If you’re saying the Hawks are poorly run now, I couldn’t agree with you more. (Alas!) But that doesn’t make Atlanta an NBA backwater. They have a history of success. Just not recent success. I think of a “backwater” as a team that has no history, no fan base, and no prospects.
And yeah, I worry that they’ll screw up their good draft fortune somehow. (I remember when they passed on Luol Deng in the draft, too. I knew that would come back to bite them in the ass.)
Every team that’s been around for 40 years has some tradition, and even though they may be basketball exile territory, they’ve had some history. As it stands right now, sorry, Atlanta is “backwater”.
I thought Deng was a “can’t miss” prospect in that draft, too.
The problem with Atlanta is that even when they were good, they were underachievers. I think at one point, all five of their starters were all-stars. And that was exactly their problem as well — the team needed five balls, one for each showboat player.
Reggie Theus and Moses Malone subtracted more than they added, if that’s the era you have in mind. They were both too selfish. That, plus Moses Malone used to average 11 boards a game, but 6 of those would be off his own blown layups. :dubious:
Back to the draft (but still from a Hawks fan’s perspective):
The number one and number two picks look obvious, but what should the Hawks do with number 3? They need a point guard, but is Ohio State’s Conley a legitimate #3 pick?
When was the last time the Hawks made it past the conference semis?
If I were to contract 3 or 4 NBA franchises, and I think they should, ATL would be second on the list (memphis is first). Atlanta is a bad sports town. Attendance is always near the bottom. It’s even low when the teams are could. The Braves couldn’t even sell out the NLCS a few years.
As for the lottery, I was thrilled with the #1 spot, disappointed with the #2, and ok with the #3 (my ATL bashing aside, they played hard this year and might be a decent team again with a solid PG).
Portland- Portland is a great place for Oden. The team is trying to dump the jailblazer crew (slow process), but with Roy, Aldridge and Oden, they are on the way. All quality guys. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Portland trade Randolph (even at his salary, he was 20/10 this season.) This would allow Aldridge to shift to the 4 next to Oden. If they can get a good veteran SF for Randolph and then use one of their young players to trade for a nice PG (moving Jack to the 6th man role) like Mike Bibby, Brevin Knight or Jose Calderon, this team will be set for a playoff run. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them win a title in 3-5 years.
Sonics- Durant seems wasted here. Of all the places he could have landed, I’m not sure this team gets substantially better even if he is great. I just kind of get a Meh reaction.
Atlanta- They played hard this season. I’ll give them that. They have had bad drafts for quite a while. What they will do this year is anyone’s guess. They may try to draft OJ Mayo a year before he is even eligible! If they are able to pass on a SF (they have like seventeen of them on their twelve man roster!), what is out there? They reached on a PF last season taking Shelden Williams (weak first season) at #5. Is Mike Conely a reach at #3? Would he be on board when they pick again with Indy’s #11? Do they take another PF (Yi, J. Wright or Horford) and try to target Acie Law with the #11?
My suggestion would be to take a big man with the #5 and then trade the #11 and a SF (like the kid from Stanforf) for a veteran PG like Bibby.
I just read that Roy Hibbert, Gtown’s Center, is pulling out. If Green also pulls out, that makes this draft a lot thinner.
Danny Ainge and Celtic nation is on suicide watch.
Karma, dude.
That’s the same retarded logic that led to them passing on Deron Williams and Chris Paul.
As a Celtics fan, I agree with this statement.
The Hawks were the toast of Atlanta in the late 80s. Attendance was solid. I will grant you that Atlanta sports fans will not support a loser. Why should they? Fans who do that are suckers. Loyal Cubs fans have enabled their franchise to be terrible for decades. If the fans are going to come out and buy tickets anyway, why should owners spend money to improve the team?
The weather is nice here, and if the sports teams are sub-par, the fans seek other entertainment options. Quite reasonably, IMO.
As for the current Hawks, well, by way of lame excuse, they’re the youngest team in the league. I think this Hawks team has good potential, but they desperately need a point guard and, in my opinion, a new coach. (Fratello, I beseech you.)
I suspect the Hawks will trade down in the draft and hope that Conley lasts (or do a sign-and-trade deal with a lower team). They have some cap room, so they could afford to take a veteran in a trade or via free agency.
spoke-, you do realize that you are bragging about a few teams that played two decades ago, right? The Hawks had some talented teams in the 80’s. You know who else had some talented teams in the 80’s and solid attendance? The Kansas City Royals. Welcome to the club.
Yeah, I know. I’m just saying that the Hawks have some history, and when they play well the fans turn out. There is a lot of enthusiasm for good NBA basketball in Atlanta. We just haven’t had much of it lately.
I think trading for Iverson would have been a smart short term move in ATL>
Not at all. The question of whether Conley is a stretch is a very valid one.
Deron Williams and Chris Paul were much higher ranked prospects than Conley. Conley may move up, but only because he is the best of a weak PG class.
Deron Williams and Chris Paul were proven commodities and SHOULD have been drafted ahead of an unproven SF based on potential. That much is true. ATL needed a PG, two very good ones were available and instead they drafted a position that they were already deep at.
This is the different. Should you draft Conley just because it fits a position need if he is not the best player available? You can’t make a mistake and take a player who could be a late lottery pick with the #3 just to make up for the sins of the past.
Conley may be worth the #3, but it is worth debating and doesn’t even approach retarded logic.
I don’t see the distinction. They knew they needed a PG last year and they felt that neither PG on the board was worth the #2 pick. They took who they thought was the BPA even though he would be playing the same position they were deep at.
This year they think there are better players available at those same positions of strength.
If Conley were projected as a late first rounder, then maybe you have a argument. But most expects have him as the 11th ranked player, and taking him at #3 would not be unrealistic considering the need.
And yes, you do take a PG with the #3 in order to make up for the sins of the past. If you don’t address those needs eventually they’ll always be drafting at the top of the draft. I suppose they could hold out for OJ Mayo, I think it’s retarded logic still.
This is particularly a dilemma for Atlanta, since they also hold the number 11 pick. Should they gamble that Conley will still be around at 11? It’s a tough call.
The problem with that is, everyone else in the world thought Paul and Williams were worth the #2. Given, many experts had Bogut or Marvin above the two PGs, all four players in questions were the cream of the crop. No one would have scratched their heads had Paul went #1 to Milwaukee. They had decent options at both Center (Magloirre) and PG (Ford) positions. But ATL had ZERO talent at PG and good talent atthe combo position.
Our debate really comes down to how you valued Paul and Deron’s stock pre-draft (it was two years ago, fyi).
Again, I guess it is the eye of the beholder. Does Conley outshine… say…Acie Law (probably available at #11) much more than Brandon Wright outshines say
In other words, what is a better draft result? Brandon Wright and Acie Law or Mike Conley and …say…Josh McRoberts?
I’m not saying Conley won’t be a stud. I like his game and he might be the answer at #3. But to say that this is a preordained choice and that going through a proper of analysis of the risks of drafting Conley #3 is not a good idea is probably off base.
I think it is possible that the phrase “Good many after bad” could apply to this blanket statement.
Good debate, either way.
Anyone know why hibbert pulled out?
The speculation is that he looked at the competition amongst big men this year versus next year’s crop and thought he could be a top 3 pick in 2008.
Sounds right, but it is risky. As a senior next year, he loses all hopes of “potential.”
Also, from Chad Ford’s Insider column (premium site, so the link is worthless):
I’d like to post more but I don’t want to push the fair use doctrine!
Yeah, and in 1984 they didn’t need a shooting guard.
Passing on Jordan was a smart move 99 times out of 100. A fluke like Jordan shouldn’t alter one’s draft strategy. In blackjack, you don’t split tens just because one time a guy did it and drew aces.
For Portland, the question shouldn’t be whether it was inexcusable to pass on Jordan. I contend that it was a no brainer to pass on him when you had Drexler on the roster. The question, rather, is whether Bowie was the right choice.
Passing on MJ was a “mistake” proven after the fact. Jordan made the front office look bad because of his awesomitude. But really, Portland DIDN’T need MJ. They had a first ballot Hall of Famer (and probably the fourth best SG ever behind Jordan, Kobe and West) at the position. C’mon! No one knew Jordan was going to be that great. Not even Dean Smith. At best, people thought he was a potential Hall of Famer. Scouts had Drexler (correctly) rated as a similar prospect. Why replace one superstar with another? You have to go a different direction.
So was Bowie a mistake? It is unfair to say “of course he was. Just look at his career.” It isn’t that simple. Injuries cannot always be factored into the equation. Shit luck can ruin even the best moves. GMs don’t have the benefit of hindsight when selecting.
The case against Portland is that I believe there were legitimate indications that Bowie was an injury risk (it is hard to get valid info on Bowie’s college career because all articles are tainted by a Jordan bias). I am pretty sure he missed a lot of games in college.
But if Bowie had been healthy, would he have been an All-Star caliber player? If so, I think Portland could have won a title. So, if you can forgive Bowie’s injuries, was it a terrible move judged by information readily available at the time?
To me the question is not whether Portland should have drafted MJ. Looking at what they had to go on at the time and not data gather over the next 24 years, that was the right move to pass on him. The question is, who should Portland have drafted besides Bowie and Jordan?
Barkley was available. Kevin Willis had an excellent career. Drexler and Barkley in their primes would have been a hell of a force. As old guys together that had a nice little run. Willis was an allstar F/C. Could he have gotten Portland over the hump? John Stockton was a bit of a surprise, so I don’t include him in the discussion.
Just because Jordan turned out to be the greatest player ever doesn’t mean it was an error, at the time, not to pick him.
I do like that no one ever says Houston should have drafted MJ over Hakeem. I think that comparison is more on point to the Durant/Oden debate than Bowie/Jordan. Drafting Hakeem was 100% the correct move looking at info from 1984 AND info we have today.
[sub]This is kind of a pet peeve of mine, so forgive the rant. Truth in advertising: Clyde Drexler is my favorite player of all time.[/sub]