Hawks

By Laved11

January 25, 2007 04:34 PM | Link to this

Unlike the NFL, there seems to be little accountablity for individual players. Even NFL superstars have to guard against a well-prepared youngster vying for playing time at his expense.

In this league, potential is paid like production. When you pay players like Samuel Dalembert, Adonal Foyle, Troy Murphy, Raef LaFrentz these astronomical salaries, it is because of what they may become as none have ever been productive. Paying through the nose like this also means these kids have nothing to work for. If they never reach their potential, they have still collected (or are collecting) their big pay day.

By HB Ando

January 25, 2007 04:38 PM | Link to this

Damn, despite regular bouts as the resident pessimist, this epiphany rings depressingly true. And I can’t see a way to turn it around, unless basketball gets very serious about it’s D-League, and only players who are truly ready to play at the level stay on the roster. Kids come out of high school, are drafted at the very top, in baseball, and then earn their way into the bigs. As long as the NBA reinforces paying for potential, over performance, we will get an ongoing dose of less than stellar play. And I know I continue to pine for the Hawks keeping their top-3 pick, if possible. Sounds like a conflict of position, but it’s not. The fact is that I believe, given the context of this front office, this ownership group, that the draft is the only realistic way we’ll see a franchise big man in Atlanta in the next five years. They’re too hard to get via trade, and unlikely to sign here as free agents. So while it’s less than optimal to have the franchise’s fortunes resting on the uncertainty of draft slots and teenagers reaching their lofty potential, it’s still the sobering reality of the Hawks that that is our best, maybe only, hope for near-term salvation.

That or we may be the Las Vegas Hawks in a year or two………..

By tb

January 25, 2007 04:40 PM | Link to this

Wake up America. Life has changed. Everything is corporate and in a corporate controlled system.

What’s up with pro-hoops. They are so desperate to find the next star that they invaded the nations High-schools, even Middle schools for that next special player.

Also the investment in youth just makes $ense. They don’t cost much the first few years. By the time they are due a good contract it is evident whether or not they have the talent.

The star mentality has permeated our whole society and everything is about competition.

I have worked in our schools and I’ve seen 14 year olds treated like some kind of demi-god because they play sports.

It’s not just B-ball, it’s everything.

Where are the values,the pride in right not might($)

Do you see what I see.

B-ball is just a game, a game where billions are in play and in every city there are children with mothers trying to work two jobs to feed their kids and provide shelter.

A bag of carrots today costs what a decent restaurant meal cost 30 years ago. That bag of carrots that cost 15 cents in 1975 costs $1.50 today. Can you see a 1000% increase in a staple. That’s a COL (cost of living)reality. The minimum wage hasn’t even doubled. The poor get poorer every day just so that the rich can be richer.

You can’t see if you don’t open your eyes.

B-ball is a game; life is so much more, c’mon reporter either keep it simple B-ball or get real with your perspectives.

Go Hawks

By HB Ando

January 25, 2007 04:56 PM | Link to this

Sam, I thought I was pretty clear on why I chose Vick and AI. They are similarly unique in that their individual talents eclipse nearly all their peers, but don’t necessarily equate to success in the context of their team games. Truth is that I don’t know of any white players, in either the NBA or the NFL that you could say that about.

I don’t really get your point about Grossman. He’s proof that superstar play, at the QB position, is NOT necessary to potentially win a Superbowl. He’s the singular reason most folks counted the Bears out. You can throw in as many names as you want, and twist the perspective into infinite knots, if you choose to. I was making a specific, subjective point that I believe both Vick and Iverson’s unique athletic abilities can be just as much as a detriment to their teams, as a boon. They both can make very bad decisions, and turn it into something spectacular. So coaching them into making consistently good decisions, in the context of the team, or game, plan, is a challenge. How do you tell either to stop making certain bad choices when they turn their mistake into a highlight reel on ESPN? How do you get them out of bad habits?

With regards to the support Vick gets on the field, I’ve said on multiple occasions that I wonder where McKay’s responsibility is for drafting Jenkins and White, neither of whom has produced. And injuries to the defense certainly played a role this season. But the defense doesn’t lack talent at all. And most of the losses this year came when Vick posted sub-par numbers, never got his head in the game, and usually included some unacceptable fumbles, while he continues to hold the football like a loaf of bread (back to those bad habits that sometimes turn into highlights). Being fun to watch doesn’t always equate into winning games.

To me, they both represent a tremendously tough choice, for their franchises, on whether it’s more important to sell tickets or win championships. Philly finally acknowledged that they didn’t believe they could build a winner around him. If they didn’t they certainly wouldn’t have traded their guaranteed box office draw. That was a tough choice for them to make. I just think the Falcons face a similar decision with Vick. And I’m not the only one. But let’s see what he does under Petrino. It will be his third head coach. I’m a Falcons fan, so if I’m wrong, I’ll be happy to admit it.

By Traceman

January 25, 2007 05:09 PM | Link to this

Sekou, I was just talking about this with some friends at the gym the other day. Unfortunately, many of the so-called NBA teams (including my beloved Hawks) are simply not in the same league as the upper tier teams in the league. Quite simply, the brand of basketball played every night by teams like the Mavs, Suns and Spurs is a totally different game than the game that teams like the Hawks, Celts and Blazers play every night.

Watching the Mavs, Suns and Spurs play is a beautiful thing. Even when they are slightly off their games, it is obvious that they know what they are SUPPOSED to be doing. Conversely, young teams like the Hawks, Celts and Blazers look clueless when their shots are not falling.

The reality is that while teams like the Hawks, Celts and Blazers might get hot on a given night or they might catch one of the better teams sleeping, they can’t really compete with the better teams on a nightly basis.

By Anakin Joe

January 25, 2007 05:10 PM | Link to this

Sekou, I disagree. I give you the Western Conference for quality basketball. There are 4-6 teams over there that are still doing things “the right way”. Good teams like Dallas were left to take Josh Howard, ACC Player of the Year, while bad teams like Golden State couldn’t resist the upside of Pietrus. Already, Joakim Noah is falling in every mock draft because scouts have seen an extra 15-20 games of the guy. And who do they like? Guys who only have 15-20 games of footage. Noah looks like a guaranteed contributor to me… Brandon Wright looks like a possible Shawn Marion or Jared Jeffries. That’s too mush of a risk for my tastes.

I have argued for months now that the Hawks do not need to get any younger. If it were up to me, we’d trade Indy’s pick with some players for a vet. I can’t imagine what a 20 year-old picked at #16-20 will do for this team.

Likewise, the continued drafting of projects (while paying them to produce) is another constant thorn in my side in the NBA. Christian Lattner was considered a bust when he played. Yet he had a 7 year run when he probably averaged 17 points and 8 boards. That’s damn near god-like by today’s standards. Yet Dalembert, Kaman and Chandler are earning $10M for far less production based on the hope of unrealized potential.

Anyway, let’s also recognize that we have the youngest team in the league for as much expense issues as for “rebuilding” purposes. Damn near our entire team is on the rookie scale. Its very easy to manage expenses on a fixed schedule. Our youth is as mush a statement about the owners lack of funds as it is a rebuilding philosophy.

Yes, I see that the influx of high schoolers and freshmen have diluted the quality of play. But there are still some GMs (like Dumars) who can build a team through deft acquisitions and signings plus the occassional solid draft pick (Tayshaun Price, another underappreciated upper classman in his draft class). We just chose to do our shopping at the Osh Kosh B’Gosh outlet store.

By Jay

January 25, 2007 05:24 PM | Link to this

Not related to the blog, but Zen missing that dunk to start the game was a microcosm of his season…awful.

By Jeff A.

January 25, 2007 05:49 PM | Link to this

I totally agree with Sekou and Laved 11. The NBA is nowhere near the great league it used to be back when it was NBA B-ball my favorite sport (just ever-so-slightly above the NFL) back in the early 80’s - mid 1990’s. Now the NFL is head and shoulders better than the NBA - i can’t even watch a full NBA game on TV anymore. it’s sad. But like Laved said, paying these jokers GUARANTEED millions a year or two out of high school whether they earn it or not means they don’t have the work ethic to compete every game because they know they’re getting paid regardless. They don’t work on shooting jumpers or making good passes - they just want to do SportsCenter dunks and threes. Now “great” shooters are guys who shoot 45% from the field or higher. i remember back in the day when even average NBA guards shot close to 50% or higher. Remember how people used to criticize Dominique for ONLY shooting 48% from the floor during his career? If Nique played in today’s NBA, he’d be considered one of the great shooters of all time! PLENTY of today’s players shoot less than 45% from the field. Unreal. and the lack of basketball skill in the NBA is atrocious - nobody moves their feet well, players throw up brick after brick, they can’t shoot free throws, teams lose to teams they should cream on a regular basis and the list goes on and on like a rolling stone. Yep, Sekou, you’re right - NBA basketball will never, ever be the same. it’s a watered-down version of what it should be.

By mykhalc

January 25, 2007 05:54 PM | Link to this

like i said YOUTH keeps me watchin’ and keepin’ up with these HAWKS. and when i reconnected with this team summer of ‘05 (they were playing GS on tv here in the BAY) the first thing that came outta my mouth was…’oh my god, they’re BABIES’!!! second thing outta my mouth was…’who the hell is the coach?? and he is DEFINITELY NOT READY’!! so SEKOU, yes i see what you see!!!

TRACEMAN brings up a good point about lookin’ at the SUNS, MAVS, and SPURS. what these teams and its’ players KNOW is that it is NOT about any ONE player!!! it’s is about TEAM, TEAMWORK, AND TEAMPLAY!!! this is what MOST/A LOT of these young players JUST DO NOT GET!! so many of these players comin’ into the league now days have been hyped from their grade school days and NEVER have learned the team game!! sure they’ve been a part of winnin’ teams but never learned to play team ball!!! so naturally with the I mentality that exists SOOOOOOO much in the USA, it’s not surprisin’ that we see it in the NBA. that’s what these kids are learnin’ these days!!

now, to the HAWKS. i do think JJ gets it!! he gets the idea of team. UNFORTUNATELY, he is not surrounded by the players that can make THE difference. so then, we as fans, complain about how he is not doin’ enough!! he should be more AI like, be able to carry the team on his back. well i don’t think that’s ever been his approach to the game???!!!??? maybe i’m wrong, but kinda DO NOT think so!!??!! so when i see JJ (what 25yrs old) surrounded by MARVIN (20 yrs old), JSMITH (21yrs old), ZAZA (22 yrs old), JCHILLS (23 or 24 yrs old), all being guided and led by MIKE WOODSON (unexperienced HC), HOW CAN WE THINK IT COULD BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN IT IS??? then throw in ownership that resembles a THREE STOOGES cartoon….well you get my point!!

and havin’ said all of that, i’m STILL pullin’ for the YOUNG GUNS!!!

By Wink from Lithonia

January 25, 2007 06:04 PM | Link to this

Sekou, I have to agree that we will never see the NBA flavor of years gone by. The NBA is definitely the training ground for the sport and not a product for consumption by pure basketball fans. Fans who have seen the game at its best. The Hawks are very young and inexperienced. My hope is that they learn to play together and just plain outrun the opposition with their youth. Which mean they would have to play a game similar to Phoenix, but we don’t have the guard play to even run that system. Eventually, the elite teams will get older and maybe then we will start to climb out of this basketball abyss. The game will never be the same, you have to look no further than our most recent Olympic experience, some of our best Ballers go clowned by Greece…amen to team concept & fundamentals.

By HB Ando

January 25, 2007 06:12 PM | Link to this

BTW, I don’t know if anyone else saw it, and I don’t know how to post the WMV file someone sent me, but if you can get your hands on the Saturday Night Live, Michael Vick “Really” clip, it’s frickin’ hilarious.

Really…….

By decider

January 25, 2007 06:19 PM | Link to this

Where does the coaches’ responsibility fit into this argument? Considering many of these players will continue to play in the NBA for several years, obviously playing as a team and developing these players is critical to the league. Also, many of the European players play the fundamentals very well. It also appears that being a great athlete sometimes translates into success more in the NBA than a fundamentally sound, but lesser skilled player. (many of those guys who stay in college for 4 years and do not achieve success in the NBA or are playing fewer minutes)

By Wedgie Evans

January 25, 2007 07:19 PM | Link to this

It’s a combination of things. Physically, players are more talented today than they were 20 years ago, but young ballers today want to win dunk contests and idolize street ballers as much as they want to win, if not more so. Expansion in the NBA has something to do with it too. People usually complain about expansion because the talent is more spread out. I don’t think that’s the biggest problem though — when you have more teams, you need more coaches and more GMs. There are a lot of players who can dunk, rebound, pass, shoot, etc., but there are not as many coaches and GMs who can effectively run franchises and develop talent. And with the salary cap in today’s NBA, it takes a lot more talent to assemble and coach a team well. This is a big reason why although there is plenty of talent in the NBA (and in college, and in AAU leagues), the overall basketball IQ is much lower today than it was 20 years ago.

I don’t think increased athleticism is necessarily the reason why basketball IQ is lower and players don’t play as fundamentally sound today, but when gifted players are not coached well they have less motivation to develop fundamentals, especially when they dominate games at the lower levels despite their lack of fundamental skills.

Here’s the Michael Vick “Really” clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjtVnqZCndo

By roan st

January 25, 2007 07:56 PM | Link to this

I surely don’t think the coaching is the reason the game has changed. I truly believe it’s todays modern player and all that damn money ruins them. Look at nene. The guy got 60 million this offseason and he has never done a damn thing. Earning 60 milliom is like winning the lottery. He never has to work hard again if he chooses not to because NBA contracts are guaranteed. Remember Juwan howard getting that ridiculous 105 million dollar deal? With that kind of guaranteed money it’s not hard to see why players lack the drive and motivation to become the best player they can be. If your employer gave you a 60 million dollar deal that was guaranteed would you lose some of your drive?

By Edo River

January 25, 2007 08:15 PM | Link to this

For the first time I read ALOT of good comments, rather than negative complaining. I also agree with Laved11, Anton, etc. This situation is what we)the total sports community) “wanted” and now that we as a mini-society of sports fans got what we asked for, We see it wasn’t REALLY what we wanted. This happens all the time in real life.

It is just that collectively through the media and other marketing pressures we have as a majority wished for something, increasing the pace of delivery to the NBA of raw talent some could enjoy in colleges or on the playground, and that wish was delivered because it was in everyone’s mutual interest.

By Wedgie Evans

January 25, 2007 08:24 PM | Link to this

If it really was today’s modern player and all that damn money ruining them, why does Kevin Garnett give 110% even though he gets paid $20 million a year? Why do Kobe Bryant, Jermaine O’Neal, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, and LeBron James work hard even though they get paid maximum contracts? What’s Steve Nash’s incentive to play hard when he gets $13 million a year? Or let’s go away from the superstars and just look at decent-to-good players. Why do Lamar Odom or Carlos Boozer work hard, knowing that $9 million is guaranteed to them every year for the next few years?

Nene’s contract is an example of GMs seeing more potential in a player than is actually there. Nene’s not a bad player — he gives pretty solid effort on the floor and is athletic, but he’s just not a $60 million player. But just because the occasional Jerome James signs a big contract and spends the next few years eating cheeseburgers on the bench, it doesn’t mean that all, or even most, NBA players are like that.

By vdunkndunk

January 25, 2007 09:39 PM | Link to this

Here’s the problem: the league has expanded beyond what it could handle from a talent standpoint. Even with the erosion of fundamentals and all that other stuff…if there weren’t so many roster spots, there would be no room for these “projects.”

Think about this: The Heat, the Grizzlies, the Raptors, the Magic, the T-Wolves, the Bobcats, the Hornets…all those teams are relatively new….I believe all those teams were added to the leauge since the 1990’s.

That’s over 100 (yes ONE-HUNDRED!) extra spots in the NBA that have to be filled by Someone. And there’s just not enough NBA-ready talent out there to fill those spots without diluting the overall the product. That’s what opens all these roster spots for the young guys that aren’t ready yet.

But since there are now 30 teams and about 15 (at most) real franchise players, too many teams have to depend on these young guys…because there’s nowhere else to turn.

Just imagine if you took the players from those 7 expansion teams and spread them througout the league: Dwayne Wade, Kevin Garnett, Shaquille O’Neal, Pau Gasol, Dwight Howard, Chris Bosh, Chris Paul, and Omeka Okafur.

That’s 8 franchise players who could be added to the teams in the league that are hurting for star power. And that leaves at least 40 other players who could add some serious quality depth to the teams that are forced to rely too much on youth.

AND…that cuts out the worst 90 players in the league entirely and makes it much more risky for all these unprepared college players to enter the draft too early.

By Clyde

January 25, 2007 09:40 PM | Link to this

Hey I believe people are actually reading our posts. If you don’t believe me look at the front page of the Living section today. We had that conversation 2 weeks ago.

Now to the Hawks. We need to seriously look to try and move Marvin Williams. To me all he is good for is a jump shot. And what’s up wit Tyron Lue? With him out again we have about 10 million in street clothes.

FIRE BILLY AND WOODY

By mykhalc

January 25, 2007 09:47 PM | Link to this

VDUNKNDUNK, nice post and good points!!!!

By BostonBallin

January 25, 2007 10:45 PM | Link to this

Josh Smith talked to a Boston reporter about the middle finger situation before the game last night. Sounds to me like he is sorry. http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_20548.shtml

By ray

January 25, 2007 11:52 PM | Link to this

The entire world changes, is changing. Why wouldn’t the game of basketball? A precedent is set, a decision made, a new direction taken, and the ball rolls from there. Money changes everything, too. Changes every angle. You can pretty much trace it back through the years how this game has changed.

By Samuel

January 26, 2007 06:48 AM | Link to this

Andro or Ando,

The only thing that I agree with you on is that Vick fumbles too much. Other than that, you’re off base IMO. Of the losses I saw, the whole team played poorly. I still say, give the man a offensive line and some receivers and he can do a better job.

On the one hand you say he has unique abilities that exceed his peers but they won’t equate to a championship. Then you say that pretty much any ole scrubb can win a ring. So you’re saying he’s playing a little too well to win a ring. The Falcons defense may be talented but they were not good this year and that was not Vick’s fault.

Now to AI’s unique skills of: being able to score at will, average over 10 assists, play great defense, and give 110 percent every damn night. What exactly about that does not equate to being championship material all wize one?

By Samuel

January 26, 2007 07:56 AM | Link to this

CUZ,

They done got me started.

AndoDAndro,

I threw two names out there(Dirk and Nash) to see if you in fact were the Rword. And looks like you passed the test.

You said a player like AI( who can basically do everything on a basketball court), abilities won’t equate to a championship. Yet you say you can’t think of two white players.

Let’s look at Nash AndoDAndro. His abilities are pretty good wouldn’t you say. He’s very athletic and can do almost everything there is:Offensively. He plays ZERO defense AndoDAndro. You can’t see that can you. Does that equate to a championship.

Same thing with Dirk. Has very unique athletic abilities. Probably (no not probably) is the best shooting bigman ever but up until recently he had that choker label AndoDAndro. Is that championship qualities? What about it? Let’s call a spade a spade here(he he).

By honest_abe

January 26, 2007 09:54 AM | Link to this

snore…zzzzzzzzzz

By Anakin Joe

January 26, 2007 10:47 AM | Link to this

Well, we’re less than 1 month away from the trade deadline. I am predicting that there will be very little movement across the league. With the Eastern conference wide open, too many teams will believe they “still have a shot” and will want to hold on to their players. I’d love to see the hawks try to work with San Antonio as they need an infusion of athleticism if they want to keep pace with the other west conference elite. I’d like to see us get back Elson, Udrih and maybe Butler (although Butler’s work ethic is supposedly not good). Hey Samuel, what have you heard about from your folk about why Butler isn’t getting any kind of love in San Antonio.

By Samuel

January 26, 2007 12:12 PM | Link to this

Ajoe,

That’s been puzzling me all year. I know SA is good but my boy JB can help them somewhere. I’m figuring that he’s hurt. SA needs to get more athletic so why not JB for Salim or Ivey.

By mykhalc

January 26, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this

JOE, you never did hit me back on my CHILLS question!!??!! link to question curious to know what you think…hopefully the link works…

By William

January 26, 2007 01:03 PM | Link to this

I have a issue with people thinking this. Watch older games and see what really is happening. Its not more skilled players. Its wide open shots. You watch any game from the early to mid and late eightys and you see a team of guys with proper spacing, proper motion on the court that results in wide open shots (thus better shooting percentages). The great teams in the league now, Suns/Mavs/Spurs have great spacing, great movement off the ball and get alot of wide open shots. That my friends is a sign of coaching. Proper offensive scheme is a lost are in the NBA these days. Thats why, even though they are ridiculously young, the Lakers still are doing pretty well in the league. because they have a system that works. Thats why you can take a highschool team and Jerry Sloan will have a team that will always be right there till the end and compete, even if they lose. A proper system can and will do amazing things.

People point at only so many teams have won the NBA championship in the last few years, but really look at the coaches that won them. Its only been a few for the last 25+ years.

It doesn’t matter if a guy has been taugh the fundamentals of the game since their birth, if they are saddled with a coach that can’t draw up a offense to get use of him, it will all be for naught. it has nothing to do with high schoolers going to the league or how many years they stay in college.

By Anakin Joe

January 26, 2007 02:10 PM | Link to this

mlkhalc, my bad. It seemed like in other games (including the recent Celtics game), Childress was playing off the ball more than playing the point role. But in that Chicago game, he spent the entire game at the top of the key directing traffic like he was Jarrett Jack or Eric Snow. In some of the previous games, he might walk the ball up the court, but he wasn’t orchestrating the offense by himself. It was simply a poor utilization of his skills. I read somewhere that you can watch old games on the nba.com website. You may want to watch a half of that Chicago game and you’ll see the difference in how he was used.

Samuel, I don’t remember where I saw it but I think the San Antonio paper indicated that he (Jackie Butler) doesn’t have the requisite work ethic for Popovich. He certainly showed flashes last season with the Knicks of becoming a solid rotation player. Maybe he got lazy after getting the guaranteed money from the Spurs. I think that Lo Wright, Salim and Batista could get us Butler, Elson and Udrih. I’d throw in a 2nd rounder if required (and/or Ivey).

By Tyger

January 26, 2007 02:48 PM | Link to this

By Tyger

January 25, 2007 05:54 PM | Link to this

Assuming that you are correct, and you are, then the draft is not the answer as far as rebuilding teams. Why?

These youngsters are drafted on raw talent, size, potential/upside. So, in the near term, they rarely can help. In the long term, they’ll more likely than not, to benefit someone other than the team that drafted them.

Take Joe Johnson for example. Drafted by the Celtics, traded to Phoenix and then to the Hawks. He was a great talent out of Arkansas, much more polished than any of the youngsters we have today, but it still took 5 years and two teams before he took off.

So whats the answer? Obviously free agency/Trades. Teams are better off getting guys coming off their 1st/2nd contracts that have an NBA track record.

It’s more expensive, but you get a better product. After the 1st contract, the good/great players are generally re-signed to an extension. Time for them to get paid, but after that 2nd, the market seems to avg. even for the good ones. And you can find good values with experience and enough consistency to build around.

Take Juwan Howard for example, he was enormously overpaid after his rookie contract, it wasnt his fault, his team overestimated his upside. But now, his value has avg. out and he’s still a very productive player, just not overpaid now.

By jhan

January 26, 2007 03:18 PM | Link to this

vdunkndunk, your opinions are very well stated. I have to agree completely. The same has happened in all sports. The $$ has become more important than the product on the field or court. Their are #1 pitchers in baseball who would be lucky to be #3 or #4 on a staff 20 years ago. I forget who said to “follow the money”, but they were absolutely correct.

By The Flash

January 26, 2007 03:30 PM | Link to this

Don’t look now sports fans, but the lone ranger is on the horizon, in the form of the new owners of yes, an MLS team, DC United. What you been drinkin Flash, lighter fluid?

Nope, I just been to the mountain top. See, you guys, well the old timers anyway, might recall my rants about the influence of soccer on the international game, has made international players much better than their US counterparts. Well, I read where Nash plays serious soccer all summer, even trains with NY Red Bulls.

So, where am I going with this? Relax boys, you got someplace you got to be? didn’t think so. Well, the principal investor in DC United, a real estate mogul from SF, happens to be committed to bringing soccer to the inner city in DC. Self interest, sure. But, the mover behind that effort is Brian Davis, from Duke, who, like the principal owner, is really committed to the community.

What you will see emerge in DC in the next few years are guys who are two sport guys, guys who play basketball and soccer. Instead of spending useless time on these AAU basketball teams, going to these Nike clinics, to learn useless skills like dribbling between your legs, all these And 1 moves, kids in this city are going to learn more about the passing game, about using space and one-two touches, to create offense as a, hello TEAM.

Yeap. Basketball in the US is about to be saved by soccer. And, two black men, one a past captain of two national championship teams, are gonna be in the forefront. And, somewhere, someone, is gonna remember the fat bald Jewish guy who predicted it!

By mykhalc

January 26, 2007 04:08 PM | Link to this

JOE, thanks. i will definitely look into seein’ if the past games can be viewed on nba.com . that’d be great. at least i could get a real look at the team with some consistency.

By jhan

January 27, 2007 09:17 AM | Link to this

I think Mark Price is deeply involved in the Suwanee Sports Academy basketball program. Their whole agenda is to provide real basketball coaching to the kids. They feel that AAU has ruined young ballers & are trying to provide an alternative. I’m not completely informed on the subject but have heard him talk about it on the radio and television.