parfait

6 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I hope Fiz stays away from this job.  I like him too much for him to get crushed in the Schlenk Crusher.  Let's just hired Collins and move on.  A young guy who don't mind losing. 

Oh no, you're drinking the "Schlenk is the source of all evil" Kool-Aid too?!  

5 hours ago, bleachkit said:

Why does Gearon get a free pass from Hawks fans? This guy was actively trying to sabotage our organization, willfully tracking in controversy and negative attention for his own petty personal gain. The man is a criminal as far as I'm concerned. 

Gearon gets no free pass. Gearon was a total douche throughout all that time. But perhaps the view of him softens a bit because he was responsible for throwing the final molotov cocktail that brought down the House of ASG.

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

He did nothing to show remorse for anyway.

Even if a mountain was indeed made out of a molehill, the GM and Head of Basketball Ops is obligated to address them. Ferry just slinked away (Shouldn't one be calling HIM Slinky?!).

Just now, KB21 said:

Let's see if he is actually offered and accepts the job.  

I'm sure he'll at least interview in Milwaukee first. And there's still the chance that he finds his way into the Cleveland job. But otherwise, Atlanta appears to be his next best option. That would have to raise even the most ardent skeptic's eyebrows if that happens.

By the way, just to show where the Hawks Head Coaching job ranks amongst the current available openings:

David Fizdale just interviewed with the Hawks today. He didn't even sniff around the Orlando or Charlotte openings. Heck, he took away from Saturday family time to meet with us.

Certainly the Milwaukee job is better (at the current time), and I still think that Portland may open up, which would be a plum job. And it's always good to interview in New York for monetary and exposure purposes.

But the best candidate out there not named Mike Budenholzer just spent the day in the ATL. And if Bud indeed gets the Milwaukee gig, then I wouldn't be surprised if the consolation prize for Fizdale is the Hawks roost.

12 hours ago, KB21 said:

When the coach can go to the league and tell them about how his front office had players fake injuries in an attempt to lose, I imagine it is in the team's best interest to just let him walk away with his money.

Ah, more fact-based accusations. That is some high level investigative journalism.

I smell a Pee-Ew-litzer! 

9 minutes ago, Watchman said:

Nothing factually inaccurate in my remarks.

So, they're cheap when they're being cheap. And they're not cheap when they're spending a lot of money. That sum it up? 

19 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Just specifically talking about Bud not being down with the tank.  And if we lost him, that we'll be looking at an assistant we can pay on the cheap, and not an established coach.  He was dead on the money in that aspect.

You don't hire an established coach to finish off the last couple of years of a rebuild. You hire a Brett Brown type and then reap the rewards once the roster has ripened.

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

The Hawks are years away from competing.  This team doesn't have good players on it thanks to this dipshit GM they have hired.  There may be two players on this team that will actually be a part of this team when it is good again, and it wouldn't surprise me if none of the players on this team actually see a second contract with the team.  They are no where near being Miami, and after the free agency season this offseason, there will be no question which team has the worst roster in basketball.  It will be the Hawks, because they aren't going to sign anyone significant that can help them win.  There will be no Derrick Favors signing.  There will be no Marcus Smart signing.  They will not hire a legitimate head coach.  This team will not even reach 20 wins in the 2018-2019 season.  

God help the team that sinks money into Marcus Smart!

31 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Actually, he’s getting all that money.  There will be some offset when he signs with his new team, but the Hawks have in effect fired him.  

The company Bud works for decided to change product lines based on market conditions. Employee Bud complained incessantly, without trying to understand the market, stating that he does not like this new product line. Employee Bud complained regularly about the new direction of the company, at times displaying insubordinate behavior, and created a hostile work environment. As a result, management was forced to capitulate to Employee Bud's disruptive behavior and agree to a separation.

Bud was clearly not a company man. He forced his way out. He was in no way fired.

2 hours ago, JTB said:

Why does someone have to be a liar? Here’s the thing...you were right if that’s what you want to hear about bud not being onboard with the tank but the part you continue to miss is that the hawks front office is in control of the tank and they could have kept his ass here to finish out these two year wether bud like it or not.

but they decided to let him go which we both agree was stupid but the point is on board or not bud could have been apart of this process for 2 more seasons and there would have been nothing he could do about it.

Clearly Bud was bitching and moaning at every opportunity. It's tough to keep that around.

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

Me thinks 95% of the board owes you a huge apology. Consider this my KB21 told you so to the board.

Bud botched the roster and then bailed. He never liked playing youngsters and refused to do so moving forward. He's the only one who owes any apologies.

3 hours ago, Vol4ever said:

Bud didn't screw us, the idiot's of ressler and sclenk did.  They will blow the draft too. 

What do you base this draft prediction on? Schlenk nailed his first Hawks draft, and most of the ones with the Warriors too.

14 minutes ago, KB21 said:

With schlenk’s negotiating skills, the Hawks will be lucky to get a 2nd round pick for Dennis.  

I actually sorta agree with this. I like Schlenk's drafting and cap management skills. But his trade and free agent negotiating skills are not his strong suits.

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

No one that actually has other options.  This is by far the least attractive job that is available.  You are guaranteed to be fired if you take this job, because you will not be winning anytime soon.

You seriously would rate the Charlotte and Orlando jobs ahead of Atlanta?! Two fellow non-playoff teams with bad cap situations and thus no hope of turning things around anytime soon?

Heck, even Phoenix is not clearly ahead of Atlanta UNLESS Sarver/McDonough actually follow through on their bold promise to hit the free agent market hard this summer. Otherwise, Phoenix just consists of a Shooter (Booker), an OK (Warren), a Bust (Len), and two Probably Nots (Chriss, Bender). 

Even New York is a questionable job right now, with a similarly bad cap situation, and with Porzingis likely to be out most or all of next year.

Only Milwaukee is a clearly better job, because of Giannis.

I'll take a team with significant draft capital, cap flexibility, and a virtually new arena in the works, to attract an enterprising young coach, over those first 3 dead end jobs.

4 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Sorry, but you can't make the comment he did, with him being in an executive position, and expect to survive.  Especially if you're in a metropolitan area full of people of African descent ( whether they be African-American, or immigrants from Africa )  

Put it like this.  If anyone Black ( or specifically a person with 1st generation African heritage ) would've been on that conference call, he WOULD NOT have made that statement.  That was Gearon Jr's issue with the statement he made.

Not to completely re-hash all of this, but let's have some context here.

Ferry's comment about Deng, from Gearon Jr's letter:

During the call, which we recorded so that notes could be made for our partners unable to participate live, our GM Danny Ferry discussed player personnel issues at some length. With respect to one potential free agent, a highly-regarded African-American player and humanitarian, Ferry talked about the player’s good points, and then on to describe his negatives, stating that “he has a little African in him. Not in a bad way, but he’s like a guy who would have a nice store out front but sell you counterfeit stuff out the back.” Ferry completed the racial slur by describing the player (and impliedly, all persons of African descent) as a two-faced liar and cheat.

We believe these comments by Ferry were far worse than Sterling’s because they were not from a private personal conversation—they were in a business environment on a business matter in front of a dozen or more people. If Ferry would make such a slur in a semi-public forum, we can only imagine what he has said in smaller groups or to individuals. We also note that the racial diversity of our management team has changed for the worse since Ferry took over. The media (and any savvy lawyer) would have a field day with that fact.

***************

Yes, Ferry did not write the negative comment about Deng.  But it's the equivalent of telling a racial joke, and saying "no offense", before or after telling the joke.  All Ferry had to say, was that Deng has a perception by some, of being dishonest, or going back on his word at times.   He STILL may have caught some flack for that, but that's at least a statement that doesn't have any racial connotation to it.   

Imagine a similar comment being said about a woman seeking an executive position in the Hawks organization. 

"She has a little "woman" in her.   Not in a bad way, but she’s like a girl who would make great decisions 90% of the time.  But she may be too emotional to make correct decisions 10% of the time, when that "that time of the month" came around.

Would Ferry survive, if he made a comment like that?

That is the litmus test when you're an executive or the boss.  If you can't say something that you can't say in front of everyone, especially when you're talking about employment, it's best to keep it to yourself.  Instead, Ferry used some ridiculous analogy to describe a player who is one of the better human beings in the league.

 

Great post TheNorthCydeRises. I think that this very important point has been lost amidst the "Ferry got screwed" argument. Professional decorum would have dictated that the reader of that statement either self edit it, or preface it with, "My God, this next scouting report is incredibly racist." Instead, he simply read it, and then compounded the transgression by trying to translate it. This was a clear HR violation. And when you have very few allies in the organization, you'd better be a model of decorum. Ferry, by multiple accounts, was not.

56 minutes ago, benhillboy said:

Great post @parfait but I have to disagree with you on the premise that Bud U. can just hum along without Bud.  I can’t see it.  Especially if he takes Ham and/or Jent with him.  Tallying up all the individual skills that improved under Bud’s tenure clearly shows how maniacally creative he was with players.  I’m watching Ilyasova and Bellinelli play like off-ball Gods and transform the Sixers after Bud refined their games so much in a training camp and half season.

Those are definitely reasonable fears, especially if multiple assistants follow Bud out of town. This certainly points to Bud remaining and working with Schlenk as the ideal outcome of all of this. Perhaps Bud sticking around would also keep management on point and keep them from prolonging the rebuild, a system of checks balances that was not in place when Hinkie was rebuilding in Philly.

Take a look this summary of a scientific study that was done looking at the effects of tanking in the NBA (I guess these "scientists" had a lot of extra time on their hands):

http://www.jonahlehrer.com/blog/2016/4/25/is-tanking-an-effective-strategy-in-the-nba

The study defines tanking as having multiple consecutive years with a top 10 pick in the first round.

They concluded that such a scenario is not conducive to building a winning team. So, tanking, in this manner, does not succeed.

They also concluded that the two factors that most contributed to a successful rebuild are:

1) The expertise of the person drafting the players

2) Player development

You'll notice that there is no mention of arbitrary win totals, such as 25 wins in a season, as being predictive of an unsuccessful rebuild. It comes down to the General Manager's drafting prowess, and the organization's Player Development program. That's it.

So, think about it. If you're hitting on a good percentage of your #1 draft picks (especially if you have many of them), and developing those players, then you should not be drafting in the Top 10 for more than 2-3 years in a row. Once you're in the 11-14 range, then you're knocking on the door of the playoffs, which is a sign of progress, both in this study and in reality.

These findings just point further at what the focus of the Hawks rebuild is and should be. If they have the right person picking the players (and in our case, they have numerous chances to pick in the first round the next couple of years, even before possibly accumulating even more picks in trades this and next summer)...

and they maintain Hawks University (losing Bud would hurt in this regard, but the infrastructure for player development would still be there. When a University loses its Chancellor, the whole college doesn't just crumble to the ground)...

then they would remain on track for an approximately 3 year rebuild, as many of us on here foresee.

This doesn't even take into account the horrid salary cap situation league-wide that puts us in a very advantageous position for picking up quality veterans over the next couple of years.

And when we're picking up other people's #1 picks, that further lessens the pressure on the Hawks to lose games moving forward.

So, we've got to give Schlenk, who already has a stellar drafting track record, the requisite time (at least 3-4 years in total) to follow this formula.

Pick the right players. Develop those players. It's that simple. It's... !

10 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Ressler can only be blamed for Al Horford but even Bud knew Al was only willing to sign if Atlanta made a serious commitment in trying to build a contender, Bud sign the only player who wanted to sign for Hawks in Dwight. Al wasn't impressed. Al asked for the max. Travis wasn't interested, they offered more than what Boston offered but Al did what Joe did. I want the max. Travis not wanting to make the mistake ASG, passed on Al's demands. He left the Hawks were history. 

Paul did want to stay in Atlanta but the Hawks knew this was a organization that is not highly profitable, so why lock into something that doesn't work. So they passed on him. Honestly, I would have paid Al the max. Hes worth it to me but many even on this site disagree with that take and some thought it was anti Hawks to give Al that contract he demanded.

Supes, I think you meant to say Bud-Cox passed on Al by not offering the max. That was a year before Travis came aboard.

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

We didn't get a late 1st round pick for Paul Millsap.  We got a late 1st round pick for taking on Jamal Crawford's contract.  Paul wasn't a part of that deal.

You're right. The original deal was reported as a multiple team trade, but then it was simplified for technical reasons. But the pick was sent as part of all of the machinations surrounding the signings of Galinari and Millsap.

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

The cupboard was never too bare to have that option.  Retooling on the fly takes a little bit of work though, and I don't think Schlenk was willing to do any hard stuff to retool the team on the fly.  The easiest route for him was to just fill the roster with filler and go with a bunch of damn G-League level players.

When Schlenk assumed the GM role in May of 2017, he was left with the following expiring contracts:

Jose Calderon, Mike Dunleavy, Tim Hardaway Jr, Thabo Sefolosha, Kris Humphries, Ersan Ilysova, Paul Millsap, Ryan Kelly, Mike Muscala

Remember, the era of big sign-and-trades has passed us by. We were lucky to get a late 1st rd pick for Millsap.

So, he was really only left with the following assets:

Dennis Schröder, Malcolm Delaney, De'Andre Bembry, Kent Bazemore, Taurean Prince, Dwight Howard

This collection of assets includes 3 bloated contracts (in a tight financial market), 1 Euro refugee, and 2 unproven youngsters.

That's a pretty bare cupboard.

11 minutes ago, AHF said:

I don't view the 60 win season as hollow at all.  It was a great year.  We didn't end up contending in the playoffs but we put together an exhilarating run.  

I would have loved to have seen Ferry continue as GM and would love to see where we would be today had he done so.  I think it is very likely he would have sold off Hoford and Sap as they approached their most recent contracts and been able to re-tool the team on the fly without tanking.  Of course, Budcox did not do that and backed the franchise into a corner given the mediocre results and escalating payroll.  Ferry was always very conscious about a nice value/salary ratio.  There is no way he would have signed contracts like the one that Bazemore got.

 

That is very possible but in gutting the team he could have traded players for immediate value rather than seeing our All-Stars walk.

These are crucial points, AHF. I too think that Ferry would have likely retooled on the fly, getting real return for Horford in the summer of '15 and then for Millsap in '16. He seemed to understand asset management. And, yes, he would not have signed any horrible contracts, such as Bazemore's.

But once Bud-Cox mismanaged their assets, the window for retooling on the fly had slammed shut. And a rebuild became the only alternative. If Danny Ferry had been hired in '17, I believe he would have come to the same conclusion. 

So, a retooling on the fly is always preferable to a rebuild. On this I think we can all agree. Bud-Cox simply left the cupboard too bare to even have that option.

Just now, KB21 said:

Danny Ferry retooled the Hawks without bottoming out, and the result was the 60 win season.  

To be fair, I did overlook his astute free agent signings: Millsap, Carroll, Bazemore. And he did change operations culture in a positive way.

I just worry that his Draft failings would have soon caught up with us. And signing bargain bin free agents only gets you so far, that hollow 60 win season being an example. It was just adding up to more treadmill time.

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

The ultimate person to blame for all of this is Michael Gearon Jr.  He's the one that got upset because Danny Ferry wasn't consulting him on roster decisions, and he's the one that spearheaded Ferry's ousting at GM.  If it weren't for that, we would still have Danny Ferry as the GM with Bud as the head coach, and we would be in a much better, non-tanking position now.  It's a shame that Michael Gearon Jr. is the most at fault for the Hawks losing both the best GM they have ever had and the best head coach they have ever had.

We can all agree that Michael Gearon, Jr. is indeed evil incarnate.

But, Danny Ferry is not without fault. He was not the main culprit in the PR disaster that led to his ouster. But he was widely known as being difficult to get along with, and the situation escalated particularly because he didn't have too many people in his corner.

And let's not sugar-coat Ferry's personnel track record. He whiffed on 3 of his 4 first round draft picks. He did pick a great coach. But outside of the Joe Johnson trade (which, as we found out, was due much more to Billy King's failings than's Ferry's prowess), what other great moves did he make? I would term Ferry's tenure an INCOMPLETE at best.

In fact, for now, I would put Stan Kasten as the best GM in our history. He traded for Dominique. He drafted Doc Rivers, Kevin Willis, and John Battle. And he's the only person ever named NBA Executive of the Year in back to back seasons, in '86 and '87.

19 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Then the solution is simple.  Give Bud an extension and a pay raise that ensures all the losing this team is going to suffer over the next several years doesn't affect his status as head coach.

My guess is, that sleazeball Schlenk wants Bud to absorb the losses so "his" choice at head coach doesn't have to.

Here we can agree. An extension for Bud would be the optimum result from all of this.

But, now Schlenk is a "sleazeball?" Come on, man, did the guy sell you some hair tonic that turned your scalp into his?