Billy Knight haters

[Diesel]

Diesel, it's funny how you believe Marvin's absence was a direct correlation with our winning streak but can't apply the same logic to Sund's entering and the Hawks finally have a winning season. Would that not be the same simple logic? It's a rhetorical question BTW don't count on me to respond and start an e-war with you. Not my style.

Mainly because a GM's reach is long. It can effect a team for years. I applaud Sund for signing Flip. It's the best move of his career after the Allen trade. But you can't give Sund credit for what was already here and is now the engine of the team.

BK brought in JJ.

BK traded for Bibby.

BK drafted Horf and Smoove.

That sir is the engine of this team.

Sund brings in Flip & Mo and we're supposed to recognize him as the reason why we're winning?

That really is not even relative to Marvin. My statement on the absence of Marvin is that we don't really miss him. We are dominating teams without Marvin. There's no drop in our scoring or defense without Marvin. I'm not saying that we're winning because Marvin is gone, I'm saying we're winning in spite of Marvin being gone.

[Sasquatch]

John Nash drafted Telfair at 13 over Jefferson, much to the surprise of everyone in his draft room who was expecting Jefferson to be picked.

The next year he had the chance to draft paul/Deron he decided to trade down and take Webster because he felt telfair was their pg of the future.

Instead of getting Jefferson and Paul or Deron they got Telfair and Webster. The result? Nash got canned and left a huge mess for the next GM to clean up. Luckily for Portland he did just that.

Just because Nash's screwups aren't as famous as BK's doesn't mean he was judged by a different standard. They both got canned.

Another deceptive analysis.

"I didn't come here to lose basketball games, trust me when I tell you," Nash said at his introductory news conference in July 2003.

But the Trail Blazers finished 41-41 in Nash's first season, snapping a streak of 21 consecutive playoff appearances. In 2004-05, the Trail Blazers had their first losing season since 1988-89. The fall to the bottom of the NBA was completed this season.

"This season" meaning 21-61 in 2006 when they finally pulled the plug.

If you really think this was the same standard applied to Billy you are not worth talking to. Billy's team went in a totally opposite and much more positive direction.

Nash's team got desperately worse each year he was there!

He got canned because his "team" was garbage.

Edited March 24, 2009 by Sasquatch

[Sasquatch]

Some people have a hard time admitting when they are wrong about somebody.

So it doesn't matter that every single player in our starting lineup was assembled by Billy Knight.

Doesn't matter that the cast is one of the youngest teams in the league with one of the brightest futures

He's judged by the players we didn't get.

Exactly!

Which raises serious questions.

About a year ago, I put up a poll asking if Atlanta fans were more upset over the Chris Paul draft issue or the Brett Favre trade issue. The obvious reason being that nobody ever took the heat that BK took when it came to the Favre issue.

Do you know it was overwhelmingly more "outrage" over the Chris Paul issue?

Get this:

1)Chris Paul has never won a championship, Favre has.

2)Chris Paul has never won MVP, Favre has.

3)Chris Paul has never even won a playoff series (if I recall correctly)!

Which leads me to one inescapable conclusion. This is about hate.

Billy takes more heat over the Chris Paul "issue" than the Portland GM that drafted Sam Bouie over Michael Jordan who is the greatest player of all time!

How do you explain this?

HATE.

[Sasquatch]

... I understand that. What I'm saying is that we passed up two players that you can build a team around so we had more chances to draft players that should be used to build around the aforementioned players.

Saying that you should give BK credit for the team that is on the floor and ignore everything else is as valid as saying that BK should only be evaluated based on what the team he could have built.

ok. fine.

Then should we ridicule all the General Managers that "passed up two players" named Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen the other year?

As you will recall, they were available and Danny Ainge traded for them. They actually won a CHAMPIONSHIP!

Basically, this ridiculous argument about focusing soley on which player a gm did not get is ludicrous, can go on and on with no end. And it is a standard that is only applied to BK, because it is the only avenue you have available to propagate your HATE.

[exodus]

ok. fine.

Then should we ridicule all the General Managers that "passed up two players" named Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen the other year?

As you will recall, they were available and Danny Ainge traded for them. They actually won a CHAMPIONSHIP!

Basically, this ridiculous argument about focusing soley on which player a gm did not get is ludicrous, can go on and on with no end. And it is a standard that is only applied to BK, because it is the only avenue you have available to propagate your HATE.

Given the lack of logic you have displayed throughout this thread this nonsensical post isn't surprising.

KG and Allen were traded. Obviously their respective teams got better offers from the Celtics than they got from other teams. Not every team had a young 20/10 big like Jefferson to give up for KG.

The "standard" applied to BK is the same one that was applied to Baylor, Nash etc. They are known for their draft screwups.

BK was seen as a national joke because of his draft picks. He isn't just seen as a joke among Hawks fans. The Shelden pick was boo'd a Phillips when it was announced. Top 6 picks don't come around often and when you get one you can't afford to waste it if you want to become a contender. BK wasted his repeatedly.

[Sasquatch]

Given the lack of logic you have displayed throughout this thread this nonsensical post isn't surprising.

KG and Allen were traded. Obviously their respective teams got better offers from the Celtics than they got from other teams. Not every team had a young 20/10 big like Jefferson to give up for KG.

The "standard" applied to BK is the same one that was applied to Baylor, Nash etc. They are known for their draft screwups.

BK was seen as a national joke because of his draft picks. He isn't just seen as a joke among Hawks fans. The Shelden pick was boo'd a Phillips when it was announced. Top 6 picks don't come around often and when you get one you can't afford to waste it if you want to become a contender. BK wasted his repeatedly.

OMG!

Are you gonna be the standard of logical thought?

We will start with the fact that the founder of this site has gone into detail regarding how pointless you and your viewpoints are but I will waste 30 seconds of my life to rebuke you just this once.

You are assuming that Jefferson was the only way to aquire KG which is ludicrous. If other gm's didn't have enough talent on their roster to aquire KG given the circumstances that the Timberwolves were facing, I think that shows how poorly stocked their rosters were, which in and of itself is an indictment. In the end, the point is that you can go on and on when you blame a gm soley on who he did not get. KG and Ray Allen were available. The team that got them won a championship. The point I am making is that it is just as ridiculous to nit pick over this, as it is to nit pick over who got picked behind a particular player on draft night. Especially, given the fact that those players have not even won rings. Many of them have not even won a playoff series.

For you to compare the John Nash situation to Billy Knighy is insane and not worthy of discussion as I have pointed out before. I wont waste my time researching Baylor, because I assume that argument is just as baseless. Nevertheless, it has also been pointed out that it is pointless to debate with you so I wont continue.

Good luck with your "problems".

Great Job Billy.

[exodus]

OMG!

You are assuming that Jefferson was the only way to aquire KG which is ludicrous. If other gm's didn't have enough talent on their roster to aquire KG given the circumstances that the Timberwolves were facing, I think that shows how poorly stocked their rosters were, which in and of itself is an indictment.

So in other words the since the Hawks didn't get KG in a trade that means the roster BK put together was too poorly stocked to get the job done. So basically you are labeling BK a failure because he didn't trade for KG. OK

[Sasquatch]

So in other words the since the Hawks didn't get KG in a trade that means the roster BK put together was too poorly stocked to get the job done. So basically you are labeling BK a failure because he didn't trade for KG. OK

I've tried to walk you through this.

Get some sleep.

[exodus]

I've tried to walk you through this.

Get some sleep.

Thanks for showing another way that BK failed as a GM. Frankly i had never though of the "failing to trade for KG" angle as a way to criticize BK but you sure opened my eyes.

[BusBoyIsBack]

I've never heard of a GM in any sport that's been so undeservingly bashed.

What other GM could build a team considered one of the best young teams in the league yet have their fans compare them to people who literally are legendary bad in their respective sport like Matt Millen?

We are the 5th youngest team in the league, and the Blazers are the only young team that you could say is outright more talented.

Edited March 24, 2009 by BusBoyIsBack

[exodus]

I've never heard of a GM in any sport that's been so undeservingly bashed.

What other GM could build a team considered one of the best young teams in the league yet have their fans compare them to people who literally are legendary bad in their respective sport like Matt Millen?

We are the 5th youngest team in the league, and the Blazers are the only young team that you could say is outright more talented.

This summer Sund will need to sign a starting calibur pg and also get more size. Does that sound familiar? That is right those are the same needs we have had for years.

One of BK's top 6 picks is in Greece while another languishes on the bench of one of the worst teams in the league. he didn't manage to pick any All-Stars with his top 6 picks but certainly passed over a few.

The opportunity to get a legit star doesn't come around often. when you have the opportunity to draft a star and say no thanks i'll take that freshman bench player or that badly undersized, unathetic wannabe big man you will get dogged for it.

His Shelden pick got boo'd at Phillips. The fans knew better than BK.

[crimedog]

Don't know if anyone will agree with this, or care, but whatever.

The problem with this sort of evaluation is that it assumes the same circumstances across the board. You say "find another GM who has built a winning, young, talented team that gets lambasted like BK" and I say "find another GM who had that many seasons of losing, that many high draft picks, and didn't ever lose his job". Chances are we will both find someone since there are hundreds (thousands?) of GMs in NBA history, but thats not the point because it doesn't represent the opportunities of any GM. By that standard, the guy who drafted Bowie was a good GM because he put together most of the peices of a team that went to the finals a couple of times and won 60+ games (after he left).

I think to properly evaluate a GM, you have to look at what he did with his opportunities and evaluate that (same with coaching, evaluate what the guy does as a coach, don't just look at the record and say "good" or "bad"). Going down the list of moves BK has made, some were good and some were bad. Unfortunately, the bad ones are bigger than the good ones whereas some GMs make bad moves that more than compensated by really big good moves they made (for example, drafting Smith and Horford were good moves but missing Roy and Paul were bad ones... Roy/Paul are awesomely good and were there for the taking and missing them sets us back more than getting Joe/Al pushes us forward - as a counterpoint, the Magic overpaid for Rashard but they didn't buckle under the pressure of some, like smartass Bill Simmons, and take Okafor over Dwight... that good move outweighs their bad move and its the inverse of the one we made with Paul/Marv).

Another thing to consider with good moves and bad moves is how easy of calls were they and how difficult of a call would it have been to go with a better alternative? We don't blame BK for missing Josh Howard, or Bynum... we don't blame Inman for missing on Barkley or Malone... we blame them for missing the guys drafted right after the wrong picks because obviously other people saw the value there.

[Sasquatch]

Don't know if anyone will agree with this, or care, but whatever.

The problem with this sort of evaluation is that it assumes the same circumstances across the board. You say "find another GM who has built a winning, young, talented team that gets lambasted like BK" and I say "find another GM who had that many seasons of losing, that many high draft picks, and didn't ever lose his job". Chances are we will both find someone since there are hundreds (thousands?) of GMs in NBA history, but thats not the point because it doesn't represent the opportunities of any GM. By that standard, the guy who drafted Bowie was a good GM because he put together most of the peices of a team that went to the finals a couple of times and won 60+ games (after he left).

I think to properly evaluate a GM, you have to look at what he did with his opportunities and evaluate that (same with coaching, evaluate what the guy does as a coach, don't just look at the record and say "good" or "bad"). Going down the list of moves BK has made, some were good and some were bad. Unfortunately, the bad ones are bigger than the good ones whereas some GMs make bad moves that more than compensated by really big good moves they made (for example, drafting Smith and Horford were good moves but missing Roy and Paul were bad ones... Roy/Paul are awesomely good and were there for the taking and missing them sets us back more than getting Joe/Al pushes us forward - as a counterpoint, the Magic overpaid for Rashard but they didn't buckle under the pressure of some, like smartass Bill Simmons, and take Okafor over Dwight... that good move outweighs their bad move and its the inverse of the one we made with Paul/Marv).

Another thing to consider with good moves and bad moves is how easy of calls were they and how difficult of a call would it have been to go with a better alternative? We don't blame BK for missing Josh Howard, or Bynum... we don't blame Inman for missing on Barkley or Malone... we blame them for missing the guys drafted right after the wrong picks because obviously other people saw the value there.

:computer8:

long...

convoluted...

no money shot...

You should never multiply entities beyond necessity.

A gm has done a good job if you have a good team with a good future.

This is the definition of the Atlanta Hawks.

Case closed.

Great job Billy!

I love this team!

I love the outlook!

[AHF]

The 1999-00 Minnesota Timberwolves. 50 game winners. Good team. Good future.

Kevin McHale must be a great GM!

[dlpin]

The 1999-00 Minnesota Timberwolves. 50 game winners. Good team. Good future.

Kevin McHale must be a great GM!

Clippers were also a young team on 05-06.

I won't get into this discussion, but I think that using average age to indicate youth is meaningless. And its even meaningless as an indicator of future.

Bibby is 30, flip is 29, and JJ is 27, and none of them is signed for more than 2 years.

[TroyMcClure]

:computer8:

long...

convoluted...

no money shot...

You should never multiply entities beyond necessity.

A gm has done a good job if you have a good team with a good future.

This is the definition of the Atlanta Hawks.

Case closed.

Great job Billy!

I love this team!

I love the outlook!

You are either 12 yrs old or you have no capacity to remember before 2000. The old Hawks had a better team and I'm not even going to get into Wilkens vs. Woodson. The whole point was to build a team that could go beyond the 2nd round, not to it! So, excuse me if my panties aren't in a wad over this organization and the teams they put before us. My apologies to any sensitive ladies. Crimedog is right, BTW.

[TroyMcClure]

Exactly!

Which raises serious questions.

About a year ago, I put up a poll asking if Atlanta fans were more upset over the Chris Paul draft issue or the Brett Favre trade issue. The obvious reason being that nobody ever took the heat that BK took when it came to the Favre issue.

Do you know it was overwhelmingly more "outrage" over the Chris Paul issue?

Get this:

1)Chris Paul has never won a championship, Favre has.

2)Chris Paul has never won MVP, Favre has.

3)Chris Paul has never even won a playoff series (if I recall correctly)!

Which leads me to one inescapable conclusion. This is about hate.

Billy takes more heat over the Chris Paul "issue" than the Portland GM that drafted Sam Bouie over Michael Jordan who is the greatest player of all time!

How do you explain this?

HATE.

Whatever point you thought you were making is irelevant. Two different sports. Besides, Favre was a 2nd rounder with half an intestine and a propensity to get sh*t faced in Buckhead. He said himself that he would have never even come close to the success he has had in Green Bay if he had stayed in Atlanta.

You made a poll on Hawksquawk, what do you think is of more interest? The Hawks or The Packers?

It's not about hate, it's about intelligence and perspective. And nobody really hates on Portland. Their fans certainly haven't. And the national media was very understanding, given the fact of what MJ became. It's ok to take a chance on a 7 ftr.

[Sasquatch]

The 1999-00 Minnesota Timberwolves. 50 game winners. Good team. Good future.

Kevin McHale must be a great GM!

"It was also during McHale's reign that the Timberwolves were punished by the NBA for making a secret deal with free agent forward Joe Smith to circumvent the league's salary cap rules. Before the 1998-1999 season, Smith agreed in secret to sign three one-year contracts with the Timberwolves for less than his market value. In return, Smith received a promise that the Timberwolves would give him a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract before the 2001-2002 season.

In 2000, after word of the secret agreement got out, NBA commissioner David Stern voided Smith's final one-year contract with the Timberwolves, making Smith a free agent. Stern also took away three of the Timberwolves' next five first-round draft picks and fined the team $3.5 million. Smith signed with Detroit for one season, but came back to Minnesota before the 2001-2002 season as a free agent."

Tell me again about the bright future that Kevin Mchale gave the Timberwolves?

And you are a moderator?

Some slight of hand.

Great job Billy Knight!

By the way...

I guess, given this latest development, I would be remiss if I did not site outstanding character as another one of your attributes.

[Sasquatch]

Whatever point you thought you were making is irelevant. Two different sports. Besides, Favre was a 2nd rounder with half an intestine and a propensity to get sh*t faced in Buckhead. He said himself that he would have never even come close to the success he has had in Green Bay if he had stayed in Atlanta.

You made a poll on Hawksquawk, what do you think is of more interest? The Hawks or The Packers?

It's not about hate, it's about intelligence and perspective. And nobody really hates on Portland. Their fans certainly haven't. And the national media was very understanding, given the fact of what MJ became. It's ok to take a chance on a 7 ftr.

Wow!

What the heck is this?

So? Since Favre was a 2nd rounder we should be less outraged over his: Championship, MVP, overall post-season success?

Different sport... So what?

Ah... Yes... the national media was "very understanding" regarding the Sam Bowie/Michael Jordan issue which is... Kind of? Oh... I don't know...

THE POINT! MAYBE?

So there we have it.

A Billy Knight hater that acknowledges that Billy Knight has taken more heat for drafting Marvin Williams over Chris Paul than Portland took for drafting Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan. And, supposedly, it makes perfect sense.

Oh and ahhh... "It's ok to take a chance on a 7 ftr."

Really? Well, what if he is: 6'11.5", 6'11", or 6'10", or 6'9"... What exactly is the allowable threshold for passing over the greatest basketball player and one of the greatest/legendary athletes of all time?

I guess it's pretty clear by now which cylinder isn't firing.

Case closed!

Great job Billy!

[exodus]

"It was also during McHale's reign that the Timberwolves were punished by the NBA for making a secret deal with free agent forward Joe Smith to circumvent the league's salary cap rules. Before the 1998-1999 season, Smith agreed in secret to sign three one-year contracts with the Timberwolves for less than his market value. In return, Smith received a promise that the Timberwolves would give him a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract before the 2001-2002 season.

In 2000, after word of the secret agreement got out, NBA commissioner David Stern voided Smith's final one-year contract with the Timberwolves, making Smith a free agent. Stern also took away three of the Timberwolves' next five first-round draft picks and fined the team $3.5 million. Smith signed with Detroit for one season, but came back to Minnesota before the 2001-2002 season as a free agent."

Tell me again about the bright future that Kevin Mchale gave the Timberwolves?

And you are a moderator?

Some slight of hand.

Great job Billy Knight!

By the way...

I guess, given this latest development, I would be remiss if I did not site outstanding character as another one of your attributes.

AHF was being sarcastic genius.

Edited March 25, 2009 by exodus