noble

8 hours ago, KB21 said:

They have killed any chance they have at a ring by tanking.

0 rings since 1968. 0 championship appearances. I'd say we have been on that road for a long time. 

I do give you credit for sticking to your guns and somehow seeing into the future. Even if no one knows what will happen. I'm sure Warriors fan said the same thing. Or Cavs fans...

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

I agree with you.   AND  we have tried tanking before.  A few times... and it has never worked.  Didn't get us close to championship calibre.   Do we ever learned from our experiences?

 

Different ownership, different GM. At this point I think we can all agree all we want is to have a shot at a ring in our lifetimes. Let's just ride it out like we have before and see what happens.

8 minutes ago, Diesel said:

How often does a superstar move?   Have you been watching the NBA?  Superstars only move to where other superstars are.  George and Anthony moved to be with Westbrook.   CP3 moved to be with Harden. 

So... with that in mind.  Maybe it's not about getting a superstar, maybe it's about using your stars to attract star players.

 

Like Hayward going to Boston .

Like Butler going to Minnesota.

Like Cousins going to New Orleans. 

 

However, in none of those cases, do you see tanking playing a major role.  The tankers are the teams that lose those players... like Utah, Chicago, and SacTown.

 

Ah ha! So yes they don't move without other superstars. We haven't had one since Nique. This is the chicken or egg question. How do you get a superstar without a superstar? LeBron was drafted, Curry was drafted, so on and so on. All I wanted since Niwue left was another superstar so that we could have a shot at a ring. None came, none got drafted, we sat in hell since. So what of we try another way to get one? What were we doing before that was so special as to have a chance to get one? All I'm saying is we are where we are. It's done. Now let's hope this path gets us a superstar. Not like we had one before. 

Just now, Diesel said:

Mainly because hen you are in contention, FAs take you seriously.   We were considered to be in good enough standing to get Gallinari until Schlenk decided to blow everything up. 

Howard came as a FA. 

Sap resigned as a FA... we won him over Orlando. 

However, when you start the tank game.. nobody wants to play for you. 

I would argue no one has wanted to play for us anyway. What superstar has wanted to come to Atlanta?

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Yeah, so let's just intentionally lose games, blow everything up, and be losers for eternity just because we can't beat LeBron James.

We were already losers for eternity, prove me wrong. How many championships have we played for?

So to flip your logic on you. Let's try to keep together a team that has zero chance of winning a ring, that we can't add the superstar needed to win one, just so we can feel good that we made the playoffs and not win a ring for eternity.

5 hours ago, CBAreject said:

Ten years of embarrassing playoff exits.  Even our ECF season was embarrassing—we had way too much trouble dispatching a bad Nets team and then meekly took a historical beating from the Cavs.  The worst out of those appearances was the historical beating from #2 Orlando when we were the third seed.  Then there were the numerous other sweeps by the Cavs.  Every year, the narrative was that we were no more than a speed bump for a real team.  

This is what I don't understand from those who didn't want to go down this road we are on. We weren't any closer to a ring then, then we are now. But just being in the playoffs was apparently enough for them. This team has 0 rings. So 3 years, 5 years, 10 years, what is the difference? We weren't getting one with a core we couldn't keep together and a core we couldn't add a superstar to. 

1 hour ago, AHF said:

You aren't going to play him anymore and it saves you cash.  Basically, you do it primarily because it is the right way to treat players and you want them to sign with you in the future.  If you hold him hostage on the bench, you could poison your reputation.  And we should absolutely be benching some of these vets.

As I posted on the other thread, I hope it will prove to be a cautionary tale for some teams as well.  Sounds like at least a half dozen teams want Belli and could have had him for an expiring and a future 2nd round pick.  If their rival gets him, maybe they will think twice about passing on a low cost deal like that next time.

I get the cash and I get fundamentally the way to treat players, but when has treating players right actually netted us anything? I'm fine with the move for cash, it just bothers me the flaw in the NBA when it comes to the trade deadline and how seemingly easy it is for some teams to trade, get pieces, and acquire picks and how it hard it is for other teams. Its the similar flaw in free agency. This is a business and while financially it saves more for the future, it does little else. 

I guess I was hoping we could have still gotten some value that would bring talent in at some point, since as we all know our history of getting it in FA is marginal at best.

On 1/18/2018 at 9:50 AM, benhillboy said:

Oh I’m a Wade fan and think his career his underrated.  Save for the three point and free throw shooting and changing jerseys too much he’s absolutely one of the greatest 2s.  I hate Barkley as a TV personality but wouldn’t put Wade’s effect on the game at Chuck’s level.  You’re not an advanced stat guy but I am.  A career .171 WS/48 for Wade is 2 levels below Barkley’s .216.  Playing with LeBron and Shaq skews that number a bit but still.  Could Wade drag a team of Kevin Johnson, Dan Majerle, and Cedric Ceballos to a Finals?

Wade stayed pretty much the same player his entire career save for a crazy blocks season.  Chuck improved until his peak where he shot .338 from three with 11 boards.  What he did in the paint at his height in an era of Great Cs is still unbelievable and I witnessed it.  

Wade is a poor man’s Jordan.  This generation’s Drexler if you will.  His closest win share comparison is Billups, mainly due to team success in the playoffs, followed by Frazier and The Glyde.  I can’t compare Chuck’s style and set to nobody.  Maybe kinda like Cousins but much smaller and more dedicated to winning and leadership.  His win shares counterparts are Dr. J and KG, both far off from his style as well.

KJ was underrated let's be honest. 

49 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Hawks shouldn't give him one. Teams wouldn't trade for him then he sits on the bench while the tank rolls on. Giving him a buyout just gives teams in the future an excuse not to trade and just wait for a buyout

That is my question above. What sense did this make other than some cash? I mean it lowers your ability in the future seasons if teams are just like, screw trading, we will wait for a buyout and not lose much. 

Looks like a buyout for Marco. Hey couldn't get anything in trade, this makes sense?

In no specific order

Kareem

Kobe

Wilt

Duncan

LeBron

Magic

Oscar Robertson

Dr. J

Shaq

Bill Russell

I would have to say there is a bunch in the next group that could be argued for a top 10 spot. Jordan, Thomas, Stockton, Malone, Drexler, Kidd, Nique, Marovich, I could go on, but this is what it is.

On 12/12/2017 at 0:35 AM, CP61 said:

That would be a very fun team. Defense is for chumps anyway.

7 hours ago, Vol4ever said:

Try 40 years

We were relevant when we had Nique and just about every game was on TBS. But yeah, I get what you are saying. Been a fan over 30 years myself.

On 12/15/2017 at 8:07 AM, KB21 said:

Bud is the best thing this franchise has right now, and their shit for brains GM is going to run him off.

Half a season, shit for brains GM....makes sense. Except it doesn't. At all. Are you always this angry and unreasonable?

4 hours ago, KB21 said:

It's obvious how it brings you closer to contending than tanking does.  If you resign Millsap, you are in the playoffs, therefore you have a chance.  When you tank, you are not in the playoffs and will not be in the playoffs anytime soon.

Collins isn't anywhere close to Paul Millsap right now and will likely never be as good because he will never be one of the best defenders in the NBA like Paul is.  Paul is also the best mid post offensive player in the NBA.  Collins would have benefitted from playing behind Paul for the next 2 years had the team resigned him like they should have.  

Marvin Bagley also isn't anywhere near Paul Millsap either.  He's a great athlete, but so is Andrew Wiggins.  Being a great athlete doesn't make you a great basketball player.  You have to have a skill level that Bagley doesn't have to be a great basketball player.

 

This first few sentences is where we all differ. You think being in the playoffs we had a shot. Many of us knew that even though we made the playoffs we didn't have a chance. Without that one player who can carry the team when needed, the chances are zero beating the teams that do. As we saw against the Cavs.

48 minutes ago, KB21 said:

How is it spin?  I mean, I know all of you love to lose games in the long term, so you are getting what you want.  It's going to be years before this team is even remotely competitive again, but hey, you are going to get your precious lottery picks out of this.

Competitive is subjective. We are losing, but being competitive while doing so. Now if you are talking about winning it all? When have we ever been competitive there?

1 hour ago, DBac said:

Lmao this is some nice spin.

Yeah either way this team went last year it was going to be the same result, no chance at a ring. Not saying we have one now, but at least there is a small chance at a superstar now. We had a zero percent chance before.

On 12/14/2017 at 10:33 PM, nathan2331 said:

I don't hate it anymore than I hated seeing us get bounced out of the first round of the playoffs.

 

Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk

 

 

This. So much this. 

What I don't get is what people thought could and would actually happen. I mean we had a roster that was slowly getting worse, we couldn't keep the talent we had, and we couldn't get high quality talent in. I agree this might take a few years, it wasn't like we were contending for a ring anyway. I get the idea of morale and such, but if there is a clear path the first year or 2 shouldn't be so heartbreaking for players and staff. They know what the road forward is and have a clear understanding of the intent. Now if it goes beyond 3 or 4 years, I can see the morale becoming an issue, but I just don't see it now.

I can buy the idea of 2 or so years in the lottery, completely there in my head. No illusions otherwise. But to say this is a 5 or 6 year thing, eh, not there.

Player evaluation is the key to every team no matter where they are in the pecking order. It is about finding the best pieces to accomplish what you want.

I'll roll with it for a while, and I can accept it. I want to see a ring for the Hawks before I die. Maybe this path works, maybe it doesn't. What I do know is we weren't sniffing one the road we were on.

I'm just busy. But I'll post from time to time for the conversation  (yes even the tank/no tank ones) to see other perspectives. Right now there isn't a ton to talk about as we all know the direction of the team this season. Most are in a wait and see mode for off-season discussion. But I will look at a lot of posts to get some viewpoints to think about even if I don't join the convo.

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

If you can't get free agents, then you don't have a winning culture.  You're just a team that wins games. 

Winning Cultures attract free agents. 

Exactly, so we didn't have a winning culture when we made the playoffs the last ten years? So what is the difference if we try a rebuild vs the path we were on?

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

The truth is the people who are for tanking point to San Antonio and Golden State.  The argument is that the lottery did so much for them.  Yet they ignore the 14 other teams who live in the lottery and never sniff championship calibre.   It suggests that maybe getting a lottery pick was secondary to having a culture for winning.  We can go through and show team after team who have had lottery picks and high lottery picks and never came close to the championship.   Philly, I have shown, went to the lottery 11 times in 21 years and they have 1 championship appearance and that was in part due to the fact that we traded Deke to them.  There are several others who are lottery mainstays and they barely make the playoffs.   Then you have some teams that arrive at the championship calibre and it's due to good trades. 

If you don't have the culture, you can draft championship calibre players but they won't stay... Ask OKC about that. 

You can have a winning culture and not get free agents to get you over the hump to be a championship contender too. I think we all know a team like that.