RealGM

If you could go back in time and change one draft pick for the Hawks, what would it be?

John Stockton?
Karl Malone?
Joe Dumars?

Deron Williams.

Chris Paul makes us too good to get Horford, Deron Williams means that we might still luck into Horford.

Not trading Bill Russell. Even if the Hawks don't win as many titles as Boston did they'd still have a winning tradition thanks to Russell and have a pedigree that attracts both fans and players for the generations following.

azuresou1 wrote:Deron Williams.

Chris Paul makes us too good to get Horford, Deron Williams means that we might still luck into Horford.

With or without Horford, we would have still had Joe, Josh, Marvin, and CP3. Zaza would have probably been our center. But we would have probably controlled Eastern conference supremacy over the last 3-4 years or so on the strength on Paul, Joe, and Josh.

That would have been hard to build around.

ACE_reppin_ATL wrote:

azuresou1 wrote:Deron Williams.

Chris Paul makes us too good to get Horford, Deron Williams means that we might still luck into Horford.

With or without Horford, we would have still had Joe, Josh, Marvin, and CP3. Zaza would have probably been our center. But we would have probably controlled Eastern conference supremacy over the last 3-4 years or so on the strength on Paul, Joe, and Josh.

That would have been hard to build around.

Not Marvin, but Childress, JJ, Paul and Smoove does have some potential.

Hard call. I have 2 ways to attack the last decade or so. I think #1 is the best.

#1) The drafting of Josh Childress. I think if we don't pick Childress and instead go with Andre Igoudala (or Luol Deng) that the following year Marvin Williams doesn't get chosen because our F's are well handled with AI and Josh Smith. We then get a PG in the draft in the more of Williams or Paul. I think that further impacts the team in that they may not have signed Joe Johnson. We probably still have signed him because of the need at SG, but he never would have gotten to become iso-Joe because we'd have a real PG with him from day 1. Also I'm relatively sure we wouldn't have traded for him, but instead just signed him to an offer sheet. That would have saved 2 1st round picks. My logic is that we had over half of the starting lineup filled with up and coming talent and wouldn't have been desperate to land someone to be alpha on the team.

Doing this makes the picks that were used on Shelden Williams, Al Horford, and Acie Law all questionable on whether we'd be picking in the same spot or same way. Additionally the picks conveyed to Phoenix which were Rajon Rondo and Robin Lopez would not have been conveyed.

The 2005 core lineup of:
Deron Williams
Joe Johnson
Andre Igoudala
Josh Smith
Zaza Pachulia

would have 5 first rounders to add to it between 2006 and 2008. Given the roster we'd have the 2 picks from 2006 would likely have been flops or maybe we would have landed Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay as a 6th man or backup SG and Rondo as a backup PG. Very hit and miss draft. The 2007 draft might have landed us Joakim Noah (Horford was unlikely and required a lottery partial win to get that pick anyway). Given our loaded backcourt from the Law pick would likely become Thaddeus Young. In 2008 we'd likely still have our choice of Hibbert or McGee as projects to develop into a center with Noah and Zaza. By 2009, I don't we'd been in a position to draft Teague. I think it is realistic that we'd be drafting in the last 6 picks of the round.

I think the team would have been selling out Philips Arena (more exciting product) allowing ownership to be in a stronger position financially. I also think Joe Johnson wouldn't have been resigned to a max deal with the logical investment in PG and the F positions. SG would like have been turned over to a free agent or Johnson's understudy.

Likely current roster based on the dominoes off the one change:
Deron Williams/Rajon Rondo
Rudy Gay/Jordan Crawford
Andre Igoudala/Dante Cunningham
Josh Smith/Zaza Pachulia
Joakim Noah/Javale McGee



#2) Never signing Mike Woodson to that 2 year extension and instead hiring a coach from outside that coaching tree that summer. I'd like to have offered the job to Thibodeau a year before Chicago hired him, but any coach coming in to be a different voice to the players we currently have would have been an improvement.
On this one I'll assume roughly our same current core roster, just with different development along the way. I think Josh and Marvin would both be better players if the Woodson coaching tree had been broken 4 years ago. It's not as exciting as scenario #1 but its simpler to project.

I think you guys are being waaaaaaaaaaay too short sighted with your focus being on the last decade.

You guys are overlooking having Bill Russell being teamed up with Bob Pettit in the 50s and 60s.

Dr J. (was signed out of the ABA, later overturned) with Pistol in the 70s.

Frickin Koncak in the 85 draft over having Malone, Dumars, Mullin, even Scrempf or Oakley being teamed up with Nique!!!!!


Paul and Deron were simply icing on the suck cake that has been Hawks history. Change any of those moves from the past though and the Nique and later on Smitie/Deke eras don't get as marginalized by fans both locally and nationally.

Can't even attempt to claim Josh or Joe having the same impact with any of those past Hawks and their "what if?" great tandems.

I would have forced Ted Turner to keep the Hawks (shotgun, incriminating pics, ...).

The 2nd thing I'd change (we each have our favorites, right? Behind Sweet Lou, Fast Eddie was it for me) would be to slap Eddie Johnson the 1st time he tried to use drugs.

(By the way, the franchise was in St. Louis when they traded Russell. One could argue they'd never have left it they had been more successful.)

MaceCase wrote:I think you guys are being waaaaaaaaaaay too short sighted with your focus being on the last decade.

You guys are overlooking having Bill Russell being teamed up with Bob Pettit in the 50s and 60s.

Dr J. (was signed out of the ABA, later overturned) with Pistol in the 70s.

Frickin Koncak in the 85 draft over having Malone, Dumars, Mullin, even Scrempf or Oakley being teamed up with Nique!!!!!


Paul and Deron were simply icing on the suck cake that has been Hawks history. Change any of those moves from the past though and the Nique and later on Smitie/Deke eras don't get as marginalized by fans both locally and nationally.

Can't even attempt to claim Josh or Joe having the same impact with any of those past Hawks and their "what if?" great tandems.

no way would i want Pettit and Russell on the same team, if that happen, the Hawks would have never moved to Atlanta. it would be the greatest duo in history, but that only serves St. Louis.

#1 would be passing up on Karl Malone. i think Dumars would be better with Nique chemistry wise, but i just couldn't pass up on that 30/10.

Nique's and Karl's games might have not worked out together, or they might have, and could have been the best forward combo in history, surpassing Bird and McHale, and ultimately getting 5 or 6 championships for Atlanta.

Malone was a system success. Armon Gillium or Chris Gatling would have averaged 25-10 in the Jazz system back then Malone was just NEVER injured but other than that he was a guy that could really finish on the pick and roll and had a monster jump shot. No post game, no face up game off the dribble, couldn't pass, couldn't defend.

Dumars on the other hand, was a great defeder, shot maker and gives us a extra playmaker. I would have gone with him all day.

hindsight debates aside Karl Malone had a frikkin post game.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPBLeb8h9Ts[/youtube]

"Widely celebrated for his intense workout regimens and his durability—he never missed more than two games in any of his 18 seasons with Utah—Malone was a tenacious rebounder who could score both by muscling in shots in the low post as well as via his efficient mid-range jump shot."

"And though one does not want to over-analyze the raw power of Malone's low-post moves, he does not simply run pell-mell toward the basket and start throwing bodies around. Generally, Utah first posts up the small forward—starter Blue Edwards or reserve Benoit—as if the ball is going in to him. (Sometimes it actually does.) Then suddenly Malone and the three-man exchange spots, the Mailman bolting into position as if he were leaping onto a subway train before the doors closed. There is no defensive player in the league who can beat Malone to the blocks when he has a running start, nor is there one who cares to impede Malone's progress by stepping in front of him. Utah's offense also involves a series of back picks designed to get Malone into low-post position. Surprisingly, Stockton is Utah's best at the underappreciated art of screening; typically, he'll set an unseen screen on Malone's man, take the punishment, pop out to catch the ball, then try to deliver it back inside to Malone."

"Malone's contributions weren't limited to layups and dunks. His strength and bulk made him nearly unstoppable in the low post; he was a bulldog on the boards, and his outside shooting and passing improved dramatically as his career wore on."
.........

Sigh....dude...so if I show highlights from his game in 02 against the spurs where he shot 1-16, do I "win". Karl Malone had a post game like Josh Smith/Al Horford have a post game(maybe bad examples because they are actually bad on the block. Karl is just well below average for the time period). I wouldnt exactly call it "good".

I don't care what that scouting report says. I WATCHED him play. His "posting up" was getting position RIGHT AT THE RIM and them getting him the ball. Because of the "no zone d" of the 80's and 90's, you couldn't just put a guy to that spot. Basically you had to beat Malone there or not get screened. Catching the ball with your back to the basket 1 foot away isn't a "post game". With his back to the basket 8-10 feet from the rim, Karl Malone was not scoring anything because his post game was horrid. He would just take fade away jumpers that he missed ALOT more than he made. Hell, the scouting report to stop the Jazz was to get Karl stationary and not on the move, because he was going to kill you.

The guy was really good player at what he did, which was finish incredibly well at the basket and hit jumpers at a ridiculously effecient rate and was a GREAT rebounder. But compared to guys like Duncan and Barkley, his ability to score outside of the Pick and roll or getting him open on jumpers is quite overrated. He was a more consistant Tom Chambers.

I would've given 5 year old me an Abdul Jabbar jersey...Laker fan for life #winner # champion

I hate love the Hawks, we got history, but if i could change one thing i'd be a laker fan instead of hater, life seems much happier for them.

i agree, Karl Malone was all jump shots..... but he still got 30pts with jump shots.

Nique could have dumped off to Malone for a jumpshot when he got the double.

and lets not forget, Malone is a huge dude, he could easily be Atlanta's enforcer and grab 15 rebounds.

but i do have Dumars very close behind Malone

1a. Malone
1b. Dumars
3. Stockton
4. Chris Paul
5. Mullin
6. Pau Gasol
7. Deron
8. Rondo
9. Roy
10. Gay

I hope no one thinks I am disparaging Karl here. To have the combination of a jumpshot that barely missed AND the ability to finish at the rim like he did, he was a monster. I'm just saying lets not overstate his skills.

I don't see his numbers being as impressive if he wasn't in Utah running that offense. That same offense allowed lesser players like Paul Milsap and Carlos Boozer be double double machines. Karl was LIGHTYEARS better than the two of them, but you still see the results of that offense.

I was focused more recently because I've only been able to afford season tickets in the last 10 years. While I would have enjoyed fixing the 80s missteps, it wouldn't have impacted my life nearly as much as improving the Josh Smith years.