Rick Sund is blowing smoke!

[LastDon]

Our perimeter players were exposed because we had a coach who was terrible at making adjustments and a offense that was based primarily on Isolations which is not a formula for success when playing against a shot blocker

Sturt the BPA formula that you have is very similar to the one BK had which caused us at one point to have a team full of small forwards

[LastDon]

The perimeter defensive woes come from a combination of things, most of which is simply a lack of quality defenders. Marvin Williams is the only player on the team that can guard other small forwards. Mike Bibby and Jamal Crawford can't guard a chair. Mo Evans isn't much better than either of them, and he clearly cannot guard opposing small fowards. Joe Johnson shouldn't be asked to guard opposing point guards, and he has to expend so much energy on offense that he uses defense to rest at times. Overall, it's not a good situation for the Hawks on the perimeter.

The interior defense is very good considering the switching defenses had Al Horford out on the perimeter guarding guards on occasion, and mis matches would pull Josh Smith away from the paint and to the perimeter, where he cannot defend at all.

This idea that the Hawks need a center is a knee jerk reaction to Dwight Howard. If the Hawks try to make there team so they can defend Dwight Howard, then they will never make that push over the hump. It wasn't Atlanta's inability to defend Dwight Howard that got them killed against Orlando. It was their inability to defend anyone else.

I saw a tottally different series from u KB.. I saw Hawk offense that was stagnent that allowed Orlando to get out in transition and also a hawk team that clearly had no answers for dwight howard. Any time a guy shoots prolly 80 percent from the field in a series a knee jerk reaction is well deserved.Dwight Howard and Lebron James are the players that stand in the way of us being elite. Therefore I'm all for knee jerk reactions in drafting players like James to match up wit James or a center to matchup with Howard. lol

[MaceCase]

Our team needs a center and we have to take the best center thats left at 24 if he is clearly better than the ones that are available late in the second.

Except if the actual BPA is a SG, PG, SF or PF then that C is not actually BPA but the BPA at his singular position. The argument is not draft the best C available just because he happens to be a center but rather draft the player with the most value period, even if it's at a position of abundance. And no, BK did not draft at BPA. Chills was not BPA but Smoove could be argued as being one, Marvin may have been seen as BPA but Shelden was a reach because BK drafted for need, Horf was BPA but Acie was drafting for need. Do you see a trend amongst the picks that weren't BPA but actually trying to fill a position of need?

[Tumbleweed]

Any fan who thinks we will find the answer to Dwight Howard at #24 needs to smoke another bowl. Our starting PG, SG, and SF were outplayed just as badly or worse for that whole series as well. I am with Sturt and all the rest who share this opinon.....Draft BPA and lets move on.

My post was in response to the fact that perimeter defense over improved frontcourt depth, would

better prepare us for the likes of the Lakers, Celtics, Cavs, or Magic in the postseason. Of course

the 24th pick will not get it done, BPA should be the priority there. Let's give some benefit of the doubt

on here sometimes.

But, somewhere they are going to have to find someone to match up with Gasol/Bynum's length, Howard's

physical prescence, and the depth of the Celtics bigmen. Unfortunately I don't see any solutions, GM's

hold on to their big men like they are precious metals, where as perimeter defenders can be had for a

soup bone.

[LastDon]

Except if the actual BPA is a SG, PG, SF or PF then that C is not actually BPA but the BPA at his singular position. The argument is not draft the best C available just because he happens to be a center but rather draft the player with the most value period, even if it's at a position of abundance. And no, BK did not draft at BPA. Chills was not BPA but Smoove could be argued as being one, Marvin may have been seen as BPA but Shelden was a reach because BK drafted for need, Horf was BPA but Acie was drafting for need. Do you see a trend amongst the picks that weren't BPA but actually trying to fill a position of need?

Woodson ruined Acie with his non true point guard friendly offense which utimately led to the firing of BK because of the owners unwillingness to fire woody.. Sheldon the world new was a reach. Marvin was supposedly the BPA lol...Chill was thought of as the BPA when we past on Andre Iguadola which was a mistake.BPA is basically based on the perception of the gm. Other than James Anderson, or Damion James from looking at the mocks Ive seen the BPA will clearly be one of those centers based on the NEEDS of the Hawks.

At 24 the guys I would considered BPA if available are as follows

Damion James

Jerome Jordan

Solomon Alabi(if when he works out he is not a stiff)

James Anderson

Thats how I rate the guys I would take at 24 based on the mock possibilites of nbadraft.net and draftexpress.com

[DrReality]

That's one thing you won't have to tell Rick twice, he loves to draft project centers.

Before he retires, the odds are he is going to land a real one!

Given how many times he's wiffed on trying to hit a homerun he's gotta get it right soon?

[sturt]

Sturt the BPA formula that you have is very similar to the one BK had which caused us at one point to have a team full of small forwards

Let's talk about "formula" since you brought that term into the discussion.

There is a formula to arriving at the determination of how players are ranked... ie, a player's perceived floor versus their perceived ceiling versus their perceived most-likely level of play.

But once that formula has been used to make that determination, the ranking is the ranking, and thus, the BPA is the BPA... by definition, BPA means whatever player is ranked highest on our board when our slot comes up, that's who we're taking.

Your responses thus far do not seem to indicate that that concept is understood b/c you keep attempting to mix BPA with team need, or what is also called PON, position of need.

And by definition, BPA is always going to be the player you have determined to have the best likelihood of succeeding... the PON is only that player that you have determined to have the best likelihood of succeeding AT THAT POSITION you've decided to take.

[KB21]

You lost me here.

BPA is BPA.

Team need is team need.

One or the other must take priority unless you happen to rate two players EXACTLY the same, and then can default to team need because of the tie.

If BPA leads us to another point guard, so be it, and for the rational reasons I've just explained. Enough said.

The thing is, there is no consensus on who the BPA actually is. Who we think the BPA is may not be the player the Hawks or the Twolves or the Blazers think is the BPA. In most cases, needs do have an effect on how the board is stacked. With the Hawks, they know they have a need for players who can give them defensive help on the perimeter, so players like Darington Hobson, Stanley Robinson, and Devin Ebanks will probably be weighted a little heavier than someone like Solomon Alabi.

[thescout]

BPA to a fill a need is what it's called. It would be like saying lewts draft another power forward if you went BPA and the best available was a power forward. All things being equal if a center grades out comparable to a guard/forward you draft the center.

The Hawks couldn't do anything right vs Orlando.They got tore up from the inside to the outside. Playoffs are usually won in the paint so the Hawks if their serious need to find another big man to add to what they have and maybe slow down Howard.Your not going to stop him but at least get a big man that can put a hand in his face.Having Horford guard him its no contest.

Orlando was hitting 3's all day vs the Hawks so either it is bad players defense or the philosphy.The Hawks need to take a page from the Celtics and find out how to slow down Orlando.

[LastDon]

The thing is, there is no consensus on who the BPA actually is. Who we think the BPA is may not be the player the Hawks or the Twolves or the Blazers think is the BPA. In most cases, needs do have an effect on how the board is stacked. With the Hawks, they know they have a need for players who can give them defensive help on the perimeter, so players like Darington Hobson, Stanley Robinson, and Devin Ebanks will probably be weighted a little heavier than someone like Solomon Alabi.

THE LAKERS HAVE SHOWN THE VALUE OF QUALITY LENGTH.. IF THERE IS A GUY AVAILABLE THAT IS BETTER THAN TWIN, MORRIS, AND JOE SMITH WE HAVE TO TAKE THEM. IF NOT WE WILL BE THE SAME FLAWED TEAM WITH A WASTED PICK WHO WANT GET A CHANCE TO DEVELOP BECAUSE OF THE VETERANS WE ALREADY HAVE ON THE PERIMETER

[LastDon]

BPA to a fill a need is what it's called. It would be like saying lewts draft another power forward if you went BPA and the best available was a power forward. All things being equal if a center grades out comparable to a guard/forward you draft the center.

The Hawks couldn't do anything right vs Orlando.They got tore up from the inside to the outside. Playoffs are usually won in the paint so the Hawks if their serious need to find another big man to add to what they have and maybe slow down Howard.Your not going to stop him but at least get a big man that can put a hand in his face.Having Horford guard him its no contest.

Orlando was hitting 3's all day vs the Hawks so either it is bad players defense or the philosphy.The Hawks need to take a page from the Celtics and find out how to slow down Orlando.

Exactly Scout! drafting a wing to rot on the bench would not be upgrading our team we need a BIG!

[LastDon]

Let's talk about "formula" since you brought that term into the discussion.

There is a formula to arriving at the determination of how players are ranked... ie, a player's perceived floor versus their perceived ceiling versus their perceived most-likely level of play.

But once that formula has been used to make that determination, the ranking is the ranking, and thus, the BPA is the BPA... by definition, BPA means whatever player is ranked highest on our board when our slot comes up, that's who we're taking.

Your responses thus far do not seem to indicate that that concept is understood b/c you keep attempting to mix BPA with team need, or what is also called PON, position of need.

And by definition, BPA is always going to be the player you have determined to have the best likelihood of succeeding... the PON is only that player that you have determined to have the best likelihood of succeeding AT THAT POSITION you've decided to take.

IMO the BPA is the guy that we can draft that is likely to come in and get minutes and minutes are limited on the perimeter with the players we have. Im not saying that we should automatically draft a center but we do need to draft someone who is going to make an impact. I think that a Big could make more of a impact on this team than a wing therefore a quality BIG would be the best player available in my estimation unless Damion James, Paul George, Luke Babbit, or James Anderson are available. In those particular situations we would have to weigh our options in whether to take a big or a wing. But based on the mocks I'v e seen those players will be long gone. One thing I think we all can agree on is that we will get a talented player at 24 however that talent would be a waisted one if a perimeter player is drafted because I anticipate having Johnson and childress on the roster next season. If Johnson or Chillz will not be back then a perimeter player would be useful. But if they are back and we get a little more length this team could be a dark horse to win a title.

[Admin]

You lost me here.

BPA is BPA.

Team need is team need.

One or the other must take priority unless you happen to rate two players EXACTLY the same, and then can default to team need because of the tie.

If BPA leads us to another point guard, so be it, and for the rational reasons I've just explained. Enough said.

That's not necessarily true. Take a look at the article I posted by Ford today in the draft section where he talks about how the successful drafting teams employ a tier system, where players are ranked into tiers according to best player and then you rank them inside of those tiers based on team need. What you're referring to is the traditional system, one which BK employed, and led us to taking Marvin because we considered him to be the BPA. Had we ranked the top 4 guys into the top tier it would have had us ranking them Bogut,Williams, Paul and then Marvin. And that's the system that we need to look at for our pick is to find that 4th or 5th tier of players and then rank them in those tiers based on team need.

[Buzzard]

Exactly Scout! drafting a wing to rot on the bench would not be upgrading our team we need a BIG!

Its is not exactly...Its IF a Center or PF grades out the same as a SG or SF, you then take the big. 1st off you are assuming that will happen after grading out these 20 or 30 players we are looking at. Secondly teams reach for bigs throughout every draft, with the highest graded bigs long gone by 24.

At 24 we are just as likely to get a SG or SF who can push JJ, Craw, Marv, and Mo for playing time as a Center or PF who can push Horf, ZaZA and Smoove for playing time. #24 has to be BPA no matter what position they play; or they will rot on the bench; and once their rookie contract is up may very well be out of the NBA all together...

[LastDon]

Personally I think when u pick this late in the draft NEED trumps everything unless a guy u view as a lottery pick falls in your lap. We have 8 or 9 quality veteran players the hawks biggest need is we need to add more length and interior defense. If this is not addressed in the draft or via free agency I will be upset. like I stated earlier we can get veteran wings all day for the low low in the nba. Quality BIGS are much more expensive. Guys like Von Wafer, Rashad Mcants, Childress, Barnes, and others can be had for little or nothing. We need a young BIG prospect and IM very confident that Rick is going to address this issue. We are going to to draft a BIG in the first round..

[LastDon]

Its is not exactly...Its IF a Center or PF grades out the same as a SG or SF, you then take the big. 1st off you are assuming that will happen after grading out these 20 or 30 players we are looking at. Secondly teams reach for bigs throughout every draft, with the highest graded bigs long gone by 24.

At 24 we are just as likely to get a SG or SF who can push JJ, Craw, Marv, and Mo for playing time as a Center or PF who can push Horf, ZaZA and Smoove for playing time. #24 has to be BPA no matter what position they play; or they will rot on the bench; and once their rookie contract is up may very well be out of the NBA all together...

We arent looking for guys to push Horford Smooth and Za Za. They are quality we need to get someone who will be more productive than Morris, Twin, and Joe Smith! I fill that JORDAN, Whiteside, Alabi, Sepherin, Pittman, can be better backups at center than what we currently have behind Al and Za Za. I also fill that those young prospects have much more potential than any stiff we can pickup via free agency unless we have plans to pay the mid level to Shaq which is highly unlikely

Edited June 19, 2010 by LastDon

[Buzzard]

Personally I think when u pick this late in the draft NEED trumps everything unless a guy u view as a lottery pick falls in your lap. We have 8 or 9 quality veteran players the hawks biggest need is we need to add more length and interior defense. If this is not addressed in the draft or via free agency I will be upset. like I stated earlier we can get veteran wings all day for the low low in the nba. Quality BIGS are much more expensive. Guys like Von Wafer, Rashad Mcants, Childress, Barnes, and others can be had for little or nothing. We need a young BIG prospect and IM very confident that Rick is going to address this issue. We are going to to draft a BIG in the first round..

No No No No No...completely opposite. The error is small this late in the draft. Once you get past the top fifteen to twenty the chances of drafting a starter are probably one in five or less. Have to get that starter quality not just for the bench, but also as a future asset. Draft a complete miss and nothing is gained this season or any season in the future.

[LastDon]

The list of quality veteran wings goes on and on..Tracy Mcgrady, Allen Iverson, Flip Murray for those that want Dominique Jones, Larry Hughes, The hawks will be making a huge mistake if we dont draft who we feel is the best center prospect available in this draft. I think that there are at least 4 or 5 future starting centers in this draft. I think that this is the year Rick gets lucky and get it right after years of failing to do so in Seattle

[LastDon]

No No No No No...completely opposite. The error is small this late in the draft. Once you get past the top fifteen to twenty the chances of drafting a starter are probably one in five or less. Have to get that starter quality not just for the bench, but also as a future asset. Draft a complete miss and nothing is gained this season or any season in the future.

I dont think that we will find a guy at 24 thats better than Flip Murray, Tracy Mcgrady, Allen Iverson, Larry Hughes, Matt Barnes, Rashard Mcants,nate robinson, ect. but look at the free agent centers available?? Alot of squawkers are looking at our team like we are still rebuilding. We are in contention for a CHAMPIONSHIP.. THE FUTURE IS NOW!

[LastDon]

That's not necessarily true. Take a look at the article I posted by Ford today in the draft section where he talks about how the successful drafting teams employ a tier system, where players are ranked into tiers according to best player and then you rank them inside of those tiers based on team need. What you're referring to is the traditional system, one which BK employed, and led us to taking Marvin because we considered him to be the BPA. Had we ranked the top 4 guys into the top tier it would have had us ranking them Bogut,Williams, Paul and then Marvin. And that's the system that we need to look at for our pick is to find that 4th or 5th tier of players and then rank them in those tiers based on team need.

I AGREE 100%