niremetal

If Simmons really is holding out for a trade and has no intention of playing again for the Sixers, it's not clear how good they'll be next year. Much hate as he got for his play in the playoffs, Simmons was far and away their second-best player. And it's not clear who they can get back that can make them as good as they were last year.

Love @AHF in lawyer mode

Oh, you mean when he played his ass off even though he had a busted ankle and knee and still managed to be our only consistent offensive threat after Trae got hurt even though he could only really drive to his left? And while he led the league in playoffs steals through the end of the conference finals? Yeah, what a loser.

He put up 50/49/90 shooting numbers as a starter under Nate. He was the most efficient guard (not just shooting guard) in the whole league offensively over the last 6 weeks of last season other than Steph Curry and, unlike Steph, he was an above-average defender too. Calling him a role player is just being a hater.

I just can't give that title to someone whose never taken a team past the conference finals. Especially one who only had one playoff series win before this year. I have to admit I hated him before this season because he definitely did not impress me when he was coach of the Blazers (his offense was Woodyball). The best coaches are the ones who've proven they can pretty much always get the most out of whatever team they are given. I think the coaches who fit that mold the best at this point are Pop, Kerr, Spoelstra, and Monty Williams (who I thought did an impressive job with a rotating series of awful rosters with the Pelicans before his fantastic work with the Suns the past two seasons). Admittedly, Kerr hasn't shown the versatility of the other guys, but the fact that he instantly turned a solid-but-not-contending team into an all-time great dynasty while largely revolutionizing the strategy of how the game is played makes it impossible not to put him in the top tier, especially after the Steph-but-no-one-else Warriors nearly snuck into the playoffs last season. In the next tier are guys who always do a solid job, but who lack either the proven versatility or success of the guys above. I'd place Nick Nurse, Rick Carlisle, and Bud in this category. It's where I'd place Nate now--but with the recognition that he could easily go up or down depending on what he does over the next two seasons. The reason I'd place Nate in Tier 2 despite the relative lack of playoff success is simply the revolving door of lineups he had to play due to injuries last season...beating a full-strength Bucks squad with Trae out twice (once in April, once in the playoffs) stands out. An aside...Doc is the perfect example of a coach who is only a great fit for certain kinds of teams--namely, teams with lots of great role players and no clear lead dog. In 2000, he took a Magic team that should have won 15 games at most (their best player was Darrell Armstrong) almost to the playoffs. Similar thing with the Clippers in his next-to-last season there, when he nearly squeezed 50 wins out of a team whose "big 3" was Gallo, Tobias Harris, and Lou Williams. But for the most part, give him star players, and he usually doesn't know what to do--he almost wants to treat them like role players too. The Celtics were great for him because he had three co-equal star players with different, complementary skill sets. He also probably would have done great (maybe even better than Bud) with the '15 Hawks or the 2000s Pistons. But he always underachieves when he has a clear talent advantage. So weird.

I'd be shocked if Bogi plays just 23mpg, at least early on. He's our second-best offensive player, and McMillan rode him for over 30mpg even when he had a busted knee and ankle in the playoffs. I think Wright will rarely see time at the 2, and Dieng will see fewer minutes than 15, with Collins being a small-ball 5 more often (although after OO returns, I doubt JC will see any minutes as a 5). I also think Lou will get a few minutes of burn every other game at the least. So... While OO is out: PG: Young (33) / Wright (15) / Williams (3) / Cooper (0) SG: Bogi (28) / Huerter (17) / Reddish (3) SF: Hunter (23) / Reddish (20) / Huerter (5) PF: Collins (24) / Gallo (18) / Hunter (6) / Johnson (0) / Hill (0) C : Capela (30) / Deing (10) / Collins (8) / Okongwu (0) After OO returns: PG: Young (33) / Wright (15) / Williams (3) / Cooper (0) SG: Bogi (28) / Huerter (18) / Reddish (2) SF: Hunter (25) / Reddish (19) / Huerter (4) PF: Collins (28) / Gallo (17) / Hunter (3) C : Capela (28) / Okongwu (15) / Dieng (3) / Collins (2)

On the subject of the best nickname, I like nicknames that are short and simple but still capture the essence of a player's game. Anything more than 3 syllables and ya lose me. So, in rough order: * "Plastic Man" Stacey Augmon * John "The Baptist" Collins * "Sweet" Lou Hudson * "Ice" Trae Young * "Red Velvet" Kevin Huerter * "Tree" Rollins I don't think "The Baptist" gets enough love as a brilliant nickname. "Red Velvet" will move up the list if he ever becomes a consistent 40% shooter from deep. Worst is J-Smoove. There was nothing smoove about Josh's game. I wish J-Smash had caught on more.

I got curious. Using the magic of the 'Squawk search function, I'm showing this anonymous comment in November 2007 as the first instance of "ISO Joe" on the 'Squawk, but only as one example of ISO playcalling in general: But then it looks like @Peoriabird was the one who popularized the term in the early days of the '08-'09 season, accounting for all of the first several mentions of it during that season: https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/333926-hawks-thunder-we-are-back-on-the-road/?tab=comments#comment-349877 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334206-give-me-one-reason-why-bibby-shouldnt-be-sixth-man/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-353246 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334205-those-of-us-who-saw-last-nights-game-now-know/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-353633 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334295-whats-wrong-with-joe/?tab=comments#comment-354215 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334308-rate-mike-woodson/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-354529 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334354-squawk-illogic-ive-never-understood/?tab=comments#comment-355205 https://www.hawksquawk.net/topic/334354-squawk-illogic-ive-never-understood/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-355235 Then @NineOhTheRino did a poll on Dec 11, 2008 that seemed to lead to an explosion in the use of the term, so that's when it basically stuck on the 'Squawk. But...I remember the term being used on Sekou Smith's blog back then as well. I don't think the comments on that are searchable anymore, so no way to find out if that's where it started popping up first.

Nash was 30 when he left Dallas (a bit AFTER the peak of most point guards) and became an MVP instantly in PHX. It was as clear-cut an example as there ever has been of a player needing a new environment and system to reach his ceiling. I don't think Nash would have been an MVP (or even made another ALL-NBA team) had he stayed in Dallas. He and D'Antoni were a match made in heaven.

Zero question Zion is the better player. But I still say he needs to lose about 25 pounds to take pressure of his knees. Otherwise, I'm going to keep operating under the assumption that he's going to wear out by the midpoint of his second NBA contract. You can count on one hand the number of guys with his physique who enjoyed long careers where they maintained even an above-average-starter level of play. And the only one of those who relied on his athleticism as much as Zion does was Sir Charles--and even he was noticeably skinnier than Zion in his early (Philly) years, which helped limit the toll on his joints. So Zion, but on condition that he accepts the Hamburglar as his roommate.

These two paragraphs kind of sum up the reasons for my bafflement at this discussion. When people are talking about the need to keep our "knowns" or our "core," they usually mean young/rising players like Cam, Dre, and maybe Huerter; those are the guys who the argument is we should hold onto, not Bogi, Gallo, or Capela--guys who actually played a much more central role in our second-half turnaround and playoff run than Cam, Dre, and Huerter did. The talk is as though our young guys aside from Trae and JC are proven quantities. They are not. Dre had a great 17-game run in January before he got hurt. Yeah, that's right--17 games. Approximately one-fifth of one season. Since then, his knee has prevented us from being able to see if that was lightning in a bottle or something he can sustain over an 82-game season, after he actually starts showing up on teams' scouting reports as a guy to watch. Right now, he's the best bet to turn into an All-Star of the 3, but he's not close to a lock for that. Huerter had a couple big games in the playoffs--most notably by exploiting a mismatch against Seth Curry over and over again in Game 7 against the Sixers. He's turned into a solid on-ball defender (though by no means a great one). He's proven himself a solid rotation player, but I still view late-season-Bogi as his absolute ceiling, and one he is not especially likely to reach given that his 3P% has been worryingly trending downwards since his rookie year. Cam had a nice little 4-game run during the ECFs and has the highest ceiling of the three, but also the lowest floor because he just hasn't shown even a 10-game stretch of consistently average (much less good) offensive play yet in his career. And contrary to what the second paragraph above says--TONS of guys peak/permanently plateau before they hit 25 and/or while they are on their rookie scale contracts. Again, just to use examples from my two favorite teams in the last 15 years--Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, Josh Childress, Greg Oden, Brandon Roy, Martell Webster, Nicolas Batum, CJ McCollum...hell, you can almost add JJ to that list (I'd say he hit his plateau at age 25). Guys getting hurt or simply being unable/unwilling to raise their game additional levels after they hit 23/24 is not exceptional. If anything, it's the norm. Pick a random NBA draft year and take a look at all the first rounders drafted #4 or lower, and count how many of them peaked by year 4. You'll be surprised. So it's nuts to me to talk about our young guys (again, aside from Trae/JC) as "knowns" while guys with multiple All-Star appearances are "unknowns." Like everyone else, I love our young core. A part of me is so excited by our collection of talent that I don't want to see us trade any of it away. But I'm also glad we have a clear-eyed GM in Schlenk who realizes that trading potential stars for proven stars is usually a good strategy, all other things being equal.

Also...in what universe is 3 titles NOT a dynasty? By that standard, the Warriors are not a dynasty, the Shaq/Kobe Lakers were not a dynasty (although they each won additional titles with totally different teammates later), etc. Hell, even the 90s Bulls had no one other than MJ and Scottie in common between the first and second 3-peats. If we were to keep even 4 players from this young squad together long-term and win even 1 title, we'd be in ratified air. If we did that and won 4+, that would be unprecedented going back to the Showtime Lakers.

What some of y'all gotta remember is that few players actually reach their ceiling. And most don't get close to it--plenty of players peak during their rookie contracts, including guys who are super-hyped or who show tons of promise early. I'm remembering especially the history of my second love (Blazers)...that team looked LOADED going into 2010. But nearly everyone fell short of their ceilings. Brandon Roy, Greg Oden, and Martell Webster never hit their peaks thanks to injuries (and Oden due to a host of other reasons too), Batum due to lack of drive, etc. The only guy who did hit his peak was Aldridge--but he and Damian Lillard (who the Blazers were able to get later because their earlier generation of young talent imploded) weren't able to make it work, and Aldridge left for SA in his prime. They've experienced a second version of that with Lillard/McCollum/Nurkic. Result is that a team that had a #1 pick and drafted 3 All-NBA players in a span of 6 years* have never won a single game in the Conference Finals. (* Here it's worth remembering that for all the flashes of talent our players have shown and despite my grumbling that Trae should have been on the All-NBA Third Team last year...our roster currently has a total of 0 All-NBA appearances among them) Even looking back at the Hawks teams from the late aughts...Josh had the makings of an elite two-way power forward, then plateaued because he never figured out how to play on-ball D, shot too many jumpers, and never put enough work into his post game, where I still think he could have dominated. He never figured out his strengths and put in the time needed to hone those to elite levels, so he never reached his ceiling. Marvin had a smooth jumper, great athleticism, and was a solid on-ball defender 1 through 4. He had all the tools necessary to be an All-Star combo forward. But he peaked in '08-'09 instead of continuing to improve. Like Josh, he never developed handles, but his failure to become better than "above average" stemmed more from playing too much within himself rather than pushing his limits (kind of the opposite of Josh). Hell, I'd argue that JJ (who never felt the need to become anything other than a great ISO player after he left the Suns) never hit his ceiling either. Only guys from that team who hit the ceilings I saw for them were Horford (and it took him awhile...imagine if he'd developed the deep ball sooner) and Teague (who became a better shooter than I thought he would be, but a lesser passer). ---------------------------------------------------------- I totally agree that this squad has a higher collective ceiling than any of those squads. But we'd have to be the luckiest team in history for even a majority of our guys to hit their ceilings. In all likelihood, several will crash well before then, whether due to reasons within or beyond their (and the team's) control. That's why a consolidation trade makes sense if it appears highly likely to give the team a short-to-medium-term boost. A bird in hand is worth two in the bush and all that.

The one guy who conceivably could become available that I'd want is Sabonis. The Turner / Sabonis experiment in Indy has to end at some point, and Sabonis is the one who is likely to draw the better assets. I think Sabonis would be an absolutely perfect complement to Trae offensively (especially if his deep ball continues to improve, which it should). His passing and scoring ability in the post would give us dimensions to our game that we just don't have now. He is also one of the best big men in the game in handling the rock. His defense is underrated--he's not a weakside/help rim protector like Capela, but he plays solid on-ball defense on both 4s and 5s and has dramatically improved in terms of moving his feet well enough to not be toast when he switches onto wings. And of course, he's one of the best rebounders in the game already. I think a Gallo/{Huerter or Reddish}/1st package would get the job done if Indiana looks destined to fall short of a guaranteed playoff spot this year, which I expect them to given that their hope for improvement basically rests on Chris Duarte having a ROTY campaign and Carlisle finding a way to squeeze more out of the roster. Alternatively, we could move Capela instead of Gallo, but that would certainly involve bringing in a third team. At the very least, if we were to trade for Sabonis, we'd then have to move either Capela (who should be super easy to move given his skill and 2023 free agency) or Collins next offseason. I think Sabonis actually would work well alongside either in the frontcourt *if* he improves his deep ball to Collins-like levels. For now, I think the fit would be better with Collins, who I think could step up his weakside D if that's what we asked of him. I know lots of people hate on Sabonis, but I think he's actually one of the more underrated players in the league, and would give us the most dynamic offense in the East, if not the whole league. We'd stay elite at rebounding and the defensive drop-off would be less than folks think (and more than offset by the huge offensive boost he'd give us). Anyway, that's the only vaguely plausible consolidation trade out there that I like.

Oooo goody, I get to do a intro-level-stats-geekout I guess the difference is what type of average you're talking about. If you're talking the mean and you place heavy weight on the very best players in each league, I don't disagree, because the extreme talent of guys like Cade Cunningham is something you very, very rarely see in EuroLeague (main recent exception being Luka Doncic). That pulls up the mean level of talent in SL. That's why I was saying that there are a few players playing every year who are better than the EuroLeague elite. But if you're talking the median, I really think the talent level in the EuroLeague (at least among the guys who are actually playing minutes) is higher. Out of curiosity, looking back at the Hawks' 2018 Summer League team, ranking the players from roughly best to worst in terms of where they are at today (and bearing in mind that because TS is way above average in terms of eye for talent, this is probably better than usual in terms of top-to-bottom talent on a SL roster): Trae Young John Collins Kevin Huerter Omari Spellman (still in NBA, but barely and probably not for long) Jaylen Adams (same) Tyler Dorsey (rotation player for EuroLeague team) Zach LeDay (rotation player for EuroLeague team) Jock Landale (just moved to Australian league, where he has been dominant, from being a EuroLeague rotation player) Alpha Kaba (starter for EuroCup team) Antonius Cleveland (rotation player for Australian league team) Jaylen Morris (rotation player for Orleans Loiret, which failed to qualify for EuroCup) Robert Johnson (sub-EuroCup Turkish team) Zach Smith (sub-EuroCup German team) Brandon Sampson (washed out of G-League) Junior Robinson (on second-tier Finnish team) So the median player on that team was probably Jock Landale or maybe Zach LeDay, who are both basically solid EuroLeague-level players today. And that's where they are now; back then, they were almost certainly a couple cuts below that. And I have no way of knowing for certain, but I'm guessing if I did the same exercise for a couple other teams' 2018 SL squads, the median would more likely land in a EuroCup player at best. Anyway, it's probably a bit apples and oranges, especially since the number of games is dramatically different and a fair number of EuroLeague players have been on the same teams for several years in a row, while SL players only have a few days together. All told, I would think success in EuroLeague is a more reliable indicator of NBA readiness than success in Summer League, but I guess smarter people than me think otherwise.

Whoooooa. Summer League above EuroLeague? I can see putting SL above the national leagues that feed into EuroLeague. But do you think any SL team would be able to beat Efes, CSKA Moscow, Barcelona, or Olympiacos? There are a few better individual players every year in SL than the EuroLeague elite. But don't the bulk of guys playing rotation minutes head internationally to teams that are a cut below EL? And that's not even accounting for the fact that EuroLeague teams have usually played a lot of games together...

Come on, now. I'll grant that there is higher-than-average on-ball defensive EFFORT in SL from SOME players simply because this is the one audition those guys will get. But the guys who that is most true for are the WORST players there. And the overall size, athleticism, bball IQ, and just general defensive skill is much, much lower in SL than in even the most meaningless of regular-season NBA games. To say nothing of the lack of chemistry on defense during SL, which leads to lots of breakdowns. There is literally no aspect of the SL experience that is within the same zip code as NBA ball.

For me, it's the fact it happened twice. I'll still get past that if he can make it through a year in College Park and playing nothing but garbage time in the Association without pouting. Or, obviously, if he proves so dominant that he actually earns himself a rotation role this year and keeps it (which I still seriously doubt will happen absent multiple frontcourt injuries). Until he faces adversity and pushes through it at this level, I feel like I'll still be waiting for the other shoe to drop.

I think you're just remembering the other guy who had a perpetually incomplete goatee

I think that the best thing for both of them is to practice with the Hawks but play their games in College Park. Much as I've been impressed by both Jalen and Deuce Coop in Summer League...it's still just Summer League. There is still miles of difference between the players they're up against this week and even marginal NBA rotation players. I just don't think that either of them is going to be able to come right in and be more effective than the guys in our second unit, much less the starters. Give them some burn against the G League, and have them run through practices against the vets. Give them occasional auditions in real games so they get a feel for what they're up against at the highest level. Nate will know if/when they're ready for more, just like he did with OO last year.

I feel like he's just such a unique/versatile player that it's hard to cabin him to the 3 or the 4 just yet. I'm guessing different aspects of his game will stand out more and others less once he is tested by rotation NBA players at either forward position. Like I've said...my concern remains how he'll react when things stop coming easy to him like they clearly do when he gets the rock against SL competition. If he sticks with it, I honestly don't know whether his skill set will translate better as a 3 or 4. It'll probably depend in part on how well his frame fills out and whether his passing skills can be utilized effectively as a 4.

He did. This was the first time I started to think maybe he can hack it at the point instead of just being a kind of undersized wing. Hope someone gives him a NBA deal even if it's not us.

I don't pretend to know the dynamics of an NBA locker room specifically. But in every setting where I've experienced it, the dynamics and relationships change pretty radically when someone goes from being a colleague to a boss/lead/trainer/etc. Making Lou or Solo a coach might kill whatever effectiveness they have as elders among equals.

Yeah, I also had really been hoping to see both Sky and Nathan Knight get contracts. As a layman fan, I'd have rather seen them get the two roster spots than Lou and Solo. But this is definitely one of those Trust In Travis Schlenk situations. He/Coach Nate obviously gave an infinitely better insight into how important a role those guys play in the locker room. If he views their intangible roles as more important than whatever TS sees as the ceiling for our marginal younger guys...well it's nice to be in a position where we're competitive enough that letting the younger guys go is arguably the more sensible move.

Yeah, that looks fishy, especially since that dude (or bot) has only had a Twitter account for 4 months. But the one@mrhonlineposted looked legit. If it is legit, it's another instance where I'll have to trust Travis. But here's my "I'm bored because my 2-year-old won't sleep but also won't let me leave his room until he does sleep" scouting report on ιωάννης παπαπέτρου (which is what YouTube wants me to call him). The lazy explanation would be that TS is looking for a bargain-bin version of Gallo. From his highlight reels (see below), it's clear that Papapetrou (like Gallo) is a pretty versatile scorer. He handles the ball quite well for a relatively big (6'9) forward. He can dribble penetrate and uses his body well to create space and offset his "meh" explosiveness. He also has a smooth jumper. He seems like a guy who can fairly be characterized as a three-level scorer. Per Basketball Reference , Papapetrou shot .429 from deep in the Greek League last year, with an absurd .674 TS%. But I wouldn't put much stock in that, because Jimmer Fredette absolutely tore up the same league from deep a season earlier, shooting .603 from deep with an impossible .824 TS%. Notably, both Papapetrou and Fredette shot way better in the Greek League than they did in EuroLeague appearances in the same season, which indicates that better competition/defense negates the impressiveness of their Greek efficiency numbers. In EuroLeague play, I calculate his TS% over the past two seasons to have been .635 (great) and .505 (poor) in 2019-20 and 2020-21, respectively. The dropoff in EuroLeague this past season weirdly seems to be almost entirely due to his 2P%, which was way worse than any other season in his career (.429). Would obviously want to know what happened there, because that's awful efficiency inside the arc. My first-glance impression is that he is basically a poor man's Gallo--falling fall short of Gallo as a deep threat, but otherwise similar in his overall profile. Gallo has proven himself to be a more efficient scorer in the NBA than Papapetrou has been in the EuroLeague (as opposed to Greek League), so clearly Papapetrou is several cuts below Gallo in that respect. Which is presumably why Gallo is making $20M in the NBA while Papapetrou is still looking for his first NBA contract. But the Greek League is better than most (I don't know @NBASupes' take, but my impression is that the Greek League is probably slightly below the G League in terms of competition level, while the EuroLeague is clearly a step above it) and he was the Greek League MVP this past season. So it's not shocking to think he's worth a "show me" contract in the NBA. If we're bringing him in at the vet min for 2 years (which is the only type of deal that would make sense, since Schlenk made clear he doesn't want to go into the tax), it seems like a justifiable investment if viewed in isolation. Don't know if it's worth it, though, if it means we won't have the flexibility to convert Sharife's deal if he shows out in College Park. Highlight reels