Making It Happen

Mike: Okay, so what if I don't want to give up on her?
Rob: You don't call.
Mike: But you said I don't call if I wanted to give up on her.
Rob: Right.
Mike: So I don't call either way?
Rob: Right.
Mike: So what's the difference?
Rob: There is no difference right now. See, Mike, the only difference between giving up and not giving up is if you take her back when she wants to come back. But you can't do anything to make her want to come back. In fact, you can only do stuff to make her not want to come back.
Mike: So the only difference is if I forget about her or just pretend to forget about her?
Rob: Right.
Mike: Well that sucks.
Rob: Yeah, it sucks.
Mike: So it's just like a retroactive decision, then? I mean I could, like, forget about her and then when she comes back make like I just pretended to forget about her?
Rob: Right. Although probably more likely the opposite.
Mike: What do you mean?
Rob: I mean at first you're going to pretend to forget about her, you'll not call her, I don't know, whatever... but then eventually, you really will forget about her.
Mike: Well what if she comes back first?
Rob: Mmmm... see, that's the thing, is somehow they know not to come back until you really forget.
Mike: There's the rub.
Rob: There's the rub.

-Swingers, 1996 (Thanks, IMDB!)


Watched pots and boiling.

Hitting the button on the elevator sixteen times to try and hurry things along.

Checking online and email every day to see if Joe Smith signed with the Hawks.


Now, if this were like waiting for someone to show up or waiting for my food at a restaurant, I would simply slip off to the bathroom, thereby guaranteeing an immediate arrival of the that which I was waiting for previously.

If I were a betting man (Note: World's Worst Gambler. Seriously--like bet against the Globetrotters bad), I would be thinking that maybe the Hawks organization was writing the contract with a hammer and chisel and waiting for Moses to come down from the mountain with the terms etched in stone.

Still, you have to believe Sekou Smith when he writes that it's just a matter of when, not if, Joe Smith signs. Don't you?

When the news first broke (Actually, breaking may be too strong a word. Maybe drifted in is a more appropriate term) from ESPN's Ric Bucher, we at the HHB immediately stepped into the Cynical Chamber of Wisdom and emerged with visions of a plot by Smith's reps to leak the terms to the other teams in the league, via the media, to let folks know that their client was about to take the veteran minimum in case some other team wanted to chime in and up the ante.

The terms do seem a little low for Smith, considering others in his production bracket scored more loot from teams this offseason and the Hawks certainly wouldn't leak a perceived bargain out before a deal was done. But, so far, no takers---but no signed contract either.

So, in the end if Smith signs, we're left with two feelings:

1. What a good deal by Rick Sund, scoring the guy they wanted for the vet minimum.
2. Why isn't anybody paying more than the vet minimum for him?

As others "race" to get their two cents in on this roster happening, Mark Bradley shamefully parrots Bret's Hoopinion piece regarding the actual impact this player might have. (Note: We are not seriously indicting a man who links the HHB in his AJC.com Blog. No sir. No way.)

We are still optimistic that this will have a positive effect, though we admit it's little more than a placebo potentially at this point given those darn statistics.

We'll hold off on a full blown "Smith Signs" piece until the deal is actually done. Ha. We'll not be the ones that people shake their internetty fingers at and say, "But he's not signed!" We'll let others make that ghastly mistake.

Last Sidenote: We have been talking about this particular--umm--chase--since the last week of July. Too long! Get it done already, Moses and let's get on with the pan-in-the-face boredom that is summertime in the NBA offseason.

End communique.

Get to the Point

ATL fans, since Jeff Denberg lost his life to cancer the city did not have a finer beat writer (no offense, Michael Lee) than today's Sekou Smith.

He is everything you want a beat writer to be; informative, timely, and candid. Smith delicately balances keeping-it-real with the fact that his livelihood comes from gaining access/information from the very people he might be straight with the readers about.

His blog is a good read, it's located on our Bird Feeds and today features some takes on Josh Smith, offseason patience (like we don't know how that is), and the thorn in the flesh of the Atlanta Hawks franchise, the point guard position.

His take is one part defense of Bibby and one part calling out the franchise for a lack of a long term plan at the position.

Our take on Bibby is well known: The Hawks are better off for having stolen him from SAC and a large part of why they are (10) games better comes from having his shotmaking ability and competency at playmaking. Just having those two things brought the Hawks from an almost decade long exile at the position to stability.

However, Bibby is miscast (common theme) as a 35-40 minute a game player at this stage in his career. Yes, he is only (31), but there are eleven NBA years on those legs, ankles, hips, etc--and it shows on the defensive end. We don't advocate letting Bibby walk, especially given the extreme negligence in developing a younger alternative/supplement over the years by the franchise. But to bring him back and continuing to run him in any longer than a 25-30 minute game; to maximize his effectiveness, is misguided and sure to show the same sorts of problems defensively next season.

The Hawks have to present some alternative next year that will be a compliment to Bibby's skills at the point guard position as well as give Bibby some strategic games off, should he be back next year. The fact that the Hawks are no closer to understanding what Acie Law might provide at that position after (2) seasons is a failure.

If the Hawks don't believe that Law can provide what we are suggesting for next season then they need to get on it quick, and by it we mean bring in that slasher type who can make plays, understands distributing the ball, and also get after it defensively. There are a few options out there that fit our description, and Sekou does a nice job in listing them out on that blog entry, and Mark Bradley lets us know what his pet project would be through the draft channel (VCU's Eric Maynor).

Sekou absolutely sticks it with this quote:

Either you have a veteran hand capable of orchestrating almost any situation, a guy that can make everything run smoothly (Kurt Warner anyone) or you have the young phenom (the Falcons’ Matt Ryan comes to mind) that simply will not be denied. If you get caught between those two extremes, you’re gambling with your team’s future.

Whatever the Hawks do with this critical decision, it must be with both next year and the future in mind. Otherwise, as Sekou says, it's a gamble---and it's a wager with immediate consequences.

The HHB wrote a post about the horrors of the past when it comes to this position---so we're extra sensitive when this subject is at hand. Thoughts and Ideas can be offered in the safety of the Comments Area.