live with that because a Nelson/Terry backcourt will not work.

Correct.

I agree that Nelson's track record speaks for itself. My only issue with the Hawks drafting him is that it would then absolutely require that they unload Jason Terry. There is no way that Terry and Nelson can be a winning back court, they are just too small. Now, continuing with the Piston's comparison, Terry in a reserve Vinnie Johnson role is intriguing - but I don't think the Hawks are yet in a position to think about role players. Nelso plus either Humphries or Jefferson at 17 would be a great coup for the Hawks.

Anyone else think that Orlando would be stupid to trade away the first pick and not get a legitimate big man in return? If they plan on keeping McGrady then Okafor is a great fit, he can play center for them. The 4 and 5 picks will not yield a big man who can step in and play. A talented wing and point guard would be nice for them but they would still have a gapping hole at center - and Gooden would be alot easier to trade for a point guard or shooting guard then a center of equivalent skill. If they are planning on getting rid of McGrady, then the trade makes sense, but otherwise I think Okafor makes perfect sense for them.

It definitely is intriguing. My only concern with having two high schoolers is that they are so young and the potential to start them on the wrong foot is huge - i.e., losing, lack of veteran leadership, etc. If the Hawks do end up with two young guys like this then they really need to be careful with the coaching selection and bringing in some veterans to guide the youngsters.

Doesn't Hughes already fill that same role for the Wizards? He came into the league as a point guard and while he has proven incapable of playing that position full time, he does have much better than average ball handling and passing skills for a two guard. He filled that role all last year while Stack was injured. Iggy may be an upgrade, but I think he only works if the Wizards are able to unload at least one of Stackhouse and Hughes - which, due to contracts, is not that easy. The best fit for Washington is probably Biedrins, if for no other reason than he can provide some stimulus to underachieving big men Kwame Brown and Brendon Haywood.

Which would you prefer: A. Trade 6 and 17 (and maybe something else) for Howard. B. Keep 6 and 17 and end up with Josh Smith and Al Jefferson. I don't know. Howard has the potential to be a huge star. Smith and Jefferson have upside as well. I could live with either. Only thing is with Smith and Jefferson what do the Hawks do with free agents - both their own (Jackson, Sura) and others (i.e., center). Scenario B, if no Jackson to carry the scoring burden could lead to a really tough year.

If Washington can trade Hughes and Stack then you are right, Igoudala is a great fit. I am just not sure there are many suitors for those guys, particularly Stackhouse and his contract. As for Igoudala and the Hawks, he would be a good fit with Terry and Jackson but I wonder if we already have a player with similar upside in Diaw. Diaw has a very similar skill set to Igoudala (they are basically the same age), and with a year under his belt, might offer similar production. Diaw definitely has skills, the question is whether he will ever develop the aggressiveness to fully take advantage of those skills. I am on the fence as to how and answer that question.

Agree. Chicago would be giving up an awful lot for just Okafor. Okafor is a good prospect but he is not a Shaq/Lebron/Duncan once in a lifetime prospect.

Gordon is an Arenas clone. Washington has no need for him as far as I can tell. They are in a funny spot in the draft because of what will be available versus their existing roster. Either they take Biedrins - or a flyer on another big man - or they create a logjam at the point or on the wing (they already have Stackhouse, Hughes, Jefferies and the dude from Georgia).

Well, if the Hawks keep the 6th and 17th pick then they can go small with the first pick (either point guard or wing) and still have a shot at either Jefferson or Humphries at 17. Maybe trading for Howard is not in the Hawks best interest. Only problem is, and this is probably true of Howard as well (but he would be number 2 pick so almost starts by default), neither Jefferson or Humphries is likely ready to start. This is a good situation for the Hawks. Initially I was thinking that they had to make the move for Howard because of the major hole at power forward and the lack of ready to contribute athletes at that position, but now I am torn. A Assuming no trade for Howard, my first choice at 6 is Livingston right now - but I don't think he will last till 6. So that leaves a choice between one of the wings (Childress, Igoudala, Deng, Smith) or a point guard (probably Harris). Still not sure which way I go here.

Well, if Okafor is really 6-10 with shoes then he really can play center - especially in the east. He is the same size as Alonzo Mourning. This is good news for Orlando - they can now realistically play Okafor and Howard/Gooden in the same frontcourt.

Where are you guys getting the official measurements from?

This probably is not worth arguing about anymore guys. I think Foyle is a good option for the Hawks but if the money is equal I would take Blount. Foyle would be my second choice, and I definitely would take him for $3mil per. I bet it takes more to sign him though.

I do not agree with the statement that Jackson will hinder Howards development. I think he will help by taking any scoring pressure of Howard the first year or two. Howard will take a few years to develop, don't kid yourself, he will not be an instant allstar like Lebron (though I wouldn't complain if he was). Plus you need two go to scorers to be successful. Jackson needs to improve across the board, most notably with consistency, shot selection and turnovers. But, he is a good young player who will continue to improve. He will make a nice sidekick to Howard when he becomes the main focus of the team. Everyone is clamoring for Josh Smith but Jackson is basically Josh Smith with experience - he is athletic and his basketball skills have improved over the years. Plus, it is not like there is another viable option at small forward. Diaw works only if there are two or more scorers already on the court - i.e., Jackson and Terry. Throw in contributions from Howard and Diaw fits nicely at the 2. Without Jackson, there is a huge hole at the two or the three and the team has almost no offense. I think Howard (at least from what I have read about him) plus Jackson plus a decent center is the best option for the Hawks for next season and down the road.

Wilcox is definitely the better player and talent. That said, I actually think Ely makes more sense for the Hawks, because as Blunt mentions, he can play center, whereas Wilcox is duplication of Howard. I think as long as the future first is top 15 protected the trade works. It is a lot og eggs to put in one basket, but if Howard fulfills his promise non one will ever remember what the Hawks gave up for him. He does fit exactly what the team needs - i.e., an athletic, tall frontcourt player. Best case his is something between Garnett and Duncan and worst case he will probably be something like Rasheed Wallace without the technicals and pot.

I agree 100%. Kobe has MJ like talent but not MJ like drive or production. That is the key. Jordan carried that Bulls team day in a day out. Kobe can carry the Lakers a game here a game there, but he does not do it every night - nor does he half to with Shaq. If I were starting a team I would pick Jordan over Kobe everyday of the week and twice on Sundays.

I could live with a starting line-up featuring Livingston, Terry and Jackson at the 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Sura and Diaw would make great backups as each can play multiple positions - Sura for more offense and Diaw for more defense. In that scenario the Hawks would need to invest some free agent dollars in the front court.

It is a tough call giving Jackson that much money but I would be inclined to do it. He has skills and I like his aggressiveness. He definitely adds some moxie to the otherwise listless hawks. I think if the money is even he would resign in Atlanta. Here he knows he is getting the ball as the number one option. Plus with some talented draft picks and a free agent big man this team has a shot next year at the 7th or 8th seed in the playoffs. Then if a Howard or whomever is drafted develops, then there is a shot for much more. Point is, I think Jackson can be a number one option on a weaker team (even a lower seeded playoff team) or a solid number two on a stronger team. Look at Detroit. They could really use a player like Jackson because he can make plays. Charlotte has some great pieces in Baron and Magloire, but Mashburn's talent is what made that team unique. Yes he is injured a lot and he has some mental issues but he is a great talent. When playing his best he can really be a difference maker. Unfortunately, that does not happen often.

I agree, this draft does seem deep in terms of players with "potential." Lots of big men with upsides will be available with 17. Using the 6 and the Philly future first would be better for the Hawks, but if Howard is the real deal I would pull the trigger using 6 and 17. If people think that price is still too high, maybe the Hawks ask them to throw in Kamen or Ely, that way the center position is filled out.