Where is your faith in Buds System?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Spud2Nique said:

Ok so that's @kg01 playing soccer, can I get a video of him playing basketball?....3,2.....1

Oh you mean this?

lol just playin young @kg01 we know you got them ups

THROW IT DOWN BIG MAN!

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said:

Oh you mean this?

lol just playin young @kg01 we know you got them ups

THROW IT DOWN BIG MAN!

Lol revenge will not be merciful for you or @Spud2Nique

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Lol revenge will not be merciful for you or @Spud2Nique

Oh that's some serious foreshadowing going on right here. The more mature @kg01 over here, about to pull up on me and spud but then....

stay off them pop-a-shot machines @ Andretti Speedway!!!

[Watchman]

These videos are hilarious.  I needed a laugh.

[Spursfanpeacemaker]

12 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Then we should kidnap Durant and hold his hand while he signs that max deal here with us this summer.

lol

[Spursfanpeacemaker]

10 hours ago, AHF said:

Short version:

• Having a superstar doesn't guarantee you a chip.  Not having one just about guarantees you won't win a chip.
• The Pistons did not have a superstar when they won their single championship with Wallace, Bilups, etc.  They are the exception to the rule with a very balanced lineup of Billups (stud, nonsuperstar PG), Rip (borderline All-Star), Prince (all-NBA D plus the ability to pass and spread the floor), Rasheed (All-Star level talent), and Ben Wallace (stud defensive big man).  They did have a superstar when they won back to back championships (Isiah) with some good supporting players (Dumar, Rodman, VJ, etc.).
• I don't have faith in the Spurs system or any system to win rings without superstar talent.  If the Spurs drafted Lamarcus Aldridge and Tim Duncan went somewhere else their history would be completely different.  The reasons their excellent system has won so many rings are Tim Duncan, Manu, Parker and Leonard.  A bad system can ruin the chances of even the greatest talent but the best system won't win without the talent to support it.
• That said, if we are in a position to contend I'll be crossing my fingers that we become another exception to the rule like I was last year.  I'm just still waiting for our first win outside of the first or second round in the playoffs.

Well said, totally agree with you, Having  superstar doesn't always gurantee winning a championship

[TheNorthCydeRises]

5 hours ago, macdaddy said:

Would love to hear an example of a star player that another team would trade to us for some combo of players we have.   And what would be that team's motivation for trading the star?

That guy has ALWAYS been Carmelo Anthony.  But fans believe all of that bad stuff about his game, without recognizing the good things he brings to a team.

Notice that whenever Melo has had good teammates around him, that guy has always balled out.  He's not going to make guys around him better, but he can be the engine that drives your team and takes big shots.

Pair him with a playmaker who can make others better, while Melo simply worries about scoring, and that team will be a high level NBA team.

 

PG - Schröder

G - Bazemore

F - Melo

PF - Humphries

C - Horford

 

Is that lineup better than the starting 5 we're going with now?  Why or why not?

Edited March 4, 2016 by TheNorthCydeRises

[Spursfanpeacemaker]

8 hours ago, hazer said:

The system is great and can take the Hawks to the Finals. But what MUST happen is better drafting. Plain and simple. All Schröders, no Paynes. Forget need, draft the the best damn player available EVERY time and develop your own star. And you can't be cheap with the pick. Combined with the continued shrewd/affordable trades and signings for need (DMC, Korver, Thabo, etc) they've been pulling off, it's the only way they're going to make it. No LaBronna, KD, CP3, Kawhi, Davis, etc is coming here, in their prime. Period. Draft day, have an evolving list of BPAs adjusted after every single pick comes off the board, try to move up if a particularly good fit falls into an achievable range, and/or take the highest one on the list when your turn comes up. It's not rocket surgery.....

Agreed If hawks cant lure superstar talent players, their best chance getting a superstar talent is in draft or in scouting, and develop that player

[Spursfanpeacemaker]

6 hours ago, JTB said:

Well Dwight not being a Superstar anymore is your opinion and I respect that but Howard is still a star player to many including myself except he gets it done without all the flash now and that's where I stand on Howard. Everything he did then can be done now with a lot less flash. He's not 2nd in rebounding and 1st in fg% by luck this season....harden has really diminished Howard limiting his number of touches offensively to avg 18-22 points a game and until Dwight leaves he will look like a player scoring wise who isn't capable of huge scoring nights anymore but we all know it's because of hardens high usage of always controlling the ball from start to finish.

Howard doesn't work with ball dominating SGs or perimeter players period who don't avg a high number of assist. Put Howard on a ball moving offense with 3pt shooters like the Hawks and he will flourish again.....oh and the back issues are bullshit! If his back is in that bad of shape and he's still capable of leading top 5 in rebounds and fg% it ain't that bad.

Bud need to seriously consider him this offseason.

Dwight is still dominant rebounder, I don't mind if hawks tried to get him but one thing i don't like about Dwight is his kiddy attitude..

[Guest]

2 hours ago, hawksfanatic said:

Oh you mean this?

lol just playin young @kg01 we know you got them ups

THROW IT DOWN BIG MAN!

Lmmfao the big boy money dance is always a crowd fav...lol

[SalvorMallow]

2 hours ago, hawksfanatic said:

There's a fundamental difference between saying you "drafted a guy" versus you trading an asset for a draft pick, which is also an asset that's inversely related to how good your team is. If there is anything in the Pau situation that is similar to a draft pick (in the sense that all teams acquire an asset in June of the NBA season which is called a draft pick) it would be Shareef as a draft pick, which is strange to think about because he was traded for. Just as Pau was traded for.

Where you say "you need to draft well/good players!" really what you're saying is you need to acquire good players. Who the f*** cares if it's through the draft, free agency, or trade (which the trade would be exactly how Kobe, Pippen, and Pau were all acquired by their first teams).

Now Diesel is being a fool by calling the draft "fool's gold" but it's equally foolish to pull the whole "OH DANG LOOK AT ALL THESE PLAYERS WHO WON A CHAMPIONSHIP THAT WERE DRAFTED BY THEIR TEAM!!!" 

Spot on.  

[JTB]

3 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

That guy has ALWAYS been Carmelo Anthony.  But fans believe all of that bad stuff about his game, without recognizing the good things he brings to a team.

Notice that whenever Melo has had good teammates around him, that guy has always balled out.  He's not going to make guys around him better, but he can be the engine that drives your team and takes big shots.

Pair him with a playmaker who can make others better, while Melo simply worries about scoring, and that team will be a high level NBA team.

 

PG - Schröder

G - Bazemore

F - Melo

PF - Humphries

C - Horford

 

Is that lineup better than the starting 5 we're going with now?  Why or why not?

No and I understand you've added a star player but Melo is an old star player who's more than likely unwilling to wait to be a contender. If he was willing I may pull the trigger but I know he's not since he's been losing too long.

The problem with this team is offense more so than defense. Every superstar need a robin/level B type of player that can also go get buckets when it's needed. It's doesn't have to be an huge star guy but it can't be horford as your 2nd best scorer. 

Millsap is perfect and he can provide being that robin/level B player next to melo but without horford defense will take a huge hit. If it were up to me I would try to do all I can to have a front court of melo, sap, horford and trade all my other key pieces to get melo instead. But if that can't happen I would take the  defense hit before I take a offensive hit that will  solely make the team depend on melo. If melo was younger it wouldn't matter what route we went as long as he could give bud 2-3 years to put a team around him without bitching.

anyways in this scenario keep millsap, add melo, take the defense hit and go into free agency to fix the issue. Shouldn't be too hard to get players to consider Atlanta with Melo, Sap, and bud being the coach.

[Diesel]

Again,

The draft is fool's gold and we're the proof.  Along with the Clippers, 76ers, Magic, Etc.  Sure, many of the teams that have won championships has drafted stars.

However, AHF, you make your claims without pointing out the History Significance.

Since we're talking about FAcy vs. the Draft, we have to be honest about when FAcy started.  It didn't start with basketball.  In fact, the first real movement in FAcy wasn't until 1988 (Tom Chambers -UFA).   So of course you have those older teams (Bulls, Lakers, Celtics, & Rockets) all sitting there with drafted players because there was no UFA.

Now to be clear, after 1988, you had UFA and now you see players being able to move from team to team and not be held hostage by the team that drafted them.    So revisit your list AHF.

You talk about Kobe with the Lakers, but would they have won anything without Shaq or Pau?

You talk about GS, but wasn't GS's Finals MVP Iguodala?

You talk about Boston with Paul Pierce, but I remember, Boston Being Scrubs until they got KG and Ray Allen.

Wade needed Lebron/Bosh or Shaq.

What does that mean for us.  That means that if we win a championship, people will talk about the fact that we drafted Teague or Horf or Dennis because they will erect these guys as Stars.   That's what happens.

 

[JTB]

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

Again,

The draft is fool's gold and we're the proof.  Along with the Clippers, 76ers, Magic, Etc.  Sure, many of the teams that have won championships has drafted stars.

However, AHF, you make your claims without pointing out the History Significance.

Since we're talking about FAcy vs. the Draft, we have to be honest about when FAcy started.  It didn't start with basketball.  In fact, the first real movement in FAcy wasn't until 1988 (Tom Chambers -UFA).   So of course you have those older teams (Bulls, Lakers, Celtics, & Rockets) all sitting there with drafted players because there was no UFA.

Now to be clear, after 1988, you had UFA and now you see players being able to move from team to team and not be held hostage by the team that drafted them.    So revisit your list AHF.

You talk about Kobe with the Lakers, but would they have won anything without Shaq or Pau?

You talk about GS, but wasn't GS's Finals MVP Iguodala?

You talk about Boston with Paul Pierce, but I remember, Boston Being Scrubs until they got KG and Ray Allen.

Wade needed Lebron/Bosh or Shaq.

What does that mean for us.  That means that if we win a championship, people will talk about the fact that we drafted Teague or Horf or Dennis because they will erect these guys as Stars.   That's what happens.

 

You are reaching too far...all of those guys pierce, Kobe, wade, lebron, bosh, etc...were star players before joining forces with other star players. They had already made there name in the league. We don't have anyone on this team that the NBA would singlehandedly point out if we were to win it all with this roster or last years roster....the headline would be "the Hawks win it all with no superstar talented players but an all star lineup of players who know their role"

you are kidding yourself if you think the NBA makes star players! Give those guys props! They truly are better players for a reason...it has nothing to do with the media or bandwagon fans or whatever else. Star players make their own name in the league and they do get the benefit of the doubt because of their names in regards to the refs but even still they are above average players in this league and it's not many of them.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, SalvorMallow said:

Spot on.  

Worst thing about the whole line of argument/conversation is that suppose the Hawks win the championship: "see, they drafted Al Horford and Jeff Teague!"

You can go through the same stupid f-ing exercise of listing players from championship teams in the past years but with respect to trades:

• Warriors traded for Iguodala and Bogut.
• Spurs traded for Kawhi.
• Heat traded for LeBron and Bosh.
• Mavs traded for Chandler and Kidd and Marion and Terry.
• Lakers traded for Kobe and Gasol and Odom.
• Celtics traded for Garnett and Allen and Rondo.
• Heat traded for Shaq and White Chocolate and Posey and 'Toine.
• Pistons traded for Hamilton and Sheed and Wallace.
• Bulls traded for Pippen and Rodman.
• Rockets traded for Drexler.

SEE! You got to win the tradez guys. There's the exception to the rule* that is the Spurs but every other team had valuable memberz who they gotz through the tradez. This Hogs team will never win without the tradezzz!!!!**

*Exception to the rule is such a dumb f***ing phrase. It comes from a phrase "exception that proves the rule" which is like a sign saying "no parking Monday through Friday" which is an exception that proves the rule is: "Parking is OK on Saturday or Sunday!" The phrase is misused and stupid.

**Kyle Korver was acquired through trade, so I guess if the Hogs win the chip this year they again "prove the rule!!!!"

[AHF]

13 hours ago, hawksfanatic said:

There's a fundamental difference between saying you "drafted a guy" versus you trading an asset for a draft pick, which is also an asset that's inversely related to how good your team is. If there is anything in the Pau situation that is similar to a draft pick (in the sense that all teams acquire an asset in June of the NBA season which is called a draft pick) it would be Shareef as a draft pick, which is strange to think about because he was traded for. Just as Pau was traded for.

Where you say "you need to draft well/good players!" really what you're saying is you need to acquire good players. Who the f*** cares if it's through the draft, free agency, or trade (which the trade would be exactly how Kobe, Pippen, and Pau were all acquired by their first teams).

Now Diesel is being a fool by calling the draft "fool's gold" but it's equally foolish to pull the whole "OH DANG LOOK AT ALL THESE PLAYERS WHO WON A CHAMPIONSHIP THAT WERE DRAFTED BY THEIR TEAM!!!" 

It is obvious why the draft is different.  Come on.  You know the answer to this.  How available has Kobe been?  

He was very available in the draft.  The Lakers traded for draft rights after directing the pick be used on him and almost every team in the league had a shot at trading for that pick or any of the preceding ones that could have been used to land him.  It was a realistic, attainable outcome for every team in the league.

Once it becomes clear that Kobe or other players like him are potential MVP level talents - THE HAWKS CAN'T GET THEM.  THEY WON'T COME IN FA AND TEAMS WON'T TRADE THEM.

 

So why focus on the fact that they were drafted as opposed to merely saying, "Eh, what does it matter if OKC acquired Durant by draft or other means"?  It is because the draft is the only realistic means by which OKC acquires and retains him.  The retention part is based largely on the powers of more money, inertia and the positive power of familiarity (i.e., OKC is MUCH more likely to resign a superstar it drafted than to sway one to leave where they are and come to Oklahoma).

[Guest]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

It is obvious why the draft is different.  Come on.  You know the answer to this.  How available has Kobe been? 

Well, fairly available if you could send similar talent outward:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/2/10/10960388/kobe-bryant-lebron-james-trade-lakers-cavaliers

 

[AHF]

In short, I agree with you in theory that it makes no difference how you acquire talent.  Just acquire it.

 

Then when you do a realistic look at how you get that MVP talent, you have to realize that the draft is by far the most realistic option for us.  The day the Hawks can sign a prime Shaq in FA will be the first day that is possible for Atlanta.

1 minute ago, hawksfanatic said:

Well, fairly available if you could send similar talent outward:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/2/10/10960388/kobe-bryant-lebron-james-trade-lakers-cavaliers

 

And how did the Cavs get that similar talent?

 

Oh.  The draft.

[macdaddy]

12 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

That guy has ALWAYS been Carmelo Anthony.  But fans believe all of that bad stuff about his game, without recognizing the good things he brings to a team.

Notice that whenever Melo has had good teammates around him, that guy has always balled out.  He's not going to make guys around him better, but he can be the engine that drives your team and takes big shots.

Pair him with a playmaker who can make others better, while Melo simply worries about scoring, and that team will be a high level NBA team.

 

PG - Schröder

G - Bazemore

F - Melo

PF - Humphries

C - Horford

 

Is that lineup better than the starting 5 we're going with now?  Why or why not?

Thank you for being the only one to step up and answer the question.    I knew at some point someone would say well we could probably get Melo by trade but I would argue that at this point Melo isn't a star.  Plus he has a no trade clause which he would and has exercised to stay in NY and not come to Atlanta.   So that by itself invalidates the argument that we could have Melo if we wanted.    He's a great offensive player but he can't even get a team into the playoffs these days.   In the past I believe we were interested in him just as I'm sure we took a shot at every legit star (Ferry said in his infamous call that Melo was worth it), but when Melo was a star we couldn't figure out a way to get him.  Why?  Because it's extremely rare instances that legit stars get traded and when they do there are usually 20+ teams competing to get that star.

 

So again I say that the idea that if the Hawks just really wanted a star they could easily trade for one is B-U-N-K

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Thank you for being the only one to step up and answer the question.    I knew at some point someone would say well we could probably get Melo by trade but I would argue that at this point Melo isn't a star.  Plus he has a no trade clause which he would and has exercised to stay in NY and not come to Atlanta.   So that by itself invalidates the argument that we could have Melo if we wanted.    He's a great offensive player but he can't even get a team into the playoffs these days.   In the past I believe we were interested in him just as I'm sure we took a shot at every legit star (Ferry said in his infamous call that Melo was worth it), but when Melo was a star we couldn't figure out a way to get him.  Why?  Because it's extremely rare instances that legit stars get traded and when they do there are usually 20+ teams competing to get that star.

 

So again I say that the idea that if the Hawks just really wanted a star they could easily trade for one is B-U-N-K

Oh, no.  That can't be right.  Didn't you see the above?  Superstars are fairly available by trade and FA.  Those are totally viable paths for us to get one.