Atlanta Hawks: Rick Sund Q-and-A
More from my interview yesterday with Hawks GM Rick Sund.
MC: What is your evaluation of the season?
Sund: There are two seasons. Once you become a real playoff team, there are two seasons. I thought we had an unbelievably great first season: 40 wins, key people hurt, the players and Larry [Drew] kept their focus. We ended up having the fourth-best record in the East. I thought with all the adversity it was really a great year with the compressed schedule and all the obstacles a team has to climb, which every team has those obstacles. I thought it was good.
The second part of the season is the playoffs and that’s disappointing. I think a great thing when you go through the [exit] interview process you get to talk to the players, and to a man—I still have a couple to do—but to a man they all think we should still be playing. And that’s a good thing. There’s disappointment in their heart. They look [at the playoffs] and feel they are good enough to be playing at the championship level.
MC: When you evaluate the team, are you able to separate out the effects of all the injuries from where you need to get better?
Sund: Two-and-a-half weeks after the season, you are a little bit more pragmatic. The emotions are out of the focus. When you look at it and you have to say, the last four years this team in the Eastern Conference has had the third-or fourth-best record either by the end of the regular season or by getting through the first round and getting to the second round. We’ve had the third- or fourth-best record in the last four years. Our goal is to get into those top two [in the East], because that’s when you have a legitimate shot to get to the finals. That’s that championship level. That’s the NBA’s version of the Final Four. You want to be one of those top two teams playing at the end of May and into June because you’ve got a legitimate shot to win a championship. We’ve fallen short of that. That’s our goal. Having said that, we have to look at our club and say where are the areas we can improve, what can we do without taking a step back. So we will have to explore all opportunities.
MC: The team’s deficiencies were mostly on offense, which came to fruition against the Celtics, a very good defensive team. From a personnel standpoint, how can the team improve offensively?
Sund: Again, you say separate the injuries, you really can’t, because if your key personnel are core members of your club, you are going to miss the points that that person may bring or the rebounds. I think we were one of the better defensive teams in the league, something last season we really wanted to focus on. I think Larry and the team did a great job. Points-wise it was Chicago one, Boston two, Philly three, Miami four, Memphis five, we are sixth. Defending in certain areas [like] field-goal percentage. In all of that, we really improved. I think that was the strength of our team. Now we have got to focus on, can we score a little more. Having said that, our offensive efficiency—which I know you are a big stat guy—was really good in the fourth quarter, particularly the last five minutes of the game. Joe [Johnson] in particular [was good] in crunch time. We were good in the fourth quarter, we were good in overtime games, close games. You are always looking at how you get better. I think some of that will come, if the team is the same, from [Jeff] Teague. Teague is going to continue to get better. He got a lot of easy shots for us in the playoffs for some of our players. Joe really improved his 3-point shooting. Marvin [Williams] shot the 3-pointer pretty good. You are asking me questions that really Larry should answer but I think, overall, the dialogue from the coaching staff and the management last year was [about] defense. We’ve got to focus on that and we can manufacture and we have enough talent to get shots.
MC: Why do you think things like good offensive efficiency in fourth quarter didn’t translate to the playoffs?
Sund: I haven’t really zeroed in on that. I think with the exception of the blowout game, all of the games—and we pretty much dominated Game 1-you take those two games out and the other four games were pretty close and could have gone either way. It was a missed shot here and a missed shot there.
MC: We saw the tension between Joe’s deliberate style that he likes to play and LD’s motion offense, something that he expressed his frustration about at one point. Can that tension be resolved with this personnel?
Sund: That question should be to Coach.
MC: Do you plan to extend a tender to Ivan [Johnson]?
Sund: I’m not going to comment on that right now.
MC: Will you try to sign Josh Smith to an extension?
Sund: I’m not going to get into contract stuff.
MC: Josh had a great year production-wise but–
Sund: I think it was the best year Josh has had, at least in the four years I’ve been here. I’ve said it for the record and I’ll say it again: Irrespective of how the voting came out, he should have been an All-Star. I thought Josh had an absolutely terrific year. He did a great job of making sure, hey, we lost some huge production with [Al] Horford and he picked it up.
MC: But his offensive efficiency fell off, and a large part of that is because he’s taking more shots away from the basket and not shooting–
Sund: You have to ask those questions to Larry.
MC: But from a personnel standpoint, do you think he fits with what Larry is trying to do offensively?
Sund: Yes.
MC: Does that mean the migration away from the basket–
Sund: Those are questions you have to ask Larry. I think he’s an All-Star player. He played a total All-Star caliber play this year. He’s been exceptional in the post. I thought his defense was great. He’s one of the better passing power forwards in the league. I think he had a very good year.
MC: Is it your perception Josh is still happy being here with the Hawks?
Sund: I’m going to have his exit interview sometime this week. But, yeah, when you read the things of him saying . . . He’s such a competitor. I was talking to his dad the other day, and he mentioned we all think we should be playing, and that’s great. And [Josh] is one of them.
MC: Can you discuss tour team salary situation going forward?
Sund: I don’t like to talk about it until we find out what the taxes are and the league does its audit. We are in a situation where we have six guys under contract and we will have to fill in either via trade, first-round pick, second-round pick. How much room [under the tax level] do we have to use the mid-level, the bi-annual. We have all of those exceptions. Its’ too early to say.
MC: Is it possible you may have to build the same way as last year, when you had to find some value with minimum-salaried guys?
Sund: Many of the good teams are going to have to finesse their way around and look at that as an option. If you don’t want to be a perennial taxpayer, you have to look at those options. . . . I thought our team this year had a legitimate chance to get to the one or two spot [in the East]. We ended up with the fourth-best record in the [East] but we thought we could still be playing. I asked ownership if we think we are going to have a chance to make a run at it, we are going to have to dip our toe into and go into the tax and pay a little bit of tax. And they did it with no problem. We are an official taxpayer this year and I thought that was a good move for us given the injuries.
MC: I know you probably haven’t had much chance to study prospects in detail, but do you have an idea of the quality of depth in the draft?
Sund: I’m a real division of labor guy and that’s Dave Pendergraft and Mike McNeive, they focus on that all the time. I am getting more involved. During the year I go out and see some people but really focusing in on the groupings, where we pick at 23 who is going to be there, who do I really need to look at, who do you like in the combines, who do you not like. Chicago [combine] has become a really good tool because it’s basically all interviews for two or three days. That’s turned out to be really more productive than even in the past, when they just play.
MC: Have you gotten a feel from Dave and Mike on what they think about the draft prospects?
Sund: They’ve handled the draft pretty good the last couple of years. We got a good player in Teague and we got a good player in [Jordan] Crawford, which we parlayed into [Kirk] Hinrich. They feel that we will get a quality player at the 23rd pick, or there are quality people there. There are a few people they like that they might want to move down to get. Who knows. It’s way too early to tell. The lottery is tonight and next week is when it really starts to focus.
MC: How do you think that Crawford trade turned out now that Hinrich’s contract is expiring?
Sund: We felt we could make a run last year. Not quite as good as this year [but] we had to get through Orlando. It was the first time in four years we didn’t have home-court advantage and many people picked Orlando to win the conference. And then we took the best team record-wise [the Bulls] where we won the first game and then won another game. Hinrich didn’t play in that [series]. We like to think if Hinrich did play we would have advanced that round. It’s just unfortunate he came in with the injury this year. But I don’t think there’s any question in my mind that we wouldn’t have advanced to the second round last year without Kirk on our team.
Michael Cunningham, Hawks beat
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
535 comments Add your comment
hawkville
June 4th, 2012
3:25 pm
I can’t get into basketball without the Hawks playing…. boring
Rod from College Park
June 4th, 2012
3:25 pm
“JC2 doesn’t see the floor on a playoff team. That’s why John Wall wants the Wiz to draft a 2 guard… because he wants to go to the playoffs.”
John Wall might be the problem, not JC2. John Wall is a 2 guard not a point guard. No coincidence that Mcgee started playing better when he got a decent coach and a point guard who knows how to run an offense.
northcyde
June 4th, 2012
3:27 pm
KevinM . . I wouldn’t have a problem moving Joe for him. But Joe isn’t the one who wants out of Atlanta. Josh is.
So why is everybody trying to trade everyone BUT Josh Smith?
And the Hawks can afford to pay Gasol’s 19 million . . if Josh’s 13 million and Marvin’s 8 million go west. That’s actually a 2 million savings.
Heck, a lot of people believed that T-Mac on a 1 million contract was a better player than Josh Smith. If that’s the case, all the Hawks have to do is find a cheap veteran free agent that can replace Marvin’s production
Gasol + vet minimum player = 20 million
Josh + Marvin = 21 million
If Marvin is such a garbage player, he can easily be replaced by a vet minimum guy.
northcyde
June 4th, 2012
3:28 pm
Heck, a lot of people believed that T-Mac on a 1 million contract was a better player than Josh Smith
Of course, that should read Marvin Williams, and not Josh Smith.
Rod from College Park
June 4th, 2012
3:31 pm
“This is funny coming from you. Because when people bring up Jamal’s 33% FG shooting in the Bulls series, you break your neck trying to cite what he did in the Orlando series. Chicago neutralized Horford, and they damn sure neutralized Jamal.”
Those numbers were not just from the Chicago series. He was neutralized in the Orlando series also, when they put Brrandon Bass on him, and he did not ever guard Howard. When teams focused on his strengths in the playoffs, he came up short. Thats what happens when good teams focus on you. Al has never been a guy that teams really had to focus on stopping offensively. That’s not and never has been his game. You are trying to make him something he is not.
Rod from College Park
June 4th, 2012
3:34 pm
“So why is everybody trying to trade everyone BUT Josh Smith?”
Maybe because many people realize that after this year, there is no question who the best player on the team is. It’s not everyday you attempt to trade the best player on your team. If teams made it a habit of trading their best players, you would not have many consistent winning franchises.
KevinM
June 4th, 2012
3:41 pm
“Sund: There are two seasons. Once you become a real playoff team, there are two seasons.”
Ummm, what’s Sund’s definition of a real playoff team? One that goes but doesn’t produce? We’ve seen it for how many years now Atlanta fans?
northcyde
June 4th, 2012
3:46 pm
So Rod . . answer O’brien’s question from earlier in the blog.
If there is no Josh Smith here, what are Horford’s numbers, if he has to assume a larger role in the offense?
Rod from College Park
June 4th, 2012
4:04 pm
“So Rod . . answer O’brien’s question from earlier in the blog.
If there is no Josh Smith here, what are Horford’s numbers, if he has to assume a larger role in the offense?”
I have no idea. He has not proven that he has the offensive ability to carry a team. He has never had to do that in his college or professional career. He could step up like Josh did, or he could regress like Marvin has. I can only comment on his skillset offensively. He has a jumpshot, he is active on the glass, but his defense is questionable, he has no left hand, limited post moves, and he is very robotic. Josh is not. Simple as that. No hate, just truth. Al plays more controlled than Josh, but he does not have the physical tools, or the natural ability that Josh has. I’m not the only one who agrees. Barkley said as much also. He said Josh is the best player on the team, followed by Al. I feel it is Josh, followed by Joe, and Al is right on Joe’s heels.
Ray
June 4th, 2012
4:12 pm
@ Northcyde
I can say this Horford’s number will rise up probably about to where Josh’s is, but the thing that will keep Horford back.
#1 the fact he has to play PF Horford is a real PF, but going against some of the best at that position he’s not getting to the All-star game in fact I guarantee that he’ll be shut down by a good bit of the PF’s in the league like a Ibaka or even Lamarcus Aldridge I know he doesn’t play PF all the time, but when he does.
#2 He’s not as athletic as Josh Smith just has better fundamentals.
I still say we move Josh to SF and Horford to PF Zaza gets a promotion to full-time C I know some of y’all feel he probably shouldn’t be promoted to Center, but looking at this past year he was pretty good.
Say Try trading Joe Johnson to someone like Milwaukee
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=7vvnrcb
Then Amnesty Marvin Williams
AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GO GET A REAL HEAD COACH!
FIRE LD!
FIRE SUND!
KevinM
June 4th, 2012
4:13 pm
“He said Josh is the best player on the team, followed by Al. I feel it is Josh, followed by Joe, and Al is right on Joe’s heels.”
And you put all three together, and you get what playoff results?
Move 2 or 3 of them, but Sund is a chicken to do anything that dramatic.
Ray
June 4th, 2012
4:14 pm
I do know some of your concerns about Josh moving to SF maybe not full-time, but he’s better suited for that role and he just might become that All-star that plus ASKG puts Josh’s name out there if you know what I mean.
Astro Joe
June 4th, 2012
4:24 pm
Here’s the thing about this whole “trading your best player” thing that I read about constantly. If your best player is only able to get you to a certain ceiling, then you should trade him. It isn’t about keeping your best player, it’s about assembling the best team. IMO, the best player on the Pacers won’t get them far… same for the 76ers. Should the Pacers keep Granger just because of his status on a team that maxes out at the 2nd round? That’s silly. Once you have identified the ceiling, it is time to make changes. And if your best player wants to be traded from a team that maxes out in the 2nd round… then you give him what he wants. A trade. The Hawks won’t break their ceiling with Josh SMith as their best player. And you can’t trade some combination of Marvin, Teague and Zaza and get back a player better than one of the captains. If I had my choice (as I’ve said ad nauseum), Josh & Joe leave within a few days of each other. But since I think Josh is easier to move, wants to move (or at least refuses to publicly deny that he wants to move) and has the ability to take his talents elsewhere in 13 months while leaving the Hawks with dreams of Hilton Armstrong, well, the choice is pretty obvious.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
4:55 pm
“Because someone on this team would have to elevate their game if a player not of Josh’s caliber came to the Hawks.”
You act as if “elevating their game” is something anyone can do. Once again, people don’t just “step up”. Stacey Augmon didn’t “step up” and become Nique when Nique got traded. Theo Ratliff didn’t “elevate his game” and become Mutombo when Mutombo got traded. Other players will get more shots, yeah, but that doesn’t mean they are going to pick up the slack if they don’t have the talent to do so.
“But God forbid that our overpaid SG takes enough shots per game to possibly average 20 ppg again. And if he handled the ball more, maybe he even gets back to 5 assists per game. Nope . . no way would we want him to get more usage again.”
No, we wouldn’t, because he has emphatically proven that he slows the ball movement down to a halt when the offense is run through him.
“I’m surprised you don’t think that Teague as the PG wouldn’t get a chance to shine more without Josh in the mix. The fact that he’d get to bring the ball up the court almost full time, would increase his touches and shots by default.”
I would hope so, since Teague is my favorite Hawk. The problem is, as much as this blog likes to highlight the possessions when Josh refuses to give it to Teague, there are at least as many possessions when Teague brings up the ball and gives it to Joe or Josh in the high post or behind the 3 point line and goes and stands in the corner for the rest of the possession. That is not going to change if Josh leaves. In fact, if anything, it is likely going to get worse, at least until Teague’s balls drop and he becomes more assertive in demanding the right to orchestrate the offense.
“Haha @ citing a season about JJ in which he made 3rd team All-NBA by averaging 21 ppg, average almost 5 rebounds and 5 assists, and shot 46% FG and 37% 3FG.”
Haha @ intentionally missing my point. My point was about usage, not production. Joe is not as good as he was in 2009-10, and he is likely going to decline from here on out in his career. Given the same usage he had in 2009-10, he is likely not going to produce at the same level. Not to mention, how did that level of usage for him work out in the playoffs against good defenses?
“But you believe that if Josh was gone, and if the Hawks didn’t get a better player/shot creator than JJ or Al here . . that Horford and Teague wouldn’t be much more involved in the offense? Come on Najeh, you can do better than this.”
I don’t think it is guaranteed, no. Not with Joe’s ingrained tendencies to dominate the ball.
In theory you are right. With Josh gone, Al and Teague should see their roles increase. I would certainly hope this is what happens if Josh gets traded. I am just not convinced that this is actually what will happen.
“Once again, you’re acting like Josh Smith was dishing out 6 assists a game last year. He’s a very good passing big man, but it’s not like the Hawks were solely dependent on his playmaking for the offense to function.”
Once again you are overvaluing the importance of stats without using them in the right context. Josh draws double teams and kicks to open shooters who either shoot in rhythm or swing the ball to other open men. Just because Josh doesn’t get the assist doesn’t mean he didn’t create the shot. If Rondo drives inside, draws the defense, kicks to Allen in the corner who swings to Pierce at the elbow for a wide open jumper, Rondo still created the shot, even though Allen gets the assist.
I also disagree that the Hawks weren’t overly dependent on his playmaking ability. If it wasn’t him or T-Mac on the floor facilitating for teammates, it was Kirk or Joe dribbling for 15 seconds trying to make something happen and hoisting a contested jumper. On the all-too-rare occasion that Teague got to do something, he usually did something positive, but he has to be more assertive in order for the Hawks to be able to rely on that from him on a consistent basis.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
5:00 pm
“If there is no Josh Smith here, what are Horford’s numbers, if he has to assume a larger role in the offense?”
At his current talent level: 18 ppg, 10 rpg, 48% FG, 4 FTA/game, 3.5 assists, 1.5 blocks.
Those are really good numbers, but they say nothing about his ability to command double teams and create shots for teammates. That is something he’s not going to be able to do until he develops reliable post moves and makes quicker decisions with the ball (a problem he shares with Joe).
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
5:03 pm
“So why is everybody trying to trade everyone BUT Josh Smith?”
I can’t speak for others, but two reasons: 1) if they acquire better players, they may be able to convince him to stay, and 2) I can’t think of one playoff team that traded its best player, paid a quarter of its cap to its 2nd or 3rd best player, and improved. It’s not that Josh shouldn’t be traded, but I can’t see a Josh trade that is going to improve this team without also trading Joe and possibly other players.
This team needs a nuclear bomb dropped on it. If you want to start by trading Josh, fine, but you can’t stop there.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
5:07 pm
“And both are good enough on defense to not make the paint a “lay up line”.”
No.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
5:11 pm
“Najeh you are correct that Horford doesn’t command a double team but I see upside there.”
I hope so. I really like him as a player. That is the one major hole in his game, though.
“I think Josh has plateaued as a player.”
Did you think that before he carried the team this season? People were saying this about Josh three seasons ago. I don’t agree. He showed in the second half of the season that he is trying to develop his right hand (which is sorely needed). If he gets that down he is going to be a much better player than he is now.
“It could not have been more evident in the series against the Celtics that Josh doesn’t want to be a Hawk. Witness all of his bad passes, quitting on plays and the way he made a complete fool of himself trying to push the fast break.”
Seriously? Dude played three games on a bad knee, leads all players in this year’s playoffs in rebounds per game, and did a pretty good job on KG the first two games of the series before hurting his knee. If that’s how he shows that he doesn’t want to be here, sh-t, give him an extension right now.
KevinM
June 4th, 2012
6:03 pm
Another reason to have Josh prioritized on the trade list first:
1) Al’s contract is very favorable to this organization. It’s a shame we can’t have 5 10-12M guys in the starting lineup.
San Antonio might come closest to this type of model next year.
Grandad
June 4th, 2012
6:13 pm
R.f C.P.
” John Wall might be the problem, not JC2 ”
This may be the silliest thing you`ve ever said !
____________________________________________
jhan
June 4th, 2012
6:32 pm
If Josh is the best player on any team they have issues!
Grandad
June 4th, 2012
7:00 pm
Why does Al get such a bad rap;
Play-off shooting % / parallel Josh v Al / `08 – `12:
Josh – 38%, 40%, 48%, 42%, 39%
Al. H – 58%, 42%, 52%, 42%, 47%
Al`s low is Josh`s avg for play-offs
•This is not a disparage Josh post
•This is a post to show how silly yawl are by jumpin` on one thang
•Al shot a low % [only] a couple of years;
yet no mention from yawl concerning Josh`s low play-off shooting%
who shoots a low % most every yr in the [play-offs]
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Assist to TO ratio:
In 2012 Josh had a 1.5 to 1 asst to TO ratio …
equaling pretty bad for the amount of time he handles the ball.
Al however, in 2011, his last full season, had a 2.3 to 1 asst to TO ratio
Much more efficient than Josh as a facilitator.
Yet;
`tis preached on this board he [Josh] is such a wonderful passer.
Once again … not really disparaging Josh … only showing the ludicrosity
of belittling one teammate over another.
Ray
June 4th, 2012
7:24 pm
@ Grandad
If people were actually smart they’d realize Josh and Al are the key to moving this team forward the only problem is we need a PG like Nash to come in here Jeff Teague is good, but he could be better I don’t want Nash to take the starting spot cause Teague has more than deserved it.
Joe and Marvin are the fat that needs to be cut out for us to get moving in the right direction just got to be smart in how your trim the fat that is.
Also I would also go so far to say John Wall isn’t a PG on NBA level I said this before to my dad that I though John Wall was going to wind up a bust because he’s out of position he rubs off even worse than Westbrook as a legit SG and not a PG at all.
In fact I went so far to say that the best player out of Kentucky that year would be Demarcus Cousins even though he has maturity issues those can be ironed out depending on the coach.
Buddy Grizzard
June 4th, 2012
7:38 pm
Najeh I’m convinced Josh is trying to be Kobe (he shoots outside 15 feet more than anybody in the NBA except Kobe, and his percentage actually isn’t that far off) because he knows that knee is a ticking time bomb. The more he has to go in the post and bang with guys like Garnett, the shorter his career is going to be.
If Josh was healthy and the Hawks had brought in a real coach who was able to reach Josh and bring out his full potential, Josh could have been a super star. I still predict multiple all star selections for him once he goes to another team, but I don’t think Josh will ever be the player he could have been if his bad knee didn’t compromise the athleticism that’s central to his game.
drmaryb.(*_*).
June 4th, 2012
8:06 pm
Gone Bye – Bye!
Richard Dwason “The Family Fued” Host died today @ age 79 (RIP). Well ladies, no more family kisses?
Mubarak (the ousted President of Egypt) gets life in prison today.
______________________
Will Sund be the next in line to exit stage left? (fingers crossed)
drmaryb.(*_*).
June 4th, 2012
8:09 pm
Wow!
I can’t believe anyone could shoot more than Kobe? Is this really true? Just wow!
(see the coach (in Slick-Rick’s voice)) … That is not Josh’s fault, if someone sent me a cake in the mail, I would eat it too.
drmaryb.(*_*).
June 4th, 2012
8:15 pm
Pink Slime!
Who do you guys think is the “pink slime” (the floor scrappings in a meat warehouse, which is gathered, liquefied and, injected into meats @ Wal-mart, et.al) ) on this team?
____________
The ASKG
Rick Sund
Jason Collins
Eric Dampieer (he snubbed us when Deke left)
Marvin Williams
…..
Am I right?
O"Brien
June 4th, 2012
8:16 pm
Najeh,
Are you ok with blowing the team up if it sets them back 2 or 3 years?
Ra’mon,
If the Hawks trade Al Horford this offseason, and then Josh walks away next season, what is your plan? Hope the Hawks are bad enough to get a top 5 pick? And then hope the Hawks get that pick right? And then hope LD is not the HC anymore, and that pick develops into a star?
O"Brien
June 4th, 2012
8:24 pm
From Hoopsworld:
Now, after a disappointing first-round exit to the Los Angeles Clippers in this year’s postseason, the likelihood of a trade involving Gay is much higher. League sources expect Memphis to shop Gay, who is owed $53,666,790 over the next three years. Gay is no longer considered untouchable, and he could be on the move in the next few months if the right offer comes along.
If Gay does become available this summer, there would be no shortage of teams interested in the 25-year-old. The Golden State Warriors, Toronto Raptors, Brooklyn Nets and Orlando Magic are among the teams who would attempt to trade for Gay, according to sources close to the situation.
Several executives believe that Memphis could to trade Gay in a cost-cutting move since the team wants to re-sign restricted free agents O.J. Mayo, Marreese Speights and Darrell Arthur after already giving long-term deals to Marc Gasol, Zach Randolph and Mike Conley..
A scoring SF would really help our offense, but Gay is out of our price range (imo).
Its funny how you hear rumors of teams open to trading what could be considered “core” players, but you never hear anything out of the Hawks despite never getting past game 6 in the second round in the 5-6 years the core has been together (I dont count Marvin and Zaza).
O"Brien
June 4th, 2012
8:31 pm
All these articles/twitter feeds about teams working out players (even the Bulls at #29 are working out players).
Any news on the Hawks?
Tired Tired Tired
June 4th, 2012
8:31 pm
The Hawks, one of the worst sports franchises in history, and we are concerned that the general
manager who is part of this debacle is leaving. Don’t let the door hit you in the a$$. Replace him with Daffy Duck, who cares. Get out of town losers.
DawgNole
June 4th, 2012
8:40 pm
KevinM
June 4th, 2012
3:41 pm
“Sund: There are two seasons. Once you become a real playoff team, there are two seasons.”
Ummm, what’s Sund’s definition of a real playoff team? One that goes but doesn’t produce? We’ve seen it for how many years now Atlanta fans?
______________________
FORTY-FOUR (44)!!!
(Tried to resist, but when no one else jumped in and answered your question, I couldn’t help myself.)
DawgNole
June 4th, 2012
8:45 pm
O”Brien
June 4th, 2012
8:24 pm
Its funny how you hear rumors of teams open to trading what could be considered “core” players, but you never hear anything out of the Hawks despite never getting past game 6 in the second round in the 5-6 years the core has been together (I dont count Marvin and Zaza).
________________________
How about “never getting past” Round 2 PERIOD in the 44 years the organization has been in ATL?
It (never hearing anything out of the Hawks when QUALITY players are available) is part of what losers are all about.
DawgNole
June 4th, 2012
8:46 pm
O”Brien
June 4th, 2012
8:31 pm
All these articles/twitter feeds about teams working out players (even the Bulls at #29 are working out players).
Any news on the Hawks?
______________________
Nope. (Not surprised, are you?)
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
8:50 pm
O’Brien, I’ve only mentioned Horford in trades for either a big or draft picks. If Horford was traded to Houston for those two draft picks and Lowery, the Hawks should use two picks one for Nicholson (is that his name?) the talented PF/C who can score from anywhere, and the other for the best big available at that slot. You draft two bigs this season, with the other pick going for a wing player or Marshall (hopefully). And then you have a strong back court for the next 4-5 seasons guaranteed. And if Josh leaves (which I don’t think he would), you still are already in position with two bigs that are learning the ropes, and producing, along with Zaza. If Josh extends, you have a deep backcourt with a deep talented front court. If Houston would take Josh, I would do the same trade for Josh also.
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
8:55 pm
Think about this, the Hornets sold quicker in a worse market than Atlanta, with no star power, faster than the Hawks. So even from a business standpoint, if Josh and Al were both off the roster, and the only big contract left was Joe, would it be not easier to sell to an owner who wants to bring in his own team and rebuild? My thoughts are, Horford trade value will disappear after this season.
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
9:02 pm
JJ for Gay makes too much sense for both team. So the deal won’t get done.
Sautee
June 4th, 2012
9:09 pm
“My thoughts are, Horford trade value will disappear after this season.” – Ramon
Ramon, since Horford’s numbers have increased every season, and he’s only 25, what are you basing that on? If Josh stays, he’ll still be the starting center, so he’ll still get lots of mid-range looks. And with Teague’s development, he’ll also get lots of dunks. How many of Teague’s passes did Zaza fumble? Al wouldn’t fumble those passes. The better Teague gets at penetrate-and-dish, the more Al will score. I don’t see any reason that his trade value would diminish.
Bravesfan79
June 4th, 2012
9:11 pm
What we need is new coach whos system dosent include Josh Smith taking 10 million outside jumpers!
Just Joe
June 4th, 2012
9:17 pm
JJ for Gay doesn’t make sense if Memphis is trying to create cap space to re-sign their free agents.
Marvin, ZaZa, and our 2013 first round pick makes some sense. Pondexter and Marvin could hold down the SF spot. ZaZa gives them a solid backup C on an expiring deal. They save $3M in cap space this year. They don’t want another 1st rd pick this year because of the guaranteed salary and nearly full roster, so an unprotected pick for next year would be what they’re looking for. Maybe a team under the cap can put together a better deal, but Ruy G makes a lot of money over the next 3 years.
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
9:25 pm
Just Joe, all of Memphis free agents are locked up. Remember Zach, Conley, and Gasol have signed their deals. Mayo and Gay are both free agent. Memphis needs a closer for some games. And JJ is great at that. The injuries that Memphis had this season will help them re-sign Arthur for a cheaper price when its time.
Just Joe
June 4th, 2012
9:32 pm
The article just said that they wanted to free up space to re-sign Mayo, Speights, and Arthur. Gay is owed $53M over the next 3 years. Joe is owed $80M+ over 4 years, including $3M more in the upcoming season.
Just Joe
June 4th, 2012
9:42 pm
$3M more than Gay that is.
Just Joe
June 4th, 2012
9:46 pm
Could LD control Teague, Johnson, Gay, Smith, Horford, and the 23rd pick?
Would our owners spend the necessary money to add a bench?
Naahhh.
Najeh Davenpoop
June 4th, 2012
10:19 pm
“Are you ok with blowing the team up if it sets them back 2 or 3 years?”
Yes, emphatically. Much better than trying to make lateral moves. Either trade multiple pieces for someone of Dwight Howard’s caliber, or blow it up and build with high lottery picks.
High-sider
June 4th, 2012
10:24 pm
Russell Westbrook’s and Kevin Durant’s [partial] first half stats for Game 5 vs. the Spurs in the 2012 WCF:
Westbrook: 4-11 [FGM-FGA], 0-2 [3PM-3PA], 2-2 [FTM-FTA], 2rebs, 7asts, 3stls, 10pts, 21mins [rnd]
Durant: 1-6 [FGM-FGA], 0-3 [3PM-3PA], 3-4 [FTM-FTA], 0rebs, 4asts, 1stl, 5pts, 19mins [rnd]
I told [some of] you [bloggers] [that] Westbrook was a “gunner.”
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
10:26 pm
Sautee, I’m saying if Al moves to the PF, then his trade value will go down. The very things that make Horford productive as a center, are the very things that will become less reliant at the PF position for him.
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
10:33 pm
Najeh, exactly. Everyone saying about the possibility if in two years, there’s no Josh or Al on this team. I really don’t see what’s the terrible part of that if it ended up happening, if that’s the worst case scenario. If this is a superstar league (each of the four teams left have a superstar – say what you want Duncan is the greatest PF/C ever to play the game skills wise, during my life time, he’s a superstar commercials or not), and you don’t have a superstar on the team. And you don’t have the ownership to lure a superstar, what’s wrong with going into the lottery to find a superstar?
O"Brien
June 4th, 2012
10:49 pm
Ray,
More than anything, I think this team needs an above average HC. He would get Josh to play to his strengths, run more pick and roll, give Teague a bigger role, get guys easier shots within the offense etc.
Also, I think John Wall would benefit from good coaching, and a better culture.
Ra'mon
June 4th, 2012
10:52 pm
O’B, would you be for (I know Sund wouldn’t dare consider this in reality) a sign and trade deal of Josh for Eric Gordon, if Gordon came in at 4 years $52 mil?