sturt

Wrong graphic, if you're gonna bring me into it, kids. Use this one.

Question answered... assuming we're talking about the same "he"... Oh. And how about the #2 in that list, eh? Few of us would have ever bet on either of those being the case, eh? Never mind me. As you were.

Answering your questions straight-up, respectfully, no snark or insult necessary over here on my side, though it's a free country and we all get to choose our approach, of course... Q1: Why do I feel compelled to "spread your misery to others"...? A1a. It makes sense to me that it must not be miserable for those for whom it's not miserable. So, for that subset, it's a false premise. These are the people who I just described... they are fully lucid about the situation, and honest with themselves that this is simply how they've chosen to be entertained nonetheless. Having an owner whose paramount goal is to use the team as a cash cow does not eliminate the possibility that the team would somehow still find a way to summit Everest and enjoy that sweet orgasmic feeling of a downtown parade. It just makes it more ambitious, more unlikely. "Oh well," they say. There remains some moments of joy to be had in the daily soap opera anyhow, and with that, there remains hope. A1b. Another subset is at the other side of the Venn diagram. They already are miserable. So again, there's a false premise there--one cannot "spread" something that is already present. These also are fully lucid about the situation. And unlike the first group, they are not content. They see the cold reality and if they have not already quit, they are working on summoning up the will power. But we all know, there's an aspect of this that's like being addicted to a drug when you've went years if not decades getting dopamine rushes from this stuff. They are as upset about the futility as anyone, but not only are they enmeshed with the team, some even have these fan-to-fan relationships that it's difficult to let go of. And it's reasonable to believe that, among that group, the posts you reference can be both sweet and salty. Salty, in that, they're reminded of why they feel so miserable; sweet, in that, there's something to be said for being reassured that there are people like yourself, and who've jumped overboard and able to testify that the water feels fine. A1c. Did someone say "A1c?" These are the diabetics. I kid. I kid. This middle of the Venn diagram is characterized by vacillation and by a private face and a public face. They occasionally find something to feel genuinely good about, but most days feel miserable. And/but that misery hides behind a mask of "Nah, it's fine." Of "I'm okay, you're okay." They understand the reality like the previous group, but unlike the previous group, they're not going to let themselves go "there," at least, in any public way... or, at most, very rarely when they feel forced into a corner. These are the Hawks/Hamsters junkies who know they themselves can't let go, even as they also know, mixing metaphors, that the journey to Everest is now complicated by a consequential change, ie, since an avalanche has mostly eliminated the most conventional path to the summit. So while they feel especially miserable, that's compounded by the idea "we can't be transparent about this reality... it's bad enough a situation as-is, but worse if, even just incrementally, my brothers/sisters start giving up and abandoning the cause... misery, yes, loves company." A1d. There is one more group, but they're not even in either circle. That group is defined by their lack of misery... by default, contentment... due to lack of recognizing the situation for what it is. So. The posts you reference have no real effect on the first group. The posts are not emotionally pleasant to the second group, but are rationally reassuring. The posts are fingernails on a chalkboard to the third group... I get it. But the posts are most justified because that fourth group exists even 5 months later evidently. That's "why." Q2: Why are you so interested that others share your persistent pessimism related to the team? A2. Feel like this question is mostly a intertwined with the first, so it's essentially already been addressed... except, that is, for this "persistent pessimism" part. Is it accurate to say I'm "persistently pessimistic" where it concerns the team? No and yes. Let's remember, as a preface to what I'm about to say, that muah has been a consistently positive glass-half-full proponent of this roster for all this time... and add to that, that muah was as over-the-moon as anyone with the hiring of Quin the Eskimo Snyder. When a majority here were demanding after the 6th game loss to BOS a major move for a new consequential talent, I was among the few making the case that the team would benefit from a tweak and not much more. And so, I've said multiple times (put the search engine to use if you doubt me) that I felt that the team--with its new coach and good health and maybe one surprise better-than-anticipated asset--plausibly could still yet achieve something special after all. I still believe that, but I'm just not going to be seduced into riding the ride this time... and for that matter, for awhile unless/until it seems my team of 50+ years isn't having to win in spite of its owner's True to Atlanta fraud. So, no, not pessimistic as-if I feel pumped to watch the team fail. That's simply not true. I'm not going to invest my heart in them, but I still want them to succeed if they can, just as I still want my friends here to be able to enjoy that success. But yes in the sense, obviously, that Peter Antony Ressler's thinking and behavior inherently makes it harder to achieve... and that's not my fault, that's his. Blame him, the guy who it now has come to light was a fake all along about caring most to bring a championship to Atlanta... not me. I'm just the guy, or one of the guys, who noticed the emperor's lack of clothing and is pissed off to have given him the benefit of a doubt all these years. I mean, you have to know that among the things I hate most over time has been when passive aggressive, glass-half-empty Jay turns out to be right about something, when I'd been among those who... adamantly... argued that the glass was half full if we just gave it enough time. Q3: Am I happier? (Or is it the case I'm needing to make others miserable in order to achieve a desirable level of happiness?) To the second question, again, see answers to Question 1... covered that, though I'll add that I like you people as a rule... I've abandoned following the team for reasons well-rehearsed by now, but that doesn't mean that the only thing anyone on Hawksquawk ever talks about is the current status of the team... and so, I've continued to visit and to participate in conversations that aren't actually applicable to the team's performance. To the first, yes. I am. To what I think might be the point of that question, allow me to highlight some quick math I just did. Since June 26, I've posted... 57 posts speaking to the Hawks' owner's bad faith in some fashion 43 political posts 32 posts about anything else... ranging from happy birthdays to uniform/jersey fashion to the ethics of imposing on an NBA legend's brand You may look at that and say, "Dang... 57... that's a lot." Or you may look at that and say, "I'm surprised. I figured about 85% of your posts targeted Ressler's decisions." (It's half that, of course.) How about you? Since June 26, you've posted... 500+ posts, or almost 10 for every single one of the number of posts you're voicing objection to. And that's just you. One person. I could go look it up, but I won't bother... obviously, then, there are thousands upon thousands of posts, an ocean of posts that have been submitted for public viewing in the past 150-ish days. My point in citing that math is this: It's not as-if these posts represent some terrible imposition, even if they are nails on a chalkboard to one particular subset of the congregation gathered here. Summing up and getting out of your hair... at least for now... I'm a proud contributor to the Tell It Like It Is PAC. And that's a virtuous principle even outside of politics, in my opinion.

Again, I have no opinion on any proposed trade, but I'm marveling at the intelligent humor offered by Jay even as I'm also simultaneously marveling at the substance of that humor. I mean... look, it's one thing to indulge Tony Ressler and just admit to oneself that, just as All My Children or Days of Our Lives never had any real expectation for soap opera addicts that there would be any final ultimate sweet mountaintop experience, Hawks basketball just happens to be my chosen dopamine rush, my chosen personal daily rollercoaster, and I don't even care that the producers/owners have no such "vision" for the show but to keep making money off of my devotion to the show... That's fine. That's a lucid, sober mentality. Good for you. It's quite another to be willfully blind to that after two salary dump trades in two consecutive off-seasons with zero on-court talent return... and to approach the topic of Hawks basketball as-if there's some "vision" other than what Captain Obvious endorses. That's not healthy. Just sayin.

I'm clearly not getting through, but oh well. It's okay. And by "both" you mean... ??? Because I don't. I'll acknowledge I look at the standings once every week or two. And maybe with about the same regularity, I'll decide to watch a highlight reel on YouTube of a recent game. Yes, I'll visit here on occasion, but notice if you will, all of the discussions I give any response are about something other than the team's status... ignorance is bliss.

Back when I cared, PWill was on my short list. Doesn't matter now. Their vision is not my vision. But I'll give 'em this... at least they made it obvious enough that literally hours of my week have now been freed up to invest in other stuff, and I do appreciate that. Can't really even call it a fraud... just that obvious.

Wait. I need to savor this.... hehe... So until now, you thought that trading a starter for no on-court talent in return was arguably a move that showed vision. And and. Then, when that very same thing happened a year later, that too was arguably a move that showed vision. But now? Now if they trade X for actual on-court talent... now you conclude that they have no vision? Pardon the observation and I'm not picking on you so much as I'm picking on a sentiment I suspect several Squawkers maintain, JTB... but they do have a vision alright. It's just not the vision we all associate with True to Atlanta. It's rather the vision Jay the Skeptic kept suggesting [] all that time, and as it turns out was unfortunately so right to be a skeptic. It's rather the vision we associate with the 10 years of middling playoffs futility led by Knight, Sund, Ferry and Budenholzer in the office and Woodson, Drew and Bud on the court. As long as the team can seem competitive, and as long as we manage that payroll.... happy owner, happy life... that's the vision. The hamster wheel? Well, from our perspective, sure.... but it's more a cash cow from the other perspective. Ka-ching.

That's enough for me. (And Tony.)

Nonsense. Tony Ressler wants a championship. I know because he said so. True to Atlanta.

(Should be more precise with my words, sorry... though, otoh, it's not like it's not self-evident... ... I've been around as little as once in a couple of months, or as much as once or twice a week, but it's only for purposes unrelated to the 2022-23 team's performance/results since I've legit checked out of concerning myself with any of that... only engaging in topics that preceded leaving my marriage... NBA marriage, that is.)

I see you. And... This is the grand compromise. (Albeit, not that far off Big-2-O, which was already on the table but didn't catch fire.) Hey, hey, heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. I may not be around anymore, may have went on hiatus awaiting Antony Peter finally shedding the True-to-ATL ruse and selling his majority share... but I do still expect to be credited along with you on this one, my friend. Being fair, I was as vocal as anyone at the time, maybe more than most.

You're one of my favorite posters. A big reason for that is you at least you have some basic respect for critical thought, for arguing with yourself--sometimes a lot, sometimes a little. While you have strong opinions like I do, you try to set some context for your conclusions that appreciates the fuller picture that may or may not support those conclusions. And and, you're not above changing your mind if substantial reason arises, or at least, considering changing your mind. You'll dig in, sometimes hard, but sometimes soft. You aspire to the intellectual humility thing as I try to do. So, you're to be forgiven for limiting your statement this once... the fuller picture looks like this... Edit: And... oops... holding myself accountable here... after doing the screenshot, I realize that there probably should be some red squares highlighting the down 2pt% and FT%.

False dichotomy, though, AHF. You know this. We've been talking about it. That's not the legitimate comparison/contrast. Jalen doesn't play 48 minutes. No one does. I just looked. There are 18-ish minutes at PF per game that Collins would have been getting for the most part if not entirely if not for Tony Ressler... JJ played 15-ish last season in the games he entered. Add another 5-ish on average on nights that it's obvious that OO and CC are having struggles or playing hurt... I mean, I get it, it's really really important to circle wagons here, even if it means extending grace to the owner... I get it on the surface, I should say... I don't get it, once given any closer scrutiny... you're only putting out a vibe that will only encourage the owner to do this same thing this off-season, and the one after that, and the one after that... and moreover, it's not as-if JC has went to Utah and got buried on their bench because he really deserves some scrub-status assessment... no, he's starting, and getting the same minutes there as he did in ATL. He's an asset, like he's always been here. Damn, he just turned 26 friggin years old. We're not discussing, as we were this time last year, the virtue or vice of hanging on to Justin Holiday, s'helpme. The determination to defend against public seller's remorse is too thick, though maybe should be expected. Tony's got to be happy... saves himself money, and fans just keep swallowing his True to ATL BS as-if Russell Stover chocolates... even smiling and resisting objection when they get that evil licorice flavor syrup in the middle... who eats that and smiles???... why??? (... ie JC salary dump).

Actually, this... ... was the most stunning part of that graphic, for me. No one else? Good point.

Any theory I would offer would be based on what I saw last season mainly, since I'm not engaged this one. My general thought would be that JC would (a) flip his 2022-23 end-of-season minutes with JJ's 2022-23 end-of-season minutes, but also (b) it's not all that absurd to me to think that he'd pick up some C minutes as you've suggested, as well. Bey? That's strange to me to hear, given his history... he has the girth but little else for that position. But maybe Quin's already made some major difference. Wouldn't pretend to know. (Take note, readers, not just of the fact that his PF net production numbers are consistently in the red, but that you subtract then that number from whatever his SF number is, so you see clearly the delta between playing SF vs. PF historically. The pattern is clear.) I have no strong evidence either way, and/but because of the absurdity of the terms of the deal, it's hard for me to imagine any coach under penalty of perjury preferring not to have a starter-type asset of JC's caliber on his roster... even if it were just for the sake of injury insurance, the only reasonable justification is the same justification anyone and everyone otherwise acknowledges... this wasn't for Quin, it was for Tony. What weak evidence there is, though, is that Quin had such consistently positive things to say about JC's play last time I was giving my time to watching Quin's pressers... and by that I mean I recall Quin bringing up JC, not waiting for a question about him. Final thought. Small sample size alert, just 40 shots. But early on, the Baptist is hitting his 3s for the Jazz at a career high clip... .425 per basketball-reference tonight. That, though, combined with how he finished last season gives a lot of reason for seller's remorse, at least among those convinced Collins' finger would forever more keep him from being able to shoot decent again.

Never mind me... just passing thru... just posting this here b/c it was the first thread where I could tell there'd be some Trae conversation, and it just so happened to pop up in my Twitter feed as I reviewed it just now..... thought it would be of some interest...

Ordinarily, these days, I only visit HS with any openness to engaging a conversation on weekends, but I can make this quick, and out of respect to you, North. I won't say there is absolutely none, but I will say 99% there is none. Maybe there's something that I can't imagine. But I can't. Look. When Tony made the JC trade, either another shoe had to drop almost immediately that would have made the first shoe make sense, or not. "Not" happened. (Obviously.) Surely I don't need to rehearse this in November, but I'm going to say it anyway. You had a starter quality asset on the roster. You had a starter quality asset, still yet, who had arguably been the most cooperative, most forgiving, most congenial personality on the team. Yes, he'd regressed in scoring production since his finger accident, but more recently there had been reason to believe JC was turning the corner on that. And no, there was no reason to believe JC would be a complainer if JJ's training camp dictated he would become the starter. You had a new coach who plausibly could also be a significant catalyst in JC's getting back to the force he's been... I mean, if the player was 30 years old, maybe there's an argument that the stock was hopelessly bottomed out, but conventionally speaking, JC's headed into his prime career years. One could not ask for a scenario that more vividly illuminates an owner's true mindset. He conned me into believing all these years that he genuinely wanted first and foremost to achieve a championship... that the financial side was secondary. Practically speaking, there is no other way to interpret that trade but as a salary dump. The roster is weaker than it could have been. I repeat, True to Atlanta, my ass. (AHF, I see you just now posted something, but at a glance, that looks like something that would require a longer dive... forgive me that that one's going to wait until Saturday.)

Quinn, at least as I had understood it, kept most of Nate's offense and defense last season, and overhauled this season. Fair to say that might matter? Collins, as I understand it, has mostly replaced Vanderbilt for the Jazz. Jazz have went from almost 117 DRtg to, so far, 121 DRtg. Vanderbilt's DRtg for last season was 4 points (!) below the team DRtg, suggesting that he was a major force for the better defensively. Collins' DRtg almost 10 games into the season is 1 point below the team DRtg, suggesting that he's slightly helped the team DRtg, but nothing like Vanderbilt did. Fair to say that might matter?

Oh geez. I get it... I sometimes if not often like to bring some critical thought to a topic where there's been some reason that most of the analysis falls to one side or the other... no problem with that. But. First, let's tease this out... there are GM basketball moves and there are (owner-driven) GM payroll moves. GM basketball moves - Traded a bunch of 2nd round picks for Bey... good move, but then a fuller picture we learned after the fact that it wasn't even our GM's idea... and practically any of us who would have picked up the phone for that phone call with GSW would have been more than happy to oblige. GM gets credit, but you didn't have to be Jerry West to pull that one off. - Fired Nate, hired Quinn... good move, but fuller picture... that one also fell in our collective lap thanks to the relationship of Kyle Korver with Quinn... however, higher marks are deserved since, sure, it was smart to have hired Kyle in the first place. Still, again, near zero of us Hawks fans would have hedged on that decision. It made itself once the opportunity emerged. Owner-driven GM payroll moves - Signed Murray and OO to "team-friendly" extensions... we'll see... I know the predictions and the optimism... God knows, we have a history here of calling some of those accurately, and in other instances, getting them terribly wrong. Not really a knowable thing so early on, and the conventional wisdom would be to believe that both sides had reason to be satisfied with the final numbers in those deals. - Didn't sign Bey to any extension... see immediately above... maybe a good call, maybe not. - "Traded JC for scraps, but retained flexibility and opened up playing time for JJ"... from a basketball perspective, this gets an F any way you want to look at it, and not even one of those high Fs... this is down there closer to 0 than to 59%... "scraps" = unconscionably bad "retained flexibility" = meaningless because there's not been any talent obtained yet, and moreover, neither is there likely to be b/c (a) well, Tony's payroll is Tony's payroll and (b) to make a move of any dramatic improvement would almost certainly cost some draft capital which this team (smartly) is loathe to give up... "opened up playing time for JJ" = nah, doesn't work like that... JJ was always going to get big minutes, and perhaps start from the git-go... JC on the second line would eat up other teams' second lines... What they've gotten right? Deals any of us would have gotten right. Wouldn't we? Any of us. What we can't know if they've gotten it right or wrong? Time will tell if the right decisions were made on the extensions... premature to celebrate, but I get the desperate want to call something from the off-season a definitive success. What they've gotten wrong? Question that inherently answers itself where JC is concerned, but I would add that it's that deal that didn't get made that would have added a key asset to the roster this off-season except it would have cost the owner tax dollars. I mean, seriously, friends... the quickest way to ensure this team never makes a move to get over the hump is for Tony Ressler and his minions to read things on this site that serve to reassure him you'll forgive him for a third and a fourth and a fifth salary dump of a major asset. Hamsterland on the horizon if your reaction to this kind of thing is to put your collective arm around Tony's shoulder and empathize with his "pain". Dr. Phil-ism is right... best predictor of future behavior is immediate past behavior. Jay, too, has been right on that one, far ahead of me... she's been the lead skeptic on paying tax for years now, in spite of Tony's occasional reassurances to the contrary. Be well.

Think you're just telling yourself that, North, all due respect (and I mean the respect part)... JC was always going to be an asset to some degree, if not a significant degree under Quinn. There's no getting around that.

Really? He wanted out? Because you're gonna have educate me on that one. I've seen only that he was very, very, very, very, very, very frustrated that he was traded. That's not to pretend I've studied it, but it is to say, right up until the day the trade was announced, there was no indication at all that he was anxious to be traded. "Well, he'd been in the rumor mill for literally years." Sure. But what happened after each time he wasn't traded? Each time, there were compliments directed toward him for how he'd soldiered through the mental ordeal that that is, complimented that he'd never become a problem child through any of that. And when asked after a deadline, he would respond that he was glad to still be a Hawk or words to that effect. So, sure, it's not illogical to read into the situation, "Surely he was ready to leave by now." But that's what it is... reading into the situation. There is no evidence of that. Did he say some things on his way out the door? Well, what would you think would happen in that situation? Absolutely. And salt in that wound, he's traded for literally a $1 lottery ticket by NBA standards. Of course you'd anticipate he'd express his frustration at that point. Of course if you're him, you're going to say things that endear you to the team that wanted you, not the team that's just decided to dump you. So, no, "how happy he was to be traded" is not the same thing the day before the trade that it was the day of the trade. All that said... none of that actually matters to the point I was making... of course. You're not going to successfully sell me on the idea that JC wouldn't get minutes without being able to quote Quinn himself. I regularly said last spring in reaction to all the trades proposed on this site and all the certainty among insiders and outsider alike that the team was going to make significant moves that I was going to be fine with any move the team made as long as there was something that pointed to the deal having Quinn's fingerprints on it, if not his outright explicit endorsement. If that happened, educate me (no kidding), because I quit cold turkey caring to read or watch anything related to Hawks roster moves at that moment the owner received payroll relief and Quinn got zero, zilch, nada. Welcome to your opinion. You're the boss of you. But if I may speculate, I take that opinion as that of a person desperate to emotionally satiate himself that "it's not so bad"... what might be called in this case trying to mentally remedy the seller's remorse that one ought to feel if your team just sent out a starter for a $1 lottery ticket. Collins would have been a force under Quinn Snyder. He was already turning the corner in terms of shooting that began to swing backward when he hurt his finger. I made the point here multiple times, this was a popular thing to say, but misses that when Trae wasn't on the court with JC, JC did dribble... JC did pass. The key seemed to me to be the arrival of DJM and the way the offense ran in Trae's absence. But under Nate, Trae and JC shared the court a lot. I don't know whether I understand what this means. What could possibly be "odd" about anything I've said? If anything, assuming what Dies has reported is accurate, there's just still more reason to stand on the hill I'm standing on. And don't come at me with "Well, yeah, but that's under a different coach" since it's generally held that the ATL coach and the UTH coach share philosophies and approaches. Okay. Well, I have the same response, then... Look. I made my decision to leave. You made your decision, as practically everyone else has as far as I would know, to stay. It's all good. I'm not against the Hawks. I'm for them, but only passively. They're not going to occupy anything close to the amount of attention they've done for most of 50 years for me. They've been replaced now by other options. And I'm for you as fans. I know how much you've wanted success, because I was one of you. It would be cool for this team to finally get to the holy grail. I just am not going to go for the ride any longer, now that I have clear and compelling evidence that the ride owner is content with a lesser ride generating a satisfactory net income number. My wrath is singularly focused on the guy who I believe conned me to believe he was genuinely committed to a championship, and would not be satisfied with just making money. I've had enough of hamster wheel entertainment, and that's the most likely outcome as we sit here today given Ressler's actions (not his talk).

Plausible. But selfishly as a fan, I don't care, I want to conserve talent. I'm not and never have been won over by any owner's argument that my team got better by subtracting a productive, cooperative player's salary. I'll not ever come anywhere close to forgiving Tony Ressler on this one... in case that wasn't already very well understood. I salivate at the thought of what this team was going to look like with Quinn being JC's coach.