sturt

If by "towards the insiders" you actually meant to say "towards the information a given insider has presented" ... then yes. I believe that's consistent with what AHF stated, as far as I understood it. It is an important clarification, though. We do not have liars passing along what they want us to believe. We do not have disingenuous posters posing as insiders who don't actually have people who should be regarded as such. The information may be deserving of disrespect... but the person passing along the information should never be held in contempt or mocked. In my opinion. There's an adult line of respect that's been forged over many, many years now with Supes, Soth and Camp.

Again. Again. Again. "Sources" is a relative term. I've illustrated that. But I'll go further. Does Brad talk with John Collins? Sure he does. Does Brad talk with assistant coaches? Sure he does. Does Brad talk with Kyle Korver. Sure he does. But what we're talking about here is "insider intel" that only certain people are both (a) well-placed to provide and (b) willing to provide. A John Collins or Joe Prunty isn't/wasn't ever going to be well-placed to provide player movement intel and related. Kyle Korver is well-placed, but he's certainly never going to be willing to provide that kind of intel, unless it's already agreed to release it. So, the question is what sources Brad... or for that matter, any other media person... has that meet those two criteria, not just one. Chris Kirschner, for instance, somehow someway seemed to have those kinds of sources.

Knew that, of course, but just b/c a person is a member of the media doesn't even barely in my experience certify that a given person has what we would commonly recognize as "primary sources." Vivlamore is a vivid example. Guy never seemed to break any story. Sure he's a good guy otherwise, but he couldn't even be relied upon to ask natural follow-up questions in a presser. As disinterested/detached a beat reporter as I've ever seen for any team I follow. News to me. But I believe it now that you tell me that. Still. Again, again. "Sources" is a very nebulous term on its own without a qualifier. Of course. Me, too. He's never, to my knowledge, been one to overstate or understate or mislead.

Soth, deep respect, but you realize he's never maintained (to my knowledge, and I don't listen to everything, of course)... that he has "sources" at all. His thing has always been analysis, not insider intel. Just saying I respect the tweet... I respect that his source in this case is, indeed, "prominent"... but again, it's one thing if your buddy Chouinard tells you "Yeah, this is the situation I'm hearing"... it's another if you actually have Nicky's secretary feeding you what intel s/he feels comfortable sharing. Right? That's what I'm trying to understand.

Well, of course, Brad said that much. Would you help clarify and go so far as to say he has "primary" sources? That would help.

I don't trust him yet. Not at all. I know he seems new. Folks... did you know... and I just now happened on this... Your Atlanta Hawks have now been under Antony Peter Ressler's (and company) control for 1... 2... 3... 4... 5... 6... 7... 8, COUNT 'EM EIGHT friggin years ?!? (... as of this day, June 23, 2015!). He gets no grace from me at this point unless and until there is a queue of substantially black-and-white facts over a period of time that accumulate to show he's not just telling us what he thinks is in his best interests to tell us. That's going to take... yes... time. The clock JUST RESET.. at least the one I'm keeping over here on my side of the internet... with his Schultz interview in February, and essentially, with the Landry Fields Collaborative era. Check back next off-season.

Spud, I'm not the right person to have this conversation with you. Haven't been for awhile. Something's different today than was true a couple or three years ago. I would like to think the something-different is temporary, and we can engage again. That's all I've got for ya, except my well wishes for better.

Surgically well said. I hate that you guys have to spend so much time doing the job you do. It's crazy how the various caretakers of this site for over 20 years now have given it the passion and time necessary to make it the exceptional community generating exceptional conversation for our still-trophy-less ATL team. Thank you (all). I would only add... police aren't the only way that a society maintains some control over behaviors that work to the greater good of all. Culture has its place, too. If in my neighborhood, one of my neighbors' teenage kids is hosting a Saturday night pool party that continues to be loud as midnight nears, it would be better if the adults in the pool party household knew that some of the other adults in the households that surround them try to get to sleep around 11 in anticipation of church the next morning... then... How much better is it if those adults who have influence with the kids exert some of that influence... rather than a neighbor pecking on the door... or, rather than one of them calling to ask police to come out to say something? Sometimes if not often the best way for a situation to resolve itself is for people of conscience within someone's circle to be kind enough to help that someone operate within conscientious, respectful boundaries... because they're the people who that someone is gonna consider to have his/her best interests at heart, whereas everyone else are just meanies and, in effect, pool party poopers.

That leaped out to me, too.... first time I've ever seen him allege he has "sources." Brad, if you're lurking, please follow up your tweet and clarify. Does "prominent" source mean... someone who would know by virtue of their inclusion in the ATL Hawks basketball ops organization chart.......... or......... someone who is "prominent," as-in, say, Bob Rathbun or Kevin Chouinard... a name we all would recognize as a media person with, no doubt, good sources of their own... but the intel is, actually, second-hand then... ??? Not doubting the information so much as, again, you've never suggested, to my knowledge, that you have what would ordinarily be described as "insider" sources... and even here, it's interesting you choose the term "prominent" which can be read different ways.

Lopez is an example of a player who would be on the court a lot. But there's a lot of reason to believe he'll be back in MIL, and even if he isn't, a lot of reason to think we can't afford him. Wright is an example of someone who might be attainable given WAS's fire sale. But there's a lot of reason to believe he'd rarely get on the floor unless you send out something of value... potentially if not likely ending up netting a zero sum benefit. But the overarching point is really really really well-taken.

New catch phrase of the Landry era of the Ressler era... "Hawks DNA". I know that Ressler has sunk some money in technology and research... is it just throwaway marketing hype, or have the Hawks, indeed, developed some way of assessing character traits that correlate highly with players who win championships? I'd like to think B, of course, but can't grant that benefit of a doubt. Leaning strongly toward A.

Sooooo... when is the obligatory presser where we learn "this is the guy we were targeting all along as we tried to get to 7 or 10, and we can't believe he was there for us at #15"... ?

1. Of course, we had no AHols on the roster this past season, just like we had no King Kongs. We try to defer to the likely preference of players even if no one's ever asked whether they'd be okay with a potentially unappreciated label. Courteous and respectful it is okay to be. 2. To the real point of your response to this statement... (and my apologies that I'm terrible trying to peck this out on my phone, so the reply is buried beneath the quote...) 12 hours ago, sturt said: Not sure how Kobe fits, at least for the near future. He's a SG who can be a secondary ball handler, not a PG who can score. He does show some exceptional defensive instincts, but it's hard to see how he gets on the floor. ... that's just it... we did not draft someone who's a primary ball handler, anymore than we'd expect that of BogBog, or in a previous era, KVon. He may develop that, sure, but he can't be your 3rd PG going into 23-24. Right now he impresses me as possibly a future KCP. But that's purely a first impression given the few hours we've had to study the kid.

(Anyone else see the David Byrne segment on 60 Minutes recently? Good stuff.)

Not sure how Kobe fits, at least for the near future. He's a SG who can be a secondary ball handler, not a PG who can score. He does show some exceptional defensive instincts, but it's hard to see how he gets on the floor.

Me...big surprise... ditto what Jeff said. And too, Jay's point is well grounded.

My God. What have I done?

You're responding to someone who can laugh at himself pretty easily... some say, because I've had so much practice, but what do they know ( )... That said, even you can do better than that. Hint... when you try to make a joke about something that the rest of us know so so so irritated you because it strikes at your core cynical soul... it's not as funny. It comes off as sore loser-ish. C'mon. Up your game there, shakes. Or, better... just stick to the substance of the comment, and avoid the personal jabs completely. Tends to tick the respect needle up a notch, in contrast. Okay... road trip... see y'all when I get home a few hours from now.

He's a PG who got some SG minutes at UK in order to get the best 5 on the floor. Good shooter. Much better than Anthony Black who is projected higher. He's very good. Not Black, but in the final accounting, Wallace is the better two-way option, between him versus Black. He checks all the boxes that Black does... but can shoot. Quin seems likely to play a 3rd PG more than Nate did... but, yeah, that's still probably not a lot. Hence, the preference if you can get a vet for #15 over drafting someone.

Here's a big ol shot in the dark................. Hawks - Patrick Williams SF (from Bulls) - Jonathan Kaminga PF (from Warriors) - #19 FRP Pacers - DeAndre Hunter SF (from Hawks) Warriors - #7 FRP Bulls - #15 FRP Last first... the #15 pick gives CHI a legit shot at a starting caliber PG... Warriors have been said all this time to be looking for a way to get into the lottery w/ Kuminga as one part of the package... Pacers get their vet wing... Hawks get a younger version of Dre with all the same upside, and at that, a more consistent 3 pt shot; and Kuminga, which in sturt-world allows Quin the luxury of playing Jalen on occasion as a point-forward, and really creating match-up problems on the offensive end; and the #19, who knows, but they've worked out a boat load of guys, and let's not forget... it's not "#19"... it's LUCKY #19" .

I don't see a trade here that makes us better on the floor for 23-24. I see a trade that makes the owner better in his pocket book, and perhaps, makes us better on the floor... after DJM becomes a free agent, pretty much mitigating any gain. Hamster wheel follies. But oh, just look at the new toy(s)!

FWIW.... maybe nuttin....

Theoretically anyhow, it could happen. WAS might do a buyout.

For the record, your intellectual humility is rarely if ever in question... on my side of the internet anyway. Only a precious few can provide evidence that they're equipped to stand down and admit they were wrong around these here parts. (I say "they," but then again, that's actually more accurately a "we".)