I said it last year and I still stand by it. Ali was at best a bare minimum net positive. The number of possessions he killed nearly cancelled out his positive impact on the offensive end. It was X and Freeman that took that team to the next level to nearly knocked off. Ali's bad possessions actually were a major contributing factor in that loss.
To diminish Mikal's absence and also say Hankerson has been a disappointment is contradictory. Is Hankerson disappointing if he isn't expected to be the 3rd best player on the team? He is this team's Channel Banks, who was the 4th best player on his respective team behind LCJ, X1.0, and Cheese. Banks' offensive struggles at times would've been a bigger problem if he was expected to be the 3rd option on that team. Insert Dawson on this year's squad, and Hankerson slots in as the #4 option. We'd be talking more about his defensive impact than focusing on his offensive woes. Dawson would be giving us 10-12 per game probably and playing outstanding D while providing huge energy.
This team was constructed to have X2.0 and Freeman as the 1-2 punch at the top, Dawson as the versatile #3 scoring option + defense/rebounding, Hankerson as the #4 + defense, with Tribble to be the gadget defender. Hunter, Johnson, Mitchell, Tavari, and Clarke were intended to be the bonus guys. Instead, they've all been asked to do more than what was originally expected, and we've seen some of the growing pains that have come with that.