Is it at all possible

[Admin]

That the reason that Dickau isnt getting any playing time is because we dont want to expose him to the league so that we dont have to use him as a throw in player in a deal? I know that probably sounds crazy to some of you who just cant stand him for whatever reason, but every single time he has gotten a chance to play he has looked very good. I just have to think that we are trying to keep him a secret and thats why we arent playing him too much. The only way to known this for sure will be to wait until the trade deadline has passed and then if he starts getting more PT then I think that will be pretty telling, that is assuming if we dont make a trade. Maybe I am just grasping for something but this is the only logical explanation I can come up with concerning why he isnt getting playing time, like last night when we desperately needed a shooter in the 3rd quarter.

[TheDude]

that is an interesting possibility I had not thought of. with our luck it probably isn't true, but I could see it happening. I'd love to see Dickau start a few games just to see where he is at as compared to other fulltime starters.

[Weez]

it's as good as anything else I've got...

[dickaufan12]

Dolfan, that's a very interesting scenario, and it very well could be a thought in the Hawks' minds. Even though Dan had the injury last year, his increased playing time didn't come until down the stretch, long after the trade deadline. I think that it could be that the Hawks realize that putting him in would showcase way too much of his talent, and other teams would want him just for the chance. Dan is way too good to be sitting on the bench like he is right now. He could do so much for this team, but Stotts won't let him. So, maybe it's just my wishful thinking, but this very well could be the reason. I can't, and don't want to, believe that they would intentionally just ignore his talent and let it go to waste.

[jeddelong]

Is it possibly expansion draft related as well?

[Admin]

Yeah thats a good point and possible as well. I would hope that we wouldnt list him on the expansion eligible roster, but who knows. Either way this whole thing is just baffling to me why they arent playing him more. Last night we went with what, a 7 man rotation the whole night? Its impossible to consistently win in this league with a rotation like that.

[RLHawk]

While I believe that would justify our belief that there is a logical reason for all illogical decisions, but history shows that is generally not the case in pro sports today.

If Stotts (or Knight) thought he had a lot of talent and would help us win if he played. They would have played him in the beginning of the season. At that point they must have wanted to win. There were no plans to trade anyone at the start of the season, so building a winning organization where you only need a key peice to compete at the end of the year would mean we would keep him and trade say JT, DG or DV.

Only a team looking to rebuild would think in a manner of hiding a player so no one else would want him. We may be thinking that way now, but not at the beginning of the season. Secondly, if we are thinking rebuild and are looking at all trade options, then having a player people want is much more of a benefit for us than a hinderance. Say we wanted a star. Atlanta was trying to work a deal with Toronto. we wanted to get Vince and they considered the deal, but felt that we did not have enough to offer. Maybe if they thought DD was good, he could swing the deal. A major deal that nets us some quality is worth a tool we do not use.

[Traceman]

JV gives us a better chance to win than DD does. When Billy Knight signed JV, DD was hurt so I can't say for sure that he believes JV is better than DD but he might.

That being said, even if JV did give us a better chance to win at the start of the season (that is certainly debatable), why is DD not playing now? We have been down right horrible for most of this season so it seems like we would at least try to evaluate DD and to a lesser extent, Hansen. I still believe that DD will struggle due to his lack of speed/quickness but he just might be able to make up for that with great shooting and his ability to see the floor. What can it hurt to give him a chance?

The theory that we are trying to somehow hide DD to protect him from other teams doesn't fly though, particularly when we are looking to make a deal(s). I don't think there is a deal out there that we are looking to make that we would not make if another team asked for DD to be included. I can see it now. The Hawks work out a deal where we would get Kobe in a sign and trade with LA. We say we'll send them Reef/#1 unprotected for Kobe. They say they want DD as well. You think the Hawks are going to say sorry, we can't throw in DD? Please!

[RLHawk]

I was listening to an interview with Jeff Van Gundy about the recent resignation by O'Brien and the firing of Scott. He said that in today's NBA all coaches know that there is no chance they will be around at the end of a rebuilding effort. If they are rebuilding, it will be for another coach. Thus all coaches do whatever it takes to win now!!!

With this in mind, and with the fact that Stotts only has a 2 year deal, there is no way he is hiding DD from any other team. If he thought DD would help us win, he would play him PERIOD!!!

Now one thing that does happen is that when coaches begin to feel pressure to win, they tend to lean more heavily on the proven talent. "If SAR/JT/Theo/SJax can't get it done, there is no way the bench can" theory of coaching. I know we can all show flaws to this, but a coach under pressure can't see them.

[Admin]

Oh come on now Trace be realistic. I am not talking about not including him in a deal for Kobe. I am thinking more along the lines of us not wanting teams asking for him as a throw in on a salary dump deal just because he doesnt make much and wouldnt be a financial factor in a deal being possible or not. Of course if a good deal came along I would gladly trade him, but I dont want us including him a trade like the rumored Knicks Blazers deal where we trade Reef and have to throw in DD and only get back Wallace.

You guys can think that this doesnt happen in professional sports but I know that in life you dont tip your hand if you dont have to and right now this team really doesnt have much to play for and even in the beginning of the year we were supposedly in salary dump mode, not we are going to the playoffs mode. Like I said though I could be way off, but this is as logical of an explanation as I have heard anyone else come up with as to why DD isnt getting any consistent playing time.

[Traceman]

I just don't think there is a chance in [censored] that DD's lack of PT has anything to do with ANYONE thinking that we want to prevent other teams from seeing him. He's not playing because Stotts (and MAYBE Billy Kinght) doesn't think he gives us as good a chance to win as JV does. Period. Teams have already seen him play in two summer leagues so they know what his relative strengths and weaknesses are already. NO ONE has inquired about his availabilty and he has shown NOTHING up until this point to make anyone beleive that he is anything special at PG. If we were talking about Diaw, I could see it because teams have inquired about him already but DD? Come on! Same thing goes for Hansen. He's not playing because the coaching staff thinks Glover is the better option. From what I've seen of Travis so far, I have to agree.

I think that RL Hawk is right on. If Stotts thought DD would help us win, he would have been playng a long time ago. Stotts knows full well that the only hope he has of keeping his job next season is to win and I'm sure he would play Dan if he thought Dan would help him win. He might be wrong and Dan might help him win but he obviously doesn't believe that.

[Snaggle]

I think Stotts doesn't feel he will help the team. When Hendu was activated either someone would be released or someone had to go on the IR. Hawks management cannot force a healthy player to go on the IR and Dickau refused. My point is Dan was asked to go on the IR. I think they simply don't want to play him.

[KB21]

I think he must have slept with Terry Stott's wife or something.

[jaywalker72]

...that he is more comfortable with Vaughn.

Dan was not healthy enough in the preseason to gain Stotts trust and wasn't healthy enough to fend off (gulp) Vaughn for the backup role.

Now, according to Dan, Stotts simply tells Dan that he is more comfortable with Jacque backing up JT. Stotts has to win now, and he believes that Jacque will help him do that more than Dan will.

It is ridiculous that Dan doesn't see more time, particularly when Knight has to make a decision about Dan's 4th year option this summer (about 1.6 mil). Right now, there isn't any way Knight picks it up because he hasn't seen enough of him playing to commit even that amount of money.

It's questionable that Jacque helps the team win more than Dane even today. Dan would likely make more errors, but make more plays as well. Knight needs to see if Dan can be a viable backup for this team's future.

[dickaufan12]

Well said, Jay. The only way that anyone can find out if Dan has the potential to do well is through game play. Practice can only tell you so much, and that is very little. He needs to get into some of these games. Vaughn has been doing very little for this team lately. He's playing a lot of minutes and returning very few stats. He may do the litle things, like setting up the offense, but he does little else. Dan actually plays the way this team needs the PG to play, and from what I've gathered and seen, works harder than anyone else on this team to get better at what he does. Dan is fighting for his NBA future as much as Stotts is for his, but since Stotts is the coach, he wins. Obviously, what is being done now isn't working, or we'd be at least near .500. Dan made an impact in the Detroit game, and because of Stotts' gnat-like memory, he's played a grand total of 57 seconds since. If the current setup isn't working, why not give Dan a try??? Maybe he can do something! What could it hurt?? We lose another game?? It's inevitable anyway!! I hate to say it, but it is. The Hawks need to give Dan a chance, and maybe when they do, they'll look smart for the first time this season.

[Plainview1981]

I'm not thebiggest Dan fan...But what's the worst we can

do with him in there, Lose? Wait a minute...The team already

does that nightly.

[Gray Mule]

He looked good against Detroit. Hawks won.

Dan Dickau hasn't seen daylight in a game since then.

His limited seconds {Yes, seconds, not minutes} are

a joke. Why can't we get him on the floor?

Hawks might loose because of him? Well, at least you

could put the blame squarely on him for the loosing.

Right now, you certainly can't blame Dan D.

A CBA or Development League player would be given

more attention than D.D. If you can't bring yourself

to play him, trade him to someone for a third round

draft choice. {Yeah, I know, there are only two rounds.

Get my point??}

Players that can't play in the N.B.A. shouldn't be kept

on a roster. They should either be used or they should

be traded / released. We can hire some homeless people

to sit on the bench and do nothing. Save us some $$$.

"Use it or loose it." That's my idea about bench players.

What have we got to loose?? A few minutes each game

for the bench isn't too much to ask. But, they can't do

it, you say ?? Then, see above. Get rid of them. We

don't need them if we can't use them.

[AHFan]

With all due respect to the thought and imagination you put into that, it's possible the most convoluted thing I've ever read in my entire life. If a guy can help a team, he'd be in the game.

[Playmaker0017]

AHFan,

You would think, wouldn't you?

But thinking is part of a skillset that Stotts does not possess.

I mean, you would think you would want your star player to play a lot of minutes, and not sit on the bench for 7-8 minutes at a time.

But, there is that whole thinking conundrum again.

Stotts makes NO SENSE.

Dickau should play, if only to know what he can or cannot bring or to feel out new lineups.

Play.