Bernie on radio this morning.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

As if I haven't. The problem existed before the draft. The solution wasn't to draft significantly lesser talent in a role player too high and bench on of our Sfs.

---

I would argue that the answer was addressed. Cover the hole.

Look..

We have 2 Sports coupes... but we needed a truck.

You're saying, don't get a truck... Just get a van and use the 2 Sports Coupes to do the job of a Sport Coupe and a truck...

So why do you want to carry bricks in your lexus LF-C? Sure it has a lot of horsepower under the hood...

The bottom line is this... if Marvin and Smoove keep their value and their redundancy you can always trade one of them or you can always keep them and have a three forward rotation.

However, without Shelden, we could have possibly spent the next few years searching for somebody to fill the PF position.

You've been around a while Walt. Remember the glory years with Mookie, Smitty, Deke... For so long, we didn't have a Sf. We spent years hoping for one. Never happened. That's because somebody was content to keep the status quo that we had and let Corbin play it instead of getting Fox or Ceballos.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Walter, this is what makes me a better poster

---

Oh, hi KB, I thought you were somebody else.

Quote:

---

i am not an extremist.

---

And in some instances low key is called for and some it isn't. I choose to put forth my ideas often in an extreme manner. However, my ideas aren't extreme. Just look at them:

1) MW and JS are Sfs

2) ZaZa is a great BU, hybrid center, but not the right starting counter part for a 2-Sf lineup

3) Either trade one of MW and JS for similar talent at another position or get the right center to allow them to play their perimeter styled games while not conceeding the post

4) DO NOT cost yourself talent trying to right the wrong of BK's rebuilding effort to date as we do not have enough talent to begin with

4) BK has never built a winning TEAM and shows no signs of the capacity to do so no matter how much capitol he has. He either gets it wrong within the excuse of consensus and BPA or gets it wrong going against the consensus and for need. He drafts 5 forwards out of his only 5 first round draft picks!!! And his latest forward he drafts he promises at 5 despite being questionably a top 10 pick, removing us from draft day trades, reducing flexibility, benching better prospects than he and our best prospects, without addressing our need for potential at the C and Pg positions.

Not one of these positions are extreme. They are in fact the mainstream. People may WANT to believe that JS is a Pf but he is not and will not be one (any time soon). People may want to believe that SW can play center but he cannot. People may want to believe...

Quote:

---

you are right when you say Shellhead is not up to par with Harrington offensively.

---

And Harrington is not up to par with Shellhead defensively. But all in all I believe Harringtøn to be a slightly better player (or prospect) than Shellhead.

Quote:

---

However when you say that Shellhead is on the same level as Al "matador" defensively i think you are letting your hatred for Billy Knight just as I allowed mine in the past to cloud your vision.

---

What on earth are you talking about????????????????????????????????????????????

Read my post again. Stake your reputation on not getting my argument 100% wrong. You come off as an extremist attempting to misconstrue my position 100%. Here's from my post:

Quote:

---

SW only shifts our problem from one side of the court to the next.

He is no better defensively than Harrington is offensively and offensively he is no better than Al defensively.

You don't use a #5 pick to shift your problems from one side of the ball to the next when you are a 26 win team and you

d@mn

sure don't bench your best prospect in the process.

---

How is this extremist? I believe SW is no better OFFENSIVELY than Harrington is DEFENSIVELY and DEFENSIVELY SW is no better than Harrington OFFESNIVELY. They are the same 1-dimensional player, only one is standing on the other's head. The difference is I feel Al is slightly better overall and is not a role player. Did we shave Al Harrington for, and waste a #5 pick on, THIS?!? His slightly lesser, 1-dimensional alter-ego?

Quote:

---

I will stake my Hawksquawk reputation...

---

Blah, blah, blah...See above.

Quote:

---

Shelden will serve his purpose whether you agree with that purpose or not and the Hawks will give up 5 less points per game this season than last.

---

That will be as much because of Speedy's on the ball "D" and a little because of Lo more than SW.

Quote:

---

will it all be because of Shellhead? no. but will it net us 10 more wins w/o our supposed "best" player from last season in some doofus's eyes? yes.

---

If we win 10 more games it won't be because of SW. It will be despite him. We should win 5-8 more games based upon youth development alone.

Speedy and Lo? Another 5-8. Loss of Harrington? -5. We should win between 5 and 11 more games without even considering a TOP FIVE DRAFT PICK! It will be interesting to see how many more games Minny wins with Foye as he is the only addition they have made.

W

[Guest Walter]

Since I do not have the patience or time to respond individually to three posts responding to my one, let me just put it this way...

While playing players out of their ideal positions isn't in most cases prefered, with the right catalyst (center in our case) it CAN BE. Does that mean it would be for us if we got a dominant center prospect, all that we can afford without costing us JS and MW in the first place? Maybe. Maybe not. But I believe players like Bynum and Sene are well worth the risk of going down that road. It is very much a forced move created by BK to get a dominant center prospect, but it is a decent one that is increasingly less possible as rebuilding continues.

What isn't a decent move is benching either MW or JS, doing so at the expense of a 5th pick, and doing so in order to start a significantly less talented player. 5th picks don't grow on trees (and we should have had our last for some time) & we do not have enough talent to spare allowing us to justify benching our better prospects for lesser ones when we don't have to.

In short, getting the right center was the right move in a situation with no perfect one. Getting a lesser talented Pf in a reach draft selection and benching our talent can at best lead to mediocrity. It was the wrong move if title contention is our intention.

W

[gsuteke]

LOL them's fightin' words!

[Guest Walter]

...do you understand my position now? I'm not comparing SW's defense to Al's, I'm comparing his defense to Al's offense and vice versa. I don't think SW's is overall better than Al and reflects more of a BU caliber role player than Al. You just don't spend a top 5 pick on this when in our situation.

W

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

While playing players out of their ideal positions isn't in most cases prefered, with the right catalyst (center in our case) it CAN BE. Does that mean it would be for us if we got a dominant center prospect, all that we can afford without costing us JS and MW in the first place? Maybe. Maybe not. But I believe players like Bynum and Sene are well worth the risk of going down that road. It is very much a forced move created by BK to get a dominant center prospect, but it is a decent one that is increasingly less possible as rebuilding continues.

---

That's a lot of hope to put on Sene or Bynum.... when you really don't have to.

Ideally, the better move this offseason would have been to draft Shelden and trade Al for Magloire. IN my heart, I believe that this was the plan before Belkin made his power move.

In Magloire, you get an allstar calibre Center who can be defensive. I don't like Magloire but this is a plan that makes a lot sense.

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

are you still talking about that toilet wand Saer Sene?

---

Yes, the very one you will not take a challenge over despite me giving you 10 minutes and your petty pictorial of emaciated africans and white guys "depicting" him.

Quote:

---

then you say Al is a mature PF?

---

Yes, he is. So is Wilcox, PJ Brown, and many others.

Quote:

---

Al is a better overall player?

---

Yes, he is.

Quote:

---

apparently you haven't noticed that the Hawks have a defensive problem, not an offensive problem.

---

Actually, they have a talent problem when they use a 5th overall pick to draft a less talented individual with less upside to bench a more talented individual with more upside.

SW only shifts our problem from one side of the court to the next. He is no better defensively than Harrington is offensively and offensively he is no better than Al defensively. You don't use a #5 pick to shift your problems from one side of the ball to the next when you are a 26 win team and you d@mn sure don't bench your best prospect in the process.

When a #5 pick is at best a PUSH and best prospect benching individual, you LOST in the draft!

---

SO let me get this straight. Our biggest need in the offseason was defense in the post. So instead of getting the 2 time ACC/NCAA defensive player of the year, you instead want to get a Senegalese project player, who was a draft pick mainly because he is tall? And you want this for a team that already full of young players and projects?

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...Ideally, the better move this offseason would have been to draft Shelden and trade Al for Magloire. IN my heart, I believe that this was the plan before Belkin made his power move.

In Magloire, you get an allstar calibre Center who can be defensive...

---

That was my hope as well - plus I believe Magloire is in his contract year so you know he'll play his tail off.

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

...Ideally, the better move this offseason would have been to draft Shelden and trade Al for Magloire. IN my heart, I believe that this was the plan before Belkin made his power move.

In Magloire, you get an allstar calibre Center who can be defensive...

---

That was my hope as well - plus I believe Magloire is in his contract year so you know he'll play his tail off.

---

An allstar caliber center who is going to sit on the bench behind Joel Pryzstiff. I'd rather stay with Zaza.

[DJlaysitup]

Quote:

---

...An allstar caliber center who is going to sit on the bench behind Joel Pryzstiff. I'd rather stay with Zaza.

---

Well granted it would have been a short-term addition. Chances are we wouldn't have been able to resign him. Still, his size and skills would have allowed us increased flexibility at the C/PF/SF positions - maybe even putting us in a situation where we could afford to play Marvin and JoshS at the same time more. Can't really do that with Zaza or we'll get torched in the paint.

[Diesel]

You say that as if Zaza wouldn't sit on the bench in PTL behind Joel P.

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

You say that as if Zaza wouldn't sit on the bench in PTL behind Joel P.

---

This board's enamoration with Prizstiff is pretty disturbing. I saw enough of him for his half season here to not want him back.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

I saw enough of him for

his half season

here to not want him back.

---

I didn't realize the NBA season was only 24 games long.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

SO let me get this straight. Our biggest need in the offseason was defense in the post. So instead of getting the 2 time ACC/NCAA defensive player of the year, you instead want to get a Senegalese project player, who was a draft pick mainly because he is tall? And you want this for a team that already full of young players and projects?

---

What if our biggest need was pure shooter. What if we drafted Reddick and decided to BENCH JJ so that we could have better perimeter shooting. HELL-the [censored]-O?!? That's the equivalent of drafting SW so we can bench MW or JS.

THE REASON WE NEEDED INTERIOR DEFENSE AT THE CENTER POSITION WAS BECAUSE WE SHOULD INTEND TO START MW AND JS AT THE FOWARD POSITIONS. Otherwise, we could simply get a role playing Pf in FAcy for around $3-5 million per year. See PJ Brown, Wilcox, others. YOU DO NOT USE A 5TH PICK ON A LESS TALENT ROLE PLAYER IN ORDER TO BENCH YOUR BEST PROSPECTS!!!

I want a winner. We will not have that benching our best prospects for lesser talent and using 5th overall picks to do so. We do not have talent excess and cannot afford to bench our best prospects, alienate and disenable them, and continually reduce the chances of their resigning. We must either build a team around them or get rid of them.

I believe we have missed out on two very real opportunities to build around them in Bynum and Sene. We could have sent them the message "the team is in your hands, now step up". Instead we send them the message "I know we traded Harrington for you to start, but one of you will be SW's BU, deal with it...oh and Childress, you're now another seat further down the bench".

You may not believe Sene is the right player or quality player that could enable JS and MW starting at the forward spots, but he utterly dominated SW's in summerleague to the point of embarrasment so that speaks even worse for SW when a 20 yr old with almost no experience doubles our NBA-ready college senior's BPG totals.

W

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Walter, the problem with your Shelden's D = Al's O, is that you don't take into account the acutal numbers that each guy contributes/gives up on the other end.

Al may score 23 in a game, but would routinely give up 21 - 25 points on the other end.

Shelden may score 12 on offense, but may only give up 15 on the other end.

In the end, the 10 points difference that Shelden would potentially give up, far outweighs Al's scoring output if he is also giving up the same amount of points.

What you're trying to correlate, is that Al's offense is just as good as Shelden's defense. But if you can hold your opponent under his average, that's a better situation . . than if you let your opponent get his average, but you match his output on the offensive end.

For example. Let's say the Hawks are playing last year's Phoenix Suns squad.

Al guarding Diaw

C - T. Thomas = 14 pts

PF - Diaw = 23 pts

F - Marion = 19 pts

G - Bell = 15 pts

G - Nash = 19 pts

Bench = 20 points

Total = 110 points

*************************************

Shelden guarding Diaw

C - T. Thomas = 14 pts

PF - Diaw = 15 pts

F - Marion = 19 pts

G - Bell = 15 pts

G - Nash = 19 pts

Bench = 20 pts

Total = 102 pts

**********************************

This is the entire premise of having Shelden here. IF . . and that's a big IF he's much better than Al defensively, that may translate into the Hawks getting more stops at the 4 spot, and with people driving the lane. In my example, I only took into account Shelden possibly holding Diaw to around 15 points.

With Al gone, other people will make up for his offense. Shelden alone doesn't have to match Al's output, or even come close to it for that matter. All he has to do is provide timely points, but defend with tenacity.

Most people on this board believe that Marvin and Smoove can improve their offensive outputs. And because the other players on this team are basically offensive oriented players, many of us don't think this offense will miss a beat with Al gone.

In this scenario, we probably still wouldn't beat the Suns if we gave up 102 points. But we'd have a better chance at winning, than the possible 110 we'd give up with Al in the lineup.

Bottom line . . . we can't win games if we don't play defense. So by adding a defensive player, it makes the team better overall.

It's almost the same reason why Dallas preferred to start Diop, instead of Dampier, who was the better offensive player. With Diop, you're more likely to get stops, while the other guys picked up the offensive slack.

With Dampier, you may lose things defensively, thus, counteracting what the others, including Dampier, are doing on offense.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

LOL @ Walter. No it isn't.

And why are people all up in arms about Marvin or Smoove coming off the bench?

When it is all said and done, both guys will get 30 minutes a game, and both guys could arguably be in the game during crunch time, depending on who we're playing and what the situation is in the game.

And you keep harping on the fact that Shelden was the #5 pick, like he's supposed to be the savior of the franchise or something. The Hawks needed interior talent . . . PERIOD. So they took what they thought was the best interior player on the board, in Shelden. Taking a more talented player at a different position, doesn't address what was really wrong with this team last year.

It would be like the Detroit Lions taking ANOTHER receiver to boost their offense, when their real problem lies on the defensive side of the football.

Shelden will play the 4, with getting spot minutes at the 5, depending on who we're playing.

Smoove, Marvin, and Childress will ALL play 30 minutes a game, along with JJ and possibly Speedy. Everybody else on this team is an interchangeable part around these guys.

Shelden may start, but may only see 25 minutes a game. The game situation will dictate who will be in at PF, and who won't.

As for the rest of you, this will probably be the starting lineup, if Bernie is insisting that Shelden will start at PF.

C - ZaZa

PF - Shelden

F - Smoove

G - JJ

G - Claxton

First off the bench . . Marvin and Childress . . . with Shelden and JJ or Claxton or Smoove getting an early breather.

There's NOTHING wrong with that, if those guys are still going to get their minutes.

Play JJ at the point in short stretches, to possibly put this lineup in.

G - JJ

G - Childress

F - Marvin

F - Smoove

F - Shelden

That's a Detroit Piston like lineup. And you WILL see that group on the floor together during each game at some point. It may be for 3 - 4 minute stretches, and maybe no more than 8 - 10 minutes a game, but you'll see it.

There is NOTHING wrong in bringing talented guys off the bench, if they're going to get their minutes anyway.

Ask Jerry Stackhouse, Corey Magettee, and Ben Gordon.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

And why are people all up in arms about Marvin or Smoove coming off the bench?

---

Because they're smart people.

Quote:

---

When it is all said and done, both guys will get 30 minutes a game, and both guys could arguably be in the game during crunch time, depending on who we're playing and what the situation is in the game.

---

1) we traded Harrington for peanuts and Diaw as a "throw-in" because JS and MW were supposed to start at the forwards and because MW and because of our existing forward glut respectively.

2) JS and MW are significantly more talented than SW with either MW or JS.

3) Neither MW or JS will resign to be a BU.

4) Their value diminishes as a BU

Quote:

---

And you keep harping on the fact that Shelden was the #5 pick, like he's supposed to be the savior of the franchise or something. The Hawks needed interior talent . . . PERIOD.

---

I can get that for the mid-level Ex. I can pay slightly more for a say Pryz and not bench JS or MW.

Quote:

---

So they took what they thought was the best interior player on the board, in Shelden.

---

He will not be better than Sene within 4 years no matter hwo you compare them. Is SW costing us JS or MW and the necessary talent to contend worth that when bigger, better prospects were available?

Quote:

---

Taking a more talented player at a different position, doesn't address what was really wrong with this team last year.

---

MW wasn't/isn't more talented than Paul, yet you insist that we take the most talented player then. What happened?

BTW, name the humber of times the Hawks have had a 5th or higher draft pick. A 5th pick can be franchise changing. You don't pick a BU quality role palyer with it EVER!

Quote:

---

It would be like the Detroit Lions taking ANOTHER receiver to boost their offense, when their real problem lies on the defensive side of the football.

---

Why not get immediate, better defensive help in FAcy for less "currency" like Atlanta did on the D-line?

Quote:

---

Shelden will play the 4, with getting spot minutes at the 5, depending on who we're playing.

Smoove, Marvin, and Childress will ALL play 30 minutes a game, along with JJ and possibly Speedy. Everybody else on this team is an interchangeable part around these guys.

---

If Childress plays 30 MPG I'll give you $5 bucks. If he doesn't you give me $5. Deal?

Quote:

---

Shelden may start, but may only see 25 minutes a game. The game situation will dictate who will be in at PF, and who won't.

---

And that is enough of a snub insult to send JS or MW looking for a new team with a starting opportunity.

W

[Swatguy]

It is very interesting how some like to play this game of "If I were the GM".

Interesting as it really Means something. Sekou wrote quoting the maturing Josh Smith saying "It's not a matter of who does or does not start," he said, "it's about what you do when you are out there on that floor."

But some maintain it is not true.

It is weak to continue bantering what you favored in the draft (as it matters). The Draft Is Over.

Reality is tapping on your shoulder, In front not behind you.

I am glad we have a gm that makes better decisions than me. That is his job and he is Good.

Coach said recently Concerning Marvin and Smoove, "I absolutely think those two guys can start for this team. But I don't think you give a starting job to a guy just to be giving it."

So there is competition. Which is good. Good for all involved.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

It is very interesting how some like to play this game of "If I were the GM".

---

This is a basketball forum. If you want to go somewhere without an opinion try elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Sekou wrote quoting the maturing Josh Smith saying "It's not a matter of who does or does not start," he said, "it's about what you do when you are out there on that floor."

---

Good smart employee talk. That's all. I would say the same thing about how much I'm paid and my empoyer's productivity standard being too high if my boss were listening, but if not I tell the truth. To think JS doesn't want to start is insulting to him and everyone else's intelligence. Josh Smith was being nicey nice. Walking the corporate line. Using cliche's to convey he's a team player. Yada. Yada. He'd still leave in a heartbeat to start if he can't or doesn't here.

Quote:

---

I am glad we have a gm that makes better decisions than me. That is his job and he is Good.

---

What if anything would make you think him not good? Never having a winning season? Being the losingest GM in NBA history? Losing out on the ROY tow years in a row and trading the MIP all within 12 months time? Could happen. But it seems you look at our talent and see only it, not the vast amount more we should have and the TEAM we could have built with all the capitol given him.

Quote:

---

Coach said recently Concerning Marvin and Smoove, "I absolutely think those two guys can start for this team. But I don't think you give a starting job to a guy just to be giving it."

---

Whatever all that coach-speak means. If I wanted coach speak I'd watch Glory Road or Hoosiers. I want a winner. We will not contend without MW or JS starting and a center that suites them or without trading one of MW or JS for a similar talent at a position of need.

Quote:

---

So there is competition. Which is good. Good for all involved.

---

We're not trying to be a farm club for other teams!!! There was competition when Diaw was here. He's now exploding for Pheonix. If we make half or more of our young talent sit as BUs they will leave. And while that happens there are holes without starter quality young talent and a team with little future to contend.

W

[AHF]

Quote:

---

There was competition when Diaw was here. He's now exploding for Pheonix.

---

If Diaw would have competed when he was here that might not have been the case. I get your point about BUs but Diaw isn't a comparable example to Josh and Marvin who have both demonstrated real success already.