Sunday, June 03, 2007
Sports

A genius or a fool?

Maybe it’s time to stop second-guessing Billy Knight

BY ADAM KROHN

I’m really torn about Billy Knight and whether he’s a total failure in terms of how he’s run the Hawks. On the surface, the argument seems easy—this guy drafts nothing but forwards, the team loses, and no one goes to the games.

Following a dismal 13-win season, the Hawks finished the next year with 26 wins. “Be patient,” we were told; it’s impossible to instantly rebuild a team. Then, the year after that, when Knight did the same exact thing by drafting another forward instead of a point guard, I thought maybe the Hawks need a new general manager.

Either Knight a) doesn’t care about winning and is in Atlanta just to collect a paycheck; b) the ownership is in shambles and needs a GM to adhere to its demands in order to increase their paycheck; or c) Knight’s going out of his way to tick off the Atlanta fan base by drafting forwards until he’s finally fired.

Or here’s another thought: d) Maybe Knight really is trying.

Believe it or not, if that multiple-choice question were posed to me right now, I’d actually scribble in “d.” So now I sound like a fool too, right? After all, according to both ESPN and New York Post NBA beat writer Peter Vescey, Knight allegedly pulled out of a three-way deal that would have brought Amare Stoudemire to Atlanta.

What if the media are being truthful? According to the reports, Knight would have had to give up the third and 11th pick in this year’s draft, plus Zaza Pachulia, Anthony Johnson and Marvin Williams. Is giving up all of that for Amare really worth it? In other words, does Amare really expedite the process of bringing an NBA championship (you know, those things Jordan, Shaq, and Duncan win) to Atlanta? When considering what the Hawks would have given up (basically what they spent the past two years building), and considering the fact that the Hawks don’t have Steve Nash—the answer is NO!

In the short run, Amare brings instant credibility to the Hawks in terms of an Eastern Conference contender. However, in the long run, it just might be smarter for the Hawks to draft a “mini-Amare” in Al Horford and a kinda-sorta point guard in Acie Law IV, and try to move forward. After all, if Horford does pan out to be the next Amare, and Law turns out to be the next, uh, Law, then the Hawks will have spent much less money than if they had absorbed the real Amare’s two-year contract and gone all in on his services.

With the three-year length of a rookie contract, the Hawks will keep the two draft picks for a year longer than Amare’s contract expiration date (he likely would have bolted for free agency when his contract ended). Plus, what if Stoudemire gets hurt and misses the season, as he’s already done twice in his short career? All of a sudden, the Hawks look like the Knicks—overspending to lose.

Let’s face it: Billy Knight isn’t in a position to gamble on Stoudemire. He has to play it ultra-safe until the Hawks actually do make the playoffs. Only then can he make the case to ownership that they should overspend on a proven star. Until then, Knight, like the rest of the Hawks nation, is stuck to wonder, “Is this the year we make the playoffs?”

Until that day, it’s hard to argue that what Billy Knight is doing is wrong. SP

Talk back to Adam at adamkrohn@sundaypaper.com.