Jump to content

  • Current Donation Goals

    • Monthly Donations
      Raised $390 of $700 target

Pete Babcock v. Billy Knight

wasBlackHawkDown

By wasBlackHawkDown
in Homecourt

 Share

Recommended Posts

wasBlackHawkDown Newbie

wasBlackHawkDown

Posted
Posted

You all know my hatred for Babcok and his buffoonery but I think we should actually take a real look at Billy and Pete's records here

When Pete came the Hawks had just won 52 games The lineup had not produced in the playoffs but was a fan favorite around the league and was expected to contend for a championship. However the team suffered from too many egos and had alot of infighting. So Pete puts Reggie Theus one of the team's stars in the expansion draft, drafts Roy Marble and re-signs former lottery pick and hug disappointment Jon Konkak to one of the largest deals in NBA history. A better deal than then star players Moses Malone and DOminique Wilkins. The next season the Hawks see the return of Kevin Willis, and a mid-season trade of Anoine Carr & Keith Livingston for Kenny " The Jet" Smith. A dissaopointing season in which the team which missed the playoffs for the first time in years.

In his second off-season Pete used his first lottery pick on Rumeul Robinson (LMBAO)! and traded Kenny " The Jet" Smith for Blair Rasmussen who retired 1 year later, while Kenny Smith would go on to be a major componenet in the Rockets back to back championships. The final move was bringing in Bob Weiss, a rookie head coach, to install a motion offense, and begin the ineffective and confusing marketing scheme "Let Run One" which confused and turned off fans. Well as we all know this season was another disaster!

Well pete makes some good moves trading Rumeul RObinson for Mookie Blaylock, Doc Rivers for (9 pick)Stacy Augmon, Kevin Willis for Steve Smith and signing Dikembe Mutumbo. Meanwhile drafting Adam Keefe and a host of other nameless clowns and Making the most wetched move in Atlanta Sports history Trading Dominique Wilkins to LA, for essentially nothing during the Hawks best season.

Then he decides that Adam Keefe, Jon Konkak and Blair Rassmussen, Danny Manning and other slow non-descript scrubs are the future of the game so he finds Cris Crawford and gives hime the same deal he gave Jon Konkak. Trades Steve Smith for a player that he would later waive. And gives Mookie Blaylock away for nothing.

He does bring in JT, Reef and Big Hog Robinson but the team lacks continuity and chemistry and loses miserably

Can Billy Knight be worse than Pete Babcock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gutz Newbie

gutz

Posted
Posted

No you can't even compare Babcock and Knight. I really don't even see how Babcock was a GM. The guy obviously knows nothing about basketball with those moves he made. I could have put together a better team than that idiot. BK knows what he is doing we just need to be patient with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weez Newbie

Weez

Posted
Posted

too early to make the comparison really. Look at the time frame over which you posted Babcock's resume...ten years or so right? You fail to really mention the playoff years after acquiring Deke or other 'good moves' that Babcock (yes, I'm saying this) made.

Babcock was a HORRIBLE drafter. That much is without question really, especially in ('99?) where we had FOUR first round picks, all of whom essentially sucked. PB was decent at trades, something I'll applaud him for (with the HUGE caveat of the 'Nique trade).

Basically, to this piont, I would 'characterize' Pete as a more savvy trader than BK, but a much poorer evaluator of talent/draft manager.

Regardless, in making this argument, one has to also factor in the baseline of the team when the gm came aboard, what moves were made (and WHY!) ~ anything less results in a very poor analysis of the moves/administrators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Can Billy Knight be worse than Pete Babcock?

Please tell me, how many winning seasons has BK had? If you don't count that 1/3 of a year that BK took over from Babcock, then please tell me how many 30 win seasons BK has had...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasBlackHawkDown Newbie

wasBlackHawkDown

Posted
  • Author
Posted

How many 50 win teams with a proven superstar in the lineup has Billy Knight destroyed, because I have seen Pete Babcock do it three times. Before you were born the Hawks were one of the top teams in the league and respected as a potential champion. One year after Babcock got here they went from potential champs to the NBA draft lottery. He let reggie Theus go for nothing, drafted Rumuel Robinson with a lottery pick and signed Jon Konkak to a better deal than Jordan or Dominique, the two best players in the league. He then traded away Kenny Smith for Blair Rassmussen so that Rumeuel Robinson could be our starting PG. I mean it has been one mess after another.

Ye Babcock was better @ making trades than Billy Knight but Babcock had no ability to evaluate talent or get the respect of anyone around him. He simply made the most absurd moves and destroyed the tewam everytime he put something worthwhile together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yeti Newbie

Yeti

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Can Billy Knight be worse than Pete Babcock?

No. Actually I think you were too generous to Babcock, I didn't like losing Kevin Willis or Doc Rivers either. He was a bit quick to break up the team.

For BK, I think each of us was disappointed in one of his picks - either Marvin or SW. And he takes FOREVER to get deals done. But his biggest weakness is how he communicates (or doesn't). It hurts building up the team in the media and developing a fan base. If he could relax and talk to the media - have a radio show - etc. We could really get excited about the team ... but he and the Bozo's keep dragging us down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
exodus Newbie

exodus

Posted
Posted

Quote:

I didn't like losing Kevin Willis

Actually I thought Willis for Smith/Long was a good deal. And I was in disbelief when he signed Dikembe, who is my favorite Hawks since I started following them in '93.

However the Manning and Rider deals were horrible. Trading for Shareef also was a bad move.

Babcocks draft record was worse than a joke. He would have been better off just using a dart board to make his picks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasBlackHawkDown Newbie

wasBlackHawkDown

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I agre I think we got great value for Willis and signing Deked was a stroke of genius but Babcock was a consistently bad GM, imagine how many good deals he pobably passed on. How many times we could have drafted Kobe or how amny times we didnt move up to draft a KG or trade for J.O'Neal when he was in Portland. We could have a monster team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Quote:

How many 50 win teams with a proven superstar in the lineup has Billy Knight destroyed, because I have seen Pete Babcock do it three times.

Then CLEARLY after he destroyed a 50 win team the first time, he was able to rebuild that team to become ANOTHER 50 win team. And then after the 2nd time, he was able to do it AGAIN, or else there was not a 3rd time. I am sure, if given the opportunity, that BK could turn a 50 win team into a cellar dwellar.

You are basing your praise of BK after 0 results. I don't have a problem with you saying Babcock was bad, but to say that BK was better is foolish. BK has done NOTHING to show that he is better than Babcock, who actually managed teams that had more than 30 wins in a season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasBlackHawkDown Newbie

wasBlackHawkDown

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Quote:

BK has done NOTHING to show that he is better than Babcock, who actually managed teams that had more than 30 wins in a season.

Babcock came in with something to work with the Hawks lineup was stacked, And Pete had alot more leverage to make moves because Ted Turner was the only owner. Who knows what BK could have already done if his hands weren't tied by ownership. Even signing Joe Johnson was an ordeal. Nobody in the league has to deal with such stupidity. Look who he has brought in name one player that was a bad choice [ other than L.Wright and Speedy]

Also factor in Babcock actually destroyed winning teams. Blly didnt have a winning team to work ith in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Look who he has brought in name one player that was a bad choice [ other than L.Wright and Speedy]

Jason Collier, Peja Dobnjack, John Edwards, Obinna Ekezie, Travis Hansen, Kenny Anderson, Jelani McCoy, Anthony Thomas, James Thomas, James Lang. But who cares anyway, you don't measure how good a GM is by the players they bring in, you measure them by results. BK is entering year 4 and this team's record is worse than when he started.

And you are still ignoring that if Babcock destroyed a 50 win team 3 times then that logically means that he has built a 50 win team 2 times. BK has yet to build a 30 win team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Quote:

If BK never fields a 50 win team, wouldn't you have to say.....gulp.....Babcock was a better GM?

That would be pretty scary. However it also would depend on how long BK had the job.

Well this is year 4. Suppose he doesn't make much improvments and is fired. Then the year after that, whoever the new GM is makes some changes and the team makes the playoffs. There are certainly people here that will say BK deserves credit, but wouldn't you say it is absurd to give a guy 4 years to improve a team and then he fails to do so? I do, 4 years is a looooong time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Quote:

Babcock had 12 years to improve the team. Billy spent 1 year just clearing out Pete's mess.

And let me remind you, I am not saying Babcock is good. But the only thing we can conclued is that UNTIL BK shows something you cannot claim him to be better than Babcock. You keep ignoring the argument, so unless you stay on track I won't argue with someone like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nicholasp27 Newbie

Nicholasp27

Posted
Posted

we are 2.5 years into the rebuilding

the 4 year number is bogus...2.5 years ago (feb 04) is when he sold all the players to the highest bidder and started his building

u can't expect a team to be built up to a 50 win team in 2.5 years...

also, it's results-oriented to say that if bk never fields a 50 win team in 10 years but babcock did, then babcock is a better gm...bk's process is FARRRR superior to babcock's, no matter what the results are...if it doesn't work for him this time, then that's short term variance plus his mistakes, etc, but it doesn't make bk a worse gm and it definitely doesn't make his process and plan and idea worse than babcock's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...