PDA

View Full Version : The Hawks - more bad luck



Channing
05-22-2007, 09:30 PM
The one pick I didnt want the Hawks to get was 3. If we couldnt have a top 2 pick i wanted to lose the pick to Phoenix this year and be able to pick up a high first round player next year - probably a guard like Gordon, Rose, or Mayo. Alas, the Hawks got the third pick, and with such a steep drop off after 1 and 2, I have no doubt we land up with another 3/4 in Brandon Wright or Al Horford. Hopefully we can somehow trade the pick and pick up a draft pick next year, but I wouldnt count on it.

at least we may be able to get Conley at 11.

JasonEvans
05-23-2007, 08:57 AM
I went from elation (we're one of the top 3!!!!) to heartbreak (we're #3... argh!!!!!!!) in a matter of moments.

I have no idea what they do with this pick. Maybe they deal it to get a player (or a pick next year?) and a pick around #7 or so where they can get Conley for sure. There is some talk Conley may not be on the board when the Hawks pick at #11.

I don't suppose there is any chance they could deal the #11 and the #3 to move up to the #2, is there? What if we throw in Josh Childress too? HA!!

It seems the Hawks only choice is taking another forward (Wright, Horford, or maybe Brewer) or do they grab the PG they need much earlier than he is projected to go? I wonder if they look at Yi Jianlian, the 7-footers from China who is young and thin but has great shooting touch and could be another Nowitzki.

I agree with you it might be interesting to see if NBA rules would allow them to move the pick to Phoenix now instead of next season. Next year's draft is going to be full of PGs for the Hawks-- but they are not going to have a pick.

-Jason "count on Woodson and Knight to make the wrong move" Evans

ehdg
05-23-2007, 12:43 PM
This brings us to the long debate about drafts be it football or basketball. Do you pick the best player on the board or do you pick based on your teams needs? Granted Conley isn't projected to go that high but he fills a big need for Atlanta. They don't need another forward they're pretty well stocked at that position. If they are unable to trade down a few spots then my thinking is for them pick based on your need (Conley) and not best athlete on the board.

arydolphin
05-23-2007, 01:59 PM
Simple solution for the Hawks: take the best player on the board at #3 that's not a point guard, and then look at the point guard at #11. I highly doubt that Conley will drop to #11, but Acie Law IV will probably be there, and he's a guy that could come in and help from Day 1. This draft is the deepest in recent memory, it doesn't make sense for a team with so many holes to trade picks in order to get up to #2 or #1, no matter how good Oden or Durant will be.

RelativeWays
05-23-2007, 04:53 PM
Bad Luck: (definition) see the Boston Celtics

phaedrus
05-23-2007, 05:12 PM
Bad Luck: (definition) see the Boston Celtics

I would call it poor managment.

juise
05-23-2007, 05:21 PM
I would call it poor managment.

Agreed, to an extent. At least Ainge tried to put a positive spin on it instead of whining, like Jerry West.

Buckeye Devil
05-23-2007, 07:51 PM
The Hawks don't really need another 6'8" type of player but they do need a point guard. They might be able to trade down a few spots and still get Conley, but he definitely won't be there at #11. If they can't trade, they should take Conley, Jr. at #3. In the long run, he will be much better than Acie Law IV. Conley's upside is huge.

kramerbr
05-23-2007, 08:03 PM
Hawks need to take him....or they could pass on him just like they passed on Chris Paul and Deron Williams.

I've been a Celtic's fan my whole life, but after some of Ainge's recent moves (most notably trading for Sebastian Telfair instead of taking Brandon Roy or Randy Foye) it is very hard to stay loyal.

Buckeye Devil
05-24-2007, 07:47 PM
Hawks need to take him....or they could pass on him just like they passed on Chris Paul and Deron Williams.

I've been a Celtic's fan my whole life, but after some of Ainge's recent moves (most notably trading for Sebastian Telfair instead of taking Brandon Roy or Randy Foye) it is very hard to stay loyal.

I am also a lifelong Celtics fan. It's tough to admit where I live which is about the same distance from Detroit and Cleveland-especially now that they are both in the championship.

I thought that Ainge would be good for the Celtics but it is turning into a huge
blunder. But of course, he can't help it that they got #5 instead of #1.

greybeard
05-24-2007, 10:20 PM
Hibbert, in announcing that he was returning, implied that it would have been different if he knew he was a top three, which means that the Hawks told JTIII that they were not taking Hibbert with the three.

My belief, Hibbert needed to return. His senior year in college, some things are priceless. Also, given the progress he has made this year, and his intellect, it was almost a no brainer. I am not sure that Hibbert would have "gone" if the Hawks had said that they'd take him.

My further belief, Hibbert could well in three years be the definitive center in the league, period. Don't tell me about Oden, Mr. Ming, Mr. Howard, or anyone else. Hibbert. Remember where you read it!

I would have taken Hibbert and Green and traded Josh Smith and whomever (anybody but Johnson) to get a decent point. Oh, I'd have paid JTIII whatever it took, fired Woody and BK. Very, very, very sweet offense for a very long time. Offense sells tickets, and is fun to watch. Offense that can control creates defenses that can make timely stops, which is all you need.

So, Atlanta hasn't made a pick yet and BK has already screwed the pouch.

Patrick Yates
05-25-2007, 06:57 AM
Hibbert is not now, and will never be, athletic enough to be a superstar in the league. Many Draftniks are lambasting this decision. If he does not dominate next year, and I mean to the point on 20+ ppg and 12+rpg, his stock will drop.

Many people question his rebounding ability, cause with his size, on the college level, he should average 12+ rpg a game. He appears slow, and his O his still underdeveloped even after 3 years as the the main post at G-Town. There is almost no way that he will move up, and could concievably move down. As he will discover, in his Sr year the scouts will start focusing on the flaws, rather than the potential.

Top 3? I thought G-Town was full of smart kids.

Patrick Yates

MulletMan
05-25-2007, 08:33 AM
Hibbert, in announcing that he was returning, implied that it would have been different if he knew he was a top three, which means that the Hawks told JTIII that they were not taking Hibbert with the three.




I don't think this is the case, since he withdrew before the lottery, there's no way he knew that the Hawks were picking 3rd for sure.

That said, the Hawks should be thrown from the league if they don't take Conley. This whole "take the best player thing" is great if you don't have anyone on your team, but they have so many 3/4s that there's no PT and none of them can develop. This is one of the stupidest franchises in basketball, and they just keep wasting draft picks on the same player year after year. TAKE A FREAKIN' POINT GUARD. Note: Power forwards cannot bring the ball up court, or distribute, or play perimiter D. Show me the last team to win jack in the NBA without a PG!

And comparing Conley to Acie Law is like telling yourself that you shouldn't ask the hot girl out because her homely friend is just as good. C'mon.

ScreechTDX
05-25-2007, 09:07 AM
Other than the fact thats hes 3 years younger. Can anyone please explain to me why you would take Conley over Law IV. This seems like a no brainer to me as Acie brings more intangibles to the floor than any point guard to come to the league in a long time.

My two cents.

dukebluelemur
05-25-2007, 10:17 AM
I wouldnt say all hope is necessarily lost... Portland does have a bad history after all. (See: Jordan, Michael) :rolleyes:

bhd28
05-25-2007, 10:19 AM
http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=2066

The site linked gives a good breakdown and comparison of the PG crop. Conley and Law are both pretty darn good. Law has great intangibles, but Conley did take his team to the finals as a freshman. What more could he be asked to do (Fla was WAY better than OSU overall, IMHO)? Yep, the 3 yrs difference in age matters. When you have 2 guys who are pretty close, it can often be the deciding factor. They are different players (as Law can play 2 guard if needed), but most feel Conley seems to be the pick because of the every present NBA term 'upside' (How come they never talk about a players 'downside?').

MulletMan
05-25-2007, 10:27 AM
Other than the fact thats hes 3 years younger. Can anyone please explain to me why you would take Conley over Law IV. This seems like a no brainer to me as Acie brings more intangibles to the floor than any point guard to come to the league in a long time.

My two cents.


Well, Conley is quicker. Conley can take more defenders off the dribble. Conley is a better distributor. Other than that, he's got nothing that makes him a better PG prospect. You know, aside from the fact that Law is really a 2 guard.

You're right... its a no brainer.

ScreechTDX
05-25-2007, 10:33 AM
Well, Conley is quicker. Conley can take more defenders off the dribble. Conley is a better distributor. Other than that, he's got nothing that makes him a better PG prospect. You know, aside from the fact that Law is really a 2 guard.

You're right... its a no brainer.

A clutch guard that made 1,000,000 CLUTCH shots for his team...when everyone on the opposition knew it was going to happen.

juise
05-25-2007, 10:52 AM
A clutch guard that made 1,000,000 CLUTCH shots for his team...when everyone on the opposition knew it was going to happen.

999,999 clutch shots... he missed that costly lay-in in the tourney.

Patrick Yates
05-25-2007, 10:54 AM
If Conley is there, they take him. If not, why not Crittendon? I think he has more upside than Conley, due to size, athleticism, and instincts.

Conley has now spent 5 years playing almost exclusively with the best Center available. A center who drew double teams, and was a freak rebounder. Frankly, it is the easiest possible situation to play in as a PG.

Look at GP. How much easier is it to play PG with a lights out shooter on the wing and a beast down low (JJ and Shel), vs playing with an inexperienced team with no proven scorers and a lack of a consistent low post threat.

Someone else mentioned downside, and they are right.

Law is not a great PG, he is more of a lead guard. I have questions about his ability to distribute and run a team, also, he is older. But, his downside is low. He is a clutch performer who did well on a team that was not exactly teaming with NBA talent, and did not really have a great player down low.

Conley has more upside, and can run a team better, but his downside is huge. How do we really know that Conley is a great player, and not merely great at taking advantage of the opportunites created by playing with the far and away most dominating center at whatever level he was playing? He might never again play with a Center that dominant.

Is he really a great penetrator and distributor, or was he really great a doing those things when the opposing team was wetting itself out of fear and respect for Oden? On the Hawks he will have great perimeter options, but virtually no post presence to keep the D honest.

Conversely, Crittendon has great upside. He has all the athleticism, and Jason Kidd level size and vision (can't pass as well but a better shooter). he can play D, he is local, and he looked good on a team that resembles the Hawks next year. Brendan Wright and JC would be really good tandem in two years, or the Hawks could trade BW to the Celts (who would jump at him) or Griz for next year's selection, which could be really high, enabling them to get the post that they need. His downside is that the money and fame will ruin hem, but that exists for every player. He might not develop, but he has been getting better, and honing his PG skills ever sharper, for the last 2-3 years, and I see no reason why that trend will not continue.

Patrick Yates

greybeard
05-25-2007, 10:58 AM
1. What's slow got to do with it? How many fast breaks Shaq lead. Bill Walton? Nate Thurman? Fast is for cars and girls, not centers.

2. Hibbert has terrific footwork. Terrific.

3. Hibbert has terrific hands. Terrific.

4. Hibbert has a terrific sense of where the basket is.

5. Hibbert uses either hand extremely well.

6. Hibbert finds creative ways to score the ball, very creative ways as the opportunities unfold. A tremendous, tremendous, tremendous athletic talent that often goes underappreciated, until you play against someone who has it and then you are always apologizing because you are oh so much more "athletic" and should have blocked it ("My fault, my fault").

7. Hibbert is a terrific passer.

8. Hibbert is extremely smart and of generous spirit while at the same time being extremely focused and an all out competitor.

9. Hibbert plays well in the clutch, when his team needs it. His second halves in close games were generally exceptional.

10. Playing close to the ground is a plus (Injuries and wear and tear).

11. Hibbert has shown an ability to grow as a basketball player and athlete that is unparalleled in my lifetime. No reason to think that that development will stop anytime soon.

12. What's with statistics? Basketball is a game to be played, not numbers to be counted.

13. Hibbert is the next great center. Write it down. You guys saying otherwise, you're not related to Billy Knight?

14. The guard to take is Dondell. Trade Conley to Portland, and get the big they drafted last year from Texas in return. Dondell will prove much more durable than Conley. Actually, as a much respected guy from Atlanta suggested, the three pick (Conley) and Marvin Williams ( I'd make it Josh Smith, personally) for the big from Texas and the Georga Tech point in return. Draft Dondell. Get a coach who has some offensive concepts, not one steeped in bobby-ball (as in bobby knight), and get a new GM, and you got yourself a team.

ikiru36
05-25-2007, 11:15 AM
Screech and Mullet both make reasonable points about the differences between Conley and Law. To me, Conley has to be the pick for Atlanta (all other things being equal) as he is both the clearly better pure PG and while the main knock on him is his outside shooting, most think his form is solid and his youth affords him much room for improvement in this area should he focus on it. While many diss the Hawks, and somewhat rightfully so, they have one of the best young SG in the league right now in the underappreciated Joe Johnson (25ppg, 4.2 rbs., 4.4 ast., 47%fg, 38%3pt).

The only other knock on Conley which he can't make up for, relative to Law, is his height. But it's not like Law is that tall either, and since their other guard, Johnson, is 6'7", they can certainly live with a 6'0" PG.

Back to the difference in shooting ability, Law, while already shooting quite a few back as a Freshman (2 per game), shot 21.6%! Apparently this is something that can be improved upon with age (and a lot of hard work, I imagine).

My question about Conley is whether they could trade down a few picks and still get him (ideal, but easier said than done perhaps) or whether there's a good veteran PG already in the league who they could get (pretty much) for the same 3 pick? I actually think that Atlanta has a fairly solid nucleus with Joe Johnson and Josh Smith (who, while offense is perhaps more exciting, can put fans in the stands with his freakish shot blocking ability alone), but they've got nothing but youth. Wouldn't a veteran (say, J. Kidd) perhaps be more logical than a good but particularly young Rookie PG? I guess this is more a question of who actually might be available through such a trade, and who might be willing to go to Atlanta. Not a huge fan of his immaturity but could one imagine Marbury, at age 30, revitalizing his career in Atlanta? Or, just sticking with the Knicks, Steve Francis or perhaps best of all, Jamal Crawford?

Just saying that Conley and Law are nice, but in either case, the 3 is a bit of a reach (unless you feel strongly that Conley is the next Chris Paul). I say, trade down or trade the pick for a good, but older and more veteran PG. I know Atlanta's management is poor, but only good things can come (to you) by flashing top draft picks in front of Isaiah Thomas!

juise
05-25-2007, 11:19 AM
14. The guard to take is Dondell. Trade Conley to Portland, and get the big they drafted last year from Texas in return. Dondell will prove much more durable than Conley. Actually, as a much respected guy from Atlanta suggested, the three pick (Conley) and Marvin Williams ( I'd make it Josh Smith, personally) for the big from Texas and the Georga Tech point in return. Draft Dondell. Get a coach who has some offensive concepts, not one steeped in bobby-ball (as in bobby knight), and get a new GM, and you got yourself a team.

Are you talking about Zabian Dowdell from Virginia Tech? With what pick? The Hawks don't have any second rounders and Dowdell's projected in the late second (if at all). As for the trades, there's no chance Portland gives up Aldridge. They may give up Jarrett Jack in the right deal (since they're high on Sergio Rodriguez). If the Hawks are interested in a a 25/10 PF who just happens to be a shady character (Randolph), I'm sure Portland would throw him into a deal for a small forward. I haven't heard anything about Portland being high on Conley. I think they were much more interested in Corey Brewer.

Patrick Yates
05-25-2007, 11:29 AM
1. What's slow got to do with it? How many fast breaks Shaq lead. Bill Walton? Nate Thurman? Fast is for cars and girls, not centers.

2. Hibbert has terrific footwork. Terrific.

3. Hibbert has terrific hands. Terrific.

4. Hibbert has a terrific sense of where the basket is.

5. Hibbert uses either hand extremely well.

6. Hibbert finds creative ways to score the ball, very creative ways as the opportunities unfold. A tremendous, tremendous, tremendous athletic talent that often goes underappreciated, until you play against someone who has it and then you are always apologizing because you are oh so much more "athletic" and should have blocked it ("My fault, my fault").

7. Hibbert is a terrific passer.

8. Hibbert is extremely smart and of generous spirit while at the same time being extremely focused and an all out competitor.

9. Hibbert plays well in the clutch, when his team needs it. His second halves in close games were generally exceptional.

10. Playing close to the ground is a plus (Injuries and wear and tear).

11. Hibbert has shown an ability to grow as a basketball player and athlete that is unparalleled in my lifetime. No reason to think that that development will stop anytime soon.

12. What's with statistics? Basketball is a game to be played, not numbers to be counted.

13. Hibbert is the next great center. Write it down. You guys saying otherwise, you're not related to Billy Knight?

14. The guard to take is Dondell. Trade Conley to Portland, and get the big they drafted last year from Texas in return. Dondell will prove much more durable than Conley. Actually, as a much respected guy from Atlanta suggested, the three pick (Conley) and Marvin Williams ( I'd make it Josh Smith, personally) for the big from Texas and the Georga Tech point in return. Draft Dondell. Get a coach who has some offensive concepts, not one steeped in bobby-ball (as in bobby knight), and get a new GM, and you got yourself a team.

Hibbert is staying in school, so we can revisit this next year at the draft.

As for point 14, WHAT?

Portland has a PG, Jarret Jack, who is bigger than Conley and has just as good a future in the league. No way will Portland trade Aldridge, the big guy from Texas. They are already talking about playing LA and GO together.

I mean, that is just ill thought out. Portland trades a promising big for a player who plays the same position as one of their bright young stars? Yes, that would be great for Atlanta. So would Portland sending Oden to the ATL for some peaches and a hug. Not even in the realm of possiblity would this happen. It is completely impossible. Portland might part with Zach Randolf, who is a trouble magnet off-court, but ATL has nothing, and I mean nothing, that Portland needs. ATL has to have a PG, and who is this Dondell kid that no one is listing in first round? Are you trolling? Cause if so (and that is the only logical explanation for this meth induced theory) well done sir. I have taken the bait like a prize sucker.

Patrick Yates

greybeard
05-25-2007, 11:39 AM
Are you talking about Zabian Dowdell from Virginia Tech? With what pick? The Hawks don't have any second rounders and Dowdell's projected in the late second (if at all). As for the trades, there's no chance Portland gives up Aldridge. They may give up Jarrett Jack in the right deal (since they're high on Sergio Rodriguez). If the Hawks are interested in a a 25/10 PF who just happens to be a shady character (Randolph), I'm sure Portland would throw him into a deal for a small forward. I haven't heard anything about Portland being high on Conley. I think they were much more interested in Corey Brewer.

I heard that Portland wants Conley bad because Oden does. Perhaps that is just wishful Atlanta fan thinking.

I don't care where Dowdell is projected, I take him over Conley. I think that Conley will be prone to occupy the ball way too much, and will get injured way too often, given his style of play. People do not factor in the injury issue; but a number of these speedy points end up injured way too often. Nash and Parker avoid it because they play close to the ground when they attack the basket--Nash doesn't even jump. Guys with the speed and hops of a Conley are injuries waiting to happen, imo.

For all the talk about the need for a point, which is real, and a big, which is also real, the Hawks also need shooters/scorers. Dowdell is both, and he handles way well enough, imo.

I do not like Noah with the three; nor do I like Conley. I very much like Brewer, above either Josh Smith or Marvin Williams. Tougher than either, and much more versatile with a mid range game. But, if the Hawks took him with the 3, BK would be shot.

I wouldn't be so sure about Aldridge being an untouchable. They ain't taking Oden just for his defense. The guy can score the ball inside. They need to dump Randolph, who I wouldn't touch if I were Atlanta. If they really want Conley, and could get a Josh Smith, along with him, I think that Aldridge could well shake loose, with Jack thrown in.

Portand needs to put fans in the stands and that means that they need to run. That got a guy who will get the thing off the board and block shots and allow players to gamble for steals, a blazer (couldn't resist) like Conley to run with Roy and JSmooth running the wing provides that. And, let's not forgot the big guy, who we want being happy. Oden, from hearing him, is a thoughtful, sensative 19 year old. Having his friend with him cannot be gainsaid.

Then, with the 11, if he is still around, and the deal I just projected is made, I take Jeff Green.

MulletMan
05-25-2007, 12:42 PM
I heard that Portland wants Conley bad because Oden does. Perhaps that is just wishful Atlanta fan thinking.

I don't care where Dowdell is projected, I take him over Conley. I think that Conley will be prone to occupy the ball way too much, and will get injured way too often, given his style of play. People do not factor in the injury issue; but a number of these speedy points end up injured way too often. Nash and Parker avoid it because they play close to the ground when they attack the basket--Nash doesn't even jump. Guys with the speed and hops of a Conley are injuries waiting to happen, imo.

For all the talk about the need for a point, which is real, and a big, which is also real, the Hawks also need shooters/scorers. Dowdell is both, and he handles way well enough, imo.

I do not like Noah with the three; nor do I like Conley. I very much like Brewer, above either Josh Smith or Marvin Williams. Tougher than either, and much more versatile with a mid range game. But, if the Hawks took him with the 3, BK would be shot.

I wouldn't be so sure about Aldridge being an untouchable. They ain't taking Oden just for his defense. The guy can score the ball inside. They need to dump Randolph, who I wouldn't touch if I were Atlanta. If they really want Conley, and could get a Josh Smith, along with him, I think that Aldridge could well shake loose, with Jack thrown in.

Portand needs to put fans in the stands and that means that they need to run. That got a guy who will get the thing off the board and block shots and allow players to gamble for steals, a blazer (couldn't resist) like Conley to run with Roy and JSmooth running the wing provides that. And, let's not forgot the big guy, who we want being happy. Oden, from hearing him, is a thoughtful, sensative 19 year old. Having his friend with him cannot be gainsaid.

Then, with the 11, if he is still around, and the deal I just projected is made, I take Jeff Green.


What? Are you just making things up? First off, Portland is not trading Jack or Aldridge. Period. That is the most insane suggestion I've heard. They are looking at a starting lineup of Jack, Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Udoka or some other small forward. Gimmie a break, that's a nucleus that's winning titles into the next decade. Aldridge is a better player than Josh Smith, not to mention the fact that I'm gonna bet that the Hawks would trade Shelden before they get rid of Smith.

Conley will occupy the ball too much..? Have you actually watched him play? I mean seriously? The guy brings the ball up, and runs the offense. He constantly moves without the ball, and has moves it like its a freakin' hot potato. In anycase, have you watched the NBA recently? Aside from a couple of teams, the whole damn league is based on one guy gaining a mismatch and driving the ball. To do that, you have to occupy the ball for a while.

As far as Conley being injury prone... I mean, where is that coming from? That's like saying, "Gee Sam Bowie broke his leg, better not take Oden with the number one pick because Zabian Dowdell is the next Michael Jordan." There is no logic behind that statement. Conley is not a high flying dunk artist. He's a small quick PG with great passng ability... something that the Hawks desperately need. Dowdell is not even in the same class. Not even close.

phaedrus
05-25-2007, 01:51 PM
i thought this would be an opportune time to post this link. it's a "celebrity" dunk contest, featuring some athletes like ken griffey jr. and deion sanders. at the end is the winner, mike conley sr., former olympic triple jump champion. keep in mind he's also only about 6'.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=dKDDJH_aU9s

greybeard
05-25-2007, 01:53 PM
What? Are you just making things up? First off, Portland is not trading Jack or Aldridge. Period. That is the most insane suggestion I've heard. They are looking at a starting lineup of Jack, Roy, Aldridge, Oden and Udoka or some other small forward. Gimmie a break, that's a nucleus that's winning titles into the next decade. Aldridge is a better player than Josh Smith, not to mention the fact that I'm gonna bet that the Hawks would trade Shelden before they get rid of Smith.

Conley will occupy the ball too much..? Have you actually watched him play? I mean seriously? The guy brings the ball up, and runs the offense. He constantly moves without the ball, and has moves it like its a freakin' hot potato. In anycase, have you watched the NBA recently? Aside from a couple of teams, the whole damn league is based on one guy gaining a mismatch and driving the ball. To do that, you have to occupy the ball for a while.

As far as Conley being injury prone... I mean, where is that coming from? That's like saying, "Gee Sam Bowie broke his leg, better not take Oden with the number one pick because Zabian Dowdell is the next Michael Jordan." There is no logic behind that statement. Conley is not a high flying dunk artist. He's a small quick PG with great passng ability... something that the Hawks desperately need. Dowdell is not even in the same class. Not even close.

Tell me what you really think. I think that Portland needs Conley. You don't. We will see. You undervalue, as in grossly since you do not address it, that Oden is a 19 year old who is reluctantly coming out because of the money. He wants to stay in school because he likes it, and, more importantly, the NBA life is too large. Portand, if they do not get Oden Conley if he wants him, are idiots!

Second, Jack is a very nice point. I wanted Atlanta to get him in the draft and thereafter. But, he is not running a runout offense, which is what Conley is really best at. Running. Case you haven't been watching, NBA west basketball is all about hepped up offense. You don't do that, stay home. Entertainment value here, not paper basketball, fantasy basketball. Sell tickets. You have two studs, Oden and Roy. If Aldridge has an upside, it is in the half court game and as a scorer. Sorry, he is expendible, to get Conley, who I have to believe they want.

Oden doesn't work out and their future is dashed. Can a friend make a difference. Ask Stevie Franchise. The Mooch man mattered. So can Conley, and as you point out, it ain't like the kid can't play.

Please, tell me that you are not going on what Portland is saying. Tell me you are not, or else I will be sure that you are BK. Just like Colangelo said that no draft picks no deal. No way Colangelo resigned JJ for 25 large; none. Zero. Zilch. Did they ever say that? Duh!!!!

Now, the occupying the ball part. I have watched, and I do not know what you are talking about. He likes the ball, dribbles it an awful lot. That might work on some teams. They didn't pay JJ 25 million to run off screens, and he wouldn't, if you asked him. They need to play the Princeton, or some derrivative of it. They don't need a point guard occupying the ball. Did anybody occupy the ball all the time with Larry on the court, besides Larry that is. Sorry, I disagree, respectfully, which you should try sometime. Really, it don't hurt nearly as much as you think.

As for preferring Sheldon to Smith, I doubt it, but I'd be fine with it, if that's what Portand wanted. I'd give them any one (maybe even two) but JJ and, I know that you will laugh, Chill. Chill stays. Anybody else you can move. Smith is not a decision maker. He never will be. Nor is he the kind of guy who you want initiating offense. Makes too many bad choices. His best game is uptempo, and then he can be outstanding. Runs and jumps terrifically. Finishes. Can shoot it from distance, but not great. Smith should go and make room on the Hawks for a real 4. Aldridge, with Sheldon backing him up, and the two playing the 4-5 also. Green and Marvin, if he is still around, at the 3-4, with Marvin being able to go to the two.

In the end, Portland MUST do everything it can to make Oden's transition to the pros a good one, and not just from a basketball perspective. Everything else is secondary.

Two, to take advantage of Oden's skills, Portland must run.

Which of those points do you disagree with. If neither, you can't say what you have been.

MulletMan
05-25-2007, 02:03 PM
Tell me what you really think. I think that Portland needs Conley. You don't. We will see. You undervalue, as in grossly since you do not address it, that Oden is a 19 year old who is reluctantly coming out because of the money. He wants to stay in school because he likes it, and, more importantly, the NBA life is too large. Portand, if they do not get Oden Conley if he wants him, are idiots!

Second, Jack is a very nice point. I wanted Atlanta to get him in the draft and thereafter. But, he is not running a runout offense, which is what Conley is really best at. Running. Case you haven't been watching, NBA west basketball is all about hepped up offense. You don't do that, stay home. Entertainment value here, not paper basketball, fantasy basketball. Sell tickets. You have two studs, Oden and Roy. If Aldridge has an upside, it is in the half court game and as a scorer. Sorry, he is expendible, to get Conley, who I have to believe they want.

Oden doesn't work out and their future is dashed. Can a friend make a difference. Ask Stevie Franchise. The Mooch man mattered. So can Conley, and as you point out, it ain't like the kid can't play.

Please, tell me that you are not going on what Portland is saying. Tell me you are not, or else I will be sure that you are BK. Just like Colangelo said that no draft picks no deal. No way Colangelo resigned JJ for 25 large; none. Zero. Zilch. Did they ever say that? Duh!!!!

Now, the occupying the ball part. I have watched, and I do not know what you are talking about. He likes the ball, dribbles it an awful lot. That might work on some teams. They didn't pay JJ 25 million to run off screens, and he wouldn't, if you asked him. They need to play the Princeton, or some derrivative of it. They don't need a point guard occupying the ball. Did anybody occupy the ball all the time with Larry on the court, besides Larry that is. Sorry, I disagree, respectfully, which you should try sometime. Really, it don't hurt nearly as much as you think.

As for preferring Sheldon to Smith, I doubt it, but I'd be fine with it, if that's what Portand wanted. I'd give them any one (maybe even two) but JJ and, I know that you will laugh, Chill. Chill stays. Anybody else you can move. Smith is not a decision maker. He never will be. Nor is he the kind of guy who you want initiating offense. Makes too many bad choices. His best game is uptempo, and then he can be outstanding. Runs and jumps terrifically. Finishes. Can shoot it from distance, but not great. Smith should go and make room on the Hawks for a real 4. Aldridge, with Sheldon backing him up, and the two playing the 4-5 also. Green and Marvin, if he is still around, at the 3-4, with Marvin being able to go to the two.

In the end, Portland MUST do everything it can to make Oden's transition to the pros a good one, and not just from a basketball perspective. Everything else is secondary.

Two, to take advantage of Oden's skills, Portland must run.

Which of those points do you disagree with. If neither, you can't say what you have been.

OK... things I disagree with.. you have no idea if Oden is "reluctantly" coming out. I think he's coming out because he would like the chance to play in the NBA and his wrist injury scared him.

You have no clue that Oden has any inkling of wanting the team who lands him to trade for Conley.

Oden does not need to be in a "runout" offense to be succesful. He is a fantastic low post player and can do so amazingly well in the half court.

NBA basketball out west is about "hepped up offense"? Ummm, so how did Utah beat Golden State? Oh right, they slowed the game down and only ran when they needed to. And who won the Spurs-Suns series? The team that runs and guns and is to tired to play defense or the team that can run half court sets and get it into a big man with great low-post moves? Just curious.

I didn't say that Portland would prefer Shelden... I said that Atlanta would move him before they move Smith.

And I disagree with your last statement. I can pretty much say what I've been saying because I'm going on facts, not pipedream speculation that isn't acutally based on facts and/or observation.

greybeard
05-25-2007, 02:26 PM
Count em. Statistics, man, you like em. Me. I don't need no stinkin statistics, I know what I've seen.

Young speedy points, who blast at breakneck speeds and oh so love to elevate at the end, how many get nasty injuries and how often. Especially those who come out early. When you need to borrow some toes and fingers, holla.

Me, my picks last year for the Hawks were Roy, 1, Farmar 2. Not bad choices, eh. Who'd you have. And, I'm sure you woulda taken Paul, instead of Marvin. How's that knee of his doing, btw? Too bad Livingston didn't come to Duke, at least for a year. He might even still have a knee, as that term is commonly defined.

No one is saying that Conley will get injured. Just that his age and style of play make it a consideration, at least for me.

greybeard
05-25-2007, 02:52 PM
I heard Oden say it multiple times that he was coming out reluctantly, and not because of his wrist. He likes college, and is just adjusting to that world. He clearly sounded like a kid, and not a starry eyed one looking for flashy rides either. He definitely is reluctant.

Look, I thought I was talking to someone who knows ball. San Antonio runs plenty, with a very, very speedy backcourt. A point who is a blur. They get loads of easy run out baskets, which lets Duncan preserve. What game you watching?

No one said that Portland should or could be Phoenix. Or Golden State. But, the West Coast teams that I am familiar with, including those two, the Clippers when they were good, San Antonio, the Lakers, Denver, all run the ball, much more than teams in the East.

To me, you have a shot blocker, rebounder extraordinaire, you want to play overplay defense and get a lot of easy baskets. Your big is working hard on defense and rebounding and run outs equal he rests. Then, when you set up in the half court, he has the energy to score the ball. Do I really need to be doing this? I thought you knew ball?

As for Atlanta preferring to move Sheldon rather than Smooth, I suppose it would depend on whom you ask and when. Smooth was gettin burried for the first half of the season, and the second half, well, there were no Hawks after JJ and MW and Speedy and Chill all were out. Sheldon, many Hawks fans feel, should have been on the court much more. And, Smooth can really only play the four. While he is productive there, it is not in a way that you want a four to be, not if you lack the big, big, which Atlanta does.

Then there is the question of ownership and mangement. If Woody stays, they need to shoot BK, but I have to believe that he would shed no tears if Smooth were gone. Me, I take Sheldon 10 out of 10 times. Who knows what Belkin would do, should he take over.

So, I don't know what you been reading, or who you been talking to, but I dispute your claim that Atlanta would prefer to move Sheldon over Smooth. I believe that Smooth would be the better take from either team's perspective. But, hey, they might want them both. I'd give it, and take back a second, with which I take Dowdell. How do you like them apples?

JasonEvans
05-25-2007, 04:31 PM
Hey Greybeard, its Shelden not Sheldon.

Its Dowdell, not Dondell.

And, no offense dude, but you shot your credibility in the foot when you said: I don't care where Dowdell is projected, I take him over Conley.

Its really hard to come back from a statement like that and have folks take your opinions seriously. Sorry, just saying the truth.

-Jason "the Hawks will make a bad move-- not sure what it will be but it will be bad" Evans

mapei
05-25-2007, 04:32 PM
I don't care one oway or another about Atlanta other than I want Shelden to have a good pro career. But I do want to chime in to respond to the two rather extreme positive/negative takes on Hibbert.

I'm a season ticketholder at Gtown games so I have been watching Roy from day one. He wasn't really the main post player his freshman year, because his skill set was just too raw. I cringed when he got the ball in the post the way I cringed this year when Zoubek did. He came off the bench for periods of time and learned the game. (Green actually played the 5 most of that year.)

And since then Roy's skills have grown day by day, and amazingly. I was a doubter on him all the way to about 1/3 of the way through this season, but no more. He is now very, very good. His footwork and hands are great, as is his shot-blocking and, yes, rebounding. The raw numbers for rebounding are lower than you might expect because Gtown plays at such a slow pace. He still averaged double digits throughout the Big East and NCAA tournaments, which, unfortunately, we are unable to say about any Duke player.

Will he dominate in the NBA? I dunno. That's asking a lot. Maybe, maybe not. I could see it going either way. I do think he'll be a solid contributor. He decided to stay in school (as I predicted on this board months ago) because he thinks he can keep improving, and because he loves going to college (said so verbatim at his press conference). We should all applaud that perspective, whether or not it works out to plus or minus however many millions of dollars.

greybeard
05-25-2007, 08:59 PM
Evans, my lad, ask your friends in Atlanta about The Flash, the ones who participate on the ajc.com/hawks blog. Ask them about me. Then we'll talk about who knows what about ball and the Hawks. Like I said, I was on board from day one to take Roy and Farmar last year; both worked out pretty well. I also would have signed Blake and Dixon straight up from the Zards. We wouldn't be talking point at this point if they had (didn't understand why my boy Belkin didn't listen until all that trouble surfaced), and we wouldn't be depending on someone named Lue to try to win games at the end. Give me Juan anyday, you do remember him, right, being a Dukie and all.

I watched Dowdell against Duke and UNC and a host of other teams. He is going to be successful in the league, as in very. Bet on it. He is also tough, and the Hawks desparately need tough. He is also long, much longer than his height. He gets to the rim and delivers in a variety of ways, and can shoot standing or off the dribble. I think Greenberg is the most underrated coach in the ACC. I think he is elite as a facilitator of player development.

People scoffed at my Farmar take; only me and the good Doctor were on Roy. And, I still like Coppenwrath, who I believe is still playing in Ireland, as a center. Coppenwrath. You can play an offense through Coppenwrath, and he can score the ball and distribute it. Can we spell PRINCTON boys and girls. That is the offense for that team. With the tight Spirit in control, if a coaching change is made my bet it is in-house. No, it will not be my boy Herb, it will be Larry Drew. Larry Drew is steeped in the Princeton (see the good doctor).

Dowdell is a steal. Bank on it. You don't agree. Who'd you have them picking last year? Wasn't the rookie of the year, was it?

You really got to stop listening to the talking heads. They are for the most part vapid gossipers. Bilas, Majerius, and a few others, I listen to (take what they have to say seriously); the rest are yodelers.

greybeard
05-25-2007, 09:58 PM
It's like a fetish on this site. From my very first days posting on the LAX case, and then again when I started on this board, spelling. We talking school or sports? Youz know who I'm referring to and get the jist of what I'm saying whether the spellin is correct or wrong, right? So, what's the diff.

It's like this thing about statistics. You'd think that sports was something that you needed to be a CPA to do, the way some worship at the alter of numbers. Numbers don't mean squat; it's the way five guys meld on the court that matters, nothing else. The final score will find a way to work itself out.

And, don't people have original thoughts, or do you need a reference to authentic what you think? Me, I like my perspectives on the game; I go with them. I think that some might find value in some of them. Or not. But, why would I care if it's against the strain of the so-called pundits?

Indoor66
05-26-2007, 09:06 AM
Strong opinions do not count for wisdom and experience. Presentation of ideas presents the man. Big things take care of themselves; little things kill you. I'll never rule the world or the State, I can rule myself.

greybeard
05-26-2007, 10:49 AM
What distinguishes a team sport like basketball and soccer from tennis, is the obvious need to meld. However, there is melding and then there is melding. Coaches can call "plays," and everybody can "know" their respective jobs in the sequence, and perhaps even "know" the option sequence that he is "supposed" to go through as the defense presents.

Or, the game can become somewhat more fluid and teams can meld in playing a joint side in a chess game at high speed. In that game, as the situation presents, all reasonably knowledgible and gifted players should read the board's possibilities relatively similarly. In that context, and putting it into the realm of basketball, one of the five can make a choice, which should signal to the others what game is afoot. Often that one is the guy with the ball, but not always. It could be the guy who clears space, or moves to a position that dictates a passing sequence that then will lead him to move to receive the ball in an excellent attack position.

This is my take, and the context in which I said that I do not believe that Josh Smith is a good decision maker. I do not believe that he reads the leads of others well, that he is attuned to off the ball leads when he has the ball in his hands, or that the choices that he makes extrapolate beyond the initial move at hand. To bring it back to the chess analogy. Sometimes, and I do not play the game, a move can be made that opens up possibilities two or three moves out, depending on how the board develops. Not, imo, for Smith.

Now, the consequence to teammates when one of them does not get it is that there is no "it" there, at least none of the dimension or sophistication that might otherwise be possible. The game, imo, becomes much less interesting, exciting, effective, and entertaining.

Among other considerable assets, I believe that Shelden gets it, particularly without the ball in his hands. I do not believe that the Hawks as a team "get it" and that that is their biggest shortcoming. Woody's offensive concepts are narrow and unimaginative, way too plodding. There are guys on the team whose extraordinary basketball IQ's and generosity of spirit is being held back because of Woody and because of players who do not get it.

I would trade Smith before Shelden. I also am not a fan of Lue, whom I think is of generous spirit (unlike Smith) but I believe is a poor decision maker.

I believe that Dowdell gets it, and his vision has been greatly expanded during his years with Greenberg.

Now, I hope I've paid enough attention to the little things.

jma4life
05-27-2007, 01:57 PM
Greybeard, you talk about what Oden himself has stated. Well are you aware of the fact that Oden said he does not want to play with Conley at the next level? During the ESPN predraft coverage, Oden flat out stated that he wanted Conley to be on a different team. His reason for this was that he wanted his good friend Conley, to get to play on a team where he would no longer be shadowed by Oden. So, if you are going to talk about Oden being reluctant to go to the league, then what do you have to say about Oden stating definitively that he did not want to play with Conley at the next level?

greybeard
05-27-2007, 08:57 PM
Greybeard, you talk about what Oden himself has stated. Well are you aware of the fact that Oden said he does not want to play with Conley at the next level? During the ESPN predraft coverage, Oden flat out stated that he wanted Conley to be on a different team. His reason for this was that he wanted his good friend Conley, to get to play on a team where he would no longer be shadowed by Oden. So, if you are going to talk about Oden being reluctant to go to the league, then what do you have to say about Oden stating definitively that he did not want to play with Conley at the next level?

What do I say about it? Not very logical to me, unless it is understood as distancing himself from any move that Portland might make to unite the two. But, it could well put the dash in what a guy I respect on the ajc blog put out and what I think makes a lot of sense.

Sounds to me like Oden don't want to be known as needing a friend to succeed or as diminishing his friend's value standing on his own. However, it worked for Bill and KC pretty well, for both of them, I might add. If Portland has a visionary like Red, and someone who will stand up and defend the move on its merits, independent of the Oden/Conley connection, it might still happen. However, what you have said makes it less likely.

Good get!!!

Exiled_Devil
05-27-2007, 11:03 PM
It's like a fetish on this site. From my very first days posting on the LAX case, and then again when I started on this board, spelling. We talking school or sports? Youz know who I'm referring to and get the jist of what I'm saying whether the spellin is correct or wrong, right? So, what's the diff.


There was a long discussion about this back when we transitioned between boards - I'll tell you my take on it: You spell the name of Duke players correctly as a sign of respect for the people and the team.

If you spell someone's name wrong, it is a signal that you don't really respect them. When you are pumping up a player, misspelling their name in the process shows a laziness and/or lack of respect that undermines your point. It's not that hard to check on a spelling - you are already online to post.

Exiled

greybeard
05-28-2007, 12:12 AM
There was a long discussion about this back when we transitioned between boards - I'll tell you my take on it: You spell the name of Duke players correctly as a sign of respect for the people and the team.

If you spell someone's name wrong, it is a signal that you don't really respect them. When you are pumping up a player, misspelling their name in the process shows a laziness and/or lack of respect that undermines your point. It's not that hard to check on a spelling - you are already online to post.

Exiled

Can't spell; never could. If I didn't have a good editor at work, I'd be cooked. My man T says I should try this for a living, but then again, he's just a yodeler, and beside used to always be correcting my spelling. Names, I get what I call dyslecsic (spelling ugh). And, never learned how to spell phonetically. No spell check on this thing for some reason either. I coulda been a contender. Hope that helps, no disrespect intended. I write faster than I think. My focus, if this makes sense, is to match content with rhythm, and catchy phrases that paint a picture of a perspective. Most writers are more linear.

You are 100 percent correct. If you aspire to be a pro, spelling is an essential fundamental. I do but don't, obviously.

JasonEvans
05-28-2007, 07:54 AM
I write faster than I think.

Truer words were never spoken ;)

I think we can put this thing to bed. We'll see how right you are about Zabian Dowdell. I must admit, I would have more confidence in your prediction if you had just made a subtle mistake on the spelling of his name-- like you did on Sheldon. But to repeatedly mistake an "n" for a "w"-- well, that strikes me as more than hitting the wrong key on the keyboard. It is almost like you are not familliar with his real name. I mean Dondell and Dowdell don't sound anything alike (the way Shelden and Sheldon could). I dunno...

But, like I say, we'll see how right you are. If Zabian is a significant rookie performer there will be plenty of people around here ready to give you your props. Anytime you pick a longshot like that and are right about it, you deserve some praise.

As for your comments about the current NBA rookie class-- everyone knew Brandon Roy would be a stud. I don't think anyone was all that surprised to see him have one of the best rookie campaigns.

I am not quite sure why you are crowing so much about Jordan Farmar. I guess he was a little better than expected for the Lakers, but just a little. It is not like he was even one of the ten best rookies in the NBA last year.

-Jason "I like Dowdell and will be rooting for him-- I wouldn't be shocked to see someone use a mid-2nd round draft pick on him" Evans

greybeard
05-28-2007, 09:30 AM
In addition to not spelling all too well, I don't remember so good anymore. You will notice that in the heat of writing something I will describe, rather than name, a player who is a star but whose name escapes me. Don't get old.

Roy, at least on the ajc board, was not among the players the boyz liked. I don't read the pundits, for the reasons that I said. To me, the Hawks desparately needed (need) someone who can really play the game, score the ball and create his own shots, who gets it, to accompany Joe Johnson. The focus on a "star" point has always, to me, been wrong headed, although a point of the sort I describe below is desparately needed and sorely lacking. Just not worthy of a five pick.

Jackson, as in Phil, never ever plays rookies, much less at lead guard (there is no real point in the triangle). And, when you are playing with Kobe (see my comments about getting it, in the previous post; Kobe gets it alright, but just has no use for it), no one can play to their potential. I see Farmar as a Walt Frazer type player, and I think so does Phil. If Farmar ever gets away from Kobe, you might see that too. Anyway, I think that his body and style will keep him on the floor, unlike others. That he can score the ball from long and off the dribble, is a good decision maker, rebounder, defender, with very good first step and change of direction. He is strong, can run, and jump, and goes for the ball. I like the kid, a lot. See some of those same traits in Dowdell.

I am not a fan of the great point guard as a concept; to me, the great points in a way dumb down the game for the rest of the players if, as is most often the case, coaches allow the points to occupy the time on ball as much as we often see. The game becomes less than it can be, imo, when that happens, in very many instances. There are exceptions, Nash; but you watch the way Phoenix plays and you will see that he generates an incredible number of one-two touches between himself and others, who do the same among themselves. Different. Same type thing, imo, occurs with Kidd.

I love the way Blake has always played the point; much different than the star point concept we see way too often in the American game.

Which brings me to dowdell, and for that matter Jack (and for that matter Paulus). To me, what would be hugely successful at the pro level at point might be different than what the average bear is looking for. I want someone above all else who gets it and values it. He also must multitask. I leave the dazzling star points to others.

xenic
05-28-2007, 12:14 PM
My further belief, Hibbert could well in three years be the definitive center in the league, period. Don't tell me about Oden, Mr. Ming, Mr. Howard, or anyone else. Hibbert. Remember where you read it!


Let me guess, he grew up playing soccer?

xenic
05-28-2007, 12:33 PM
Look, I thought I was talking to someone who knows ball. San Antonio runs plenty, with a very, very speedy backcourt. A point who is a blur. T

Sounds like they had better trade him ASAP before he injures himself.

greybeard
05-28-2007, 08:46 PM
Let me guess, he grew up playing soccer?

No. But he stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. And, oh by the way Xman, he has played the Princeton for 3 years under the best of the best this side of Pete, which is the same as playing the great game, actually, borrows from soccer for most of its principles. Otherwise, your point is well taken.

greybeard
05-28-2007, 08:48 PM
Sounds like they had better trade him ASAP before he injures himself.

When Parker attacks the basket, you will notice that he slows down for the finish, does not elevate meaningfully, and almost always knows where he is landing which is on his feet. And, where is he from; and Mano; and what the hey, Duncan? And, what is the main sport in their respective countries, Xman. That's okay, you can say it. Soccer, that's right, Xman, it's okay. So, what was your point again, Xman. That's what I thought.

"I got no more use for this guy, your hona." Vinnie, from My Cousin Vinnie.