Ultimate what-if: no JJ

[txsting]

Follow along what might have occurred had the Hawks not dealt for JJ (only one possible scenario of course):

1) we keep Diaw (no big deal)

2) we keep the 2006 #21 pick - which was used for Rondo. Marcus Williams went #22 and we know BK was interested in him. I say we would have picked Marcus Williams, likely.

3) we would be certain to have our pick in this draft, likely #5. This becomes Hibbert, most likely.

4) most importantly, our ownership is not fractured by the JJ deal fallout. Legal trouble perhaps never occur.

5) Since we pick Marcus Williams in June 06, we never sign Speedy in July 06.

6) Since we have no JJ, we don't need to pick Shelden at #5. We pick Roy instead because we still have a huge hole at SG.

7) we probably still pick Solo because we still are weak in the front court at that point.

8) We still have the #11 pick in the 2007 draft - we can take BPA.

9) we have a ton more cap room - no JJ and no speedy. Probably BK would have made another dumb free agent signing but we can't know for sure.

Ultimate woulda-coulda-shoulda team:

Marcus Williams / Lue

Roy / Chills

Marvin / Diaw

Smoove / Solo / #11 pick

Hibbert / Zaza

So, maybe even our best moves have bit us in the arse. We can't really judge it completely until tonight. If we don't get a top 3 pick this year, we'll be joining mediocre team hell. Our team will probably be good enough to win 40 games, never contend, no future lotto chances, and be capped out to boot.

However, if we do get a top 3 pick (even #3) - it's redemption time. We will have assembled enough capital in order to at least have a chance. With Oden we would be undeniably be the best positioned team in the East for a bright future in a couple of years.

Crossing my fingers now....

[gsuteke]

don't forget BK had been eyeing Joe as his PG. that was part of his logic for signing him to a max deal. there may have been no Marvin Williams either.

I think the Joe trade was the right move, it just came two years too soon. But hey, that's why Billy gets paid to be the GM and I am just some guy killing time at work on an internet message board.

[coachx]

I hate the what if / Monday morning quarterback game ?

It is pontless to look in the past and say what if! There are so many other variables I will not even begin to list.

Look toward the future, you can't change the past.

Why waist the time, energy, and effort to dwell on the past ?

The good thing is that by 8:40 PM we can put our energy toward looking at the draft at what IS rather then what might be or could have been.

[mrhonline]

That team is horrible...

[TexasPete]

I think it's an interesting point. The NBA is like dominoes and one move can impact another and another.

AS Teke said I believe that JJ was the PG and if we didn't have JJ we would have selected Deron because I heard BK like him more than CP. A Roy/Deron backcourt is as good a young tandem as you would find in the league.

[Packfill]

As long as BK is doing the drafting the team would such either with or without JJ. Pretty sad considering the what could have been.

[AHF]

Quote:

---

I think it's an interesting point. The NBA is like dominoes and one move can impact another and another.

AS Teke said I believe that JJ was the PG and if we didn't have JJ we would have selected Deron because I heard BK like him more than CP. A Roy/Deron backcourt is as good a young tandem as you would find in the league.

---

We didn't have JJ at the time of the draft. We agreed to a deal with him a few weeks later. JJ wasn't part of the consideration. We also went after Ray Allen prior to coming to an agreement with JJ, for example.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I think it's an interesting point. The NBA is like dominoes and one move can impact another and another.

AS Teke said I believe that JJ was the PG and if we didn't have JJ we would have selected Deron because I heard BK like him more than CP. A Roy/Deron backcourt is as good a young tandem as you would find in the league.

---

We didn't have JJ at the time of the draft. We agreed to a deal with him a few weeks later. JJ wasn't part of the consideration. We also went after Ray Allen prior to coming to an agreement with JJ, for example.

---

but there were talks on the Hawks and Joe's end without a doubt. they knew they were targeting Joe before that draft.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Joe Johnson is better than Marcus Williams and Roy combined

[AHF]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I think it's an interesting point. The NBA is like dominoes and one move can impact another and another.

AS Teke said I believe that JJ was the PG and if we didn't have JJ we would have selected Deron because I heard BK like him more than CP. A Roy/Deron backcourt is as good a young tandem as you would find in the league.

---

We didn't have JJ at the time of the draft. We agreed to a deal with him a few weeks later. JJ wasn't part of the consideration. We also went after Ray Allen prior to coming to an agreement with JJ, for example.

---

but there were talks on the Hawks and Joe's end without a doubt. they knew they were targeting Joe before that draft.

---

They certainly had JJ in mind but only went after him after losing out on Ray Allen. I don't think you can rationally plan your lottery selection based on JJ being your PG if you are going after Allen hot and heavy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=2100705&type=story

[txsting]

It's arguable that JJ is better than Roy+Marcus. I could see both sides of that, and time will tell.

I think if you take everything together, from a salary cap position, and the ownership squabble - my "couldabeens" would be in better position long term than the current team, barring a top 3 pick in this draft.

Anyway, it's just a scenario for fun and discussion - and of course it wouldn't work out just the way I proposed. For instance, our results this year would have no doubt been different, maybe worse, maybe better - affecting our draft position, changing everything.

I think when you evaluate how good a given move was, you have to consider what your alternatives were. If you are BK, I agree that there is no point in looking back. But if you are evaluating BK, you must look at past because it all you have to go on.

[raindog]

Quote:

---

Joe Johnson is better than Marcus Williams and Roy combined

---

In this case, the question is: Is JJ better than Rondo/Marcus, Roy and our pick (maybe Hibbert) for the Hawks? IMHO, I prefer to build the Hawks with Rondo, Roy and Hibbert, even when JJ is the best player. Add a BPA (11th pick) and cap space and for me the future would be brighter. But as I said, it's just my opinion. Who knows?

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Joe Johnson is better than Marcus Williams and Roy combined

---

In this case, the question is: Is JJ better than Rondo/Marcus, Roy and our pick (maybe Hibbert) for the Hawks? IMHO, I prefer to build the Hawks with Rondo, Roy and Hibbert, even when JJ is the best player. Add a BPA (11th pick) and cap space and for me the future would be brighter. But as I said, it's just my opinion. Who knows?

---

You're also assuming that we would have had a pick to land Hibbert.

[AtLaS]

You really think BK would have picked Roy over Shelden? We still would've had horrible interior D, which was BK's said primary reasoning for selecting Shelden.

[Johnnybravo4]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I think it's an interesting point. The NBA is like dominoes and one move can impact another and another.

AS Teke said I believe that JJ was the PG and if we didn't have JJ we would have selected Deron because I heard BK like him more than CP. A Roy/Deron backcourt is as good a young tandem as you would find in the league.

---

We didn't have JJ at the time of the draft. We agreed to a deal with him a few weeks later. JJ wasn't part of the consideration. We also went after Ray Allen prior to coming to an agreement with JJ, for example.

---

but there were talks on the Hawks and Joe's end without a doubt. they knew they were targeting Joe before that draft.

---

They certainly had JJ in mind but only went after him after losing out on Ray Allen. I don't think you can rationally plan your lottery selection based on JJ being your PG if you are going after Allen hot and heavy.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=2100705&type=story

---

We also went after Eddy Curry as well. Well kind of.

People forget we wanted Bogut more than anything. If we got the #1 pick we would have gotten Bogut not Marvin.

Marvin was simply the BPA. Not to mention Ty Lue had just had a career year.

[coachx]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I hate the what if / Monday morning quarterback game ?

It is pontless to look in the past and say what if! There are so many other variables I will not even begin to list.

Look toward the future, you can't change the past.

Why waist the time, energy, and effort to dwell on the past ?

The good thing is that by 8:40 PM we can put our energy toward looking at the draft at what IS rather then what might be or could have been.

---

BK, is that you?

I don't like these what if games either, especially this one because its scope is over 2 years worth of changes. But at the same time, the idea of waisting time by "dwelling" on the past is a good idea. It shows you your mistakes and then allows you to learn from them. This is a reason why we record history, a reason why players and coaches watch "game tape", a reason why you pay attention to people's past moves in poker, so on and so forth. However, BK at least given the public image that he doesn't look at the past at all, hence he never can learn from his mistakes. Maybe its a ploy by him, but I doubt that.

---

OK, I guess I have to explain myself.

This seems like common sense, I din't think I would have to explain. Forgive me if I mis-spell some words. I am at work and don't have time to proof read.

Your right, you can learn from history. This is very true in politics but the NBA I am not so sure about due to all the variables.

Examples:

Just b/c player (A) did certain things for one team does not mean he would perform that way for the Hawks.

Why is this ?

Because player (A) is playing for a different coach,under a different style, possibly at a different position, with a different supporting cast of teamates.

There are several variables that make this more complicated then many simple minds let on.

Specific Example:

Don't even begin to tell me that b/c Deron Williams is so succesful at Utah that he would be equally good for Atlanta. Thats is just irrational. Williams has so many things going in his favor at Utah that he would not have here:

1. Better coaching that offers structure to the offense and better teaching then what Woody can offer. Heck, Sloan knew how to get the most out of Stockton's 20 year carrer. Woody would have played Stockton so many minutes he would have retired at 34 instead of 39, meaning no all-time assist leader and maybe even no hall of fame.

2. A better all round supporting cast (this means so much chemistry wise.)

3. A more expierenced team that flattens the learing curve for a young PG, and takes the pressure off. (A 25 year old JJ would have been his oldest teamate in ATL)

4. A "go to" offensive post option (Boozer). That makes life so much easier for a PG to run an offense. Without a true post option life is much harder on a PG, he would be forced to run the pick role 75% of the time (Sound familar, huh ?). Personally I don't see Deron's game or any PG being as effective for a team without a go to low post scoring option (like the Hawks).

The Hawks team was the youngest in the NBA entering the season each of the last 2 seasons. That must be taken into account when "projecting" if a given player would produce the same for the Hawks as they did for their given team which more than likely was a more veteran team with better talent.

I do agree BK has failed at assembling a balanced roster. However, some of the conclusions people jump to are given very little thought.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

Follow along what might have occurred had the Hawks not dealt for JJ (only one possible scenario of course):

1) we keep Diaw (no big deal)

---

OK

Quote:

---

2) we keep the 2006 #21 pick - which was used for Rondo. Marcus Williams went #22 and we know BK was interested in him. I say we would have picked Marcus Williams, likely.

---

I could see that . . OK.

Quote:

---

3) we would be certain to have our pick in this draft, likely #5. This becomes Hibbert, most likely.

---

I disagree. I think we'd been one of the 3 worst teams in the league going into this draft. We'd probably be in the same position as a Boston, with about 20 - 26 wins . . that is, if we were healthy. It may be worse if we had the same amount and the same type of injuries we had this year. So the pick probably becomes Oden or Durant.

Quote:

---

4) most importantly, our ownership is not fractured by the JJ deal fallout. Legal trouble perhaps never occur.

---

I can see that . . OK.

Quote:

---

5) Since we pick Marcus Williams in June 06, we never sign Speedy in July 06.

---

True . . but we still might have major problems at the PG postion.

Marcus struggled this year playing the point in Jersey at times this year. He has talent, no doubt about that. But he makes silly, if not stupid turnovers as well, by trying to do way too much. Add the fact that he only shot 39.5% FG, and we'd potentially still have a BIG PROBLEM at the point.

In fact, Tyronn Lue may have very well have still been the starter going into this season, even if we'd drafted Marcus. And if Lue goes down in the same fashion that he did this year, the burden of playing the point would've went to Marcus. Would he respond positiviely and prove that he's the future PG of the Hawks? Or would he prove why he dropped from a top 10 pick, all the way into the 20s?

It's conceivable that we'd still be in the market for a PG.

Quote:

---

6) Since we have no JJ, we don't need to pick Shelden at #5. We pick Roy instead because we still have a huge hole at SG.

---

If we had no JJ, I don't think the Hawks win more than 15 - 20 games in the 2005 - 06 season. And if that's the case, we're probably a top 3 lottery team, with the worst record going into the draft. JJ was a big reason why Harrington played so well in the 05 - 06 season. JJ probably got 2 assists a game from Harrington converting off of his passes. Sometimes, those assists came because Harrington converted on 3 pointers. So JJ probably contributed 4 - 7 points to Harrington every game.

But for the 06 - 07 squad, this is how important JJ was to the Hawks this year:

* when JJ scored 30 or more points, the Hawks were 12 - 7

* when JJ scored 25 or more points, the Hawks were 18 - 18

* when JJ scored less than 20 points, the Hawks were 1 - 12

So if he had a bad game, we were dead in the water . . period. If he had a good game, we at least had a fighting chance.

In the NBA, if you're not a well balanced team in which many guys can score at least double digits every night, you better have a guy on your squad that can get you 25 points on any given night. A team would preferably like to have 2 or 3 of those guys. The Hawks only had one. And if JJ weren't here, they wouldn't have any guy like that on the squad. And they wouldn't have a balanced enough team to depend on 7 - 8 guys to score on a given night.

Quote:

---

7) we probably still pick Solo because we still are weak in the front court at that point.

---

I can see that . . OK.

Quote:

---

8) We still have the #11 pick in the 2007 draft - we can take BPA.

---

OK.

Quote:

---

9) we have a ton more cap room - no JJ and no speedy. Probably BK would have made another dumb free agent signing but we can't know for sure.

---

OK.

Quote:

---

Ultimate woulda-coulda-shoulda team:

Marcus Williams / Lue

Roy / Chills

Marvin / Diaw

Smoove / Solo / #11 pick

Hibbert / Zaza

---

I'll break it down even further in the 3 seasons you're talking about:

2005 - 06 squad:

PG - Lue, Salim, Ivey

G - Chill, Diaw, Donta

F - Smoove, Marvin

F - Harrington, Batista

C - ZaZa, Edwards

Offseason question #1: What do you do with Al Harrington at this point?

On this team, he'd obviously be the best player on the squad. And his contract is coming up at the end of the 06 season. Do you re-sign Al, or let him walk? If you let him walk, you better be sure that you can either get a big name FA to come here that can SCORE, or you better make sure that one of the kids you have on your roster, can become that scorer.

Offseason question #2: Who do you take in the draft, if you have the #1 or #2 pick?

Like I said before. Without JJ, that 05 - 06 team may be looking at being one of the worst 2 teams in the league. So we're not looking at a #5 pick, we're looking at a #1 or #2 pick.

BK was high on Bargnani, so does he take him? How about Aldridge? Thomas? God forbid . . but Morrison? The one guy that I don't think BK takes, is Foye or Roy, if he's picking #1 or #2. Roy would definitely be a good pick for that team, seeing that you still have a scoring need ( especially if Al is gone ). If you get the #2 or #3 pick, maybe you trade down to get Roy. But I think Aldridge may be the route that he goes here if he has a top 2 pick.

* Also of note: If that 05 - 06 squad finished with the worst record, I think that Woody is fired, or at least given a very short leash going into the 06 - 07 season. No 3 - 10 starts would be tolerated from Woody in 06 - 07, if the team was healthy. The hook would probably be quick.

2006 - 07 squad:

PG - Lue, Marcus Williams, Ivey

G - Chill, Salim

F - Marvin, Diaw ( if re-signed )

F - Smoove, Solomon

C - Aldridge, ZaZa, Batista

Here's a scenario for you. I think if this is the team that is going into the 06 - 07 season, the one guy that has a chance to really break out and be the scoring option, is none other than Salim Stoudamire.

When you look at this team without a JJ, Salim is the only guy, outside of Lue, who is capable of pouring in 20 - 25 ppg at any given time. Remember, Smoove hadn't shown the ability to do that early last year. And Chill was good for a solid 15 points, but not a solid 20. Marvin wasn't ready yet. Diaw would still be a scared rabbit on offense, looking to play more of a passing point forward, than look for his own offense. Aldridge would slowly be growing into his own, but far from a difference maker type of player. The offensive leaders would be Lue and Salim. Which means that we would probably live and die by the jumper more than ever.

(( And this is why it's probably more likely that the Hawks re-signed Harrington, than trade him and get the #11 pick. They'd have to have SOMEBODY for offense. But if they did trade him, it would be for Marvin to immeadiately try to step in and get the job done. Question is, could he do it right away? ))

I mean, look at that squad? The only guys who could create their own offense, would be Lue and Salim. Chill could still be the mini-slasher, but he relies on others to get him the ball when open so that he can knock down the shot. Marvin might start out slow, but develop as the season went along. Maybe Smoove breaks out at the PF spot earlier than expected. The situation may be far worse going into this draft with that team, than people think it is with our current squad.

Offseason question #1: Do we break the bank and go after Billups?

Cap space wouldn't be a problem with this team. We'd have more than enough money to go after any top notch UFA. But the question is always . . will they sign with us, even if we overpay? If they fail to get Billups, do the Hawks immeadiately go after a guy like Vince Carter, if he were to opt out of his one year remaining deal in Jersey?

Offseason question #2: Oden or Durant?

I could imagine the debate on this board now, if faced with this decision.

* Remember, no 25 ppg scorer in JJ to rely on.

* Center wouldn't necessarily be a position of need, seeing that we have Aldridge there. Now, if it's the belief that Aldridge would be a much better PF, than Center, then we could slide him there, and make a BIG DECISION on whether to start Josh Smith or Marvin.

* Smoove may or may not have developed to where he is now, so the decision isn't a no-brainer.

* Same with Marvin. He may be better than he is right now, because he'd be given the chance to start right away in his rookie year.

* Chill would be Chill.

* Lue would be the leader, but highly expendible.

* Salim would either be rotting away on the bench, or be the "Monta Ellis" of our team, leading the team in scoring, as a 6th or 7th man.

As many questions as we have now, there would be even MORE questions surrounding this team at this point right now.

So do you get the center that can play great defense, but is still developing as an offensive force?

Or do you get another SF, that has the capability to become the next great scorer in this league in a very few years?

I think you would still have to go with Oden, and hope that Smoove and Marvin are developing into nice players by now.

Offseason question #3: Who do you take at #11?

Even more debate would surround this selection. If Williams plays lackluster in his rookie season, would Hawk fans still be crying about obtaining a PG, especially with Lue being in his last year? Or would we be looking for a guy who could score in bunches, regardless of position?

The choices may still boil down to Law or Crittenton. Whomever was chosen at #11, they'd probably have to show the ability to score the basketball.

Projected 2007 - 08 lineup:

PG - Lue, Marcus

G - Chill, Salim

F - Smoove, Marvin

F - Aldridge, Solomon

C - Oden, ZaZa

#11 pick: choose between Critt or Law or another scorer at any position.

Quote:

---

So, maybe even our best moves have bit us in the arse. We can't really judge it completely until tonight. If we don't get a top 3 pick this year, we'll be joining mediocre team hell. Our team will probably be good enough to win 40 games, never contend, no future lotto chances, and be capped out to boot.

However, if we do get a top 3 pick (even #3) - it's redemption time. We will have assembled enough capital in order to at least have a chance. With Oden we would be undeniably be the best positioned team in the East for a bright future in a couple of years.

---

I personally think the JJ move saved us from being the 1999 - 2002 Chicago Bulls. In 4 years, they won 13, 17, 15, and 21 games . . despite having drafted:

* Elton Brand #1 and Ron Artest #16 in 1999.

* Marcus Fizer #4 and Jamal Crawford #8 in 2000. ( they had three 2nd round picks that year too. The #32, #33, and #34 picks. )

* Eddy Curry #4 and trading Brand for Tyson Chandler, who went #2, in 2001.

* and Jay Williams #2, who had a horrible rookie year that season, before basially ending his career with that motorcycle accident.

The JJ move gave us a bonafide star to build the team around, with the chance to have our young talent develop as well.

The vast majority of the time, young teams just don't win in this league. It's proven every year. You'll see a team slip through the cracks here and there. But for the most part, they just don't win. The veteran teams win. It's no coincidence that San Antonio and Detroit are 2 of the final 4 teams for the championship.

This isn't saying that I would've done all of the moves that BK has done. It's pretty obvious to everyone that we should've gotten one of the PGs instead of Marvin, because both PGs seem to be more NBA ready than Marvin, even if he turns out to be the better player in the future.

But the JJ trade? I'd do that again in a heartbeat.

I'd just hope that the team wouldn't be as injured in the 06 - 07 campaign.

[txsting]

Wow northcyde - you put a lot into that. I feel obligated to give you a reply here.

Your scenarios are every bit as valid and likely as mine - i could certainly see it playing out like you said.

The 07-08 lineup you come up with is actually better than what I had envisioned. If anything, it seems to support the surprising notion that we could actually have been stronger without the JJ trade, knowing what we know now.

I enjoy drawing out these scenarios. But to be fair, I've come to the conclusion that you have to judge the JJ deal (or any deal) on the known facts and not on 2nd and 3rd levels of ramifications which cannot be accurately predicted, despite being fun to do.

So given that, the deal was

Diaw, #21 in 2006, ? in 2007/08 (we'll see tonight)

FOR

JJ

If we get a top 3 tonight, we are WAY ahead on the JJ deal, and we'll likely pay back PHX with a mediocre pick next year.

If PHX gets the #4 or #5 pick, IMO we very likely lost in the deal, even if you put ramifications aside. EDIT: but it was still a good gamble since we netted an all-star and retained a shot at greatness through the lottery.