Hawks leave home, hope for some positive continuity

Things can’t be all that good for your team when they feel like they might have to leave home to get back on track.  Every team, even the true contenders, go through bad spells. If you don’t believe it, just read NBA.com and every other site that pays any attention to NBA basketball. Why watch soap operas when you can just keep up with what’s going on with the Lakers? It’s just another reality show. But with the Hawks, it just feels different. How do you lose a home game to a team with a worse record by 34 points, then follow it up with another loss at home by losing a 22 point lead? 

Denial is an ugly thing 

Josh Smith talks about a chance to bond. Honestly? How much more bonding can you do before you realize that some parts simply don’t fit the way you need them to? This team doesn’t need to bond. They don’t need to gel. They don’t need to find an identity. They don’t need a shock either, or any other cliche. What they need is an operation. A transplant. Something that wasn’t there before, but is needed. The problem is, you have to first accept that you’re missing something, or that whatever you had has gone bad. Then, you have to act on this knowledge. Does management know that something is flat out wrong? Is the front office willing to accept that idea? Most fans are tired of hearing “we’re keeping an ear out and an eye open for any deals that may come along.”

You know what? That sounds like you’re doing something else, but you’ll try and take notice if an opportunity to improve the team happens to come along. Gee, there must be a lot of people in need of suing, or something…..

 

What’s the worst that could happen?

Maybe management should have asked that question once it was decided that Mike Woodson wouldn’t be the coach of the team anymore, and the “search” for a “new” one was on. Maybe management did ask that question when deciding to promote Larry Drew, instead of trying for someone from outside the organization. Maybe I have the question wrong. Maybe it should have been “what’s the best that can happen?”

Of course, asking such questions would insinuate that Larry Drew is part of the problem, rather than part of the solution, right? Well, that depends on your perspective. Drew brought forth the idea of the motion offense, yet the team continues to have inexplicable collapses in the second half of games. Drew preached accountability on defense, yet the Hawks succumb to penetration from the perimeter on a regular basis. Drew said this, Drew said that. Now he is doing things that seem in direct contrast with what he said before the season began, and making phantom tinkerings with the lineup. Yeah, the Hawks could have and maybe should have hired a guy from the outside to coac this team. But how much difference would it have made? Maybe no more than changing a dirty oil filter on a car that really needs a few engine parts replaced.

 

A pointed issue

There is a good deal of unrest about the point guard situation for Atlanta. Sports writers will typically bring up the 2005 draft when broaching the subject, but the past is indeed the past. The Hawks can’t get better defense out of Mike Bibby or Jamal Crawford, and they are easy targets when either is not shooting well. The obvious solution to some is 2nd year point guard Jeff Teague. But what has Teague done that makes him a solution to an ongoing problem? Perhaps that question need not be asked, and we find ourselves back with another one – “what’s the worst that could happen?” Maybe Drew sees this sooner rather than later, and decides to play the guy. Why? Because by now, the point is not longer about whether or not Jeff Teague is the solution for the Hawks, in the areas where Bibby and Crawford fail. The point is that the Hawks need to know what they have in Teague, and whether or not he can be developed into something they can use. If not, then he’s trade bait. In addition, the Hawks must get to where they are no longer relying on a super-sub shooting guard to be their savior when their top scorer is off his game, or when their starting point guard can’t get it done. I mean seriously, relying on a streaky scorer who can’t defend, to save you when your back is against the wall? Who’s idea was that?

Up Next

Two games east, five games west. This could get really ugly for the Hawks, or we could be left shaking our heads and wondering how a team this good can be this bad at time, as they roll to a winning total on their road trip.

Well, it all starts in Detroit. Talk about bad memories, when the Hawks last played there (December 14th) they lost by 23 points. Of course, Joe Johnson was out with injury, but that wasn’t all. Atlanta got ripped by Detroit’s bench, beaten like a drum on the glass, and had an epic fourth quarter collapse. Fact is, the Hawks only played one winning quarter out of that whole game. Now, with Joe back in the fold, can they get revenge and start this trip off right?

 

 

By Big Ray, Hawks Fan Nest Blog

343 comments Add your comment

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
1:30 am

All of this isn’t to say that ASG has done a good job running the team. They haven’t. They’ve done a poor job. But the Hawks are not suddenly going to start spending the luxury tax and become a free agent mecca if only ASG’s litigation went away and/or the team were sold. The litigation didn’t cause the Hawks to blow draft picks, sign worthless free agents like Speedy and Lo (RIP), and overspend to keep its “core” together. Hell, we’ve been dealing with the same BS since the days that Turner owned the team (albeit in a pre-luxury tax era). The team has fallen short because it’s made stupid decisions on who to draft, sign, and trade. Nothing more, nothing less.

vava74

February 17th, 2011
2:54 am

LD must go.

He has completely lost it.

Before the game he said that he would start the big line up UNLESS the Knicks went small with Amar’e at the C.

The Knicks started Mozgov and LD went for the traditional line up. WTF?

Unfortunately LD says all the rights things but then fails to implement them.

He has ZERO command over his troops. Did he go small to avoid the Al-Amar’e match up? What does that tell your adversary after all that talk?

I hate to say it. But it’s true. He deserved his shot and he deserves the boot.

Although Mozgov his hardly important for the Knicks, as the Pistons game proved, Collins give us a defensive mentality from tip off which we lack when we use our small line up.

Josh is a good help defender using his athleticism but he is not disciplined and does not play D with his brain hence although he gives away too much to quick SF I think it’s preferable to use the big line up where he could – theoretically – punish the inside.

vava74

February 17th, 2011
2:55 am

Punish the SFs inside.

E43

February 17th, 2011
3:28 am

Niremental-
I was with you until the part about picks. I have never expressed this approach out loud so bare with me.

The hawk’s picks were expected picks for the most part. The guys just didn’t live up to their potential. Most of the hawks to my knowledge appeared on at least one mock draft at one time or another. Its not like the hawks went out there swinging blindly. Look at Marvin and Chris Paul. People hate Marvin and wish they had Chris Paul but that’s just how the NBA is. If Marvin didn’t go at 2 he definitely would’ve gone at the 3. The sad thing about it is people think that Chris Paul was a surefire thing had we picked him. If he wasn’t then we’d all be complaining about why the hawks didn’t pick Marvin. There was just about the same hype for Marvin as there was Chris Paul. When the pick was made it was all cheers until much later. The only bad 1st round picks were in 2000 when the hawks picked Dermarr Johnson 6th overall instead of Jamal Crawford. The next bad judgment they had was when they traded for Dan Dickau a draft pick in 2002. Saying that they did a poor job is just over the line to me coz poor is like drafting a 3 point guards in the draft. They may not have don’t a great job but the word average is somewhat more acceptable.*this is in terms of pick though*

Big Ray

February 17th, 2011
5:50 am

E43 ,

You’ve got to be kidding me. 2006 was the worst. We took Shelden Williams, everybody in the world knew we were taking Shelden Williams, and nobody was crazy enough to take him as high as 5th. Except Billy Knight.

I’m not even going to bother with the 2005 draft argument with any lengthy details. I’ll never be able to understand the logic behind it. There are two positions in the NBA that are clearly pivotal. One of them is center, the other is point guard. Centers you build around. Point guards run your team. Anytime you pick differently, it better be a superstar or a clear position of need.

While the “potential superstar” status of Marvin is forever debatable (I know what the mock drafts said then, but the fact remains that potential is potential, not proof, and there was NO PROOF), he did NOT meet a position of clear need.

I don’t blame Marvin for not living up to his status. I blame Hawks management for their philosophical standpoints. And we’ve struggled with the pg position continuously since then. This ain’t even about CP3. Personally, I think Deron Williams would have been a better pick than CP3.

But 2006? Inexcusable.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
7:36 am

E43,

To make matters worse, when Marvin was drafted, the Hawks had already drafted Josh Smith (17th)and Josh Childress (6th) just one year earlier. Both were considered SFs at the time AND we had Al Harrington, another SF. So why take another SF in Marvin (specially when we had a glaring hole at PG).

Our PGs for ‘05-’06 were Tyronn Lue and Royal Ivey. Nobody knew Marvin would be a solid player (and not a star), and most scouts had him rated top 2. But when you have other wings on the roster, and a glaring need at PG, there is no excuse for taking Marvin (imo).

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
7:45 am

From MC’s blog;

“At one point, a New York hack sitting next to me asked: “So, basically, whomever Bibby is guarding scores?” Me: “Not always. Sometimes his man passes to open shooters when everything breaks down, and they score.”MC.

Bibby has played well on offense recently, but I wonder if we are overlooking his impact on defense. For example, last night, he had 15 pts and 2 assists, and he made his 3’s. Not bad.

But the guy he was guarding had 13 pts and 11 assists, which means Felton scored almost the same as Bibby, but he also got his teammates involved.

Against Detroit, Bibby played great. But early on, he was a big reason why we ended up being down 15, because Bynum and Stuckey where breaking us down, and the Pistons were making their shots.

On a team thats jumper happy, we need a PG that can get to the FT line, get into the paint and get easy shots for his teammates etc…

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
8:33 am

O’B,

JJ was guarding Felton most of the game, and Bibby was on Fields…

Astro Joe

February 17th, 2011
8:59 am

I thought the scheme we are running is supposed to be “PG neutral”. Seriously, if you have watched Bibby play with this team for 3 years and then takeover as a head coach and bring in a new scheme, how do you do so without regard for your PG and his skills? I think you can certainly take Bibby to task for poor defense (although it is mostly a physical issue and not one that he can solve as he likely doesn’t own a sci-fi kit that will change his physical attributes). But I struggle to say that Bibby lacks the skills to run an offense effectively.

Anyone who remembers Josh’s rookie season would fully admit that he wasn’t so outstanding that a GM would decide that “our wing position is filled”. He looked a lot like Jerome Williams in his rookie year was the way I recall it.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
9:43 am

Ok. Maybe the issue is the Hawks do not execute the scheme often enough or well enough.

As for last night’s game…Total team loss.

Props to Marvin.

But Josh took 16 shots when his jumper was clearly off. And I’m disappointed that he only had 5 rebounds in 40 minutes, playing PF.

As for Jamal, LD is asking him to play backup PG, and that’s not his strength. He is a scorer off the bench. I think that has contributed to his struggles.

Hawks need a backup Center. ZaZa played 5 minutes, and he looked lost out there.

And of course, there is LD. I have been very disappointed in him these last few games. He says all the right things, but I am not seeing him back it up on the court.

However, either he is not telling the players the right things (stop taking jumpers, feed the ball into the post etc), or is he telling them but they ignore him (like they probably ignored Woody). My guess is its the latter, which is one reason why a change is needed.

I wonder if LD will make any changes after the AS break, because he cannot be happy with what he saw last night (although his options are limited thanks to Rick).

doc

February 17th, 2011
10:55 am

ok i guess i missed it over the weekend, break down CFTSOC for me.

is bibby that much better now than the guy he replaced, a johnson? or, is he worse because he cant run an offense nor play any defense?

BK was right. jj is a point after all as he continuously gets that assignment on defense unless there is a super star sg or a second rate point on the other team. he is the major distributor and ball handler on offense. just move jamal to sg and stop the pretense he should distribute and let it either go through jj of through al and josh then come back out. then limit bibby minutes to less than 20 a game and essentially let him be an eddie house like guy. do not expect or want more out of him. these guys are delusional to continue to do what they are doing.

also from that interview; it is plain that championship is not what they are after with the nba team unless it falls in their lap, “only one team gets that each year” type of stuff. they want an entertaining team that gets some wins on the side as well as get fans to buy into just that as their goal, too. sounds like going to the ballet, just sit back and enjoy what we give you. there is no sense of the competitor though he stated he wants to win. he also seemed to think growing up around basketball made him an expert in a way and lauded the nique deal his dad got when he was here. there was almost an appeal to get someone to buy from the local area into their product as an investor.

also mention was made of the coyotes as a possible place the thrashers could end up. not sure how but that concern was brought up. basically, it seems the thrashers are very fluid and threatened right now.

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
11:12 am

Doc,

CFTSOC = Change For The Sake Of Change

kwooden

February 17th, 2011
11:16 am

nire, from your 8:30 post. Fields nearly had a double-double also on 5 shots!

doc

February 17th, 2011
11:42 am

thanks nire.

here is an article i missed on the business section i guess.

http://www.ajc.com/sports/lawsuit-thrashers-owners-have-811606.html

it was part of the schultz article today with a picture of the happy ASG group showing their cuts in on the deal they had put together. last picture of them made with them all smiling i assume.

Najeh Davenpoop

February 17th, 2011
12:31 pm

“is bibby that much better now than the guy he replaced, a johnson? or, is he worse because he cant run an offense nor play any defense? ”

Right now, to me, Bibby is almost identical to 2006-2007 Tyronn Lue. The only difference is that Bibby is a much better screener.

Najeh Davenpoop

February 17th, 2011
12:40 pm

“You’ve got to be kidding me. 2006 was the worst. We took Shelden Williams, everybody in the world knew we were taking Shelden Williams, and nobody was crazy enough to take him as high as 5th. Except Billy Knight. ”

I think all of BK’s draft miscues go back to his initial vision for this team, which was a versatile team of interchangeable parts with little regard to traditional positions. In his mind, BK probably thought that Joe-Childress-Marvin-Smoove could be a viable 1 through 4 in the NBA. I still think the 2004 Pistons were somewhat of a model for him, with Joe roughly filling the role of Billups, Childress playing Rip, and Marvin and Smoove filling the roles of Prince and Rasheed Wallace more or less. I really think BK passed up CP3 and Deron Williams not because he didn’t think they were good, but because he really thought Joe could play the point in his grand vision for the team. Of course, as we now know, Childress only resembles Rip in appearance and not in his game, Joe is nowhere near quick enough to play the point full time, and Marvin has been underwhelming in every way. Smoove is the only one of those players who has even approached the vision I think BK had, filling the role of the versatile defensive forward.

To me, the 2006 offseason was a panic move necessitated by BK’s realization that his original master plan wasn’t going to work. Nothing else explains the long term contract for Speedy Claxton and the reach for Shelden Williams. I think somewhere during the 2005 season, BK came to the realization that Joe is not an NBA PG and the Hawks would need a traditional, defensive-minded big man along the lines of Ben Wallace to realize his vision. Unfortunately, instead of getting quality players to fill those roles, BK reached for a guy who was way out of his league as an NBA center in the lottery and signed a role player whose skill set didn’t mesh all that well with the rest of the team even on the rare occasion he was healthy.

Thank God for the Hawks lucking into the #3 spot in the ‘07 draft and having Al Horford drop into their laps.

Najeh Davenpoop

February 17th, 2011
12:46 pm

With all that said, at least you can attribute BK’s mistakes to having a unique, high-risk high-reward vision that didn’t pan out, as opposed to just being a poor judge of talent. He wasn’t good by any means, but I think the argument can be made that if he were to receive another shot as a GM somewhere, he could probably do well. That’s more than you can say about Sund, who has an abhorrent draft history and has accomplished nothing as an NBA GM despite having had a much, much longer career than BK.

doc

February 17th, 2011
1:04 pm

sund is the equivalent of the inept gm that “ran” the thrashers so long making poor decision after poor decision on personnel.

not sure if money problems required the reach in shels, najeh. they werent going to go out and spend for a big so they tried to get by with a draft pick, shels failed miserably. so viola, shels and lo to fill in the missing pieces. yes the franchise lucked into al flat out plain and simple. it “saved” the franchise from themselves. no other way to put it. think fan support sucks now, what would it have been if that hadnt fallen into place for them. still jj is playing point guard in principle as najeh pointed out as he guards felton and get the dimes for this team.

doc

February 17th, 2011
1:18 pm

of course meant nire pointed pout that jj had felton last night not najeh.

vava74

February 17th, 2011
1:51 pm

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20110216&game=ATLNYK

Our lead (small) in the first quarter went down the drain when Bibby left the floor and entered…

The UNDERTAKER (Jamal).

With Bibby on the floor JJ was assigned to Felton and probably that changed when Jamal got in (nire, please confirm).

Then, Jamal, who was having a monster game, AGAIN played a 17 minute straight shift to close the game.

Is anyone looking at stats in the Hawks organization?

Apart from a few (very very few) scattered games Jamal has been EXTREMELY ineffective in virtually all late 3rd + 4th quarter shifts that LD stubbornly gets him to play.

This has happened even on games in which he scores 16-24 points since he gets 80-90% of his points in the early part of the game.

vava74

February 17th, 2011
1:53 pm

Jamal’s first shift (last 5 minutes 10 second of the 1st quarter and first 3 min 22 second of the second) produced a brilliant ± of -17!!!!!

Ken Strickland

February 17th, 2011
2:30 pm

BIG RAY-Don’t feel like the lone ranger, because I was convinced that LDrew was the perfect hire to replace Woodson. Actually he was, but for the wrong reasons. Hopefully, the teams lastest nose dive will be enough to convince RSund and the ASG that a trade is needed and need soon if we intend to improve.

I’ve become so frustrated lately that I’ve started coming up with possible trade ideas. I really liked the one posted earlier involving Golden State trading PG SCurry, C’s DGadzuric and ABiedrins and SG CBell for Zaza, Bibby, MEvans and JSmith. We get the PG of the future, a decent center in Biedrins and a nice expiring contract(Gadzuric).

I’d also like to see us persue a trade for PG DHarris. Send New Jersey JCrawford’s($10.8M) and MEvans’ ($2.5M)expiring contracts for DHarris($8.981M), and use our $3.63M trade exception to make up the difference. They get $13.3M in expiring contracts and we get the PG of the future that we need.

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
3:47 pm

Ken,

Not sure why you’re making a potential Harris trade complicated: Crawford for Harris straight up would work as far as salaries go. Adding Mo Evans would actually make the trade unworkable because the Nets would be taking back too much in salary. The trade exception can’t be combined with players in a trade, and wouldn’t be helpful in that trade anyway since we’d be sending the Nets more salary than they’d be taking back.

doc

February 17th, 2011
3:56 pm

maybe it is so we can finally say we used a trade exception

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
4:07 pm

The most frustrating thing is that the TPE is worth $3.6M and Sessions is getting paid $3.9M. The thing just isn’t big enough to land us a player of real value.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
4:11 pm

Ken,

I would trade Jamal for Devin Harris. He would be our starting PG, which would change the dynamic of the starters, and Bibby would stabilize the bench with Mo Evans and Marvin (when we go big). But the issue with the ASG always comes back to money.

If we do that trade, then we are adding an extra $9 mil in salary for next year, and that would put us into the luxury tax. ASG will not add that much in salary (imo) unless its for a superstar.

Najeh,

When the Hawks drafted Marvin (June 2005), BK did not know (for sure) that he would be able to get JJ in a sign and trade (which was completed August 2005). So although his plan was to have JJ play PG, I dont think that played in a reason in Marvin being drafted.

I think Marvin was drafted because the Hawks (and Dominique) thought he was going to be a top 5 player at his position.

As for Rick, his decision to re-sign our guys for the contracts he did has come back to haunt us.

He signed Mo Evans for a 3rd year player option ($2.5 mil), Bibby got a 3rd year guarantee ($6.2 mil), and although Marvin has been solid at times (and defends his position well), his 5 years, $37.5 mil deal made him almost untradeable.

I think the ZaZa deal was ok, but ZaZa has not lived up to his end of the deal. And time will tell about the JJ deal.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
4:15 pm

nire,

I thought the TPE could be used for a player’s salary that was within 125% (+/-). Is that correct?

Although even if we could use the TPE, we would have to cut somebody (Etan) to make space.

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
4:20 pm

O’B,

No, the 125% exception does not apply to TPE’s.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
4:29 pm

Thanks for clarifying.

Guys,

This is long, so feel free to get your scroll on. From Hoopinion;

It would be unfair to blame this loss entirely on Mike Bibby’s defensive shortcomings as he’s not to blame for the Hawks missing plenty of good shots while falling behind in the first quarter, Josh Smith taking nine more jump shots (making three), or Smith and Joe Johnson throwing the ball away on three successive fourth quarter possessions, effectively eliminating any question about which team would win the game but New York scored 102 points on just 92 possessions with the vast majority of those points coming from attacking Bibby or attacking the weaknesses created through the machinations involved in attempting to hide Bibby’s defensive liabilities.

Primarily, the Knicks attacked Bibby on the pick-and-roll. Bibby’s lack of mobility forced whichever player guarded the screener into double-duty: slow the ball-handler and recover quickly onto his man.

Because, if the Hawks switched on the ball-screen, the screener could either roll Bibby into the deep post or pop and shoot over Bibby. Most often, Bibby went under the ball-screen, his help defender showed on the ball-handler, then quickly retreated to his man.

This gave the ball-handler two options: 1) take an uncontested jumper or 2) attack Bibby off the dribble again in the hopes of drawing another help defender. And that second option created two avenues of attack for the ball-handler. He could attack in the hopes of either again drawing help off the initial screener or from off of one of New York’s spot-up shooters.

When Larry Drew attempted to remove Bibby from the screen-and-roll defense he did so by keeping Bibby on the court but assigning Joe Johnson to guard the ball-handler. Joe Johnson struggles mightily dealing with off-the-ball screens and had little success (*Nor should he have been expected to have success in that situation) dealing with the combination of Raymond Felton’s speed and the ball-screens inherent in the design of New York’s offense.

Finally, as has been tried so often this season as the Hawks have been attempting futile comebacks or busy blowing leads in the fourth quarter, Larry Drew responded to the inherent defensive problems of playing a Bibby/Jamal Crawford backcourt not by removing one from the game in favor of a two-way player but by playing a 2-3 zone that roots Bibby and Crawford in space on the perimeter and drags at least one of Josh Smith or Al Horford away from the basket to deal with spot-up shooters.

One hopes that the All-Star break provides Larry Drew and the Hawks with the time to reflect on whether or not it is worth it, even given the limited options at his disposal, to work so hard to find a way to keep Mike Bibby on the floor for 30 or more minutes a night.

It wasn’t worth it in New York and that on a night when Bibby shot the ball well (15 points on 8 shots), providing more of an offensive contribution than can be reasonably expected on a regular basis..

To be fair to Bibby, the team is 34-21, and could finish as high as 3rd or 4th. But it will be very difficult (imo) to win a first round playoff series given the team’s limitations, which I think starts at the PG position.

Najeh Davenpoop

February 17th, 2011
4:42 pm

“The most frustrating thing is that the TPE is worth $3.6M and Sessions is getting paid $3.9M. The thing just isn’t big enough to land us a player of real value.”

Forget the TPE… the Hawks can very easily acquire a lot more than just Sessions if they really want. They have the expiring contracts to do it.

http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=4ukp8yw

I’m usually the kind of person who thinks most of the trade ideas posted on these blogs are unrealistic nonsense, but I can’t think of one good reason why any team in that deal would veto it. Detroit saves money, Cleveland saves money and gets a prospect (incidentally one who dropped 25 and 15 on them
about 10 months ago), and the Hawks improve their depth at four positions. Send out a pick if need be and get it done.

Najeh Davenpoop

February 17th, 2011
4:50 pm

If that deal were to happen, Bibby would become a backup/instant offense bench player like his brother in law, Zaza would be relegated to fourth string center (thank goodness), the Hawks would instantly add two players who can get to the free throw line, the added depth would more than make up for the loss of Jamal’s scoring, Marvin would face the most meaningful competition for his starting job that he has ever had, and Josh Powell would no longer be the only Hawk with “championship experience”. Short of a trade for a legit star like Nash, that is about as good as the Hawks can hope to do in my opinion.

Ken Strickland

February 17th, 2011
5:52 pm

NIREMETAL-when you’re right, you’re right. However, our trade exception can be used in combination with a player, but only if we receive no more than one(1) player in return. But on the other hand, it can only be used when you receive more salary than you send, so you’re right on that front as well. The trade actually works straight up as well.

OBRIEN-It wouldn’t automatically put us in luxury tax territory. We’d still have MEvans’ $2.5M, approximately $3.2M in expiring contracts(JPowell, DWilkins, JCollins & EThomas)and the $3.63M trade exception, if we allow it to expire. That $9.33M in savings would give us some breathing room, and Bibby’s contract would become an expiring one.

Look, the Hawks have been pretty doggone good over the last 2+yrs, and managed to make it to the 2nd rd of the playoffs both seasons. They were good enough to accomplished this while overcoming some coaching and player issues, especially at PG and SF, but PG in particular. If we can become the Eastern Conference’s 3rd best team with so many issues, particularily at PG, adding a quality PG like DHarris would take us to the next level, which would be worth any luxury tax payments, which would likely be minimal.

He’d give us more speed, quickness, scoring, more consistent scoring, more ways to score(more FT attempts from penetration and assists), better DEF, and the ability to change tempo.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
6:09 pm

Ken S,

The luxury tax this season is ~$70 mil, which is where we are right now (right below). Next season, the Hawks have $64 mil committed in salary (and this is assuming Jamal, Mo, Etan and Josh Powell are allowed to leave). And we would still have to add an additional player or 2 at the vet min (which brings us up to $66 mil).

What makes the total salary an issue is because there will probably be a new CBA next season, so the luxury tax threshold will probably be lower than the $70 mil it’s at right now.

If we assume the luxury tax drops to $65 mil, then Hawks are already pushing the envelope (and it might be even lower). So the ASG will be in a cost cutting move trying to reduce salary.

Ken Strickland

February 17th, 2011
6:40 pm

OBRIEN-your 4:29PM post should be required reading. I’ve been saying the same thing for yrs. I’ve made numerous posts about how, upon Bibby’s arrival, our scoring increased by 9PPG, and about how there was a corresponding increase of 9PPG allowed, due to his poor DEF ability. Now, if his DEF back then was bad enough to cause our PPG allowed to increase by 9PPG, how many additional PPG is he allowing now?

Consider this. When Bibby first arrived, he wasn’t being targeted by teams and still caused us to give up an additional 9PPG. But now we all see how targeting him has become a primary strategy when attacking the Hawks’ DEF. He certainly hasn’t scored enough PPG in the last 2yrs to increase our scoring by anything close to 9PPG, and his DEF has definitely diminished beyond allowing just 9PPG, especially with him now being targeted.

WHAT IN THE DEVIL IS WITH THIS LOVE AFFAIR WITH MBIBBY? He’s killing the team, and placing undue OFF/DEF pressure and hardship on everyone on the floor with him. And what’s worse, I don’t think he’d have any trouble with being Teague’s backup, if a committment was made to develop him. After all, he did say last yr that he talked to Woodson several times about playing Teague more.

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
6:53 pm

Ken,

No, sorry, you’ve got it backwards. The TPE cannot be used in combination with a player. It can, however, be “split” and used to acquire multiple players. From the FAQ:

There are some common misconceptions about non-simultaneous trades. For one…teams cannot combine a Traded Player exception with other exceptions (such as the Mid-Level exception or the 125% plus $100,000 margin from another trade) in order to trade for a more expensive player. For example, a team with a $1 million Traded Player exception cannot combine it with their $2 million player to trade for a $3 million player (see question number 75 for more information on combining exceptions).

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q72

Remember: The ability to make trades AT ALL for other teams’ players when you are over the salary cap is only allowed through an exception to the salary cap. The salary cap rule is that a team cannot add any more players AT ALL if the team is over the salary cap. Not through trade, and not even if the trade would result in the team taking back less salary than they are sending out – the salary cap does not care about the effect of getting rid of players, but only the affect of adding players.

There are, of course, exceptions to that rule. When you’re over the cap, you are barred from signing or trading for other players unless you use one of those specific exceptions. Exceptions cannot be combined. One of those exceptions is the “traded player exception,” which permits teams to make player-for-player trades even if they are over the salary cap, as long as they are not taking back more than 125% + $100k in salary in that trade. Another exception is that if you trade a single player to another team and take back little or nothing in salary, you can use the “gap” in salary to acquire another player later (that “gap” is colloquially called a “trade exception”). But since that’s a separate exception, it cannot be combined with the exception allowing you to make a player-for-player trade.

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
6:55 pm

“I think you can look at it both ways,” Crawford told HOOPSWORLD. “Hopefully we can go out there and prove our fans right—that we did the right thing sticking together. The one thing I know for sure is that we have continuity. We’ve stayed together so guys know each other and there’s no surprises. Hopefully that plays to our advantage.”.

Doesnt Jamal realize this is a bad thing? It’s like players, coaches and Rick are in denial.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=18809

Ken Strickland

February 17th, 2011
7:09 pm

OBRIEN-on the luxury tax issue, I doubt if the luxury tax will be drastically lowered all at once, which would automatically place most teams in luxury tax territory. If it’s reduced any measurable amount, it will be done in increments, thus giving teams adequate time to adjust.

niremetal

February 17th, 2011
7:17 pm

O’B,

In fairness, what do you expect them to say in public? “Nah man, this sucks. It’s same old, same old. We all do stupid things and ain’t no one gonna stop us long as we’re together.”

O'Brien

February 17th, 2011
7:36 pm

nire,

One thing I give Jamal credit for. He could have used the opportunity to mention him not having a contract, or thinking about a trade etc.

But you’re right. He has to say all the right things in public. I wonder if when he is home, and thinking about things…if he feels the same way.

Sautee

February 17th, 2011
9:39 pm

Ken Strickland,

I’m not arguing in favor of Bibby, but in fairness this should be pointed out:

Yes, our PPG allowed went up when Bibby got here, but our turnovers went down by about 2 per game, and got even lower as the team adjusted to Bibby.

And yes, you and I have discussed that ONE reason for that is because he no longer penetrates very often, but STILL, by taking care of the ball, he gave us a couple of extra possessions per game and when your average margin of victory is as small as ours, a couple of possessions can be key. And that showed as we began to win games that we previously had pissed away.

But there is NO doubt that Bibby has regressed since he arrived.

I’m still of the opinion that Teague is not ready yet, so I’m hoping we trade Jamal for a starting PG. But if we don’t, then we need to let Teague fly the plane with the starters a little more often.

Ken Strickland

February 17th, 2011
10:05 pm

SAUTEE-I understand what you’re saying, but we need more production, better direction, and more versatility from our PG position, and we’re not getting it from Bibby. We’ve virtually become a jump shooting team because we rely heavily on a PG with little more to offer offensively.

Because he doesn’t control the ball or the OFF more than half the time, doesn’t make certain everyone is involved in the OFF, and doesn’t create easy close to the basket scoring opportunities for others, certain players are starting to revert back to their old ISO habits(JJ and Jamal) or launching numerous ill advised jumpers(Josh).

As efficient and versatile as Horford is as a scorer, there’s absolutely no excuse for him going long stretches receiving limited touches. There’s also no excuse for Marvin going long stetches without getting the ball in a position to score, especially when he’s active. This is the result of poor PG play, and even poorer coaching. It appears as if the closer we get to the trade deadline the less productive Jamal becomes. I believe he really wants to remain in the ATL, and the idea he might have to leave is bothering him.

E43

February 18th, 2011
2:08 am

Big Ray + Obrien- the issue about your arguments is that your throwing away the situations the hawks were in. especially with that shelden williams pick. Rajon Rondo is the only guy that i can think of that has evolved into an efficient player from that 2006 draft who else do you think could be make an impact for the hawks in that draft? as for centers. i dont think that draft has produced a single starting center. there were multiple 7 footers. say they did decide to pick point guard in that draft, who were they supposed to pick? there was a huge amount of combo guards but maybe two or three point guards. If some of these guys the hawks picked did what they were drafted to do then maybe we wouldn’t be in this predicament. Look at the al horford pick. its a sin to pick shelden a pf/c but its perfectly fine to pick horford a pf/c the very next year? and even when it does come to point guards. they did damage control by going after acie bibby and teague but they all failed aside from bibby helping us get to the playoffs his first year.

Say we didnt pick shelden. who exactly should the hawks gone after? mouhamad sene put together the best a 2006 C draft best 5rpg. The point i was trying to make was that yeah the management has swung and miss but they did do damage control. its not like they all out abandoned going after centers and point guards. in the meantime the hawks have put together 3 good seasons so. they have to be doing something right somewhere. I’m not saying that they did a great job but I refuse to say that the did a bad one.

doc

February 18th, 2011
9:20 am

e43 uh brandon roy to answer the questiom of who instead of shels.