sturt

I see that he's most typically referenced as being a small forward in Euro reports, but his size suggests... as you suggested... he may be considered more of a PF for ATL... following again in Gallo's footprints there. So/but, I wonder if they've played him at both SF and PF in Greece, and perhaps the difference you've cited is related to that. On the second part, I can't help but wonder whether Solo's contract is non-guaranteed until later in the season... in which case, it makes it less confounding to sign a 15th man after all. Spotrac reports, no, it's all guaranteed. Probably, but we've all seen contract intel updated from time to time, and what was previously understood turned out not to be substantiated after all.

From a widely respected voice...

Yes that roster flexibility seems to be an important goal until buyout season hits later, and for that matter, until we see what injuries we encounter through the season. But no, we're not under any gun to convert Sharife's deal. Can wait until next off-season, no problem.

It's greek to me. ........

Pretty much mirrors what I was thinking.

CAUTION. Can't vouch for who this guy is, nor that Yahoo is reporting this.

Fyi... and there are a couple of especially familiar names to Hawks fans... https://basketnews.com/news-154670-top-10-euroleague-market-players-to-hit-the-nba-free-agency.html

As I understand any two-way player's position, once he's been given a qualifying offer, he's under team control as would be any other RFA. Thus, if he gets a better offer than the two-way from ATL, Schlenk will have the opportunity to match that. Failing that, the RFA will be playing for ATL as a two-way, or I suppose his one other legit option is to look at overseas opportunities. But to the point, outside of that, he's getting paid by Tony Ressler this year again. There was a time when I thought Schlenk might reward Mays with a standard contract, as an atta-boy gesture, and to set some precedent that if you work hard, this organization rewards that. I'm less inclined right now to think that will happen than I did a couple of weeks ago, based on what quotes we've heard from Schlenk, who it seems is being very calculating with how he handles that one last roster slot.

Excellent Q&A. Excellent questions. Excellent answers. Extremely pleased with the maturity and attitude of both our draftees, me, and I'm pretty sure I'm just mindmelding with everyone else on that much. Can we start the season next week?

Mom objects to that phrase, you just need to know. For that matter, so does wifey, particularly on the "sense" part. But I only said in too many words what @mrhonline has tried to say previously more concisely.

I have a very different perspective. It just doesn't feel right. We can't have comedy actors thinking they can just all of a sudden take the lead role in a heavy drama. People need to stay in their lane and not try to be all things to all people. I'm disappointed. And

To no one in particular... Bruno was put on a standard contract. Conventional wisdom held that you had clearly open roster slots, so why restrict Bruno to the 40(?... and I think it's 50 now?)) games that he would have had under a two-way contract? Go ahead and sign him up, and do a 3-year so you had bird rights if it went well. Bruno's situation was different than Cooper's. There are no clearly open roster slots where he fits--we're bringing back last year's #2 PG, and have acquired someone who is a proven quantity and an upgrade. Granted, you could consider Lou as your #3 SG, which is open, and sign Cooper to a standard. But here's why you don't even do that... WE CONTROL COOPER REGARDLESS. So, selfishly, what's in it for us (ie, "us" as-if we're the Hawks braintrust)... ?!? We gain no actual compelling benefit. We only take off the table the two-way option... and mind you, worst-case scenario, we pin ourselves down to him occupying a roster slot for which we very conceivably could be yearning to be open later into the season... remember, now that we're in this phase that we're thought to be an actual potential contender, like Schlenk said, it's that much more likely that at the trade deadline, there will be a player who wants to come here... or just as if not more likely, after the trade deadline, there will be a player who gets bought-out that we want to sign, and that player will take interest. This idea that you hamper your own roster flexibility by removing the two-way agreement with your 2nd rounder on the basis of summer league games?... against what, soberly, all understand is mostly sub-par competition? Why? What purpose is served? Wait. You lose nothing by waiting. He's going to be yours anyhow. He can't leave (... and not that I think he would be all that inclined to want to, since he's a hometown kid). And if he starts the year in G-league as anticipated and he is lights-out, then you have more evidence that maybe he's an actual difference maker worth not limiting to 50 games. Maybe that happens. Maybe, it turns out, not. Sign him to a standard contract when it actually has been undeniably earned and there is evidence against legitimate competition that he can help you better than can other options. To me, the plan would be to let him get 15-20 consecutive games in College Park, and then let him play some combination of the two, and after the trade deadline, re-visit the conversation. Maybe then. But certainly, don't make roster moves that decrease your roster flexibility before you have to. That seems like a rational plan.

While I've been at the front of the line beating the "tap the brakes, it's only summer league" line, and remain skeptical (... a healthy skepticism, of course...) that it could take some time for Cooper to have success versus top shelf competition, have to agree with Ja... Probably should've been drafted in the neighborhood of the 20s... based on what I've seen.

Hmmmmm.... this from a month ago... did he fudge on signing after all???

Someone here told us all back-when, or at least hinted at it. And... back-when was weeks ago, so I'm not sure that the interest isn't by now seriously past tense given all the activity that's occurred since then... most prominently, MIN's Rubio trade, which would naturally seem to have been a potential asset in any MIN/ATL trade before we dealt for Delon.

Or, at least, offer a counter that builds off of what @niremetal proposed.

He looked like he belonged, that's for sure. Figure that if BOS puts him in a position to develop this year, he'll sign a free agent contract next off season with a team where he'll stand a real shot at being part of their rotation.

I cannot not agree with this statement on any level, me. If you say you'll pay the tax if you're a contender, and if you define what you mean by "contender" as having proven yourself to be a EC finalist two years in a row, then that makes some sense to me. For all my optimistic thinking that we'll only get better this season, there is a plausible floor in which we disappoint with a first round exit, and yet without having exercised some prudence, would be paying tax. And here's the other thing. The GM earns or doesn't earn his right to go to the owner and say, "I'd like for you to let me spend more of your money" in the future by being or not being prudent at a juncture like this. And that's especially important in this relatively new era where teams are prone to do buy-outs after the trade deadline, sometimes releasing some high quality talent into the marketplace. You want your GM to have won his owner's confidence at a time like that. We've not had that concern, of course. But we certainly intend to have it now.

Yep. Thanks. I knew but hadn't thought to adjust the Collins number, and I knew about Mays but discount that since that would vanish anyhow as soon as a new signing would occur (the only consequence being that Mays either is on a standard or a two-way, but either way, it's resolved). What I'd missed was that likely-incentives thing for Capela... but even then, the luxury tax only actually matters at the end of the season, when your payroll either exceeds the threshold or it doesn't, so it's really not that big of an issue right now if Travis were to sign someone to a $4m contract. The caphold comes off and Mays' two-way money has no effect... assuming Capela gets incentive pay, still would be less than $1m over.

So, two games into Summer League, here's what we know: Cooper = Trae. ...got it. So, two games into Summer League, here's what we know: Cooper = Halliburton. ...got it. Evidently not. I have to admit I hadn't figured it out yet either, though I realize now I was just fooling myself. So, rather, both BOS and IND have determined that their summer league guys have so impressed that they've relegated the likes of Brown, Tatum, Smart and Sabonis, LeVert and Brogdon to the bench. More seriously, how can someone not like what they out of Cooper saw versus IND, and to an appreciably lesser but acceptable degree, versus BOS? Count me intrigued. But don't hate me because I (and others) have been down this road a couple of times. Sobriety is a good thing. Getting drunk on first impressions can be a real bummer. Cooper had some success in the SEC, and that's no small thing. He also had some legitimate deficits in the SEC that, in the end, made him the 12th PG selected in the 2021 draft. That doesn't magically just disappear from the profile. Give it time. And higher competition. And most of all, don't set expectations so high now that it makes it more difficult for him to impress later--that happens, and a lot.

Is "convolution" the same thing as "definition?" Maybe just me, but I see nothing "convoluted" in @niremetal defining a bet in a way that purely looks at whether the player earned his way into the #2 role, or just was the default because there were no better alternatives. The earning part would seem to me to get at the heart of the debate--is he that good, or given that the better player had to miss games, was he just the next man up?

The NBA champs will not look upon us as their biggest rival. But from our perspective, I believe they have to be considered our biggest rival. There are other rivalries that are called that for a variety of reasons. But when the question is "which is the biggest," I read into that "which is the most significant and compelling... which is the one for which the team will/should feel most proud if/when they defeat that team?" There is no other answer than Milwaukee. They won what, but for a referee's misplaced slipper, truly could have been Cinderella's... ours.

Right. Reality is, it's more typical for there to be 1, 2, 3 or 4 of the first unit on the floor with 4, 3, 2 or 1 of the second than it is for you to have all 5 of the second unit on the floor. And, too. If you're really good at what you do in the first unit, the opposition actually would prefer to see something different. That's how I think about it anyway.