What is that Boston Echo?

[BornandDieHawks]

Belkin screaming, "I told you so."

I like the rest of you jump for joy when Belkin lost his place with the organization and the trade went through. Right now we have a good player, with a MAX contract, playing out of position, not leading the team as expected.

We trading away a guy who is producing and the only difference is he playing another position.

Rebuilding took a hit because we gave up two number 1's and limited ourselves to get a veteran in because of the trade exemption we gave up.

Nevermind, I'm still pissed about the game last night.

[mrhonline]

Sounds like a bunch noise to me.

[Diesel]

Regaurdless of if JJ turns out to be worth the money or not.. BELKIN was still wrong.

You don't undermine the GM after he has agreed to the deal the way that Belkin did. It was as if Belkin heard through the grapevine that Phoenix would take less a day later and he tried to hold up the trade and hold this team hostage. Belkin may be laughing or screaming, But I'm glad he's no longer governor!

[chillzatl]

forest for the trees.

You, like them, seem to think that JJ was supposed to come to a team with hardly any developed talent, and lead them to something.. It's naive to expect that. A team of horses can't pull a wagon that only has one wheel.

The reality is that, for the first time in his career, he's trying to helm a team. That, in and of itself is a hard thing to do. Not only that, he's trying to take on a role that he has never held full time in the NBA. More than that, he's trying to do it on a team that Steve Nash and Jason Kidd could not turn into a winner at this point.

You, like some of the sports radio people, have expectations that show a surpreme lack of understanding as to what it takes to succeed in the NBA.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

forest for the trees.

You, like them, seem to think that JJ was supposed to come to a team with hardly any developed talent, and lead them to something.. It's naive to expect that. A team of horses can't pull a wagon that only has one wheel.

The reality is that, for the first time in his career, he's trying to helm a team. That, in and of itself is a hard thing to do. Not only that, he's trying to take on a role that he has never held full time in the NBA. More than that, he's trying to do it on a team that Steve Nash and Jason Kidd could not turn into a winner at this point.

You, like some of the sports radio people, have expectations that show a surpreme lack of understanding as to what it takes to succeed in the NBA.

---

JJ is the rare exception to my "the NBA is full of spoiled cowards" view. In the long run, that intangible courage will equal wins.

[Wretch]

Quote:

---

You, like some of the sports radio people, have expectations that show a surpreme lack of understanding as to

what it takes to succeed in the NBA

.

---

Why can't we have a forum full of people that understand this concept! Maybe because so many people want to look at sports and make it cut and dry...black and white.

This...is the problem. He...is the problem. Etc...

But, it isn't that simple. It isn't as simple as "The Hawks expected Joe Johnson to catapult them into the playoffs...since he won't, the JJ experiment has failed."

And a dozen games into an 82 game season no less...

That's just...

LoL, man I can't understand how people can be so damn simple...

What is McGrady's worth to Houston? What was his worth to Orlando? Is he somehow a completely different player now?

No.

TMac is simply TMac. In the same way, JJ is simply JJ... It is how the team and a player fits that makes all the difference. Rarely, there is that player/coach that can take any given group of scrubs and make them something much more signficant. Ala Jordan or Shaq...

Personally, I am excited about JJ. The guy is a damn good player and could be a main cog to a VERY good team. We're just not a very good team right now and that doesn't fall (completely) on his shoulders. It is the team that is failing.

[er9dverk]

i actually dont think we are that bad. lenny wilkens used to say it would take 20 or 30 games to work ONE new player into the mix, before the team would settle down and start to take shape. this team is practically ALL brand new.

we do need ball movement. there has been some. not for a whole game.

as i said in another post, i would like to see more of ivey at point. we are going to win sporadically for the next half season. i'd like to see jj play more of his natural game for that period, so the others can get used to him. not giving up on him at point guard, but we need to get down to basics, develop a groove. woody should yank anyone who doesnt move the ball, or who doesnt play d, or who doesnt move WITHOUT the ball.

there is no sense wringing our hands about the roster right now. we might as well see what we've got at every position. that includes ivey and donta smith.

pretty clear we never knew what we had with boris diaw.

[BornandDieHawks]

First, don't get it twisted because I started the post with Belkin gloating.

When Green Bay beat the Falcons a few weeks ago, GB fans had their time to gloat, it was short term but it was their time.

(1)Do you not think JJ is playing out of position? Is he a floor general yet?

(2)Now with a changing of position, has Diaw played above our expectations?

(3)Do you think we gave up too much for JJ?

These are the three subtopics in that post.

So I started out a post with Belkin gloating, yes I think it will be short term, but hey...

No, believe me, I am not like the sports radio and do not think JJ is suppose to come (in your words)to a team with hardly any develop talent, and lead them to something.

First of all, do we have that much under develop talent on the team?

I admit we are young and maybe inexperience, but we have won two games and with a little luck flowing our way we could have at least four more wins. Would a true PG made the difference? who knows....

(quote)You, like some of the sports radio people, have expectations that show a surpreme lack of understanding as to what it takes to succeed in the NBA. (quote)

What does it takes? Not only do I need to know, but several NBA teams need to know as well.

I am a big supporter of JJ and glad the deal was done. I don't look at him as the Hawks savior like some do. I understand the load he has on him, but at the same time we did not pay a guy the MAX to come here so we can develop him. He has to step up and become the leader of this team. The losses are going to come, don't mean I have to like them, but you can lose going down fighting with some direction.

So the post was about Belkin gloating, it will be short term, but hey......it's his time.

[BornandDieHawks]

The experiment is not having JJ on the team, it's him being the main pg for the team. We all know he is a good player but the argument is if he go back to his natural position would he be a great player. Houston did not sign McGrady and say since you handle the ball sometimes you are now our pg.

(quote)TMac is simply TMac. In the same way, JJ is simply JJ... It is how the team and a player fits that makes all the difference. Rarely, there is that player/coach that can take any given group of scrubs and make them something much more signficant. Ala Jordan or Shaq... (quote)

I watch every game and did not know we had JJ and a bunch of scrubs on the team..

[pathway23]

I don't care if Belkin gloats, he isn't part of this organization anymore, and for good reason, he wasn't the majority owner and he tried to behave as if he was, and he made the team and its GM look bad at the time. It wasn't so much about agreeing or disagreeing with the deal, it was on the principle that Belkin violated which was the agreement he made with the other owners on the resolution of disputes among the owners.

Now, to answer your questions.

Quote:

---

(1)Do you not think JJ is playing out of position? Is he a floor general yet?

---

I don't think JJ is playing out of position. I notice that JJ is not a leader. Do you pay a 70 million max contract to a guy who is not a leader? Well, this depends. I don't think Larry Hughes is a leader and I don't think Michael Redd is a leader. The thing about Redd is that he has better talent around them and they have played with the players around them. Hughes had his best season playing next to Arenas, Redd had his best season playing next to Ray Allen, and then when Ray Allen left, it wasn't as much of a problem because he took the reigns, and still had the same players around him. Give JJ 20 or 30 games with the players the Hawks have and I think his shooting will get closer to what it was in Phoenix, do I think it will be the same as it was in Phoenix, no, because he has more defensive attention. Do I think he can be a floor general? I don't think he can be, but again, I think it is on Woodson to fit Joe's personality into the offense, if Joe isn't a floor general, than Woodson needs to formulate an offense that isn't geared around one guy, that is team first offense, more of a passing game/motion offense, which imo JJ can thrive in.

Quote:

---

(2)Now with a changing of position, has Diaw played above our expectations?

---

Diaw has had very little pressure on him to perform in the Phoenix system. I have seen him make some of the same mistakes he made in Atlanta, but the difference is now that he doesn't get yanked for it. He is allowed to play through those mistakes. Some of that is on Woodson, and some of that is that Phoenix can afford to let Diaw play through those mistakes because they have so much other talent on their team that it doesn't hurt them too bad. Diaw is the guy being left wide open and he is taking advantage of that. With the talent deprived Hawks, Diaw had more attention, and more pressure on him. I am not surprised he is doing better, but I still think he is the same player with the same faults, they are just more covered now.

Quote:

---

(3)Do you think we gave up too much for JJ?

---

No I don't think we gave up too much for JJ. We can't keep relying on developing talent through the draft, eventually we're going to have to keep a core together for some time and add pieces to it through free agencies. Any necessary role playing holes on the roster can be filled late in the draft / or 2nd round.

Quote:

---

First of all, do we have that much under develop talent on the team?

---

Yes we have a lot of underdeveloped talent, the average age of our team is 22 and on top of that we have an inexperienced head coach. But I think this coach is good at developing talent, perhaps not showing up in the win column, but it has been shown on how Smith/Childress improved over the course of the season last year.

Just my 2 cents take it for its worth and I apologize for the lengthy post.

[BornandDieHawks]

Larry Hughes nor Michael Redd was not given the team as JJ. Hughes went in to compliment James. Redd was not brought in he was already in the mix and knew his place in their system. Now before I go on, I am not anti-JJ. I am glad we have him too, I admit I would like to see him a lot more at sg which I think the Woody is coming around too.

Diaw is the same player. To be honest,I do not see much improvement in his game. The difference is Phoenix move him down instead of trying to be the 6-9 guard. With his ball handling, most forwards can not guard him. He still won't take a lot of shoots, but he can find the open man because of he create alot of problems for the bigger, slower men down low.

As for what we gave up for JJ. I know we gave up alot, but BK had to do something to get him here.

We do not have underdevelop talent..we do have inexperience players. We probably have one of the most talented team in the NBA, but I don't know about basketball IQ. That will come with experience.

[pathway23]

I doubt that Larry Hughes or Michael Redd would be very successful with the Hawks at this point either, too much pressure on them to be the man.

[TheDude]

pick a point guard...any point guard in the NBA...hell, pick one in college or one retired...anybody you want on this planet...

now put them on the Hawks...do you actually think we'd be that much better...Joe's numbers are pretty good actually and he hasn't even been playing with these guys that much yet. we start slow(as most of us kind of expected) and the next thing you know, we're calling for the coaches head and saying the trade was bad...i know it gets tiring to lose but be logical about this..

the season has just started...not enough time for chemistry or roles to be developed...

our players are young with not much experience...

joe johnson is getting back in the swing of playing a new position (even though he's played well enough unless you were expecting 25 points 10 assists a night to start off)..

boris diaw sucked on our team..just plain sucked.. most of us wanted him gone, he's gone..he still doesn't score which is what we needed from him...Robert Horry was good for the Spurs last couple years...put him on the Hawks, guess what- he blows..

WE HAVE TO HAVE OVERPAID TO GET SOMEWHAT OF A STAR TO SHOW UP HERE...we threw money at Kmart, he declined..we threw money at Dampier, he declined(thank god)..

can we pleeeeaaaaasssseeee give this team time to develop...

[pathway23]

I couldn't agree more...lets take the wait and see attitude, these guys are so young and promising and there are still a few holes we need to fill, thats obvious, but I'm not going to beat myself up as these guys suffer growing pains anymore..I'm going to enjoy watching these young guys develop right now.

[TROUBLEMAN69]

Quote:

---

pick a point guard...any point guard in the NBA...hell, pick one in college or one retired...anybody you want on this planet...

now put them on the Hawks...do you actually think we'd be that much better...Joe's numbers are pretty good actually and he hasn't even been playing with these guys that much yet.

---

Let me open by saying that i'm not one of the people here in panic mode, because I knew the Hawks would struggle this year, and probably next. With that being said, if I could choose a point guard retired or playing now, then yes I could find a few guys who would make this team better than the current version of the Hawks. It would take a special "true" point guard to make this team better, not playoff worthy, but better.

Let's look at a few things. 1) A good point guard will always make players around him better, because he is able to create easier shots for his teammates. 2) A good point guard is able to control the tempo for his team, which is why they are called floor generals. 3) A good point guard can also create opportunities for himself.

Adding a good point guard, Nash for example, would make veterans like Joe Johnson and Al Harrington better. He would also make life easier for a shooter like Salim, simply because he would draw attention to himself with drive and kicks. Even a guy like Marbury would make this team better.

Watching the Hawks right now, anybody who has every played point guard for an organized basketball team can see that they lack a floor general. Adding a point guard will not improve the interior defense, but offensively this team would be much better. The Hawks haven't had a true point since Mookie was traded, and please don't mention Bob Sura. I'm on record saying that the Hawks should have drafted Paul or Williams, and I still strongly believe that.

[Plainview1981]

Joe Johnson is a bust...

40%FG

29%3pt

70%FT

Sorry, the guy can't shoot a lick... His percentages

reflect that. It's pretty obvious that it was a fluke

last year.

I figured he'd put up

18PPG

43%FG

33$3pt

FG percentage now down to 40%!

Shameful.

[Nicholasp27]

Quote:

---

but hey......it's his time.

---

But right now, they got to do what's right for them. Because it's their time. Their time! Up there! Down here, it's our time. It's our time down here. That's all over the second we ride up Troy's bucket.

[Wretch]

The point that you are missing is that there is no experiment. Period. We went out and got a player, that's all. BK wanted him to play PG, probably still does, but what does that mean in the grand scheme of things? If we somehow managed to trade for Dwight Howard...and BK wanted to play him at center and he subsequently failed and had to move to PF, does that make the trade a failure? PG, SG, SF...doesn't matter. He's a very good player who needs help. To say he or any kind of "experiment" has failed is just shortsighted blame pointing...and there will be no discussions about JJ once the team starts winning.

Just like there is no one dissing Chris Paul right now.

...and where did I say our team was full of scrubs? Where exactly? If you don't understand what someone is trying to say, just ask for clarification. The point is that a player is the same player regardless of where he plays. Was the Orlando experiment with Tracy McGrady a failure? And does that fall completely on his shoulders? No. It was a team failure and a management failure.

If we brought in Jason Kidd or Michael Jordan or Shaq and expected him to turn this team around...and subsequently we did not, then we could say...that's a failed experiment. Big Dog was a failed experiment. Payton/Malone to LA was a failed experiment to an extent - they made the finals, but their goal was to bring in those guys for a championship.

Joe Johnson to Atlanta is not an experiment. It was not a move to get a point guard. It was a move to acquire talent. We wanted him to play PG, but if he can't then he is versatile and can play something else - that is why BK went after him.

And when the dust settles, many of the short sighted fanatics in here will likely be "Chris-Pauled" all over again.

[Wretch]

Quote:

---

We do not have underdevelop talent..we do have inexperience players.

---

What do you define as underdeveloped talent and inexperienced players?

[Final_quest]

It's definitely splitting hairs but I think I know what he means.

Can you have developed talent without experience? yes.

I think what he means is that there are a lot of talented players on the Hawks that are simply lacking experience. Many of the Hawks can shoot, but are they shooting in the right place and at the right time. The talent of shooting is there, but the execution of it needs experience.

Anyways debating whether there is a difference between underdeveloped talent and inexperience is just a matter of perspective.