<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Once again it&#8217;s on!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/</link>
	<description>Coverage of Atlanta’s NBA franchise from AJC Hawks beat writer Michael Cunningham</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:07:19 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: cdog</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25830</link>
		<dc:creator>cdog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 02:29:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25830</guid>
		<description>TO ALL RICK SUND BELIEVERS, &quot;DING&quot; GET READY FOR MAYBE AN 8TH PLACE FINISH. HE DON&#039;T HAVE THE GUTS TO SIGN ANYONE</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TO ALL RICK SUND BELIEVERS, &#8220;DING&#8221; GET READY FOR MAYBE AN 8TH PLACE FINISH. HE DON&#8217;T HAVE THE GUTS TO SIGN ANYONE</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Strickland</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25785</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Strickland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:32:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25785</guid>
		<description>I think some of you need to ease up on demanding Sund sign a Big, LIKE RIGHT NOW. I&#039;ve been thinking about why we&#039;ve sat back and played the waiting gm as far as signing a Big, and here&#039;s what I&#039;ve come up with.

(1) I don&#039;t think Sund wants to commit big money to acquire a #2 backup center that&#039;s not going to make a appreciable difference as far as getting us past the top teams in the East. Joe Smith might help us hold on to the #4 seed, but he won&#039;t necessarily get us past the Big 3.

(2) Every Big that&#039;s still available knows we&#039;re looking for another experienced Big, and they might be using that to try and get a 2yr instead of a 1yr deal. So why make a 2yr committment and spend the kind of money some of them are asking just for the 9-10MPG they&#039;ll get from Woodson.

(3) I don&#039;t think Sund is sold on Woodson being the HC past this season, so why commit to a contract past this season for a Big that will get limited mins. And why tie up money and CAP space that a new HC might be able to utilize more effectively to get us past the big 3.

(4) If we wait until the trade deadline to go after a vet Big, we could possibly get a better quality player and a better deal. There are always teams looking to dump players/salaries and clear cap space at the trade deadline. We have at least 2 expiring contacts in MEvans and RMorris, as well as the cap space and money saved by not signing a Big LIKE RIGHT NOW. 

With all of the uncertainty among most of the top teams in the East, as a result of changing rosters and starting lineups, it might not be a bad idea to wait and see what we might need at the trade deadline before making more than a 1yr committment before the season starts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think some of you need to ease up on demanding Sund sign a Big, LIKE RIGHT NOW. I&#8217;ve been thinking about why we&#8217;ve sat back and played the waiting gm as far as signing a Big, and here&#8217;s what I&#8217;ve come up with.</p>
<p>(1) I don&#8217;t think Sund wants to commit big money to acquire a #2 backup center that&#8217;s not going to make a appreciable difference as far as getting us past the top teams in the East. Joe Smith might help us hold on to the #4 seed, but he won&#8217;t necessarily get us past the Big 3.</p>
<p>(2) Every Big that&#8217;s still available knows we&#8217;re looking for another experienced Big, and they might be using that to try and get a 2yr instead of a 1yr deal. So why make a 2yr committment and spend the kind of money some of them are asking just for the 9-10MPG they&#8217;ll get from Woodson.</p>
<p>(3) I don&#8217;t think Sund is sold on Woodson being the HC past this season, so why commit to a contract past this season for a Big that will get limited mins. And why tie up money and CAP space that a new HC might be able to utilize more effectively to get us past the big 3.</p>
<p>(4) If we wait until the trade deadline to go after a vet Big, we could possibly get a better quality player and a better deal. There are always teams looking to dump players/salaries and clear cap space at the trade deadline. We have at least 2 expiring contacts in MEvans and RMorris, as well as the cap space and money saved by not signing a Big LIKE RIGHT NOW. </p>
<p>With all of the uncertainty among most of the top teams in the East, as a result of changing rosters and starting lineups, it might not be a bad idea to wait and see what we might need at the trade deadline before making more than a 1yr committment before the season starts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: digimon</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25779</link>
		<dc:creator>digimon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:40:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25779</guid>
		<description>Ric Sund needs to sign Mikki Moore. He&#039;s tall and can get rebounds. Sign him and we will equal last years wins.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ric Sund needs to sign Mikki Moore. He&#8217;s tall and can get rebounds. Sign him and we will equal last years wins.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hms</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25778</link>
		<dc:creator>Hms</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25778</guid>
		<description>Stating the Obvious, 



Dang, you&#039;re on fire. Like you, I don&#039;t expect Woody to automatically expand his rotation to 9 or 10 guys just because he gets a veteran player added to the mix. Especially if that player is a frontcourt player. I&#039;ve heard the man say he&#039;ll expand it before. I&#039;ll believe it when I see it. Until then, why expect him to play a guy anymore than he did Solo? Not sure where that idea even comes from, but there&#039;s no sense in complaining because we are going to hear the same noise we always do, which is that whatever Woodson is doing is keeping us winning, so it doesn&#039;t matter. Ironic how the same noise made about Woodson and his offense working is not made about him and his defense. If we are winning, then we are winning. Everything must be working. All that noise about not needing another guard that shoots and doesn&#039;t play defense is bunk. That is the Woodson way. Woodson likes guards who shoot and don&#039;t play defense. He has a roster full of them. He insisted on bringing back the main culprit. If defense is a problem then look to the coach who loves his defensively incapable guards and gives them the ball all the time. But it&#039;s okay because we had a winning season last season. Ironic how the same logic is not used when talking about the big men, rebounding, defense and all that. What&#039;s the problem. We won with a shaky front court last year. I thought winning made it all good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stating the Obvious, </p>
<p>Dang, you&#8217;re on fire. Like you, I don&#8217;t expect Woody to automatically expand his rotation to 9 or 10 guys just because he gets a veteran player added to the mix. Especially if that player is a frontcourt player. I&#8217;ve heard the man say he&#8217;ll expand it before. I&#8217;ll believe it when I see it. Until then, why expect him to play a guy anymore than he did Solo? Not sure where that idea even comes from, but there&#8217;s no sense in complaining because we are going to hear the same noise we always do, which is that whatever Woodson is doing is keeping us winning, so it doesn&#8217;t matter. Ironic how the same noise made about Woodson and his offense working is not made about him and his defense. If we are winning, then we are winning. Everything must be working. All that noise about not needing another guard that shoots and doesn&#8217;t play defense is bunk. That is the Woodson way. Woodson likes guards who shoot and don&#8217;t play defense. He has a roster full of them. He insisted on bringing back the main culprit. If defense is a problem then look to the coach who loves his defensively incapable guards and gives them the ball all the time. But it&#8217;s okay because we had a winning season last season. Ironic how the same logic is not used when talking about the big men, rebounding, defense and all that. What&#8217;s the problem. We won with a shaky front court last year. I thought winning made it all good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Big Ray</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25775</link>
		<dc:creator>Big Ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 18:17:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25775</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt; Ken Strickland &lt;/strong&gt;, 


Excellent post. Just excellent. 




&lt;strong&gt; Ariose &lt;/strong&gt;, 



No way is our &quot;lack of motion&quot; offense Flip&#039;s fault. I&#039;d say whose fault it is, but we already know the answer : it&#039;s all the players&#039; faults. They don&#039;t know how to execute the brilliant design we have. :roll:



&lt;strong&gt; A Tribe Called Quest &lt;/strong&gt;, 


What is your deal? 



&lt;strong&gt; Sekou &lt;/strong&gt;, 


I agree. I&#039;m sure Sund will get &lt;em&gt; somebody &lt;/em&gt; in here to back up our frontcourt regulars. I don&#039;t think he&#039;s willing to go to work with nothing more than minicamp invitees. Of course, to hear some people tell it, the summer is already over. 



Astro Joe, 



Pardon me and my &quot;seeming suggestions.&quot; Let&#039;s assume that I&#039;m just all wrong about this (. Why don&#039;t you tell me why you think we haven&#039;t signed Smith yet. Since you&#039;re scoffing, you must have a better idea. Please tell me something other than &quot;Jamal Crawford&#039;s contract is in the way.&quot; I&#039;m tired of that one already...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong> Ken Strickland </strong>, </p>
<p>Excellent post. Just excellent. </p>
<p><strong> Ariose </strong>, </p>
<p>No way is our &#8220;lack of motion&#8221; offense Flip&#8217;s fault. I&#8217;d say whose fault it is, but we already know the answer : it&#8217;s all the players&#8217; faults. They don&#8217;t know how to execute the brilliant design we have. <img src='http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif' alt=':roll:' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p><strong> A Tribe Called Quest </strong>, </p>
<p>What is your deal? </p>
<p><strong> Sekou </strong>, </p>
<p>I agree. I&#8217;m sure Sund will get <em> somebody </em> in here to back up our frontcourt regulars. I don&#8217;t think he&#8217;s willing to go to work with nothing more than minicamp invitees. Of course, to hear some people tell it, the summer is already over. </p>
<p>Astro Joe, </p>
<p>Pardon me and my &#8220;seeming suggestions.&#8221; Let&#8217;s assume that I&#8217;m just all wrong about this (. Why don&#8217;t you tell me why you think we haven&#8217;t signed Smith yet. Since you&#8217;re scoffing, you must have a better idea. Please tell me something other than &#8220;Jamal Crawford&#8217;s contract is in the way.&#8221; I&#8217;m tired of that one already&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RealSquawk</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25763</link>
		<dc:creator>RealSquawk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:44:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25763</guid>
		<description>I must have got a peek at the schedule because our longest home stand is five games.  And almost between every home stand there are playoffs teams we will be playing from the road. This I believe leaves only a two game improvement for the team. I don&#039;t think the number of wins will be significantly worse, but I don&#039;t  think it will be a big improvement. Unless this team makes a significant road game improvement.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I must have got a peek at the schedule because our longest home stand is five games.  And almost between every home stand there are playoffs teams we will be playing from the road. This I believe leaves only a two game improvement for the team. I don&#8217;t think the number of wins will be significantly worse, but I don&#8217;t  think it will be a big improvement. Unless this team makes a significant road game improvement.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PDubATL</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25761</link>
		<dc:creator>PDubATL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:39:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25761</guid>
		<description>StO,

The rumor is that Joe Smith is worried less about the cash than that second year.  Not sure we could get him to sign for a single year at the vet minimum.  If we really want him we&#039;ll either have to sweeten the pot for a 1-year contract (in the neighborhood of $1.5 to 2M?) or go with a two-year, vet minimum deal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>StO,</p>
<p>The rumor is that Joe Smith is worried less about the cash than that second year.  Not sure we could get him to sign for a single year at the vet minimum.  If we really want him we&#8217;ll either have to sweeten the pot for a 1-year contract (in the neighborhood of $1.5 to 2M?) or go with a two-year, vet minimum deal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anakin Joe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25760</link>
		<dc:creator>Anakin Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25760</guid>
		<description>Stating the Obvious, I don&#039;t think that you can say that because Woody didn&#039;t give Solo extensive playing time (who just signed to likely be the 5th big for the Pacers), that he would not give a proven vet like Joe Smith playing time.  I just don&#039;t think that the equation of if not Solo then not Joe Smith is valid.  Or, if not Lo Wirght/Batista, Medvendenko then not Joe Smith.  And I would absolutely offer Smith a second year (at his option) if he helped get him in the door.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stating the Obvious, I don&#8217;t think that you can say that because Woody didn&#8217;t give Solo extensive playing time (who just signed to likely be the 5th big for the Pacers), that he would not give a proven vet like Joe Smith playing time.  I just don&#8217;t think that the equation of if not Solo then not Joe Smith is valid.  Or, if not Lo Wirght/Batista, Medvendenko then not Joe Smith.  And I would absolutely offer Smith a second year (at his option) if he helped get him in the door.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stating the Obvious</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25759</link>
		<dc:creator>Stating the Obvious</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25759</guid>
		<description>Ryan Hollins is trash and not  worth tying up $4M for him over two years, that would make it less likely that we could re-sign JJ which is way more important than adding a big man who won&#039;t see any PT under woodson anyway.  He got raped every time he was on the floor late last year.  I remember the game against us where Flip kept driving down the middle of the lane and scoring at will because Hollins doesn&#039;t know how to play help  D.  He did the same thing against the NUgs where Carmelo kept driving down the middle of the lane and scored on him every time when he came to help.  He must have gotten posterized 10 times that game.  Like I said, trash.

And I&#039;m fine with Joe Smith as long as Sund doesn&#039;t bid against himself to get him.  He&#039;s worth the vet min for one year, not much more money and certainly not for two years.

It doesn&#039;t make a damned bit of difference anyway, because Woody won&#039;t play a fourth big man more than a few minutes a game.  That&#039;s why Sund would be better off to save his money and just sign the mini-camp guys, again unless Joe Smith is willing to pay for the vets&#039; minimum.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ryan Hollins is trash and not  worth tying up $4M for him over two years, that would make it less likely that we could re-sign JJ which is way more important than adding a big man who won&#8217;t see any PT under woodson anyway.  He got raped every time he was on the floor late last year.  I remember the game against us where Flip kept driving down the middle of the lane and scoring at will because Hollins doesn&#8217;t know how to play help  D.  He did the same thing against the NUgs where Carmelo kept driving down the middle of the lane and scored on him every time when he came to help.  He must have gotten posterized 10 times that game.  Like I said, trash.</p>
<p>And I&#8217;m fine with Joe Smith as long as Sund doesn&#8217;t bid against himself to get him.  He&#8217;s worth the vet min for one year, not much more money and certainly not for two years.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t make a damned bit of difference anyway, because Woody won&#8217;t play a fourth big man more than a few minutes a game.  That&#8217;s why Sund would be better off to save his money and just sign the mini-camp guys, again unless Joe Smith is willing to pay for the vets&#8217; minimum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anakin Joe</title>
		<link>http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2009/08/03/once-again-its-on/comment-page-2/#comment-25758</link>
		<dc:creator>Anakin Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 17:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/?p=434#comment-25758</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;The definition of a broke ownership group&lt;/strong&gt;, reportedly the Memphis Grizzlies have fired ALL of their scouts.  No college scouts. No pro scouts.  No international scouts.  I guess that the GM and owner will throw darts against the wall in future summers.  Seemingly, the NBA may want to step in and do something about that.  Don&#039;t they want 30 competitive teams in the league?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>The definition of a broke ownership group</strong>, reportedly the Memphis Grizzlies have fired ALL of their scouts.  No college scouts. No pro scouts.  No international scouts.  I guess that the GM and owner will throw darts against the wall in future summers.  Seemingly, the NBA may want to step in and do something about that.  Don&#8217;t they want 30 competitive teams in the league?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
