CWSD

FWIW, my sources in Athens says Mercer is behind schedule in his knee rehab and they are preparing to play this season without him.

He also said Shelden was a 5 and when we finally started playing him there regularly at the end of the season he was the rookle of month. He spoke to him exclusively as a 5 and didn't say anything about him at 4. He said Horford was a 4/5. From what he said it sounded like a roster of: PG - Law, Speedy, Lue, AJ (need to move one of these guys) SG - Joe, Stoudamire (Ivey) SF - Marvin, Childress PF - Josh, Horford, Solomon C - Zaza, Shelden, Lo (Batista) This is of course barring any other moves, but it indicated how the FO views these players and ther best positions.

I was in 122, row M, seats 3-10. I had a big crew of family, my wife, two boys, brother, brother in law, his kid, etc. I wish I had met some of y'all. Next time.

Physically Curry's heart is fine. It checked out. The problem is that he has no heart. He is lazy and will be a waste once he gets his contract.

As we all know, BK drafts the BPA. When you are building a team from ground zero, and primarily through the draft, you are just trying to find guys who can play at an NBA level, and hopefully who can play at the highest NBA star level. BK simply evaluated Marvin as the available player most likely to play at the highest NBA level. Diesel, in your argument, you are relying on the assumption Paul will be as good of an NBA player as Marvin. BK disagrees, he thinks Marvin will be a better NBA player, and apparently so much better that it overrode any positional need. You and BK just evaluated the available talent differently. Can evaluations be incorrect? Sure. You might be right that Paul was the best pick, but BK does the picking and he saw things differently. As you mentioned, this was the highest pick in franchise history. When you pick that high you go for who you think will be THE franchise, i.e., who will be your superstar. BK thinks Marvin is that guy moreso than Paul, Deron or anybody else in the draft, except for maybe Bogut, who we won't know about. Could we have gotten a superstar SF later in the draft? Maybe, but if you could tell who that was going to be you would draft them at any pick. If people knew any of the SF superstars mentioned would be as good as the ended up being, they would have been taken with the first pick. BK is looking for the next Nique, Bird, Pippen, Dr J, etc. You need a superstar and BK thinks Marvin was the most likely draftee to be that kind of star.

Chili w/ Slaw Dawg I picked it up when I first started perusing the net in the old 2.4 bps Prodigy days (mid 90s). I'm a big UGA football/basketball recruiting junkie (as well as a lifetime die hard Hawks/Falcons/Braves fan)and all us picked up "Dawg" related handles. I've had mine for so long I use it on all sites, but just shortened it. Now you know more than you ever cared to know about CWSD. I think we've covered all the main reasons why Al will likely be moved, but I was just curious what shaped peoples expectations because the organization has never said anything official about moving him.

He is often mentioned as one of the cornerstones (although not as much lately). He is a young and a talented 4, who can also give you some time at the 3 and 5. He fits our mold. Why do we expect him to be moved? Is it because he contract is expiring and he has good value for us in a trade? Is it because we have other players with more potential at his position? Is he not developing as we hoped? Does he just not fit our plan? What do y'all think and are there any indications that BK feels the same way?

starters JJ Chillz Smooth Al Zaza off the bench: Lue/Ivy Salim/Delk/Dontae Marvin Collier/Edwards Lue will be resigned. Delk will be moved, but maybe not until the trade deadline. Probably the same for Al, but not until deadline.

I would take Kasten's comments very seriously. For one, he is very smart and knows his stuff. Two, he won't throw around statements like that loosely. Third, I know for a fact he is not on the best of terms with the current ownership. He doesn't hate them, but he wouldn't speak highly of them, nor would he do them any favors. I am very encouraged by his comments.

Tomorrow is the hearing regarding the TRO. A TRO is an emergency measure where a person requests the court step in to prevent something from happening and maintain the status quo, until the legality of the action can be determined. The next step is a hearing (which is what we have tomorrow), where the court will hear the arguments for whether the TRO should be converted into a preliminary injunction. A PI is like a more permanent TRO, which is designed to maintain the status quo until the full blown hearing/trial can take place. The burden is on Belkin to show there must a be an injunction to prevent irreparable harm and that the action to be enjoined (removing him as Governor) is improper/illegal. The level of burdenor proof he must meet changes and becomes a higher standard and each additional level. The lowest burden is to get the TRO, which is minimal. Belkin made that showing and got his TRO. Now, at the preliminary hearing he must present additional evidence to show he is likely to prevail at trial. If he does not meet this burden, then the injunction is lifted and the owners can go about their business. If he meets this burden and is granted a preliminary injunction, then the war is still not over. The injunction stays in place, and Belkin as Governor, until the final hearing/trial can be held. This could take a long time, but the burden of proof on Belkin is now at its greatest. At the hearing tomorrow, in addition to their arguments that the ownership authorized to remove Belkin, they will also argue an ongoing injunction will cause irreparable harm to the organization and that it is likewise crucial to the team Belkin be removed immediately in order to complete the trade and conduct other free agent activities.

The TRO was filed in Boston, so unless the owners want to prolong the matter by arguing improper jurisdiction, they will just accept Massachusettes. For contract disputes the jurisdiction is generally either in the state where the contract was entered into, or where one of the parties resides. Often in contracts, the jurisdiction for subsequent disputes is agreed upon and made part of the contract. I don't know if the owners will be there, unless they are needed as witnesses. Generally, the parties to a lawsuit do not attend motion hearings because they deal primarily with issues of specific law, and are not open forums. Sometimes they come along just to watch, but unless they are there to testify regarding a relevant fact, the Judge could care less what they have to say. The burden is on Belkin tomorrow. In a TRO hearing, Belkin must persuade the court on 2 issues: 1, that the Judge must keep the TRO in place to maintain the status quo or he will irreparably harmed, and 2, there is a likelihood Belkin will prevail on the underlying dispute. It is obvious if the TRO is lifted that Belkin will be harmed because he will be removed as Governor. It is not clear he will win on the underlying issue, which is whether the owners are authorized to remove him from his position. I don't mean to spout off a bunch of legal junk, but I thought y'all might be interested in what is going down tomorrow and how it might shake out.

NBA players definitely make the most money (and potentially their agents), but there are not that many players. There are no more than 500 NBA players, including all the injured and marginal players. The top 25 agents probably represent nearly half. The next 25 agents probably have another 30%. That leaves all of the rest of the agents (hundreds of them) fighting over the remaining 100-125 players. At least in football you can get your foot in the door easier, but it is harder to sign enough guys to really make good money at it.

Here is some related info: Athlete's Yearly Salary: Sport: Low: High: Agent Advisor Commission: National Football League (NFL) $225,000 $20,000,000 $6,750 - $600,000 Arena Football League (AFL) $28,000 $240,000 $840 - $9,600 Canadian Football League (CFL) $75,000 $275,000 $3,000 - $11,000 National Basketball Assoc. (NBA) $385,000 $28,000,000 $15,400 - $1,120,000 European Basketball $6,000 $1,000,000 $240 - $40,000 Major League Baseball (MLB) $300,000 $22,000,000 $12,000 - $880,000 National Hockey League (NHL) $350,000 $10,000,000 $14,000 - $400,000 Minor League Hockey $10,000 $200,000 $400 - $20,000 Major League Soccer (MLS) $15,000 $500,000 $600 - $20,000 European Soccer $45,000 $7,800,000 $1,800 - $312,000

Your right on target. The reason Belkin's position doesn't make sense is because the role of the Governor was never to be the final say or gate-keeper of the Hawk's business. The decisions for the team are made by a majority of the owners, or by the GM if he given such authority. The Governor's job is simply to carry out the wishes of the team's management. Belkin is using this loophole/technicality, against the spirit and intent of the agreement, to improperly inflate his authority.

The TRO will likely be decided tomorrow, but it is possible the the Judge will "reserve" his ruling on the larger issues in order to further analyze the contracts and case law presented by the parties. I would guess 3 things could happen: 1. Judge agrees with Belkin and directs the owners they cannot remove Belkin as the Governor. 2. The Judge reserves his ruling and keeps the TRO in place until a decision is finalized. 3. The Judge agrees with the owners and lifts the TRO, allowing the owners to proceed with the removal of Belkin. Belkin's ownership and the related battles will not be resolved tomorrow, but will be a long, long war. I am not privy to the terms of the agreement between the owners, but I would assume it is generally run under a majority rules basis, which effectively strips Belkin of any power, assuming the remaining owners remain in agreement. You must remember that this whole issue arose because Belkin used a BS "end-around" to usurp the majority decision of the management. The issue before the Judge is whether, pursuant to the contract/agreement between the owners, they are allowed/authorized to remove Belkin from his position as Governor. From my understanding of the contract language, it does not directly speak to this type of scenario, but I believe there is a valid argument which can be made in support of the owners and their authority to remove him from his position.