You guy give up too easily

[Gambit99]

As I read the post on this site, I've noticed that people around here give up too easily.

People have given up on both Al and Chill. It doesn't make sense and I'm glad none of you are GM's.

Al: He's only played ONE year as a starter and put up good number, while being the number two guy for most of the season. He had a new coach, new owners, an ever revolving point guard and center...hell the line up changed from game to game. I think the guy will have an breakout season next year after having a year of being a starter instead of a sixth man. Remember Stephen Jackson was the sixth man for the Spur's, had a full year as a starter with us, did well and then did much better with the Pacers. Al will have a much better year this season.

Chill: He's only been in the NBA for ONE year. His numbers improved throughout the year...so what he didn't win the dunk contest(Mason won it and still struggles to be a starter on a non-playoff team, not that this will happen to Smith). If not a star 2 guard, he will be a starting 2 guard. One that could start on any team.

For some reason many of you have this idea that if the guy is not an alstar then they shouldn't be here. How many star's were on the Laker's, Celtic's, Bull's, Spur's, Rocket's or anyother championship team, 2, maybe 3. No team in history has ever had 5 stars on it. There are many parts to a team and that's what I believe BK is building.

I'm hoping for a line up of:

JJ/Ivey/Slim

Chill/Slim/DSmith

JSmith/JWill/DSmith

AL/JWill/DAnderson

Curry/DAnderson/Diop

Others for Mentoring, Clean-up and Injury:

Delk,Collier,Diaw,Willis

I'm buying season tickets anyway, but I would upgrade them if we have this line-up/rotation.

[Nicholasp27]

i agree

but by jwill u mean marvin?

[mrhonline]

I'll counter by saying this: Many of you ignore the limitations in the games of players like Harrington and Childress.

Marvin Williams and Josh Smith are both still very young, inexperienced, and have had quality coaching for only one year each.

Harrington and Childress, by contrast, have been at the collegiate level or above for, what, four or five seasons? The chances of them making dramatic changes to their games aren't out of the question, but MUCH LESS LIKELY than the same scenario for Marvin or Smith.

Harrington, while a good guy and good scorer inside, is undersized, is not a good rebounder, and an average defender.

Childress, while a great guy, good scorer inside, and a great rebounder for his size, is a poor outside shooter, has poor shooting mechanics, is thin, not very quick for his position, and doesn't use his length as well as he could.

If I only looked at a player's best skills, I'd think everyone else was impatient as well.

[Final_quest]

Very well said Mr. H.

[parvezf]

I believe that people are ignoring Childress' work ethic, his heart, and his brain. His work ethic will make him a very good shooter (as he was at Stanford by all accounts) VERY SOON, possibly already. His work ethic will ultimately lead to him building up his body. His heart is what helps him drive to the basket and crash the boards like few others. His brain is what allows him to play solid team defense and see the court well. You can't put him in the same category as Harrington as far as finished products go.

Go ahead and trade Childress if you want, especially if it improves the team, but just not until you see what you truly have in Childress, thereby maximizing what you can truly fetch for him.

[Final_quest]

I don't agree with trading Childress right now either, but Mr. H summed up his limitations quite well.

I hope he does improve his shooting, but practice does not always guarantee that either. If you practice your shot using the same technique, you'll get the same result no matter how hard working you are.

His shot does not simply have mechanical problems, but it's shot in a position that's easier to block and harder to get off.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

I believe that people are ignoring Childress' work ethic, his heart, and his brain. His work ethic will make him a very good shooter (as he was at Stanford by all accounts) VERY SOON, possibly already. His work ethic will ultimately lead to him building up his body. His heart is what helps him drive to the basket and crash the boards like few others. His brain is what allows him to play solid team defense and see the court well. You can't put him in the same category as Harrington as far as finished products go.

Go ahead and trade Childress if you want, especially if it improves the team, but just not until you see what you truly have in Childress, thereby maximizing what you can truly fetch for him.

---

And that ^^^ is what's called a counter-argument.

Thank you.

[DominiqueWilkins]

Josh Childress is my favorite Hawks, I've only had faith in the kid, but I wish he would improve his shooting, and I like him as our shooting guard. The kid rebounds, plays his heart out, and all that he can be asked of is becoming a better shooter. He also needs to do some speed drills to become faster.

Al Harrington I just don't think he fits our power forward needs, but I still like the guy, and I wouldn't mind him coming off the bench. Do you think he would be happy coming off the Hawks bench, because I don't think he would like looking at all the youngsters starting over him. The guy isn't a true rebounding power forward. We need a power forward that can rebound, block shots, and different low post moves. Al Harrington doesn't have many low post moves, he's not a shot blocker, and he's not the best rebounder.

[Gray Mule]

If I wanted to trade Josh, it wouldn't be the Josh that

you want to trade.

I don't want to loose either of them. However, I believe

Chill is a much better all round player and much more of

a leader and I would keep him.

A super athlete, a showman who loves to block shots and

dunk the ball, who excites the fans and makes the ESPN

11 P.M. highlights. What else does he do? He has the

potential to do a lot more, but right now, he doesn't

do it. He may. I hope so.

Let's keep them both. They are both yet very young in the

NBA and have loads of room for improvement. Childress

already has a lot of the characteristics that we hope

that Smith will grow into.

[Sage11]

Honestly, I agree with the orginal post, it's much too early in the game to give up on either of the Josh(s) . I am not willing to trade either of them.

[mrhonline]

It's two totally different things to:

a.) give up on a player

b.) trade a player in exchange for a big man

Tading Childress or Harrington for a big man is not an insult to their talent.

[Sage11]

It does not matter. I Disagree with any trade that involves Chill.....peroid. Its too early to trade the kid, let his value rise as a hawk for another year if that is his ultimate fate.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

It does not matter. I Disagree with any trade that involves Chill.....peroid. Its too early to trade the kid, let his value rise as a hawk for another year if that is his ultimate fate.

---

There are no centers available next year as good as Daly or Chandler (sad, huh?). It's kind of a "now-or-never" scenario.

But I certainly respect your opinion. I just don't see the Hawks being successful without a center and don't see Childress' numbers improving if JJ comes to Atlanta.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

It does not matter. I Disagree with any trade that involves Chill.....peroid. Its too early to trade the kid, let his value rise as a hawk for another year if that is his ultimate fate.

---

You'd disagree with Chill for Lebron and all the Cavs picks for the next 10 years?

[thesheedera]

MrH is right. It takes a lot to get talent at the 1 and 5 in the NBA. Childress and Harrington are considered expendable now because the SF position is the only position we have talented depth at, and the front office would be afraid of trading Marvin in the event he becomes a top 10 type player.

Keeping those guys AND getting guys like Curry, Johnson and Watson is really ideal. I love the problem of too much talent at the forward positions. Realistically, most of our current players are ideal 6th men and/or role players on contending teams. Having Marvin, either of the Joshes or Al coming off the bench (if they can handle that role) would mean we've stockpiled enough talent to be a really good team.

If we get the guys I want, and keep the guys we have...

Guys who can play point:

Watson/Johnson/Diaw/Stoudamire/Ivey/Childress(?)

Guys who can play the 2:

Johnson/Childress/Stoudamire/J. Smith(?)

Small forwards:

Al/J. Smith/Marvin/Childress/D. Smith

Power forwards:

Curry/Al/Marvin/J. Smith

Centers:

Curry/Collier

I'm not worried about the starting lineup, that might change from game to game depending on who we're playing, and I hope we're building a team that's unselfish enough to accept the roles that give the team a chance to be great.

That team, plus another big man with a truly physical presence that can play PF and Center, is a very very good team. But if we sign Curry, Johnson and Watson, and we still need more interior depth, something might have to give to stay under the cap in the long run.

Our team's strength is that we have a plethora of young talents at the small forward position. Sure, they can play other positions, but I believe Al, the Joshes and Marvin would best reach their potential as a 3 on a very good team. They have value and long careers ahead ofthem It would hurt to lose any of them, but that's all we have to offer to fill in the huge holes in our lineup.

[Nicholasp27]

???@now or never

u can trade for ANY center ANY year...u don't have to do a snt to get a center...and to give up chill in a snt would be HORRENDOUS

not to mention, we are YEARS away from contending...u get the final pieces when u are ready, not when your best talent is still 4 years from being really good

and chandler/daly both have holes and question marks...and the bulls wouldn't do chill for chandler anyway...they have deng/gordon/hinrich/nocioni...and philly wouldn't do daly for chill as they have ai/iggy/korver

[Sage11]

Quote:

---

You'd disagree with Chill for Lebron and all the Cavs picks for the next 10 years?

---

In a pipe dream world if such a deal was offered I would take it. Yet in the context of these discussions, a max contract AND a trade sign Curry, Dale, Dalmbert, Swift;......no way.

[mrhonline]

Quote:

---

u can trade for ANY center ANY year...u don't have to do a snt to get a center...and to give up chill in a snt would be HORRENDOUS

---

I can understand your not wanting to trade Childress for centers with "question marks." I disagree, mostly because I think Childress has question marks as well.

However, you can't simply trade for ANY center ANY year. Centers are expensive in the NBA and if a team gets one, they're not likely to give him up.

You either pay a steep price for a center in a trade, or you draft one hoping he becomes a starter. Those are the only options for the Hawks at this point.

[Sage11]

Quote:

---

There are no centers available next year as good as Daly or Chandler (sad, huh?). It's kind of a "now-or-never" scenario.

But I certainly respect your opinion. I just don't see the Hawks being successful without a center and don't see Childress' numbers improving if JJ comes to Atlanta.

---

yea it is sad, and that is part of the reason why I am not thrilled about trading chill. I think the price is very steep for a big man that may not pan out. I hope curry's heart is healthy, but we simply do not know. I want him in a hawks uni, but I do not think that trading chill is the best way to make it happen. I agree that we need a big man to improve.