<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rwj @ Feb 16 2008, 07:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/bask...e.ap/index.html One less option for Ben Gordon.</div> Gordon still gained Philly and Memphis during earlier manuevors. Either way, I see either Bulls signing him or him going QO. S&T is possible. I can't see a team using cap space on him as that is so rare these days. Maybe next year when he is unrestricted.
The significance of the move is that Atlanta got a lot better, doing the kind of thing that Paxson should have been doing all along. In fact, Atlanta, IMO, is the model teams should follow in rebuilding. They're a team that's a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to deal for Joe Johnson. They consolidated talent to trade for Bibby to fill their biggest hole. Their ownership situation is in a shambles, tho.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 17 2008, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The significance of the move is that Atlanta got a lot better, doing the kind of thing that Paxson should have been doing all along. In fact, Atlanta, IMO, is the model teams should follow in rebuilding. They're a team that's a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to deal for Joe Johnson. They consolidated talent to trade for Bibby to fill their biggest hole. Their ownership situation is in a shambles, tho.</div> I agree that Hawks got a lot better, but isn't this nearly the exact same thing that Pax tried to do? The Bulls are also a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to sign Ben Wallace. Granted, Pax and Reinsdorf blinked on Gasol which would be akin to the Bibby deal.
I still don't look at the Hawks and see them going anywhere. They're have managed, though, to get themselves into a position where they've got a quality player at every position and won't have to exceed the luxury tax to resign them. So they probably did about what the Bulls tried to do but did it better. Of course, they've had quite a bit of success along the way. 1- Bibby, Law 2- Johnson 3- Williams, Childress 4- Smith 5- Horford, Zaza I spose we'll see how it all works out, but I don't look at that team and come away very impressed. That being said, I don't see them giving up the 8th seed to the Bulls either
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Feb 17 2008, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I still don't look at the Hawks and see them going anywhere. They're have managed, though, to get themselves into a position where they've got a quality player at every position and won't have to exceed the luxury tax to resign them. So they probably did about what the Bulls tried to do but did it better. Of course, they've had quite a bit of success along the way. 1- Bibby, Law 2- Johnson 3- Williams, Childress 4- Smith 5- Horford, Zaza I spose we'll see how it all works out, but I don't look at that team and come away very impressed. That being said, I don't see them giving up the 8th seed to the Bulls either</div> well you don't know how bad are PG were. Mike Bibby is 10x better at the point and t.Lue and A.Johnson put together. Seriously they were just horrible to watch.
This is going to create a race for the 6th spot between the Wizards and Hawks. Smart move by Billy King to finally bring in their veteran PG and give the Hawks a chance to compete. It'll also make Atlanta a more organized team, they tend to get sloppy at times and with a guy like Bibby they'll have someone who knows how to run a team. He might not be a true PG but that's not always neccesary for up-tempo teams, the Wizards have had Gil at the point all these years and been a solid team, Allen Iverson was never a true PG, and even Chauncey Billups used to have a score first attitude. This will make them a playoff team for sure.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (o.iatlhawksfan @ Feb 17 2008, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MikeDC @ Feb 17 2008, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I still don't look at the Hawks and see them going anywhere. They're have managed, though, to get themselves into a position where they've got a quality player at every position and won't have to exceed the luxury tax to resign them. So they probably did about what the Bulls tried to do but did it better. Of course, they've had quite a bit of success along the way. 1- Bibby, Law 2- Johnson 3- Williams, Childress 4- Smith 5- Horford, Zaza I spose we'll see how it all works out, but I don't look at that team and come away very impressed. That being said, I don't see them giving up the 8th seed to the Bulls either</div> well you don't know how bad are PG were. Mike Bibby is 10x better at the point and t.Lue and A.Johnson put together. Seriously they were just horrible to watch. </div> This is a valid point to be sure. Maybe with a real live NBA PG those other guys will look better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JayJohnstone @ Feb 17 2008, 07:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 17 2008, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The significance of the move is that Atlanta got a lot better, doing the kind of thing that Paxson should have been doing all along. In fact, Atlanta, IMO, is the model teams should follow in rebuilding. They're a team that's a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to deal for Joe Johnson. They consolidated talent to trade for Bibby to fill their biggest hole. Their ownership situation is in a shambles, tho.</div> I agree that Hawks got a lot better, but isn't this nearly the exact same thing that Pax tried to do? The Bulls are also a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to sign Ben Wallace. Granted, Pax and Reinsdorf blinked on Gasol which would be akin to the Bibby deal. </div> This isn't the same thing the Bulls tried to do. Where's our Joe Johnson? Johnson was traded to the Hawks in an S&T. Our moves have been the reverse - give up the talent in the S&T scenarios for cap space, not using cap space to bring in talent.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 18 2008, 09:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JayJohnstone @ Feb 17 2008, 07:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 17 2008, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The significance of the move is that Atlanta got a lot better, doing the kind of thing that Paxson should have been doing all along. In fact, Atlanta, IMO, is the model teams should follow in rebuilding. They're a team that's a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to deal for Joe Johnson. They consolidated talent to trade for Bibby to fill their biggest hole. Their ownership situation is in a shambles, tho.</div> I agree that Hawks got a lot better, but isn't this nearly the exact same thing that Pax tried to do? The Bulls are also a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to sign Ben Wallace. Granted, Pax and Reinsdorf blinked on Gasol which would be akin to the Bibby deal. </div> This isn't the same thing the Bulls tried to do. Where's our Joe Johnson? Johnson was traded to the Hawks in an S&T. Our moves have been the reverse - give up the talent in the S&T scenarios for cap space, not using cap space to bring in talent. </div> We used cap space to bring in Ben Wallace. And Adrian Griffin. How's that for talent?
The Hawks seemingly paid little attention to jib in their rebuilding. Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress. Their drafts focused on gaining freakish athleticism, high upside players. Ready to play from day 1, proven college LEADERS and jib was clearly secondary. Also, they made their play for their high talent, big $$$ player on Joe Johnson, who can actually still play. Also, they went talent first, positional need second. They grabbed the high upside, BPA in most cases. The one pick that was most jib-oriented, Shelden Williams, was one of their worst. So, now the Hawks look like a legitimate, young, athletic, talented NBA team, unlike our gang.
I still think Portland's the ideal model for a rebuilding team. They did the "let's get cheap young talent through the draft" stage quicker and better than anybody I've seen. They got rid of malcontents and bad contracts quickly and efficiently, rather than through a long drawn-out process. And, because of their internal growth, they're in a situation where they don't necessarily need to take a huge, expensive (potentially devestating) gamble to put them over the top (eg: Ben Wallace in Chicago, Mike Bibby in Atlanta).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kukoc4ever @ Feb 18 2008, 11:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The Hawks seemingly paid little attention to jib in their rebuilding. Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress. Their drafts focused on gaining freakish athleticism, high upside players. Ready to play from day 1, proven college LEADERS and jib was clearly secondary. Also, they made their play for their high talent, big $$$ player on Joe Johnson, who can actually still play. Also, they went talent first, positional need second. They grabbed the high upside, BPA in most cases. The one pick that was most jib-oriented, Shelden Williams, was one of their worst. So, now the Hawks look like a legitimate, young, athletic, talented NBA team, unlike our gang.</div> I think there's a couple things missing there. First, I think the biggest difference with the Hawks is they just didn't do any anticipatory salary dumps. I'm not convinced that they'll resign Smith and Childress, and losing one of those guys would be a setback. Second I wouldn't overestimate how good they look. Up to this year since the Gordon/Deng/Smith/Childress draft they were 69-177 over three years with no playoffs. The Bulls were 137-109 and made the playoffs each year. This year, even with the Bulls sucking ass and the Hawks coming on strong, we're 21-31 and they're 21-28.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 18 2008, 09:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JayJohnstone @ Feb 17 2008, 07:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ Feb 17 2008, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The significance of the move is that Atlanta got a lot better, doing the kind of thing that Paxson should have been doing all along. In fact, Atlanta, IMO, is the model teams should follow in rebuilding. They're a team that's a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to deal for Joe Johnson. They consolidated talent to trade for Bibby to fill their biggest hole. Their ownership situation is in a shambles, tho.</div> I agree that Hawks got a lot better, but isn't this nearly the exact same thing that Pax tried to do? The Bulls are also a collection of lottery picks. They used their cap space to sign Ben Wallace. Granted, Pax and Reinsdorf blinked on Gasol which would be akin to the Bibby deal. </div> This isn't the same thing the Bulls tried to do. Where's our Joe Johnson? Johnson was traded to the Hawks in an S&T. Our moves have been the reverse - give up the talent in the S&T scenarios for cap space, not using cap space to bring in talent. </div> They gave up Boris Diaw and, I think, two first round picks for Joe Johnson. And they gave Joe a max contract. They were very lucky that they didn't give up a lottery pick to Phoenix. It was top 3 protected, but they got the 3rd pick and were able to pick Horford. So in the end it was a good move, but it was looking pretty questionable for a while. ...Can you imagine Phoenix with Noah? Also, Billy Knight has a horrible draft record - He passed on Deng and Iguodala in 04, passed on Chris Paul and Deron Williams in 05, passed on Roy and Gay in 06. That's pretty conspicuously awful. The only reason he has a job is because the ownership situation is still sorting itself out.
I give Knight very little credit for the Josh Smith pick. His other drafts have shown that he is unable to evaluate talent. If you had a first round pick in 2004, you had a very good chance of getting a near all-star building block for your team, just about, - Howard, Okafor, Harris, Gordon, Deng, Iguodala, Jefferson, Smith, Kevin Martin, Biedrins... It was a stacked class.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kukoc4ever @ Feb 18 2008, 11:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The Hawks seemingly paid little attention to jib in their rebuilding. Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress. Their drafts focused on gaining freakish athleticism, high upside players. Ready to play from day 1, proven college LEADERS and jib was clearly secondary. Also, they made their play for their high talent, big $$$ player on Joe Johnson, who can actually still play. Also, they went talent first, positional need second. They grabbed the high upside, BPA in most cases. The one pick that was most jib-oriented, Shelden Williams, was one of their worst. So, now the Hawks look like a legitimate, young, athletic, talented NBA team, unlike our gang.</div> What's funny is that they are 21-28 and the Bulls are 21-31.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Feb 18 2008, 12:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I still think Portland's the ideal model for a rebuilding team. They did the "let's get cheap young talent through the draft" stage quicker and better than anybody I've seen. They got rid of malcontents and bad contracts quickly and efficiently, rather than through a long drawn-out process. And, because of their internal growth, they're in a situation where they don't necessarily need to take a huge, expensive (potentially devestating) gamble to put them over the top (eg: Ben Wallace in Chicago, Mike Bibby in Atlanta).</div> I think you're on to something and to me it really comes down to something pretty simple: Get about the best possible guys with your draft picks. Portland, at least under, did very well in 06. We don't know how well they'll do with Oden. I don't know what hand, if any, Presti had in the 05 trade of the #3 pick (your choice of Deron Williams or Chris Paul) for #6 (Martell Webster) and #27 (Linas Kleiza) and 2006 #30 (Joel Freeland). That one's not looking too smooth, but John Nash was running the show in 05 and Steve Patterson in 06. So it's kind of hard for me to figure who's responsible for all that. Getting extra lottery picks (Roy and Deng) sure doesn't hurt either does it?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rwj @ Feb 18 2008, 07:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (kukoc4ever @ Feb 18 2008, 11:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>The Hawks seemingly paid little attention to jib in their rebuilding. Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Josh Childress. Their drafts focused on gaining freakish athleticism, high upside players. Ready to play from day 1, proven college LEADERS and jib was clearly secondary. Also, they made their play for their high talent, big $$$ player on Joe Johnson, who can actually still play. Also, they went talent first, positional need second. They grabbed the high upside, BPA in most cases. The one pick that was most jib-oriented, Shelden Williams, was one of their worst. So, now the Hawks look like a legitimate, young, athletic, talented NBA team, unlike our gang.</div> What's funny is that they are 21-28 and the Bulls are 21-31. </div> Yah, after reading my post again it comes off as way too pro-Hawks. They have a brutal ownership (much worse than Jerry) and their picks have seemed inexplicable at times. Still though, I'd consider switching rosters with them and they probably will be a better team than the Bulls over the next 3 years. And this is a franchise run by complete idiots mostly. Still though, their current starting 5 looks good to me, despite lacking a traditional big man. And they certainly will be more entertaining to watch, IMO. I think that's playing into my thinking when looking at this team. I'm just so damn bored watching the Bulls. Change for changes sake usually isn't the smart move, but as a consumer of Bulls NBA entertainment, this act is getting very stale.
I suppose it's a good move to get them over the hump and into the playoffs this year, and then they can have 2008-2009 to evaluate further (although they may have had to make a big decision about Josh Smith this summer), but I'm not a big Bibby fan and I'm not sure he's really what they need. My first beef is that Bibby's defense has basically fallen apart over the last couple of seasons. Anthony Johnson/Lue aren't exactly world-beaters, but I think they're probably both a lot more effective on that end than Bibby is. The Hawks have been a fairly solid defensive unit, so it'll be interesting to chart any impact here. So imo it boils down to how much better Bibby can make them offensively. I'm not sure he's a good fit to play alongside Joe Johnson, who you could argue should probably be getting more touches than he already does, or that he'll do well in a slower Hawks pace. I think the perfect point for the Hawks would have been someone like Andre Miller or a young, healthy Brevin Knight -- a true floor general who can give you some classic drive and dish every now again. The biggest thing that kills the Hawks offense from what I can tell is Josh Smith's intermittent atrocious shot selection and decision-making. I guess if Bibby can keep the ball away from him during those times, the Hawks will look great in pretty short order.
