Sekou's latest 7/27 pm

[sturt]

Quote:

---

He trades an unrestricted free agent and gets a first round pick out of the deal. Not only that, but he doesn't take back any bad contracts in the process. Fabulous move!!

This deal maintains our cap flexibility, which is something that wouldn't have happened with Golden State.

---

But is there truly no one on the Pacers roster that can help us?

I'm not sold.

Sure, this leaves us with cap room, but (a) there's no FA's left to matter, and (b) using it in another deal is going to cost players.

This needed to be a straight-up 3-way deal, or we needed to AT LEAST come out of it with Foster or Harrison. We held the best hand at the poker table... Al couldn't get the money he wanted w/o our help; IND couldn't sign Al for the money he wanted w/o our help; and if we decided to walk away from the table, the whole market for Al would have been re-opened, a circumstance that IND couldn't have welcomed.

No... it's easy to pot-shot BK from the outside, I admit, but I still maintain that a 1st and a Foster or Harrison were the very minimum that should have been gained.

[frosgrim]

I have to think this is part of a move to get Magloire. We move Al for a first, then we have the cap room to get JM and we have a pick, not bad. If we just get the pick and cap room that we really can't use on anything useful this season, then I am disappointed. Again, we may be seeing the results of a completely disfunctional ownership group. The NBA really needs to step in and clear this situation up.

[KB21]

It was going to be difficult to get Foster without having to take on an undesirable contract. That's why getting Foster isn't happening.

Atlanta couldn't do a deal for just Foster and a 1st round pick or Harrison and a first round pick. Al was never going to sign for that little. Al is actually doing the Hawks a favor by signing a 6 year $57 million deal rather than pushing for the 6 year $66 million he wanted.

Like I said in another post, I would like to get Jeff Foster, but I don't think I would take on Jamaal Tinsley's contract to get him. Taking on Tinsley's contract defeats the purpose of what the Hawks are trying to achieve long term.

If you make it a three way deal with a team like Milwaukee, chances are the Hawks would lose out on getting the first round pick. I would not have liked this deal if it were Al for just Jamaal Magloire.

Getting the first round pick is the key in my eyes. Having that first round pick, which depending upon the protection could be a late lottery pick next year, is better than any player we could have gotten from Indiana or from any other team that was being offered.

Billy Knight is one of the best in the league at drafting talent, and I never want to see the Hawks without a first round pick while Billy is the GM. Trading the two to get Joe Johnson was a must to get the kind of player Joe is. One of those turned out to be a meaningless pick. The next one will probably be a late lottery pick. Getting Indiana's pick recoups that pick, essentially.

[Final_quest]

Consider this an addition to your post, and don't feel that you have to read this KB.

If we did two deals, we could have essentially anybody on Indiana's roster we wanted without having to take on additional salaries.

Deal #1- Al for the first round pick

Deal #2- Edwards for Foster, or Edwards for Harrison

So, did we not want Foster or was Indiana unwilling to give him up?

[KB21]

My guess is, the only way Indiana would give up Foster is if the Hawks would take Tinsley's contract with him.

[Gray Mule]

Draft picks, like poker chips, are in themselves, worthless.

They have to be "cashed in" to be meaningful.

Why is it that the draft picks we gave up in the JJ

deal were considered so valueable and the draft pick

we expect to get in the AH swap considered almost

worthless? Doesn't make sense. Going out, they were

almost priceless. Coming in, it's nothing much???

"Don't count your money while the cards are on the table.

There's plenty of time for counting when the dealings

are done."

The final dealing could end up being lousy. It could

be great. It's probably somewhere in between.

If Atlanta doesn't give up it's valueable core of young

players, how ever this turns out won't be terrible,

to say the least and it may just be great!!

Meanwhile, we wait - - -

[chillzatl]

the only deals had us taking back marginal players with bad contracts. Many here doubted that BK would get anything at all for Al and he would just walk (for you anti-dieselers, he was right about the Facy market). I think it's a GREAT deal. We're taking a player that technically we shouldn't have gotten ANYTHING for and turned it into cash, a pick AND dumping a dead weight player. That's a freakin steal of you ask me.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

One of those turned out to be a meaningless pick. The next one will probably be a late lottery pick. Getting Indiana's pick recoups that pick, essentially.

---

How the heck do you figure the first pick was worthless? You can set its value one of two ways:

(1) It is worth Boston's 1st round pick in the loaded 2007 draft (which is what Phoenix got for it) and the value of unloading Brian Grant's contract; or

Quote:

---

Then, the Celtics sent a 2007 first-round pick (from the Cleveland Cavaliers) to the Suns for the draft rights to Rondo, and Brian Grant.

---

(2) It was worth Rajon Rondo or Marcus Williams - both of whom were available at that spot.

How do you figure those things are worthless?

[tmac13]

Its a good deal in a non-basketball perspective..Its a great financial deal..Its a great way to rid ourselves of Edwards..But at the end of the day we are not a better basketball team because of this deal..I think most here had seen AL as a way of picking up a piece or 2 to make the team better next season so its disapointing in that sense..Its also looking more and more that BK's hands are tied by the ownership regardless of what the Spirit says in public..

[chillzatl]

and the reality of it is that when you're trading, you have to deal with other teams. We have the luxury of being able to dream up trades that work salary wise. But are trades that the other team simply isn't interested in making. So when you have to deal with other teams, you have to hope they are offering something you want. In this case, they weren't. So I don't see it as disappointing at all. Sure it would be nice to land a great player in return. But if nobody is offering a great player, you can't just make it happen by wanting it to happen.

I also don't see how you can say that it seems his hands are tied. He's making deals. They fought in court to regain the right to make deals and are in the process of making deals. one of the owners has openly stated that we're going after another player after the Al deal happens. That is a complete contradition to your opinion that his hands are tied. They obviously are not.

[tmac13]

I guess we need to wait and see who that "big Man" is before we get too excited..Last year Mullen said we we after a "talented young bigman".We were thinking Darko or someone similar, that talented young big man turned out to be Edwards..

[Johnnybravo4]

He also said one that fans will recognize. The only ones I can really think of are. Magloire, Dalembert, Z. The reason why I say Z is that Cleveland needs money to resign Drew Gooden.

[Sothron]

I had forgotten Philly wants to dump Dalembert. Z always seem like he's on the trading block.

[KB21]

The fact is, without Al in the line up last year, the Hawks still scored at the same pace, defended better, and was a better rebounding team.

His production will be easily replaced from within the team, because it was easily replaced this past season. In fact, with Marvin poised for a break out year, I think it is very possible that the Hawks will be even better offensively simply because Marvin can do many more things on the floor.

[KB21]

While Dalembert may be one that a bunch of low IQ fans will think it is good, in reality, he isn't good and has a terrible contract. It won't be Dalembert.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...Now, the Hawks don't have the bottomless pit known as Al Harrington on offense...

---

Another classic !!

[Sothron]

I agree, I'm not a fan of Dalembert. He has a very low basketball IQ and his playoff series against Detroit two years ago seems to the exeption rather than the rule. He was sitting behind Stephen Hunter last season.

[Johnnybravo4]

I think Dalembert is a better situation. He can play D and he is under contract for the next 4 years. In Magloire we will be going through this same crap next off season trying to resign or sign and trade.

[Nicholasp27]

all anyone needs to do is look at how inefficient al is as a scorer

his touches have to go SOMEWHERE; if those other players can be as efficient of scorers as al, we won't miss him

imo, they will be MORE efficient AND we'll get more touches and opportunities due to better defense/rebounding and lack of black hole

[Sothron]

Actually Dalembert is not a good defensive player. He is one of those "Block or Posterized" type of centers who has poor footwork and has a very low basketball IQ with hands of stone. I would not go Walter if we got him for a reasonable price but I'd rather have Magloire. If Mags works out for us we can resign him or if he's a bum on the downside of his career we just S&T him or let him walk and keep cap flexibility.