(04-16-2015 10:01 AM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 08:37 AM)nbcards Wrote:  Predictions:

Atlanta over Brooklyn in 5
Cleveland over Boston in 4
Chicago over Milwaukee in 5
Toronto over Washington in 6

Golden State over New Orleans in 5
Houston over Dallas in 6
San Antonio over LA Clippers in 7
Memphis over Portland in 5

Atlanta over Toronto in 6
Chicago over Cleveland in 7 (As a Bulls fan I have to pick Chicago)

Golden State over Memphis in 6
San Antonio over Houston in 7

Chicago over Atlanta in 7
Golden State over San Antonio in 6

Golden State over Chicago in 6

I like how you had to pick chicago over cleveland, but couldn't suspend reality enough to pick em against GS.

I think the Bulls actually have a shot at beating cleveland in a 7 game series. I dont think they can beat gs in a 7 game series

(04-16-2015 10:47 AM)nbcards Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 10:01 AM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(04-16-2015 08:37 AM)nbcards Wrote:  Predictions:

Atlanta over Brooklyn in 5
Cleveland over Boston in 4
Chicago over Milwaukee in 5
Toronto over Washington in 6

Golden State over New Orleans in 5
Houston over Dallas in 6
San Antonio over LA Clippers in 7
Memphis over Portland in 5

Atlanta over Toronto in 6
Chicago over Cleveland in 7 (As a Bulls fan I have to pick Chicago)

Golden State over Memphis in 6
San Antonio over Houston in 7

Chicago over Atlanta in 7
Golden State over San Antonio in 6

Golden State over Chicago in 6

I like how you had to pick chicago over cleveland, but couldn't suspend reality enough to pick em against GS.

I think the Bulls actually have a shot at beating cleveland in a 7 game series. I dont think they can beat gs in a 7 game series

It all depends on Rose and his health. I think they can give Cleveland a good series with Rose at 100%, but I don't think they will with an 80% Rose or no Rose at all.

(04-16-2015 09:59 AM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  I got ATL over BKN in 5
CHI over MIL in 6
CLE over BOS in 6
TOR over WAS in 7 in a pyrric victory for Toronto as this likely means Dwayne Casey stays another season.
GS over NO in 5
MEM over POR in 7
SAS over LAC in 6
DAL over HOU in 7

ATL over TOR in 6
CLE over CHI in 6 -Rose gets hurt in this series
GS over MEM in 5
SAS over DAL in 6

CLE over ATL in 6
GS over SAS in 7

GS over CLE in 6

I concur with your picks save the Finals. CLE over GS in 6

I think part of the problem in picking Golden St for the finals is I think their series with San Antonio is going to be an absolute knock out drag out war. Meanwhile, I think the Cavs tough series is in the conference semifinals.

(04-14-2015 04:43 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  Does anyone want to be in Atlanta/

Flames and Thrashers have bolted.

Hawks up for grabs.

Braves moving to a different locale in the area...

What's the deal?

Flames was in what? 1975

Thrashers is Liberty Media the worst ownership group on Earth.

Braves are moving 13 feet outisde city limits. LOL

Hawks are not leaving Atlanta

(04-15-2015 11:48 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(04-15-2015 10:49 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-14-2015 04:43 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  Does anyone want to be in Atlanta/

Flames and Thrashers have bolted.

Hawks up for grabs.

Braves moving to a different locale in the area...

What's the deal?

It's my contention that hockey would have worked if they had moved the Thrashers to where the Braves are going. The Atlanta metro is about 50/50 black to white with the more affluent part of town being up north. Not that many black people go see hockey and not the many whites wanted to go downtown to see a game.

Both the Hawks and the Thrashers are/were owned by a terrible collection of people who simply see the franchise as an investment. If the Hawks get sold, they won't move from Phillips Arena.

The Braves have spent 50 years in an area where gentrification hasn't taken hold. They actually would have liked to stay but weren't getting any help from the city in creating an entertainment district around Turner Field. Liberty Media owns the team and have a $100 million dollar spend limit per season. Which is why the Braves want to augment that with money from a live/work/play development. Cobb County, which has always thought of itself as in competition with Atlanta, gave the Braves the farm when talks broken down regarding staying at Turner Field.

If by "anybody" you mean the 6.5 million people in the metro, then yeah, some do.

City of Atlanta admin basically told the Braves mgt: "You have to sign a new deal with us on our terms--you basically don't have any options to move anywhere else. Braves brass took that as a dare and went out and made something happen; proved the city of Atlanta leaders wrong. Irony is, if the GA State deal to buy the stadium and surrounding area goes through, it will be just the thing needed to inject new life and young people (students, new residents, retail, parks etc...) into the area that has been a virtual wasteland for 50 years. In a way everybody wins with the Braves move.

Braves got butthurt by the Falcons deal and the city balked at doing what Cobb is doing. Falcons deal involved hotel/motel tax money. Braves with Cobb County is ACTUAL residents tax money. And yeah there is a lot of irony in GSU being able to revitalize area area and put several thousand residents and shoppers in the area daily where the Braves could not.

(04-17-2015 11:35 AM)panama Wrote:  

(04-15-2015 11:48 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(04-15-2015 10:49 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-14-2015 04:43 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  Does anyone want to be in Atlanta/

Flames and Thrashers have bolted.

Hawks up for grabs.

Braves moving to a different locale in the area...

What's the deal?

It's my contention that hockey would have worked if they had moved the Thrashers to where the Braves are going. The Atlanta metro is about 50/50 black to white with the more affluent part of town being up north. Not that many black people go see hockey and not the many whites wanted to go downtown to see a game.

Both the Hawks and the Thrashers are/were owned by a terrible collection of people who simply see the franchise as an investment. If the Hawks get sold, they won't move from Phillips Arena.

The Braves have spent 50 years in an area where gentrification hasn't taken hold. They actually would have liked to stay but weren't getting any help from the city in creating an entertainment district around Turner Field. Liberty Media owns the team and have a $100 million dollar spend limit per season. Which is why the Braves want to augment that with money from a live/work/play development. Cobb County, which has always thought of itself as in competition with Atlanta, gave the Braves the farm when talks broken down regarding staying at Turner Field.

If by "anybody" you mean the 6.5 million people in the metro, then yeah, some do.

City of Atlanta admin basically told the Braves mgt: "You have to sign a new deal with us on our terms--you basically don't have any options to move anywhere else. Braves brass took that as a dare and went out and made something happen; proved the city of Atlanta leaders wrong. Irony is, if the GA State deal to buy the stadium and surrounding area goes through, it will be just the thing needed to inject new life and young people (students, new residents, retail, parks etc...) into the area that has been a virtual wasteland for 50 years. In a way everybody wins with the Braves move.

Braves got butthurt by the Falcons deal and the city balked at doing what Cobb is doing. Falcons deal involved hotel/motel tax money. Braves with Cobb County is ACTUAL residents tax money. And yeah there is a lot of irony in GSU being able to revitalize area area and put several thousand residents and shoppers in the area daily where the Braves could not.

Hey I'm not mad that GSU is getting a campus and a stadium out of the deal. The irony of course is that taxpayers will be on the hook for the revitalization. Let's hope that it actually takes hold.

(04-18-2015 04:55 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-17-2015 11:35 AM)panama Wrote:  

(04-15-2015 11:48 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(04-15-2015 10:49 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-14-2015 04:43 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  Does anyone want to be in Atlanta/

Flames and Thrashers have bolted.

Hawks up for grabs.

Braves moving to a different locale in the area...

What's the deal?

It's my contention that hockey would have worked if they had moved the Thrashers to where the Braves are going. The Atlanta metro is about 50/50 black to white with the more affluent part of town being up north. Not that many black people go see hockey and not the many whites wanted to go downtown to see a game.

Both the Hawks and the Thrashers are/were owned by a terrible collection of people who simply see the franchise as an investment. If the Hawks get sold, they won't move from Phillips Arena.

The Braves have spent 50 years in an area where gentrification hasn't taken hold. They actually would have liked to stay but weren't getting any help from the city in creating an entertainment district around Turner Field. Liberty Media owns the team and have a $100 million dollar spend limit per season. Which is why the Braves want to augment that with money from a live/work/play development. Cobb County, which has always thought of itself as in competition with Atlanta, gave the Braves the farm when talks broken down regarding staying at Turner Field.

If by "anybody" you mean the 6.5 million people in the metro, then yeah, some do.

City of Atlanta admin basically told the Braves mgt: "You have to sign a new deal with us on our terms--you basically don't have any options to move anywhere else. Braves brass took that as a dare and went out and made something happen; proved the city of Atlanta leaders wrong. Irony is, if the GA State deal to buy the stadium and surrounding area goes through, it will be just the thing needed to inject new life and young people (students, new residents, retail, parks etc...) into the area that has been a virtual wasteland for 50 years. In a way everybody wins with the Braves move.

Braves got butthurt by the Falcons deal and the city balked at doing what Cobb is doing. Falcons deal involved hotel/motel tax money. Braves with Cobb County is ACTUAL residents tax money. And yeah there is a lot of irony in GSU being able to revitalize area area and put several thousand residents and shoppers in the area daily where the Braves could not.

Hey I'm not mad that GSU is getting a campus and a stadium out of the deal. The irony of course is that taxpayers will be on the hook for the revitalization. Let's hope that it actually takes hold.

Why would tax payers be on the hook?

Apparently a new ownership group has been found. Estimates of the sale price are between $750-900 billion.

Link

well, it was ugly, but after 47 years in Atlanta, Hawks finally make it out of second round. everyone's picking Cleveland to beat the Hawks in the East Conf Finals. Will be interesting to see how much of a fight is put up.

saw this fact. Lebron has played #1 seed 3 times in the conference finals. He's 3-0- 12-5 in games played(with no series going the distance).

(05-17-2015 12:59 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  well, it was ugly, but after 47 years in Atlanta, Hawks finally make it out of second round. everyone's picking Cleveland to beat the Hawks in the East Conf Finals. Will be interesting to see how much of a fight is put up.

I think a lot of people are skeptical since both Brooklyn and Washington gave Atlanta some trouble. Hell, Atlanta won three games against Washington by only 3 points or less and the other was close for 3 quarters and the Wiz were sans Wall.

I do think the Hawks match up well with the Cavs though and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Hawks win the series (especially if Irving isn't healthy).

Hawks got creamed in the East finals, now this...thing...is their new logo? Not good, not good:

Michael Cunningham
The new Hawks logo is awful
by: Michael Cunningham
1:47 p.m. Wednesday, May 27, 2015 | Filed in: Hawks


The Hawks filed a claim for this logo with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

After the Hawks no-showed against the Cavs in the Eastern Conference finals they could have a new look with key cogs Paul Millsap and DeMarre Carroll headed for free agency. Anyone upset about that potential development can take solace in the fact that the team’s new owners are spiffing up the team’s image with a new logo for the new era of Hawks basketball.

And this new Hawks era will be represented by a flying basketball that has caught on fire for some reason.

Chris Creamer of sportslogos.net, which apparently is a thing, highlights a recent filing with the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Atlanta Hawks LP. According to the filing, the new Hawks logo will be that thing you see at the top of this page.

That is unfortunate because it is not a good logo and is, in fact, a terrible logo. Apparently the Hawks saw some dude bro with that thing tatted on his bicep and thought it would make a fine logo for a professional sports franchise.

Creamer includes a quote from Hawks CEO Steve Koonin indicating that the popular and cool “Pac” logo will be the primary logo “and we’ve got some big, secret stuff on the way.” Apparently the big, secret stuff is “a basketball with two wings one on the left and the other on the right with a flame on a shield located in the center of the basketball design” as the trademark filing describes the new logo.

If the only place we ever see this logo is a tiny mark on the waistband of those Christmas Day unis that were leaked then fine (though I could do without the lime green color). NBA rules dictate that at least one of the logos must include a basketball, and so the Hawks decided a basketball with flames, wings and a shield would be cool.

If this new logo appears anywhere else other than waistband shorts then the new owners will have squandered some of the goodwill they’ve gained by not being the old owners, who at least never tried to unleash bad tattoo art on the public.

that is UGLY. looks like a basketball angel, not a hawk.

If that secondary mark is only to fulfill the absurd basketball in some logo requirement and it's never used in any capacity then I'll live. But it still doesn't make any sense, just continue as now with the Pac-Man as primary and winged hawk as secondary. I just wished they'd get ride of the blue and bring back the yellow.

Well, here's the scoop on the Hawks new logos:


The Pac-Man logo, featuring the “Atlanta Hawks Basketball Club” wordmark, is the team’s new primary logo.

Hawks Rebrand With New Logos
12:26 p.m. Monday, June 1, 2015 | Filed in: Hawks

The Atlanta Hawks Monday unveiled a new brand identity with the return of the Pac-Man logo as the team's primary insignia.

As reported last week, the Hawks will have a new secondary logo, featuring a burning basketball with wings, paying homage to the city's history.

The team expects to complete it's full rebrand when it unveils new uniform designs ahead of the 2015 NBA Draft on June 25.


The Atlanta Hawks’ new secondary logo, designed to represent Atlanta’s history.

An updated Pac-Man, featuring the wordmark "Atlanta Hawks Basketball Club," will replace a wing-spanged hawk as the team’s new primary logo.

The Hawks' iconic bird inside a circle was the team's primary logo from 1972-1995. The team reintroduced the logo during last season's playoff run and was the team's secondary image for this record-setting, 60-win season.

The Hawks new secondary logo is meant to be more inclusive of the city.

“Our new secondary logo represents the storied history of our proud city. Being True to Atlanta means embracing all parts of its history and we are proud that this logo illustrates that so wonderfully,” said team CEO Steve Koonin.

Speaking of logos and uniform updates: here's one that is decades overdue. While almost anything would have been an improvement, the change is underwhelming to me:

LA Clippers New Logo and Uniforms for 2015-2016:

(06-01-2015 02:25 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Speaking of logos and uniform updates: here's one that is decades overdue. While almost anything would have been an improvement, the change is underwhelming to me:

LA Clippers New Logo and Uniforms for 2015-2016:

I've never understood why the Clips don't acknowledge the naval aspect of their name. The closet they've ever come is the use of semaphore flags to spell LAC on the light blue shorts.

(06-02-2015 12:20 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(06-01-2015 02:25 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Speaking of logos and uniform updates: here's one that is decades overdue. While almost anything would have been an improvement, the change is underwhelming to me:

LA Clippers New Logo and Uniforms for 2015-2016:

I've never understood why the Clips don't acknowledge the naval aspect of their name. The closet they've ever come is the use of semaphore flags to spell LAC on the light blue shorts.

If you search Clippers proposed uniform images or some similar, you will see designers have come up with many better ideas than either their old unis or these "improved" ones. At least they won't look like a high school team, but this new look is so bland, it's kinda a shame.

Hawks make Huge Mistake in letting Danny Ferry go, especially after he was thoroughly cleared of any racial bias or wrongdoing after extensive review (including vetting every single one of more than 24,000 other emails.)

Hawks will very likely regret the day their franchise's recent brief moment in the sun willingly came to an end. Making a biased and apparently incorrect decision to please a small number of vocal special interest groups instead of making the opposite sound basketball decision will probably not serve these Hawks well in their future.

Akin to the baseball Braves' recent costly and erroneous blunders by former GM Frank Wren and Hank Aaron is signing BJ "do less than nothing" Upton, his streaky brother, Justin, and Jason "not the next Hank Aaron, but likely the next Mendoza" Heyward, Ferry will likely eventually sign to helm another team (he still gets paid the final three years of his current contract), and will have the opportunity now to go elsewhere and use his proven skill and acumen to take that new team to the NBA Finals and Championship, more likely than not leaving the Hawks to flounder and fall apart slowly under mediocre leadership, as is their history.

Exclusive: Danny Ferry ‘relieved’ following buyout of contract
12:37 p.m. Monday, June 22, 2015 | Filed in: Hawks

Exclusive: Danny Ferry ‘relieved’ following buyout of contract

by: CURTIS COMPTON / [email protected] / http://www.ajc.com

Atlanta Hawks general manager Danny Ferry takes in the Hawks media day at Philips Arena in Atlanta on Monday, Oct. 1, 2012 soon after being named to the position. CURTIS COMPTON / [email protected]

Story Highlights:
Danny Ferry tells AJC exclusively he is ‘relieved’ following buyout of Hawks contract; Danny Ferry had been on indefinite leave since September following disclosure of racially insensitive report; Ferry has not spoken publicly about the issue since taking the leave.

The Danny Ferry tenure with the Hawks is officially over. He can finally speak about it.

The team announced the buyout of the general manager’s contract Monday. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the deal was approved by the team’s board of managers Friday after being signed by Ferry in the early morning hours. Ferry had been on an indefinite leave of absence since September following the disclosure of racially insensitive remarks he made last June in a conference call with ownership and management. On Saturday, the AJC obtained copies of letters written to Ferry by the lawfirm Alston and Bird, who conducted an investigation into the matter last June, and from co-owner Todd Foreman clearing him of racial bias. Copies of those letters were attached to the formal annoucement of the buyout.

Ferry has not spoken publicly about the issue since taking the leave. Until now.

Ferry answered a number of questions from the AJC. Here is one. The rest of the interview can be found here on myajc.com.

Q. We reported that the Bernard Taylor investigation cleared you of any racial animus regarding your remarks about Luol Deng. Do you feel vindicated?

A. That’s not really for me to say. But I do feel relieved. I’ve been asking the Hawks for many months to release the results of the Taylor investigation because I wanted everyone to have those facts. For whatever reason, the team refused to release the results until after the season ended. The Taylor investigation included 19 interviews of Hawks owners and employees, and a review of 24,000 emails—including every one I wrote and received as general manager. Both the Taylor investigation and a parallel but independent investigation by the NBA found no negative information about me and not a single incident where I exhibited racial bias during my tenure. Now, does that make my comments about Luol okay? Absolutely not. The words I used from the scouting report came out of my mouth and they were totally inappropriate. I am deeply sorry and take full responsibility.