sturt

It is one option/conclusion. I have to grant that. It is not the only option/conclusion. Right? Happens every off-season that teams decide to let a player leave in free agency, no? Sure, you'd prefer to get some value for a player, but then again, sometimes GMs prudently decide that they're not being offered enough in trade and/or that the player(s) in question is/are too valuable to the current season's post-season hopes to let them go. So, no... that's not true that it's "the" natural conclusion. It's one. There are others. Good then. It shouldn't be hard for someone to correct me.

I believe I heard that first sentence, and the second. I do not recall him saying the third. Indeed, I think it would have been huuuuuuge news if the owner had been that matter-of-fact, since it was huge news when he said that he doesn't mind going into the tax at that point when we've clearly established ourselves as title contenders....

Honestly? So much more interesting this way, for whatever reason. And quite seriously, I thought when BogBog got asked this first question... ... he was holding himself back from muttering... "that's the best question you can come up with?!?... did you not just watch the game?!?"

Well, yes. But also no. "Yes," they were true on the face of it... Schlenk was indeed engaging teams to try to move him. But "no," to the degree that those rumors presumed it was Schlenk looking to move him because it originally was Schlenk's idea... that was, we now know, the player's behind closed doors request. So, I don't take that as meaningful to this since I don't have any reason to presume any of these players are like Cam in that way. As said... and as Schlenk himself strongly intimated prior to the Cam trade... he was wondering aloud whether his presumptions about the need to bring this team back mostly intact were just him fooling himself... and so I have no doubt that there was plausibly merit to these Fischer rumors that @Mikey has cited. Past tense. I... me... just my opinion... see no way that Schlenk is talking today in any serious way about moving any of the key pieces of this roster, though due diligence demands that he always listen in case that jaw-dropping offer is ever made, of course.

hehe... for some I suppose... hehehehe

Yes... that's me, too. I should have qualified my earliest post... not "No friggin way you can persuade me" as personal, but instead, "universal" you.

Be fair. I said exactly that as I chose to insert the words... ... ie, me... maybe others, but not me... and... The opinion is my own. And yeah, I say it with my chest, even though you don't get to see my chest... hehe... well... and you should thank me for that much.

That, then, would be the precise tipping point of disagreement between you and me, my friend. Best I can grant you is that, even as he acknowledged the excitement over what the 2021 team achieved and was himself excited, in the next breath he seemed to want to temper the excitement with words that went something like, "You can be a great team, but in the NBA that doesn't automatically deliver you to your conference finals every year." But when asked how he thought the team could be improved, he had only one answer in the off-season as far as anything I ever read or heard (and I don't miss much, even though I don't live in GA)... upgrade at back-up PG. That was it. You'll have to provide that for me to read for myself. I've read no shortage of bloggers and media and fans stating that that was part of their plan... what they thought needed to happen. I've never read or heard the ATL GM saying anything like that. The closest he's ever come to saying anything like that wasn't even in the vein of suggesting a trade. It was in the lead-up to the off-season before he signed BogBog and Gallo, when everyone was so bullish on the idea that the roster was now complete, in light of how Dre and Cam had performed in their rookie season, seeming all but certain to have cemented every starting slot with a "young core" member. It was then that the ATL GM said that he was going into free agency expecting to sign players who would not just fill out the bench (as some were advocating), but who would be legitimate options as starters. (And he did just that, of course.) He has never, as far as I'm aware (feel free to educate me, sincerely), stated a consolidation deal was part of the plan. Neither is that something one can look back at his GSW experience and allege happened there.

There is no friggin way you can persuade me that this is anything but click bait, and rooted at best in conversations had before or about the same time as the Cam trade. Schlenk believed in the team he built preseason. He has no itchy trigger finger in the midst of a winning streak, in my not-so-humble opinion. He's letting this play out, and only if he's overwhelmed by some offer from another team--unlikely--is he going to be persuaded to do anything that would potentially upset the mojo of this team.

This was yesterday... https://twitter.com/ATLHawks/status/1486101548316962822?What will today bring... should hear something soon. Still anxious, me.

Regarding the OP... was a whole lot more popular to say this last season than it is this one... but... In McM I trust... it's his decision. But I'm not even sure it matters that much who starts... both players should see plenty of floor time as long as they're healthy (somewhat obviously).

A lot depends on where we sit relative to the lux tax, but there's at least a sliver of a chance that I give the GM permission to sign Skylar to one of those 2-year non-guaranteed deals just prior to post-season so I can have him available.

Somehow I screwed up voting... but here, this should suffice.

Moose was in my cross-hairs ... pun intended... last off-season. But mainly so as an alternative to Dieng who I thought would be significantly pricier than he turned out to be. As it's turned out, Moose has had what most seem to regard as one of his better seasons, while Dieng of course has been more "meh" than "wow." I do think, though, that Dieng projects to be an important asset for the post season because he's scrappier than Moose is, ie, can take some minutes in an enforcer role that Moose isn't as well-regarded for. Still... there's a legit argument that what you lose in enforcer-ism with Moose, you gain in terms of being a more prolific floor-spreading threat than Dieng. Sooooo... I wouldn't say no. I might even be persuaded to say yes... I just looked at Moose's FT% for the season... 88%(!). Dang. I really like that trade as proposed for us. I really don't like it for OKC, not even a little bit. Even if we say Moose and Dieng are a wash... and I'm not sure they would see it that way, given Moose's production this year... as said in the last War and Peace I posted, I'm persuaded the market for Kenrich is a late first, and since we don't right now have one of those with any certainty, my counter is to give them the best of their LAC pick and our two, with us taking the two lesser.

Can't dismiss this. Me, I just prefer some girth that neither of those two have.

I do advocate that Kenrich is a significant value because his game is Solo's game, and it's easy to envision McM using him effectively in his system as a result. And I do advocate that Kenrich impresses me as "Solo on steroids"... take only the best of Solo's performances, eliminate all the lesser, and that's pretty much what you're getting. Again, I don't want to be taken as someone advocating to give up a 1st for Kenrich Williams. I'm not. I agree that, at the most, you give up a #25-#30 pick for someone of his caliber, and at that, only if you (a) do consider yourself an actual contender two weeks from now and (b) perceive that you're smart to take into consideration your starting small forward's likelihood of availability through June. I would "agree" with that. I still wouldn't be an "advocate" for that. There's a difference. So, I certainly wouldn't agree with giving up anything better than a #25 pick. But on the flip side, I also think the market is going to dictate he's going to cost you something more than the two 2nd rounders that, in my opinion, a more balanced market would allow. My bright (?) idea, then, is to find a good middle between those, and instead of sending out a FRP outright, give OKC the rights to the highest of their own LAC, our newly acquired CHO, and our regular pick, with us getting the other two. My other bright (?) idea is... which may not actually be that compelling since we're talking about Presti and OKC, but for many if not most teams, it would be... to take Favors off their hands, who has a $10m player option for next season, and who they've been supposedly shopping practically from the day they got him from Utah. Between those two "bright ideas," I feel we might be able to do better than competitors for his services. And. We are a contender. We can feel confidence because of... both... the fact that we weren't considered a contender at this point in the previous season... and, much for the same reasons, at that... and... the fact that we were a referee's misplaced foot away from the NBA Finals by most Hawksquawkers' account last season... oh, and... the fact that this roster is stronger if only because we now have a legit backup PG, and our #6 2020 FRP is becoming a beast that he was not yet becoming this time last year. There's a lot of season left. There's no clear-cut absolute bullies sitting at the top of the standings who we can't possibly imagine beating. If we perform well enough to get us into the show, even if we don't get home court, this is a team that has won on the road in big games.

I hear that. And I think that Coon's essays on "simultaneous" trades establishes that it's legal. At least as I read it.

I found the same thing. Not sure. But this is the law of the land according to the prophet Larry Coon... Knox can be traded for an asset up to $10.3m if I'm recalling my calculator correctly.

In a year when there were more of his kind on the market, yes. Think OKC is just in the fortunate spot where there's not a lot of supply, but there's plenty of demand... which will drive up the price, assuming my last remaining brain cells from ECON 201 are still viable and I'm not confusing the law of supply and demand. The clincher for Kenrich is his salary ($2m). And that you get him at that price not just for this year but next, too. And that he's on an upward trajectory by most accounts, plausibly capable of developing to be a starter-level talent. I have no doubt that the SLC beat reporter was correct last week when he reported OKC is expecting to get a straight-up 1st rounder.

(Not sure if by "either" that's in reference to the one proposed over on the RealGM OKC forum by yours truly (?). Probably not, but maybe. Just in case and to be clear, that one is a pick flip... there's no "giving up" a pick.)

Nope. Nope. Nope. But this is. https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=96342003#p96342003

You mean in terms of the inclination of bloggers to seize on the Hawks and on Collins as trade candidates?

Consistently money from 5-10 feet... and he'll get you some effort rebounds.

See some Paul Millsap in that kid, me.