AJC > Sports > Hawks > Blog > Archives > 2008 > May > 25
Sunday, May 25, 2008
The only thing missing …
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
SMYRNA - The only thing missing is the official announcement.
Chris Grant’s name has been plastered all over cyberspace, if it’s even called that anymore, starting with this space the day it was discovered that Billy Knight has resigned from his post as Hawks GM.
The former Hawks assistant GM and until notified otherwise Cleveland assistant GM has long been rumored to be “The guy” for the opening here. But he’s not returning calls, at least not mine. And his future bosses aren’t giving up any specifics.
But anyone with a keen eye for what’s gone on around here has to have figured out that all the smoke (including Mark Bradley’s prediction last week that Grant would indeed be the guy) has to know there’s a whole lot of fire behind this sudden rush of opinions flowing out about this prolonged search (in the absence of the greatest upset in sports history, Grant will be introduced to the public sometime this week).
So much of the steam the Hawks had after that playoff run against Boston has been lost in the weeks since Knight resigned. Had the Hawks put the finishing touches on this hire say two weeks ago there might have been some residual drafting to be done in regards to this issue.
But now, folks have had plenty of time to digest all the particulars of what they believe will happen. And quite frankly, so few of you (and NBA observers in general) seem particularly enthused about what’s going on.
I’ll admit that I don’t know Grant very well. We didn’t have much of a working relationship when he was here (I showed up shortly before he was hired away by the Cavs) and never had a chance to have one of those enlightening, philosophical discussions about the basketball that would have given both of us insight into each other’s thinking about the NBA game in general. But we got along fine and he seemed like a decent cat to me.
That said, I’ve spoken to quite a few people that I respect that know him and have worked with him that speak glowingly about Grant and what he’s done in his career. When he left here and I called around to check with some people I know in other NBA locales, they reminded me that he was making a move up, which is always indicative of a guy on the rise.
On the flip side, I’ve spoken to just as many people that I respect that know and have worked with him and aren’t nearly as enamored with Grant and what he’s done (but that’s standard for just about anybody and would have been true about every other person on the Hawks’ short list, which is a debatable topic itself since most of the names you’ve seen tossed about elsewhere were never on said list).
I have no idea what kind of job he’ll do if he is hired this week because he’s never done this before. The same could be said of any of the hires the Hawks might have made since it was clear that they wanted to go in a certain direction (first time GM) in this case.
That’s why his introductory press conference, whenever it comes, will be revealing in so many ways. He’s worked for each of the Hawks last two GMs, so it’s natural for us all to be curious about what it is exactly that he’ll do differently?
What’s his philosophy on the game?
What’s his vision for this franchise that he knows quite well?
And perhaps most interesting to me, who are the people he will bring with him to help change the culture of an operation that has known mostly misery and dysfunction for so long?
If this new GM is going to be the Hawks’ agent of change, than there has to be some significant change done to a basketball operation that hasn’t seen much of that in the past decade.
But so much about Grant and his time with the Hawks is unknown to the media and public.
Surely he was intimately involved in the Hawks’ scouting and drafting operation for so long that it’s hard to separate him from all the personnel misses (there were a few hits in there, too) of the recent past.
So there are more questions.
Was he a vocal member of the staff under Knight? Did he protest some of the choices being made as they were being made (one former Hawks staffer has never let me forget the error of passing on Chris Paul, and to a lesser degree Deron Williams, to this day)? Or was he simply a follower, a yes man if you will, making sure he maintained his position? Did he sit by and watch mistakes being made and not do any and everything to stop them?
No one knows for sure. And with Knight gone and certainly no more eager to discuss his tenure with the Hawks now than he was while on the job, we’re left mostly to our imaginations about what happened and revisionist history of those still leftover (I still have never gotten a straight answer from anyone regarding whose choice it was to take Shelden Williams over Brandon Roy - an even greater draft gaffe in my mind than not taking Paul or Williams a year earlier because there was a question as to who the best talent was in the 2005 draft. Everyone was in agreement in 2006 that Roy was the truth and would do exactly what he’s done. But like always, teams outsmarted themselves with foolish evaluations during draft workouts and meaningless projections, yet another argument for another day in this space).
As I sit here typing, I’m wondering if Grant will get roasted for all the same things you’ve been roasting Knight about in this space the past three years? Or do you give him a pass, since he wasn’t technically in charge?
It’s strange, really, when you think about it.
The Hawks are set to hire a new GM and I, like I’m sure most of you, have far more questions (not our usual and comforting rhetorical ones) than anyone might have solid answers about the guy set to take over the top job in Hawksville.
Services »
