hawkman

Quote: But this would not be the year to tank regardless. There are two teams that will absolutely battle for the worst record...the C's and the Griz. We can't "catch" them. Because PHX owns our pick, if its not top 3 then what exactly is the point of tanking? If the Suns did not own our pick I might see the logic. One of these years we need to learn the mechanics of winning. If we could get a PG and some help inside before the deadline I think we have the core of a nice situation. We've had that same problem for the last few seasons. We supposedly "addressed" that with signing of Speedy and Lo Wright during the offseason. How much you wanna bet that we'll still need a C and PG next season?

Quote: Quote: GSUteke, the question started with whether we will have made a mistake to not tank earlier if both Oden and Durant do not come out. I said no as we need at least one in the draft to have justified it. I asked in return if we don't make the playoffs and both enter the draft if it would be a inverse mistake in return. I conceeded to the facts on my part, but of course, the opposing side balked at any notion that tanking could be justified. No, Diesel balked. Entirely different. The tank situation is VERY similar to the CP/MW situation. Next year at midseason, if we aren't in a strong position for a playoff run, then it's pretty evident that we SHOULD have tanked. Bear in mind, this doesn't mean "tell your players to lose," it means "keep JJ at only about 35 minutes a game, tell Smoove NOT to come back so fast from his injury in lieu of reaggravating it, and trading off Zaza/Lo/any other stiffs that don't need to be on the team for what we can get for them. A few months ago, the topic was posted "If you picked NOW, would you still pick MW over CP and DW?" (Perhaps someone can find it for me) I don't know the exact numbers, but 1 person out of about 30 said yes. But it took until the next season to acknowledge that yes, a PG would have been the right pick. Now, before you jump on my ass like you all love to jump on Walter (and he is so often deserving of it), I don't want to tank. I think this team is on the verge of being a playoff contender, and with a competent big (Re: Not necessarily dominant, but not Zaza), and either a healthy speedy or a playmaking PG, we'll be in the upper echelon of the east (for whatever that's worth). If this is true, then I really don't doubt that, at the very least, Walter will shut up about tanking in retrospect, because it wouldn't have been a good idea. However, if I'm wrong and we're not major contenders, and at this point next year we're still 5 games out of the 8 seed, and Greg Oden and/or Kevin Durant are tearing up the league, then Walter will be right, tanking would have been a better idea. Honestly, 80% of this board needs to get rid of their own egos and post as a Hawks fan and not as a message board superstar. We'd be better off if names weren't displayed, because I'm pretty damn sick of the "Oh God, Walter posted, I'm going to post the dead horse emoticon because it's the funny thing to do and lololololol. The man makes some (stubborn yet )good points, but you're too busy being trendy and ignoring them. Grow up. Great post. I don't agree that we should "tank" the season, but I also don't see the point of another 20-30 win season either. Frankly, I'm a bit tired of this team's play. We can beat a great team one night and then lose to the worst team in the league on our home court. And when I say lose, I mean we get run out of the friggin building. I honestly don't believe that this team is good enough to make the playoffs this season. That's sad when you think of the fact that this rebuilding thing has been going on for a few years now. I'm pretty sure that THIS is NOT what most Hawks fans had in mind when they thought that BK would build the Hawks team of the future. Even if you take away Speedy Claxton and replace him with Sam Cassel, we probably still end up with the same record we have now. After watching almost every Hawks game I possibly could over the last few seasons, I can honestly say that I'm disappointed with the development and construction of this team. I understand where Walter is coming from. He wants change and I don't blame him. We all have to admit that we have been watching some pretty bad basketball over the years and if the team continues on "as-is", we can look forward to a team that ranges from bottom feeder at worst to mediocre at best for the next few years. I can't fault Walter if he wants to sacrifice this season to change that.

Honestly, I never was in the "let's draft Shelden" camp. I felt like Foye was the way to go. I know drafting him wouldn't have addressed all of the interior defense issues we had last season but, in my opinion, we still haven't addressed that. It just seemed like we would have been better off picking up Foye or Roy and at least gotten some real value out of that draft. That way we wouldn't have felt the need to tie up any cap space by signing Speedy to a multi year deal. Foye seems to come up big in the clutch and that's something that this team needs. He's not a "pure" PG but he is more than capable at that position from what I've seen of his play so far. Roy has enough versatility to play 1-3 positions EFFECTIVELY on the court. If everyone on this board was so willing to "make room" in the lineup to draft Marvin, I don't see how we couldn't have found a place for Roy in the lineup. Don't get me wrong, Shelden is a solid pick, but I'm getting a bit tired of getting "solid" players high in the lottery. It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised by what we get out of the draft for a change. As it stands now, the 17th pick in the draft has shown the most "star potential" out of all of these other supposed "can't miss" prospects

Quote: Quote: I know his Inj History is bad. I know that he has been injured to start this season. BUT.. i saw good play out of him when he was healthy. Actually, if he can come back from injury, I don't think we'd be crying for a PG anymore. This guy defends the PG well and he can get about 6-8 apg with our team. Speedy has had some very good games. The guy has an uncanny gift in getting his hands on the ball often. Defensively he is pesky and what you want. His jumper started coming around the 3-4 games before he went on the injury list. We just need him healthy. In fact Speedy has been as effective as Chris(Hasn't played since 12-26) Paul this season. chew on that. I'm trying to wrap my mind around this. Are you saying that you would rather have Speedy than Paul? And are you pointing out Paul's injury history when our PG can't play three games in a row? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

Quote: Quote: Quote: That question was posed by Sekou Smith on the AJC. Sekou It seems the negative distractions of home are dominant in the collective fragile psyche. We have a young team and when on the road they bond. They come home to Atlanta and negative press, negative fans, ever-present rememberance of failures (drafts and so on). We win and only the Hawks really celebrate. The negative is ever-waiting to turn on the ugly if we lose. Losing mind-set be fans and media seem to have a prophetic effect. Its terrible not to want to come home. So to you haters, there, you have your want. Professional basketball players get paid good money to do their "job". No complaining...No more flimsy excuses...DO YOUR FRIGGIN JOB!!!!! Are you speaking as an owner? Or are you just renting space with opinion? It is not excuse, the team plays better away from home. It's just my opinion, no harm intended. If they play better on the road, so be it. But I don't want to hear that nonsense about their losing being based on fan support(or the lack there of). Let's face it, they've earned their attendance figures through their play during the last few seasons. It's simple cause and effect. They stink up the joint for the last 8 years and as a result, people decide not to spend their hard earned money on a bad product. Honestly, there was little to no negativity on this board or among the fanbase in general when they were winning at the beginning of the season. The attendance seemed to be better too. All of the negativity didn't start until this team experienced some injuries and began to take a serious nose dive. It reached an all time low when the team appeared to give up a few weeks ago. There were posts everywhere about tanking the season. Then JSmith comes back and we win three straight. Then we lose to the Bobcats TWICE! That's what it has been to be a Hawks fan for the last 8 years. There may be a lot of underlying reasons for why we play the way we play, but it really doesn't matter at the end of the day. What really matters is results. If the Hawks win CONSISTENTLY rather than building everybody up just to let them down time and time again, people will show up and support this team. And why wouldn't they? BK has done a pretty good job of bringing in some strong character guys. All they have to do is win to be embraced by the fanbase. The Falcons are proof of that.

Quote: That question was posed by Sekou Smith on the AJC. Sekou It seems the negative distractions of home are dominant in the collective fragile psyche. We have a young team and when on the road they bond. They come home to Atlanta and negative press, negative fans, ever-present rememberance of failures (drafts and so on). We win and only the Hawks really celebrate. The negative is ever-waiting to turn on the ugly if we lose. Losing mind-set be fans and media seem to have a prophetic effect. Its terrible not to want to come home. So to you haters, there, you have your want. Professional basketball players get paid good money to do their "job". No complaining...No more flimsy excuses...DO YOUR FRIGGIN JOB!!!!!

Are you watching the same team that I've been watching for the past few seasons?!?!?!?

Quote: Player of the game - J- SMOOOOOOOVEEEE. He's a keeper. He has really turned his game up since he has come back. That leads me to believe that he was very attentive to how the team was playing while he was out. I say that because he seems to be trying to bolster the inherent weaknesses of our team: Creating fast break opportunities even though our PG's are banged up, providing some semblance of interior defense, and being that second scoring option that we so desperately needed. I think this guy has a much higher bball IQ than he gets credit for.

Quote: Jackson never averaged 25 ppg and wasn't doubled and tripled teamed like JJ is. That's besides the point though. No need to get sidetracked by any details here. I was emphasizing the fact that JJ is playing great, but he's playing great on a bad team. It's a lot easier for good players to shine on bad teams due to the abundance of shot attempts and minutes. It's always been that way.

Once again, the only thing that makes any comparison between Smitty and JJ valid is the fact that Smitty did his thing on a winning team. JJ is doing his thing on losing team as THE FIRST offensive option. Heck, Stephen Jackson did the same thing when he was here. I had to throw in a more "recent" Hawks reference so that everyone can get the gist of what I'm saying here. Take from that what you will but it is a well known fact.

Quote: Quote: Smitty was a superior passer and defender. How so? If Smitty is such a great passer, why did Joe average almost 50% more assists than Smitty did in his best season? Smitty could dump it to much better scorers and shooters. And many players have stated that the Joe is so much more physical than he seems and that he really wears you down. I honestly think Joe is better at both right now than Smitty ever was.Also Joe doesn't get garbage points. He gets double teams all night. Quote: Maybe the winning clouds me. I believe this is correct. That, and a better team around him that ends up making him look better. Smitty's averages were on a WINNING team. Maybe that's what makes him the better player. Ricky Davis averaged 23 points and 5 assists on a terrible Cleveland team before the arrival of Lebron. Does that make him a better player than Smitty or the equivalent of JJ this season? Hmmmmmmmmmm. Don't get me wrong JJ is a great player and a great piece to build around, but he has to do it on a WINNING team to be considered better than the other players mentioned above. If he can't do that, then he's just another good player racking up huge numbers on a bad team. It's not his fault, that's just the way it works.

Why is everyone getting so defensive about this question? Is there some history here with gsuteke that I may not be aware of? Anyway, here's my answer. I think that we overpaid for JJ. I honestly think that we should have AT LEAST gotten more protection on the lottery picks. If you asked this question last season, I would have to say that I was a little disappointed with JJ's production. I just thought $70 million AND draft picks was a little too much for 20 points and 6 assists per game AS THE NUMBER ONE OPTION ON A VERY BAD TEAM. It could be the fact that a guy like Ricky Davis could've done that for us for a lot less money. Then again, I'm frugal(cheap). But this season, I have to admit that he is a pleasant surprise. He still hasn't been much of a leader, but he has become a big-time player in this league. He does his job and he's a solid citizen as well. He's been in kind of a slump lately due to injuries and extended minutes, but he has been playing at a very high level. I believe that with the addition of one other legit scoring threat, he will become an even better player and the Hawks will become a better team for it. The bottom line is that we gained a player that we can actually build around, and that's something that I thought BK would never be able to accomplish.

I agree about having regrets over the past few drafts. I know hindsight is 20/20, but those draft choices would have made us a playoff team for the next few years. Instead, we have what we have now and we have to live with it. But cheer up! We won't have a lottery pick in this year's draft so there'll be no regrets this time next season over how we screwed THAT draft up.

So far this looks like a repeat of the game last night.

Quote: i told the people over at RealGM's Indy board that their defense would go in the tank this year with Harrington. they told me he was a great defender becore he came here. i predicted their points allowed would go up by 5 a game the second they traded for Harrington. I'm sure that has come to fruition, although scoring D seems to be up somewhat league wide. O'Neal has to be the next shoe. this screams rebuilding to me. I don't agree with your post as far as Harrington is concerned but I do agree that JO is on his way out of Indy. I wonder where is he going to end up? Hmmmmm.

Quote: Quote: ^ you obviously didn't see that game last night.. you are right, i didn't. i saw a SportsCenter snippit. I thought to myself "damn this kid can ball." then i saw the final score 105-103. Durant shot 13-31 from the field and his team shot like 39% from the floor. if they had made 1 more basket the team would have won the game in regulation. it's too early in the morning for me to do the math on his shooting percentage but it's right at 30%. if he took a few less shots his team may have won the game. is the rest of his team that sorry or was he hogging the ball? i'm not saying the Hawks would be better off without the kid, all I'm saying is there's trouble in those stats. The guy is the TRUTH. If you watched the game last night you saw a guy score inside and outside with no problem whatsoever. He rebounded the ball well and had a few blocks and some deflections. His FG percentage had no bearing on the game at all. He was doing what he had to do to keep his team in it against a much better team. Ok State would have won this one going away if it had not been for Durant. Money turn around jumper in the post and good ball handling skills on the perimeter. Can stop on a dime and hit the pull up jumper off of the dribble. Great first step. I'm thinking he's a mixture of Bosh/Odom/Garnett/Mcgrady. At this point, if this guy went first in the draft to a team that has a 7 footer who at least has a pulse, no one would argue with the pick. Heck, if the Hawks somehow got him with the 2nd or 3rd pick, no one would argue with the pick. He's that good.

Quote: Sekou caught the vibes and weighed in: from his blog What’s with all the venom for Jeff Schultz for his criticism of the Hawks and their owners? He wasn’t anywhere near as cold-blooded as some have been around these parts (you know who you are). Just like everyone here weighs in with their thoughts, Shultz is entitled to his opinions. I had no problem with what he said about the state of the Hawks after Friday’s win over the Pistons. He came and surveyed the situation and wrote it the way he saw it. Everyone’s entitled to his or her own opinions. Sekou co-signs the article by Schultz? Is this the definition of irony or what?

Quote: I met Mr. Gearon back in 79' or 80', while working for a radio station in town. He is the number one Hawks fan in all of Atlanta, and there would not be a franchise in Atlanta today if not for him. So you can talk about this trade or that firing all day long, but it would be a moot conversation without him. If he calls me with an opinion on the Hawks, I'm at least going to listen to him. In the case of Woody he is wrong. But for this talking head from the AJC to show the disrespect that he did to this man, just makes me want to puke. He is obviously using print to even a score on a long standing feud, he knows the contributions Mr. Gearon has made to this city. I wish the AJC would show some balls and fire him. So we've come back to him getting fired for what he wrote again. Maybe I need sensitivity training or something. I give up.

Quote: Quote: Quote: What exactly is the cheap shot? I'm just curious... I was wondering the same thing. I actually had to read the article again to see why this has become such a hot button topic. I don't see how Schultz went out of his way to mention Gearon in the article. My guess is if Gearon hadn't have tried to dissuade Schultz from writing it in the first place, his name wouldn't have been included. Schultz just reported events as they happened. His job is to report the news. When a man of Gearon's stature contacts you personally, THAT IS NEWS. I don't see what was so disrespectful about it other than the fact that he might have gotten his Gearon Jr's and Sr's mixed up. Not so correct. Schultz is a columnist not a reporter. Columnist and reporters function differently. Columnist have certain latitudes. My problem is the blatant disrepect of an owner and community leader needlessly. That would be akin of me blasting TexasPete by his real name. The inclusion of his name is classless and regretable. But that is Jeff Schultz's cross to bear. I just don't get the disrespect angle. I know this was stated earlier, but Gearon should have expected this to be reported. If he had kept his opinions to himself, his name would never have been mentioned. None of the other owners were really mentioned in the article. You wanna know why? Because they didn't provide anything "newsworthy" to write about. I understand that you guys respect Mr. Gearon, and probably for good reason. But the bottom line is that it's his fault that his name got mentioned in that article. Now if Schultz made some unsolicited personal attack on the man, that's a different story. But as it stands now, Schultz was just doing his job. Keep in mind that I don't know Schultz. The guy could be a major league jerk for all I know. But I feel that he was operating well within his responsibilities in what he wrote.

Quote: Quote: Quote: What exactly is the cheap shot? I'm just curious... I was wondering the same thing. I actually had to read the article again to see why this has become such a hot button topic. I don't see how Schultz went out of his way to mention Gearon in the article. My guess is if Gearon hadn't have tried to dissuade Schultz from writing it in the first place, his name wouldn't have been included. Schultz just reported events as they happened. His job is to report the news. When a man of Gearon's stature contacts you personally, THAT IS NEWS. I don't see what was so disrespectful about it other than the fact that he might have gotten his Gearon Jr's and Sr's mixed up. Here's my take: Schultz was implying (at least how I read it) that Gearon Jr got his daddy to call and yell at the columnist. Schultz is apparently ignorant that 'daddy' has been a crucial part of the Hawks for decades, OR he knew well who Gearon Sr was and chose to portray him as just an owner's dad. Ignorance or malice, take your pick. But with all of the things he reported about the franchise itself, doesn't that seem like a really small thing? Does it make any of the other things he said any less true? This is the first meat and potatoes article I've seen on the Hawks in a while and some people on this board are getting hung up on perceived slights. I just don't think something so trivial should be cause to discredit the journalist who wrote this article or the article itself. Any attempt to do so sounds more like a weapon of mass distraction rather than genuine outrage over a perceived slight.

Quote: What exactly is the cheap shot? I'm just curious... I was wondering the same thing. I actually had to read the article again to see why this has become such a hot button topic. I don't see how Schultz went out of his way to mention Gearon in the article. My guess is if Gearon hadn't have tried to dissuade Schultz from writing it in the first place, his name wouldn't have been included. Schultz just reported events as they happened. His job is to report the news. When a man of Gearon's stature contacts you personally, THAT IS NEWS. I don't see what was so disrespectful about it other than the fact that he might have gotten his Gearon Jr's and Sr's mixed up.

Maybe I should expect it by now. That's why when I pull up AJC/sports/hawks on the net, I just scan the titles. If I see more "fluff", I just go to Hoopshype rumors and look for actual "insider" info on the Hawks. Sad.

Quote: Quote: Good point about Sekou TP. I have no problem with the guy personally, but his articles will always put the Hawks in a positive light. I don't know if it's a statement that was made up in business or if it's something confusia said... or some kind of proverb... But there's this saying that rings true: You don't Sh-t where you eat. If you think that Sekou doesn't write negatively about the Hawks because he wants to keep his job... You're damn right. In fact, I don't think you can find a beat reporter anywhere in the whole world who casts his team in a negative light. Maybe when Sekou becomes a National media personality like Vescey or Stephen A. Smith, maybe then he can be more confrontational and he can be as opinionated as he wants to be... But QUITE FRANKLY as Stephen A. Found out this week, that doesn't always play either. Now, here's the bottom line for you marks who don't know any better and prefer to spend goobs of posts in your rosy colored fantasy land where every reporter has Journalistic integrity.... Jeff Schultz' primary job is to sell papers. If he can sell paper by drumming up as much controversy as he can, guarantee you.. he will do it. Ask yourself.. How many times has he ever wrote a story about the Hawks? Maybe 2 times in 5 years. Shultz' is just looking for another angle because the Falcons are yesterday's news and there's nothing to talk about with the Braves. He'd be talking about Holyfield and FanMan if it sold newspapers. I have no problem with Sekou trying to assure his job security. But you have to admit that with all of the bad things surrounding this franchise right now that his articles do seem a little like pointless fluff. The team basically quit for two or three weeks straight and Sekou writes an article on Marvin Williams being more vocal during a practice? What's up with that? I just expect more inside info on relevant topics concerning the Hawks. It's bad when the Detroit news has more to say about your head coach than you do. What's strange is that if Woodson was fired tomorrow, Sekou would come out with an article about how he knew a coaching change was in the works weeks in advance. Well, that would be nice to know before it happens, not after the fact. Anyway, if that's what sekou wants to do, that's fine. Heck, I'd probably do the same if I was in the same situation. But the point is when a guy comes out with an article that's not pointless fluff about the Hawks, he shouldn't be picked apart by the ASG/BK lemmings around here.

Quote: Quote: His only fault is that he never can beat a pick and roll So i guess shooting 37% isn't a fault. Heck, our starting PG is shooting 33% from the field and our "superstar in the making" is shooting 38% from the field.

Quote: In another market these horrible owners would be called out on a daily basis. And when a writer finally has the guts to call a spade a spade...an owner calls him and asks him not to do it? Why? What has this ownership done to build equity with ANYONE? These guys need to be hammered 10x more than they are...this newspaper is as awful as any in the nation. Sekou is so concrened with keeping access he doesn't have the guts to write anything controversial. So, these guys have gotten a free pass after having presided over the worst franchise is sports. Lunarblues: I have never read such a lightweight post on this site. You think everything is rosy in your little hawkland. You think this is all the good ship lollipop. Yeah, a guy should be fired for calling the Hawks owners out for being incompetant. Makes sense to most people here... Good point about Sekou TP. I have no problem with the guy personally, but his articles will always put the Hawks in a positive light. That's the way it's always beeen with him, and that's the way it has to be....IF he wants to continue to have access to this team. Earlier, someone called Schultz a coward for writing his article. Well what do you think about Sekou's failure to objectively report about the current state of this franchise? Isn't what he's doing akin to sacrificing journalistic integrity just to maintain access to this pitiful franchise? And for what? So he can keep his job as a "journalist" and keep writing the same articles that he's beeen writing for the past few years? Once again, I'm not trying to flame the guy here but if no one has a problem with what Sekou's been doing, how can you have a problem with Schultz? If Sekou is thought of as a credible journalist around here then Schultz should be thought of as a credible journalist as well.