I'm just gonna say it............

[Wretch]

I gotta get this off my chest...  (Begin rant)

 

We had a #1 seed...

 

 

 

We had a regular scoring leader:

(And in 1986 we had a scoring CHAMPION)

 

 

 

We had a shoe commercial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njOYSWUgAME

 

 

We had a Sports Illustrated cover:

 

The fact that we are even IN this conversation:

 

And just look at this...

 

 

People were coming to see the Hawks play:

Y'know....

 

There's an underlying theme here that sort of answers the question as to why we've been irrelevant.  We have not been truly relevant since Dominique left us.  Why is that?  Well, one big OBVIOUS reason, to me anyway, is because of that dreaded S-word that's sort of "not okay" to use these days.

 

What word is that?  

 

Well, you know..."star."  

 

(DUN-DUNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!)

 

Yeah, I said it.  It's silly, but it's gotten to be...  Well, it's like a forbidden word around here.  Use the S-word, and people start coming at you with things like:

 

"It takes a TEAM to win."  

"There are only 3 stars in the whole the NBA."

"You can win without a star."

 

Folks will want you to define exactly what a star is and why exactly you need one.  As if it needs explaining...  Here I thought all these years that the best guys lead teams to the big games.

"Yeah, that's BS because the NBA caters to stars.  They're really not that good, but since the clueless masses love the stars, the NBA messes with the rules, makes bad calls, and does other stuff to make sure the stars win the games.  It has nothing to do with talent."

 

^^No the talent there, just the NBA making those shots go in...

 

Then when you do define what a star is, people will downplay the significance of it by throwing out names like Chris Paul and Kevin Durant and say, "Neither one of these guys has won anything."  Then, they'll take Tim Duncan and turn him into a mere mortal by ignoring the fact that this guy has been making awesome sauce on a daily basis for eons and can basically pull it out of his bag of tricks when necessary.

 

...and everything BUT having elite talent is the reason for all of our woes:

 

"The fans in Atlanta suck...that's why they don't come to games (even though the show up by the truckload to see other teams with stars)."
 

"The free agents don't look at us because THEY suck...and because the fans suck."

 

"The media hates on us because THEY suck, not because y'know...we're not that interesting."

 

"We're not winning the big games because we're not playing the right way."

 

"We can't get games on TV because the sports world is brainwashed...they don't know what good basketball is."

 

Hell, even one of the greatest stars we've ever had...  We just wanna throw this guy to the dogs.  I mean, people actually have a problem with him getting his own statue.  The S-word has become politically incorrect around here...and yet, the last time we had a star, there was so much going right for us.  It's almost like we're afraid of that word because we don't know any better.  We don't want a star.  We can't even use that word.  We make up excuses about how difficult it is to get one.  We jump through all sorts of hoops to prove how "meaningless" the label is and just how few "stars" there are.

 

...and you know what?

 

I'm calling bullshit.  We need the attention a star will draw from free agents - that's kinda what those guys look at when they consider moving.  We need the positive attention that the the fans will give.  We need a guy that can draw attention on the court and can score in the clutch.  We need a guy that can provide consistent, prolific scoring.

 

I'm not saying a star is ALL we need (repeat this 100 times so I don't have to explain it with a book).  I'm also not saying that we can't advance to the ECF's without a star or that we can't build a Detroit model team.  We are, however, trying to swim upstream with this line of thinking...and for what?

 

We are so out of the loop, that some of us have forgotten the fundamental principle of competition: do it better than everyone else.  In sports, the guys that do it better than anyone else?  

 

We call those dudes STARS...and the Atlanta Hawks need one.  

 

(End rant)

Edited September 22, 2014 by Wretch

[Guest]

Whew, thanks for clearing that up. :-)

I think most Squawkers are aware that a 'STAR' is needed to win Championships to draw fringe fans etc. If memory serves me correct the debate has always been the best way to go about getting said star (please let's NOT have that discussion again).

[HawkItus]

I feel you, but you are missing one point.  We need the star for this all to work.  Nique was great, but that season is a bit of a misnomer.  He had opportunities with better teams and couldn't get out the 2nd round.  Nique wasn't the star.   Jordan, Hakeem, Bird, and Magic were the star during different points of that time period.  Now its Lebron and Tim Duncan.  We need that guy.  If someone can figure out who the next one is and bring him here I say do it. 

[Wretch]

Whew, thanks for clearing that up. :-)

I think most Squawkers are aware that a 'STAR' is needed to win Championships to draw fringe fans etc. If memory serves me correct the debate has always been the best way to go about getting said star (please let's NOT have that discussion again).

 

OHHHHHH no.  You would think it's a given, but I've had this conversation with folks for years.  It's not always the "we don't need a star." Arguement.  Sometimes it's about attendance...and why it's so bad.  Sometimes it's how we can build a team without a star.  Not too long ago when we were rebuilding, people were citing how we had no star in the 90's and won 50+ games.  There's a lot of conversation about what it takes to be a star and some people will tell you that there are only 3 or 4 of them in the whole league.

 

The bigger conversation is how do we get one, but make no mistake...some folks make a big huff about the S-word.

 

I feel you, but you are missing one point.  We need the star for this all to work.  Nique was great, but that season is a bit of a misnomer.  He had opportunities with better teams and couldn't get out the 2nd round.  Nique wasn't the star.   Jordan, Hakeem, Bird, and Magic were the star during different points of that time period.  Now its Lebron and Tim Duncan.  We need that guy.  If someone can figure out who the next one is and bring him here I say do it. 

 

Sure he was a star, he didn't have the best supporting cast.  You also have to look at the teams we had to go through.  The Bad Boy Pistons? Jordan's Bulls?  The Celtics?  Nique was good, be he wasn't beating those teams by himself.  That doesn't make him less of a star.

 

I certainly could build a contender around him right now.....

Edited September 22, 2014 by Wretch

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

It takes a TEAM to win championships, but that team needs a leader.  Michael doesn't win without Pippen or Kerr, but for the two years MJ retired ('94 & '95), the Bulls weren't even in the ECF.  It was the Nique show at the Omni, but no one else showed up.  Atlanta had a star and we showed up to see him.

 

And the Hawks have a star in Al Horford.  The problem is that Al Horford is a complimentary star... Kinda like Pippen was to Jordan.  Durant is the modern-day Nique.  They aren't really similar players, but as for how they are viewed around the league, they are similar.  I reeeally am hoping OKC has a miserable season this year and we can try to snag him.  He is the perfect superstar for Bud's system of ball movement and shooting.

 

Oh:

 

We had a shoe commercial:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljNdfgoLjNY

 

Two actually:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjsXvvk2yRY

 

We had a magazine cover:

 

 

A transcendent dunk contest:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EfYwBb2iho

 

Annnddd...

 

Attendance during the WLOC era made it to 20th.  Why did fan support increase, but could not make it in to the top 20?  Because the fact is to generate fan support, you have to generate interest.  Atlanta's interest was piqued in WLOC era until the fans saw that the teams ceiling was the second round. The Pistons were number one because they consistently made it to the ECF, made it to the Finals twice, and even won in 2004.  That Pistons team also embodied what Detroit is too -- a blue-collar, hard-working city. The Pistons were number 1 in attendance during that time... Now the Pistons are dead last because the fans no longer believe in them.

 

The problem with attendance isn't the fans, it's the lack of belief.  If :insert GM here: can form a team that makes it to the ECF or can draft the next transcendent star, the Hawks will start to see those seats at the Philips arena start to fill up.

[GameTime]

Ferry's plan (Save up your cap space)  is doomed to fail now.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Wretch has been on FIRE all year with his posts. Excellent analysis of our situation.

[AHF]

If Al is the best star we have had let's use a reality check on that one.  Al Horford has been closer to Horace Grant than Scottie Pippen.

 

Through the same 7th season they are pretty darn close in their per minute production: 

 

http://bkref.com/tiny/odGoC

 

Al has been slightly better but can you imagine how much buzz Horace Grant would generate as your best player?

 

Throwing that into the same conversation as Nique seems like a red herring to me.  If the comparison is Josh Smith that is equally off base.  Think Dennis Rodman for his counterpoint if you want.  None of these galvanized a fan base or will ever do so.  They can be great complimentary players to a true star but not real stars on their own.

[JTB]

I gotta get this off my chest...  (Begin rant)

 

We had a #1 seed...

 

 

 

We had a regular scoring leader:

(And in 1986 we had a scoring CHAMPION)

 

 

 

We had a shoe commercial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njOYSWUgAME

 

 

We had a Sports Illustrated cover:

 

The fact that we are even IN this conversation:

 

And just look at this...

 

 

People were coming to see the Hawks play:

Y'know....

 

There's an underlying theme here that sort of answers the question as to why we've been irrelevant.  We have not been truly relevant since Dominique left us.  Why is that?  Well, one big OBVIOUS reason, to me anyway, is because of that dreaded S-word that's sort of "not okay" to use these days.

 

What word is that?  

 

Well, you know..."star."  

 

(DUN-DUNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!)

 

Yeah, I said it.  It's silly, but it's gotten to be...  Well, it's like a forbidden word around here.  Use the S-word, and people start coming at you with things like:

 

"It takes a TEAM to win."  

"There are only 3 stars in the whole the NBA."

"You can win without a star."

 

Folks will want you to define exactly what a star is and why exactly you need one.  As if it needs explaining...  Here I thought all these years that the best guys lead teams to the big games.

"Yeah, that's BS because the NBA caters to stars.  They're really not that good, but since the clueless masses love the stars, the NBA messes with the rules, makes bad calls, and does other stuff to make sure the stars win the games.  It has nothing to do with talent."

 

^^No the talent there, just the NBA making those shots go in...

 

Then when you do define what a star is, people will downplay the significance of it by throwing out names like Chris Paul and Kevin Durant and say, "Neither one of these guys has won anything."  Then, they'll take Tim Duncan and turn him into a mere mortal by ignoring the fact that this guy has been making awesome sauce on a daily basis for eons and can basically pull it out of his bag of tricks when necessary.

 

...and everything BUT having elite talent is the reason for all of our woes:

 

"The fans in Atlanta suck...that's why they don't come to games (even though the show up by the truckload to see other teams with stars)."

 

"The free agents don't look at us because THEY suck...and because the fans suck."

 

"The media hates on us because THEY suck, not because y'know...we're not that interesting."

 

"We're not winning the big games because we're not playing the right way."

 

"We can't get games on TV because the sports world is brainwashed...they don't know what good basketball is."

 

Hell, even one of the greatest stars we've ever had...  We just wanna throw this guy to the dogs.  I mean, people actually have a problem with him getting his own statue.  The S-word has become politically incorrect around here...and yet, the last time we had a star, there was so much going right for us.  It's almost like we're afraid of that word because we don't know any better.  We don't want a star.  We can't even use that word.  We make up excuses about how difficult it is to get one.  We jump through all sorts of hoops to prove how "meaningless" the label is and just how few "stars" there are.

 

...and you know what?

 

I'm calling bullshit.  We need the attention a star will draw from free agents - that's kinda what those guys look at when they consider moving.  We need the positive attention that the the fans will give.  We need a guy that can draw attention on the court and can score in the clutch.  We need a guy that can provide consistent, prolific scoring.

 

I'm not saying a star is ALL we need (repeat this 100 times so I don't have to explain it with a book).  I'm also not saying that we can't advance to the ECF's without a star or that we can't build a Detroit model team.  We are, however, trying to swim upstream with this line of thinking...and for what?

 

We are so out of the loop, that some of us have forgotten the fundamental principle of competition: do it better than everyone else.  In sports, the guys that do it better than anyone else?  

 

We call those dudes STARS...and the Atlanta Hawks need one.  

 

(End rant)

Good post...I definitely agree we need a star player surrounded around a team.

I have always hoped that one of our players drafted or acquired in a trade would turn into a star for us.

I hope Teague can become something special or at least to all star level every other year or something like that.

You have to have a team to win championships but you definitely will find a hard time winning without that s word being in the team.

Last I've always felt like if the hawks ever get a star player again it's going to do so much for our franchise more so than it would have back in the day with nique....guess I'm saying I feel once we get a star this time around we will be one of those franchises that always keep a star on the team for years to come.

Atlanta can offer a lot to the nba as far as money goes and I know silver knows that!

[Wretch]

It takes a TEAM to win championships, but that team needs a leader.  Michael doesn't win without Pippen or Kerr, but for the two years MJ retired ('94 & '95), the Bulls weren't even in the ECF.  It was the Nique show at the Omni, but no one else showed up.  Atlanta had a star and we showed up to see him.

 

And the Hawks have a star in Al Horford.  The problem is that Al Horford is a complimentary star... Kinda like Pippen was to Jordan.  Durant is the modern-day Nique.  They aren't really similar players, but as for how they are viewed around the league, they are similar.  I reeeally am hoping OKC has a miserable season this year and we can try to snag him.  He is the perfect superstar for Bud's system of ball movement and shooting.

 

Oh:

 

We had a shoe commercial:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljNdfgoLjNY

 

Two actually:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjsXvvk2yRY

 

We had a magazine cover:

 

 

A transcendent dunk contest:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EfYwBb2iho

 

Annnddd...

 

Attendance during the WLOC era made it to 20th.  Why did fan support increase, but could not make it in to the top 20?  Because the fact is to generate fan support, you have to generate interest.  Atlanta's interest was piqued in WLOC era until the fans saw that the teams ceiling was the second round. The Pistons were number one because they consistently made it to the ECF, made it to the Finals twice, and even won in 2004.  That Pistons team also embodied what Detroit is too -- a blue-collar, hard-working city. The Pistons were number 1 in attendance during that time... Now the Pistons are dead last because the fans no longer believe in them.

 

The problem with attendance isn't the fans, it's the lack of belief.  If :insert GM here: can form a team that makes it to the ECF or can draft the next transcendent star, the Hawks will start to see those seats at the Philips arena start to fill up.

 

WINNING cures all ills. Winning is what the Pistons did, but the problem with emulating them is that it's difficult.  For one, you need to find these perfect complimentary cast offs.  Secondly, the way they played and SACRIFICED shots masked how good they were individually.   Consequently, those guys were severely underrated offensively.  Especially this guy:

 

 

Lastly, it's difficult to be that team and advance...because there are guys (avoiding the S-word here) that will take over a game and there's nothing you can really do about it.

 

Of course you can make the case that there are many paths to victory (winning), but generally speaking...you need a really good guy to anchor your TEAM around...and contenders are not complete without that guy.  Contenders are what the fans want to see, what the media puts on TV, where the coaches want to coach, and where the players want to play.

 

The Hawks looked young and exciting 7 or 8 years ago.  So we got attention.  Josh Smith was at the center of that because of P-Word (potential!).  Who knew what he was going to be and after a Slam Dunk championship (in grand fashion BTW), of course the sponsors jumped all over it...that lake dried up as soon as the P word dried up.  Had he progressed to his potential, and had the team been coached/built properly, surely we'd be having a different conversation now.

 

Funny though how people also don't want to go the rebuild route to find another young talent with potential.

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

WINNING cures all ills. Winning is what the Pistons did, but the problem with emulating them is that it's difficult.  For one, you need to find these perfect complimentary cast offs.  Secondly, the way they played and SACRIFICED shots masked how good they were individually.   Consequently, those guys were severely underrated offensively.  Especially this guy:

 

 

Lastly, it's difficult to be that team and advance...because there are guys (avoiding the S-word here) that will take over a game and there's nothing you can really do about it.

 

Of course you can make the case that there are many paths to victory (winning), but generally speaking...you need a really good guy to anchor your TEAM around...and contenders are not complete without that guy.  Contenders are what the fans want to see, what the media puts on TV, where the coaches want to coach, and where the players want to play.

 

The Hawks looked young and exciting 7 or 8 years ago.  So we got attention.  Josh Smith was at the center of that because of P-Word (potential!).  Who knew what he was going to be and after a Slam Dunk championship (in grand fashion BTW), of course the sponsors jumped all over it...that lake dried up as soon as the P word dried up.  Had he progressed to his potential, and had the team been coached/built properly, surely we'd be having a different conversation now.

 

Funny though how people also don't want to go the rebuild route to find another young talent with potential.

 

And I wasn't looking to start another "Detroit model" conversation, but I do agree that that way of building a team and making them a contender is very difficult.  I think the biggest difference between the current Hawks and the 2004 Pistons is Ben Wallace.  Rebounds and defense.  Horford can be our Rasheed.  Korver and Rip are similar.  Teague and Billups are similar, although Teague isn't the leader that Billups was.  Just missing our Ben Wallace.

 

As for WLOC, I agree if that situation was managed and coached differently, we would have been a much better team.  Woody ruined Smoove.

 

And the only reason people don't like the T-word (tank, tank, TANK!!!) is because Americans are impatient and want results now.  We want to win NOW.  Tanking... err... rebuilding requires patience and faith...

 

 

If Al is the best star we have had let's use a reality check on that one.  Al Horford has been closer to Horace Grant than Scottie Pippen.

 

Through the same 7th season they are pretty darn close in their per minute production: 

 

http://bkref.com/tiny/odGoC

 

Al has been slightly better but can you imagine how much buzz Horace Grant would generate as your best player?

 

Throwing that into the same conversation as Nique seems like a red herring to me.  If the comparison is Josh Smith that is equally off base.  Think Dennis Rodman for his counterpoint if you want.  None of these galvanized a fan base or will ever do so.  They can be great complimentary players to a true star but not real stars on their own.

 

I wasn't meaning to say that Horford is Pippen, just that he is a good 2nd option.

[JTB]

With all this said I have to ask so as title of the thread...I'm just gon say it or ask it in this case.

As a hawks fan do any of you feel we have the supporting cast in place and that we are just waiting for the star?

Seems like we have some already established roles that can safely be put in stone....

Horford/Sap-good 2nd team options

Teague-can be 2nd option but elite speed makes him a game changer when he's aggressive. In all honesty I think it's fair we call teague a player that can give a star player some rest for some games....that's how effective Teague CAN be.

Everybody else-Korver,DMC, etc....just good unselfish players.

So what do you all think? Is it safe to say we are just waiting on a star player to join this team and we are instant contenders?

(I think so if everyone is healthy, sticks with buds offense, commits to defense and plays unselfishly...I really do believe the skills are already there on this team to surround a star talent)

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

With all this said I have to ask so as title of the thread...I'm just gon say it or ask it in this case.

As a hawks fan do any of you feel we have the supporting cast in place and that we are just waiting for the star?

Seems like we have some already established roles that can safely be put in stone....

Horford/Sap-good 2nd team options

Teague-can be 2nd option but elite speed makes him a game changer when he's aggressive. In all honesty I think it's fair we call teague a player that can give a star player some rest for some games....that's how effective Teague CAN be.

Everybody else-Korver,DMC, etc....just good unselfish players.

So what do you all think? Is it safe to say we are just waiting on a star player to join this team and we are instant contenders?

(I think so if everyone is healthy, sticks with buds offense, commits to defense and plays unselfishly...I really do believe the skills are already there on this team to surround a star talent)

 

I believe we have good pieces for a contender on the team presently.  Teague, Korver, DMC, Thabo, and Mack are good players to have for a contender.  The problem is that we don't have a defensive anchor or a number one option.  That really is the problem with a Horford/Sap combo is that they are neither number 1 options nor defensive anchors.  We need an anchor at center and a number one option at 3.  That means either Horf or Sap has to go.  Marc Gasol/Horford works.  Horford/Durant works.  We can get to the ECF with either combo.  Gasol/Horford/Durant is dynasty talk... but also a pipe dream.

 

I don't see Teague as a go-to guy on option.  He is one dimensional on offense.  His only threat is using his speed to get to the hoop.  His jumper isn't reliable enough nor is he a good enough passer to be a "Steve Nash" type threat.  But he is a good piece and we can win with him as our starting point guard.

 

And it is safe to say that we are just waiting for that transcendent player to show up, but how long do we wait?  Horford isn't getting any younger.  How will we attain such player?  Draft?  We're too good to attain a top pick.  Free agency?  How far back did the Clownership ordeal set us back?  I believe the time for waiting and hoping is over.  It's time to reel the damn big fish in.

[AHF]

Most 2nd round exit teams look like they would be great with a superstar added to the lineup.  They just lack the dry powder to get that superstar without destroying their team so it doesn't happen.  Imagine Memphis the last couple season with Lebron added.  Champions, am I right?  However, did Lebron end up there?  Of course not.  Superstars don't jump ship to go to Memphis, Memphis doesn't have bright enough stars to get a team to consider trade an elite to them, and Memphis doesn't have the lottery picks to tempt a team that is losing a Deron, Carmelo, Love, etc. to salvage the situation by dealing with them.  So Memphis hangs around the middle and ends every season by hoping, "maybe next year we will get all the breaks and maybe next year will be first year we win a game in the conference finals!"  Memphis is who we aspire to be without our current team composition.  

[Wretch]

With all this said I have to ask so as title of the thread...I'm just gon say it or ask it in this case.

As a hawks fan do any of you feel we have the supporting cast in place and that we are just waiting for the star?

Seems like we have some already established roles that can safely be put in stone....

Horford/Sap-good 2nd team options

Teague-can be 2nd option but elite speed makes him a game changer when he's aggressive. In all honesty I think it's fair we call teague a player that can give a star player some rest for some games....that's how effective Teague CAN be.

Everybody else-Korver,DMC, etc....just good unselfish players.

So what do you all think? Is it safe to say we are just waiting on a star player to join this team and we are instant contenders?

(I think so if everyone is healthy, sticks with buds offense, commits to defense and plays unselfishly...I really do believe the skills are already there on this team to surround a star talent)

 

I wouldn't disagree with you at all JTB.  Though, I don't think that's changed since DF took over.  We have the right team in place (and great flexibility! Don't forget that! lol) for a star.  It hasn't been enough sadly.  I mean, think about CP3/Horford/Howard...  That would have been scary with the right roles players around.  

 

 

I think we've definitely got the perfect setup for the right guy to step in and take this team to the next level.  Therein lies the ages old conversation though...how do we get that guy to come HERE?  Not to derail the thread, but this is where I part ways with the overly optimistic crowd.  The more I think about ways to get that guy to come here and who to actually target, the less optimistic I get.

 

And I wasn't looking to start another "Detroit model" conversation, but I do agree that that way of building a team and making them a contender is very difficult.  I think the biggest difference between the current Hawks and the 2004 Pistons is Ben Wallace.  Rebounds and defense.  Horford can be our Rasheed.  Korver and Rip are similar.  Teague and Billups are similar, although Teague isn't the leader that Billups was.  Just missing our Ben Wallace.

 

As for WLOC, I agree if that situation was managed and coached differently, we would have been a much better team.  Woody ruined Smoove.

 

And the only reason people don't like the T-word (tank, tank, TANK!!!) is because Americans are impatient and want results now.  We want to win NOW.  Tanking... err... rebuilding requires patience and faith...

 

 

 

I wasn't meaning to say that Horford is Pippen, just that he is a good 2nd option.

 

I think the Pistons conversation is extremely valid...because it's the antithesis to the "star player" argument.  I just think it's very difficult to build a team like that.  I also think that the Pistons were underrated offensively.  Especially Rip, who was really one of my favorite players back in the day.

 

 

Korver's a lot more one dimensional.  He's good moving without the ball, spotting up, and catch/shoot...but Rip could score in all sorts of ways.  Missing Ben Wallace is really huge.  We don't have that guy, we don't rebound like they did or defend.  We also didn't have Billups' leadership or Sheed's versatility inside and out.  Horford is good for energy, moving without the ball, and making good on that midrange...but he's limited in the post.

 

Honestly...we don't compare very well in my opinion across the board.

[yungsta]

Its easy to say the only difference between us and the 2004 pistons is defense and rebounding but then you realize that the pistons were one of the best defenses in NBA HISTORY.

 

the only modern team comparable defensive to the 2004 pistons are the 08 celtics and the early 2000 spurs.

[Diesel]

Whew, thanks for clearing that up. :-)

I think most Squawkers are aware that a 'STAR' is needed to win Championships to draw fringe fans etc. If memory serves me correct the debate has always been the best way to go about getting said star (please let's NOT have that discussion again).

 

Unfortunately.... Currently, we have a GM who doesn't believe that a star is necessary to win a championship.

[Diesel]

I feel you, but you are missing one point.  We need the star for this all to work.  Nique was great, but that season is a bit of a misnomer.  He had opportunities with better teams and couldn't get out the 2nd round.  Nique wasn't the star.   Jordan, Hakeem, Bird, and Magic were the star during different points of that time period.  Now its Lebron and Tim Duncan.  We need that guy.  If someone can figure out who the next one is and bring him here I say do it. 

 

Hawkltus,

 

I have to call BS... When Jordan was losing to the Celtics and Losing to the Pistons.... annually, Nobody said that he wasn't a star.  The Same goes for Lebron in Cleveland.  Championships isn't the thing that separates average players from stars... otherwise, there are  alot of good players who were never stars and there are a bunch of suckers who are stars.   Nobody can pick their teams. (except Lebron)...

[Diesel]

With all this said I have to ask so as title of the thread...I'm just gon say it or ask it in this case.

As a hawks fan do any of you feel we have the supporting cast in place and that we are just waiting for the star?

Seems like we have some already established roles that can safely be put in stone....

Horford/Sap-good 2nd team options

Teague-can be 2nd option but elite speed makes him a game changer when he's aggressive. In all honesty I think it's fair we call teague a player that can give a star player some rest for some games....that's how effective Teague CAN be.

Everybody else-Korver,DMC, etc....just good unselfish players.

So what do you all think? Is it safe to say we are just waiting on a star player to join this team and we are instant contenders?

(I think so if everyone is healthy, sticks with buds offense, commits to defense and plays unselfishly...I really do believe the skills are already there on this team to surround a star talent)

 

 

I don't think we can go forward with both Sap and Horf.  One of them will have to be traded to bring in a better player.  Secondly, our SF/SG positions need better definition.

Here's my take.

If we can get a star SG... then Horf, Korver, and Teague will make for a good Backdrop.  But who is this magic SG?

 

 

 

 

 

 

For you History Buffs....

 

[Admin]

Oh man another one of these superstar / tank threads. Guess that hasn't been dissected enough the last dozen mega threads it's become. Everyone here has their opinions on it so not sure why it keeps getting dredged up as if it's an epiphany.