What is the plan?

[macdaddy]

Do you really think we're better? I would have loved to see Joe play in Bud's system with Millsap and Korver. We should have gotten rid of Marvin and Smoove a long time ago. We should have made Teague the man.. A long time ago. Our best is still when we played Chicago in the 2nd round of the playoffs. We are not that good mac. I will agree that BK got rid of everything at the same time and we sucked and got high draft picks. DFerry is doing the same thing but he didn't get rid of everything at the same time. He's pulling a Big tuna and he's bringing in the ingredients that he wants. Nobody has an anchor.. Everybody can be moved. That was the same way BK started.

Its not that i think we are better, we are. We were better the year after Joe was gone than we were his last year here. With Joe/Smoove/(rusty)horford we couldn't get by the Celtics in the first round. The celtics were creaky and we had every opportunity to win that series but we just weren't that good. The next year without Joe we play the Pacers, a much better team than the Celts, and play a much better series. You could argue we weren't better but we certainly were not worse.

We are better this year than we were last year. With Smoove gone and almost no long term contracts we are a much better team than the previous year. And if Horford was healthy i'd put this team against any of the 'core' hawks teams.

So I'm just not seeing the similarities to BK. So Ferry is doing the same thing EXCEPT not getting rid of everyone at once and not tanking and not losing and making smart moves to move up without first sinking to new depths. How is that the same thing?

[MrMeltdown]

We are not a better team. We let a borderline all-star walk in Josh. We acquired a borderline all-star in Millsap. We let a 6th man of the year walk in Jamal. We acquired a 6th man of the year in Lou. We lost one of the best go to guys at the end of games in Joe and really didn't replace that.

If we had of got something for Josh and Jamal instead of trying to replace them with similar talent while losing them for nothing we could have been a better team.

[capstone21]

We are not a better team. We let a borderline all-star walk in Josh. We acquired a borderline all-star in Millsap. We let a 6th man of the year walk in Jamal. We acquired a 6th man of the year in Lou. We lost one of the best go to guys at the end of games in Joe and really didn't replace that.

If we had of got something for Josh and Jamal instead of trying to replace them with similar talent while losing them for nothing we could have been a better team.

One thing that has changed is that we have a quality coach with a true system. We play more of a true team game now and that has made a big difference

[Atlantaholic]

Ferry is only in his second season here and is building a foundation with coach Bud, who BTW is easily the best coach we've had since Lenny Wilkins. Every year he has been here he has made good moves. He got crucified for not getting Dwight Howard, but I believe it may have ended up being better for us in the long run, as Dwight is clearly not the player he was in Orlando anymore especially on Defense. Houston is actually playing worse defense this year than last year. Teague-Horford-Millsap all under affordable contracts is a great foundation.

[MrMeltdown]

So Bud is better than LD and Woody who took us to multiple playoffs after less than 40 games?

[Guest]

Better not better? All I know is we are no worse off having let out Allstar, 6th man, Border line Allstar leave. We got to the same place in the playoffs.This year before Al went down - same place in playoffs, with Al gone - same place in playoffs. 1ST ROUND EXIT!All I know is I'm enjoying this season and watching the type of basketball we are playing!GO HAWKS!!!

[ag82]

So Bud is better than LD and Woody who took us to multiple playoffs after less than 40 games?

Yes.

[Atlantaholic]

So Bud is better than LD and Woody who took us to multiple playoffs after less than 40 games?

So it's early enough to judge Ferry, but not Bud??? how does that work?

Anyhoo, my comment is based off of the observation that we look more polished in these less than 40 games than we did after 5 years with Woodson. Under Woodson, and to a lesser extent Drew I was constantly yelling at the TV as I watched players stand around off ball, dribble the ball for over 8 seconds without making a move, switch on defense non stop and for no reason (the Knicks are absolutely comical this year on how they are switching btw... grantland wrote an entire article highlighting how ridiculous their defense has been). This year all of those things are almost completely gone. In addition to the personal eye test, virtually every opposing commentator, journalist (the ones who decide to pay attention to us) and opposing coaches mention how well we move the ball and how good our players execute, and they almost always mention Bud and how impressive he has been for a rookie coach --- Outside of the graphic showing the improvement in the win column, I can't remember teams ever saying anything specifically positive about Woodson, and often remember opposing commentators deriding our style of play, to the point of literally insulting us in game. Before the Horford injury this team was taking off big time and those 4-5 games where we were lighing it up were the best team basketball I've seen probably ever for this team. Now with limited talent on the squad, the overall results this year will probably not be as good as with Woodson and Drew during their best years, but it won't be because of Bud.

Tell you what, find me a single article about the Hawks during the Woodson/Drew era that compliments our in game strategy and execution the way this one does and I'll give you this argument:

http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-131223/daily-dime-heat-hold-spurs-hawks

Most telling part about how much a great job Bud has done this year is this quote IMO:

"It took a do-it-all effort from LeBron because, well, the Hawks played Spurs basketball almost better than the Spurs."

[Diesel]

Its not that i think we are better, we are. We were better the year after Joe was gone than we were his last year here. With Joe/Smoove/(rusty)horford we couldn't get by the Celtics in the first round. The celtics were creaky and we had every opportunity to win that series but we just weren't that good. The next year without Joe we play the Pacers, a much better team than the Celts, and play a much better series. You could argue we weren't better but we certainly were not worse.

We are better this year than we were last year. With Smoove gone and almost no long term contracts we are a much better team than the previous year. And if Horford was healthy i'd put this team against any of the 'core' hawks teams.

So I'm just not seeing the similarities to BK. So Ferry is doing the same thing EXCEPT not getting rid of everyone at once and not tanking and not losing and making smart moves to move up without first sinking to new depths. How is that the same thing?

So you want to ignore the injuries we had the last year that Joe was here. Horf with the PEC Torn the first time. Josh missed some games too. Joe missed a stretch of games also. That team made it to the playoffs in spite of all the injuries it had and for you that has become "the standard". I'm laughing.

[Diesel]

Better not better? All I know is we are no worse off having let out Allstar, 6th man, Border line Allstar leave. We got to the same place in the playoffs.This year before Al went down - same place in playoffs, with Al gone - same place in playoffs.1ST ROUND EXIT!All I know is I'm enjoying this season and watching the type of basketball we are playing!GO HAWKS!!!

I will say this... Millsap is a team upgrade when compared to Smoove. Millsap will play team ball better than Smoove did. Smoove had better potential but like I always say, Potential unrealized = Nothing.

However, my focus was Joe Johnson. Mac or somebody said that we were better because we got rid of Joe. I say, we never saw Joe under Bud with no Smoove so how can we claim better?? It makes no sense.

[nathan2331]

 I will say this... Millsap is a team upgrade when compared to Smoove.  Millsap will play team ball better than Smoove did.  Smoove had better potential but like I always say, Potential unrealized = Nothing.However, my focus was Joe Johnson.  Mac or somebody said that we were better because we got rid of Joe.  I say, we never saw Joe under Bud with no Smoove so how can we claim better??  It makes no sense.

You can debate how good of a player Joe would have been in this system is the reality is that we were smart to get out of that contract when we did. He's way overpaid and its not even close. The only time the Nets will ever be able to trade him is when is expiring.

[Diesel]

You can debate how good of a player Joe would have been in this system is the reality is that we were smart to get out of that contract when we did. He's way overpaid and its not even close. The only time the Nets will ever be able to trade him is when is expiring.

The problem Nate is that we really got nothing for Joe. We traded Joe for ending contracts and the bulk of which we used on player raises and Brand and Lou. So, to say that we've made such grade moves by trading Joe means nothing until this trade of picks go down. The hope is that we're not trading 12 for 11.

[nathan2331]

 The problem Nate is that we really got nothing for Joe.  We traded Joe for ending contracts and the bulk of which we used on player raises and Brand and Lou.  So, to say that we've made such grade moves by trading Joe means nothing until this trade of picks go down.  The hope is that we're not trading 12 for 11.

I wouldn't care if we got rocks for Joe. I liked Joe while he was here. While he never elevated his gameto where we needed it, he did make us semi- relevant. As Lt. Gordon said, he was the hero we deserved, but not the one we needed right now, or something like that. But he's signed to a max contract he doesn't deserve. So yes getting out of it while taking back contacts that didn't handicap us was a great move, no doubt in my mind.

[Diesel]

I wouldn't care if we got rocks for Joe. I liked Joe while he was here. While he never elevated his gameto where we needed it, he did make us semi- relevant. As Lt. Gordon said, he was the hero we deserved, but not the one we needed right now, or something like that. But he's signed to a max contract he doesn't deserve. So yes getting out of it while taking back contacts that didn't handicap us was a great move, no doubt in my mind.

I'm not saying No to trading Joe. I'm saying that until we see what we got from Joe is better than Joe, it's wrong to say we did a great thing by trading Joe. Cap Flexibility means nothing unless we use it. So far we have used it on Player raises, Brand, and Lou. Now either I'm drunk or high or something but I would rather have Joe in Bud's System that Brand and Lou.

[Guest]

Korver.

[nathan2331]

 I'm not saying No to trading Joe.  I'm saying that until we see what we got from Joe is better than Joe, it's wrong to say we did a great thing by trading Joe.   Cap Flexibility means nothing unless we use it.  So far we have used it on Player raises, Brand, and Lou.   Now either I'm drunk or high or something but I would rather have Joe in Bud's System that Brand and Lou.

What? So you are actually saying you would have declined Joes trade to the Nets?! Let's see what would happen: a) Coach Bud doesn't come here. Part of the appeal of this team is that we have the flexibility to make moves other teams can't. Now yes, flexibility means nothing if you don't use it but who would you rather be us or the Nets who have no cap room through 2016. While it's a big if, I don't think Bud comes here of Joe's still on the books b) Joe's declining. He's only averaging 15.3 points on 43.6% shooting and I can only imagine how bad his defense is. What do you see in him that makes you willing to keep him at 21.4 million dollars?

[Diesel]

Korver.

The deal as it stands, as reported Sunday night by ESPN.com, calls for the Nets to send the expiring contracts of Jordan Farmar, Johan Petro, Anthony Morrow and Jordan Williams along with DeShawn Stevenson (via sign-and-trade) and a future first-round pick (lottery-protected in 2013 via Houston) to Atlanta in exchange for Johnson.

[Guest]

The deal as it stands, as reported Sunday night by ESPN.com, calls for the Nets to send the expiring contracts of Jordan Farmar, Johan Petro, Anthony Morrow and Jordan Williams along with DeShawn Stevenson (via sign-and-trade) and a future first-round pick (lottery-protected in 2013 via Houston) to Atlanta in exchange for Johnson.

How do you think we got Korver? We also received a trade exception as part of the deal that allowed us take Korver from the Bulls without sending back a player,

[Diesel]

What? So you are actually saying you would have declined Joes trade to the Nets?!Let's see what would happen: a) Coach Bud doesn't come here. Part of the appeal of this team is that we have the flexibility to make moves other teams can't. Now yes, flexibility means nothing if you don't use it but who would you rather be us or the Nets who have no cap room through 2016. While it's a big if, I don't think Bud comes here of Joe's still on the books b) Joe's declining. He's only averaging 15.3 points on 43.6% shooting and I can only imagine how bad his defense is. What do you see in him that makes you willing to keep him at 21.4 million dollars?

I'm saying I don't see anything gained from trading Joe YET. There's certainly not enough gained from trading Joe to say that we are better because we traded him. That's pure BS when you traded Joe for all ending deals and draft picks. Johan Petro is not making us better than Joe did.

Secondly, poor speculation on Bud. Bud came here because his good friend told him that we can run the team the way that you like and we can use metrics to get the players you need to be successful. If we had Joe and Ferry made the same pitch, Bud would have still stumbled his ass over here.

Thirdly. Joe is declining. In fact, everybody playing in iso offense is declining. However, what I said is that we haven't seen Joe in Bud's system playing next to Millsap and Korver.

Fourth... it's not what I see in Joe. It's what I don't see in this argument. We are not better because we traded Joe. First off we're not better, but we are more disciplined. We are what we are for a variety of reasons but if we had Lost Marvin and Smoove a lot sooner, we would be great. In fact, if we had traded Marvin and resigned Crawford, we would have been great.

The Hawks squawk fanbase has a problem because they believe that cap flexibility and capspace does something on the court. IT does nothing. The fact is you have to follow the money and when you do so, you'll find Brand, Pero, and Lou...

[Diesel]

How do you think we got Korver? We also received a trade exception as part of the deal that allowed us take Korver from the Bulls without sending back a player,

So you're on record as saying that Korver makes us better than us having Joe? Offensively and Defensively, Korver is bringing it so good that we're better with him than we would be with Joe. Joe is playing in a poor offensive system and he's still putting up better offensive numbers than Korver and his defense was always better than Korver's so your argument is what? Korver plus .... Until this swap of picks is concluded, we can't say that trading Joe made us better. Period.