REHawksFan

3 hours ago, thecampster said:

Baseball rebuild - Trade aging expensive stars for young prospects for your farm team after your team is already out of the playoff race. Let those players stay in the minors for 2-3 years and develop. Call them up to the big club. You still own their rights for an extended period of time. Sign veterans to go with them.  This is what the Astros did. They weren't trying to "Get a high draft pick", they were restocking their farm system with already drafted players on other minor league rosters via trade. But every year, the Astros signed new players to take those spots on the big club roster. They recycled and traded vets for prospects.

 

Basketball tanking - Trade aging expensive stars for players on bad contracts with little value in exchange for draft picks.  Draft those young players who must play on your roster if signed. You own their rights for 4 years. Wait for the bad contracts to become expirings and try to trade those at the deadline to other teams trying to rebuild or if those players redeem themselves, to contenders for low first round picks. Wait 4 years for 4 years of high drafting. Before your rookies get max deals and if they've developed into star level talent, try to sign free agent stars to pair with them. If they don't develop, you won't be able to sign stars to play with them, restart the treadmill.

 

It is very different in that a Baseball rebuild usually centers on restocking a farm system and can be broken out of at any time by taking on salary at the trade deadline from failed teams. The acquired players are draft picks, but players already drafted and who are stashed in the minors. You don't even have to lose big to do this. Because a major league roster is comprised of 8 starters, 5 starting pitchers and 1 closer (14 impact players), it isn't worth it to tank for an entire year to get 1 higher 1st round draft choice. The pool of players is much larger to pick from and scouting becomes better than draft position. The variance between 1st and 30th picks are much closer than in the NBA.

In Basketball, you have 5 impact players and a much bigger variance between the skill level between the 1st and 30th pick. Also, age is a factor because basketball players come out all through the 4 year college window. The higher the draft, typically the younger you draft. So high level players are less likely to contribute right away but have higher potential. A top 5 pick is very attractive, but player movement in the NBA is such that most high level picks explore free agency after their rookie contract expires and before they reach their prime.

Let's use Lebron as the example. Lebron was drafted by Cleveland and spent his first 7 years there. But then he got frustrated and went title shopping. He went to Miami as a free agent to get his ring.  If Lebron hadn't had OHIO ties, he wouldn't have gone back to Cleveland and they wouldn't have gotten their ring...12 years after they drafted him.  Remember, Lebron's Cleveland championship wasn't due to their tank or to him being drafted by them, it was due to Lebron negotiating some level of control in personnel decisions to sign as a free agent and Cleveland spending the money to bring in a butt load of free agents and going into the Luxury Tax. Cleveland bought a championship, they didn't draft one.

Yes GS drafted Curry, Thompson and Green (not a lottery pick) but in the 2 years before winning the championship, they also traded for or signed Iquodala, Murphy, Crawford, Brooks, Blake, Livingston, Rush, Barbosa.  They traded/signed their way to a championship....which they wouldn't have been able to do except for the dumb luck that Curry was injury prone his first 3 years and was resigned on the cheap.

The same is true for the Astros and Cubs. They made savvy trades to build their farm system and but they weren't able to finish their teams without going out and spending money on free agents and trading away some of those farm systems.  Tanking doesn't win. In the end, every team figures out that you have to spend money to make money. You have to sign Jon Lester, acquire Iggy/Durant, Bosh/Lebron. You realize getting a Lebron isn't enough and you have to add a JR.Smith on the cheap, trade for a Kevin Love. Tanking doesn't win....stepping up your player acquisition game does.

Let me get this straight.  You don't draft a championship? So the Cavs title had nothing to do with Kyrie and his 20 pts / gm or Love (who they only acquired because they had drafted Wiggins No. 1) and his 16 pts / 10 rb per game?  It was solely a product of LeBron (whom they also drafted but we'll ignore that) and the signing of several role players?  Got it.

And what about GSW?  Their title was obviously not a product of their draft right?  I mean, why would anyone think that drafting their 4 best players on their first title team (Steph, Klay, Draymond, Barnes) would be significant?  That title wasn't due to their 67 pts / 21 boards per game, right?  Had nothing to do with it.  It was all a product of signing eight role players.  Sure, I get it.  You don't draft a title.  The real key to winning a title is signing a bunch of middling bench players.  We'll just ignore the core of that team since they were drafted and you obviously don't win titles through the draft.  

Your logic is impeccable.  I think you almost have me convinced.  

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

A lot of rookies play at a level that loses their team games rather than winning it.  I think you could see that in losing Belli / Ilya and giving those minutes to rookies.  Dennis is a big question-mark.  If he stays, it is hard to see how 48 minutes get divided between Dennis, Lin and Trae.   If he goes, then the team's talent takes a hit.  Baze is another guy who might be with us all year or who we might finally get a deal for that would lower our win total (particularly given all the public reports of him being shopped just a couple weeks ago). 

I think the team will unquestionably start the season better than we ended last season but I'm not ready to say what our roster will look like in January and/or whether they will be better than when we were running Dennis, Baze, Prince, Collins, Dedmon, Ilya, and Marco as our top 7.  It could certainly happen (none of those guys are world beaters) but there are a lot of moving parts for this team.

 I'm just looking at what we know right now.  And I know that the players lost from last years squad:

Ersan, Marco, Cavanaugh, Babbitt, Delaney, and IT = 8.4 win shares and a -13.7 Box Plus Minus.  That's not a lot to replace when we consider adding Trae, Huerter, Spellman, and Lin.  Even if we agree that Dennis will be gone eventually, he was at 2.6 WS and -0.7 BPM.  I'm just saying it's likely that they improve as a team, imo.  And it's certainly not a given that they GET WORSE by 4 games.  They were playing barely above g-league players last year.  Not they will be replacing those guys with rookies from the 1st round.  On talent alone they should be better than some of the guys getting run last year.  

15 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So wait...We replace Cavanaugh, Taylor, Lee and Delaney with real players and somehow we get worse?

This is what I don't understand.  Between the natural progression of the young players like Collins, Dorsey, and Prince and the addition of Trae, Huerter, and Spellman, I can't for the life of me see how they don't get better, let alone get substantially worse.  Makes no sense.  

Excited about Collins.  I think him and Prince will be really good this year.  I'm not sure how long it will take Trae to get his feet under him, but once he does, I think that core will be very impressive.  Call me an optimist or a sunshine and lollipops guy, but I'm excited about the young guys going forward.  And that starts this year.  

15 minutes ago, thecampster said:

He left then came back...not what we're talking about here. Go back and read my previous comment. Only about 1/5 of all top 10 picks ever win titles....anywhere!

Your stat - even if true (which I doubt) - doesn't prove the conclusion.  How many teams in the last 30 years have won a title without a Top 10 pick?  The answer is less than 1.  ZERO.  Even Detroit had a top 10 pick on its roster.  And most of the champs have multiple top 10 picks.  

Now you claim drafting in the lottery is not a recipe for success, but no team, not one, in the last 30 years has won without having top 10 players on their roster.  So you want Atlanta to have Top 10 players but not draft them?  Is that it?  And how do they attract such players?  Because LeBron, KD, Curry, ADavis, etc... ain't walking through that door in ATL.  

1 hour ago, thecampster said:

In the last 30 years, only 2 number 1 overall picks have won a title with the team who drafted them

 

David Robinson

Tim Duncan

That's it.

 

Hmmm.....I guess we are just ignoring Kyrie, LeBron, Hakeem, Magic, and Worthy?

39 minutes ago, thecampster said:

In the last 30 years, only 2 number 1 overall picks have won a title with the team who drafted them

 

David Robinson

Tim Duncan

That's it.

 

Did LeBron not win a title with Cleveland?  But it isn't about No. 1 overall picks.  The Hawks didn't get a No. 1 pick this year and nothing they've said publicly leads me to believe that is their agenda.  The whole "trying to lose" argument is one contrived on this board and others like it.  It isn't reality.  Or at least hasn't been yet.  If they start trading away Prince, Collins, Trae, etc... in an effort to just get the No. 1 pick each year, then you're argument would be valid.  But so far, all they've done is torn down the previous version of the team, collect assets, and draft the potential "core" of the future team.  

A core of Trae, Huerter, Prince, Collins, and Spellman sounds fine to me at this point.  Will it pan out?  I don't know but I'm willing to let it play out to see.  Now they have to let those guys grow up and get better - while trying to win as many games as possible - and then add more talent next year.  By year 3, they could be at a point where the team will be ready to add complimentary vets to the talented young core in order to facilitate a PO run.  That's how you build it, imo.  That's the smart way to do it.  Yes, you use the assets you accumulate to facilitate trades and attract free agents to supplement the drafted talent.  But you can't ignore the drafted talent.  They still had to get a Trae or Luka or JJJ or whomever they chose with the 3 pick.  And I agree they have to be smart with Cap space and not sign bad contracts.  

4 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Alrighty...I'll play....the 9 straight losing seasons was due to what then?

 

The 10 year playoff streak was due to "what"?

 

Does Miami make the finals without Lebron and Bosh?  Did Miami not trade away the farm to clear space to sign Lebron and Bosh?

The 2009–10 Miami Heat season was the 22nd season of the Miami Heat in the National Basketball Association (NBA). The Heat made the playoffs for the second straight year under Spoelstra. They failed to make it out of the first round once again as they were overpowered by a Boston Celtics squad that featured Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen in five games. Boston eventually lost in seven games to the Los Angeles Lakers in the NBA Finals. Following the season, the Heat would bring in LeBron James and Chris Bosh to join team captain Dwyane Wade.

"

June 23, 2010	To Oklahoma City Thunder----  Daequan Cook No. 18 Pick (Eric Bledsoe)	To Miami Heat---- No. 32nd Pick (Dexter Pittman)
June 24, 2010	To Oklahoma City Thunder---- No. 48 Pick (Latavious Williams)	To Miami Heat---- Future Second-Round Pick Cash Considerations
July 9, 2010	To Cleveland Cavaliers---- 2013 First-Round Pick 2015 First-Round Pick 2012 Second-Round Pick (Jae Crowder) Future Second-Round Pick Trade Exception	To Miami Heat----  LeBron James (sign and trade)
July 9, 2010	To Toronto Raptors---- Two 2011 First-Round Picks Trade Exception	To Miami Heat----  Chris Bosh (sign and trade)
July 12, 2010	To Minnesota Timberwolves----  Michael Beasley	To Miami Heat---- 2011 Second-Round Pick 2014 Second-Round Pick Cash Considerations

 

Was or was not the Golden State rebuild 6 years before they made the playoffs?

Was or was not the rise of Golden State due to them finally trading away assets for Iggy, Brooks, Crawford, Murphy, Blake...all of which were turned into cap space to sign others in the following years?  In every case, its management of the cap, trading the future to capitalize on free agent or expiring contract stars that leads to the championship.  You build a base of young stars but then mortgage the hell out of the future for 2+ stars to pair with them.  See GS signing Durant, Pachulia, Rush, Barbosa, Livingston etc.  All this nonsense of growing your own is just nonsense.  They were crap until they started trading/signing their way up the West.

 

Trades[edit]

June 27, 2013
	To Golden State Warriors Draft rights to 30th pick Nemanja Nedović[1][2]	To Phoenix Suns Draft rights to 29th pick Archie Goodwin Malcolm Lee

July 10, 2013
	To Golden State Warriors Andre Iguodala[3] (from Denver) (sign and trade) Kevin Murphy (from Utah)	To Utah Jazz Andris Biedriņš (from Golden State) Richard Jefferson (from Golden State) Brandon Rush (from Golden State) 2014 & 2017 first-round draft picks (from Golden State) 2016 & 2017 second-round draft picks (from Golden State) 2018 second-round draft pick (from Denver) Cash considerations (from Golden State)	To Denver Nuggets Randy Foye (from Utah) (sign and trade) 2018 second-round draft pick (from Golden State)

January 15, 2014
	To Golden State Warriors Jordan Crawford[4] (from Boston) MarShon Brooks (from Boston)	To Boston Celtics Joel Anthony (from Miami) 2016 second-round pick (from Miami) Conditional first-round pick (from Philadelphia via Golden State)	To Miami Heat Toney Douglas (from Golden State)

February 19, 2014
	To Golden State Warriors Steve Blake[5]	To Los Angeles Lakers MarShon Brooks Kent Bazemore

You have to do both. The Hawks didn't have anything to trade away prior to the rebuild. They have to draft the talent first and that means being in the lottery to do so. But KB claims that the lottery is some magnetic field that won't let you out once you dip your toe in it and that doesn't have to be the case. 

24 minutes ago, EazyRoc said:

No, it really doesn’t. The guys research just is what it is. 43 wins is all it took to make the playoffs last year. That number likely decreases to about 38-40. This team won 24 games last year. With natural progression of a young team, 30 wins could realistically be accomplished this year. Long story short, we won’t be in the lottery too much longer unless we continually bottom out the roster year in, year out. This team could make the playoffs 2019-2020. That isn’t outside the realm of possibility. 

The east will be complete trash this year. Any team that wins 35 games will likely be competing for the 7th and 8th PO spots til the end of the year imo.

Also, unless the GM trades away the young talent on the roster, I don't see how they don't get better each year as prince, Collins, Trae, Huerter, and Spellman all get better. The idea now is to shed to middling players over time and replace them with more young talent and then add vets as they go along. 

People forget what Schlenk said when he took the job. This doesn't have to be an extended rebuild and it certainly doesn't have to be "worst team in the league rebuild. He's going for the GS model not the Philly model. GS never drafted higher than 5th if I'm not mistaken and only did that once.

2 minutes ago, sturt said:

Effectively, this seems likely to end up merely being a trade of 3 years of Dennis @ 15k for 1 year of Lin @ 12k, plus whatever asset(s) Dennis brings back.

I don't trust that Lin is actually going to get much playing time simply because injury history is what it is. He's likely going to be more of a player-coach than he is a player.

Except if you trade Dennis' 3 years for Lin's 1 year and Lin is hurt during his 1 year, who are the PGs other than Trae? Where's the vet?  

5 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 

You agreed with AHF, so tell me - how do you get the lottery picks and young players with potential to Trade for the stars? 

Hawks haven't had that in a ahile, now we do. The question will now be - when and if we will be willing to do so and if we should.

Exactly. And that was my point. You have to have assets from somewhere. Prior to the tank, they had no lottery picks to trade for a star. 

I'm trying to reconcile the following facts:

1. Atlanta is neither a destination city nor a prestige franchise so attracting Elite FA has historically been a non-starter;
2. Trading for Elite NBA players requires giving up comparable assets (which the Hawks have never had) OR taking on marginally "Elite" players (Joe Johnson ,for instance) that aren't leading them to a title OR taking on guys with red flags (see Cousins, Boogie); 
3. Teams that draft in the lottery seem to make a habit of doing so (evidence suggests true) implying that teams cannot get out of the losing habit once they start;
4. In the last 20 years, every NBA champion has been led to said title by a minimum of 2 lottery picks; usually including one top 5 pick (or more);

The above seems to point to one conclusion:  Winning team / franchises will continue to win while losing franchises will continue to lose.   For IF it holds that you must have elite talent to win titles (history suggests this is true) and IF it holds that Atlanta cannot sign Elite FA or trade for an Elite player (again, history suggests true), THEN the only logical conclusion is that ATL must DRAFT elite talent.  BUT, IF it also holds that tanking breeds losing which cannot be easily corrected, then how exactly does that lead to a title?  

I think the answer is that point 3 is not entirely accurate.  Yes, a lot of teams have tried to tank and have been unsuccessful.  Or at least they haven't proven it a good strategy.  But that's where the other front office stuff comes in.  Do you have a vision / plan for the team? What is its identity?  Are you signing lesser role players that fit that identity?  Do you have a coach that pushes the identity and players that buy in?  All of that stuff matters and can be the difference between getting out of the lottery revolving door and into the fast lane for a title (see Warriors, Golden State).  

No, it's not easy.  No, the Hawks don't have the built in advantage of having a Top 5 player of all time grow up in our back yard or having a history of titles to draw on (LA / Bos / Chi).  No, ATL isn't NY or LA or South Beach with all the glam and no state tax.  And yes, imo, it does mean that the only real viable option for a team like the Hawks is to go the lottery route and hope they have the front office brains to make the right decisions to go along with the drafting.  It takes time and it takes doing it in a smart way.  We'll see if Schlenk has what it takes.   

3 hours ago, DBac said:

Apparently none of the other teams in the NBA offered Boogie a deal. Say what you want about his attitude, he's outperforming a 5M contract on his worst day. Hard to feel bad for other competing teams if true.

Yep.  According to Marc Spears this morning on the radio, Cousins didn't have a single offer from any other team in the league.  Not one.  So Boogie actually called GS to ask about the possibility and the only option was the ME at $5.3 Mil.  He then called and talked to Steph, KD, and I think Draymond and all were excited about welcoming him to GS.  So he called the GM back and said let's do this.  

I know everyone wants to hate on the super team concept (and I hate it too), but at least in this case, it isn't really players getting together to make it happen so much as the rest of the NBA saying "no thanks" to Cousins.  So it's hard for me to hate on the deal when literally no other team offered.  

3 minutes ago, capstone21 said:

I would take Deng if they add Josh Hart

I think Kawhi is Lakers first choice and they need all the assets possible to make that trade.  If Pop still says "no" (highly likely imo given SAS general disdain for the LAL and lack of willingness to help them build a dynasty), then to me Boogie is their next best option.  In order for that to happen, I think they have to shed Deng's contract OR stretch him.  Obviously trading him into cap space would be the best case scenario and there's only a few teams that could even accommodate his salary.  Hawks being one, I think Bulls being the other.  So you could be on to something with Deng IF the Spurs don't cooperate with Kawhi.  My only concern would be that the LAL try to peddle their worthless picks with Deng instead of a legit asset.  

Keeping Melo will cost OKC something like $100 Million so there's ZERO chance he plays there next year.  BUT, as others have said, there's also little to no chance OKC or Melo would agree to that deal.  They have to cut salary not exchange salary.  On NBATV last night, David Aldridge was saying Melo is a good fit for OKC on the court and in the locker room, but financially, there's just no way the owners can tolerate the $100 Million bill that comes with Melo.  

If we are talking about trading Dennis, Orlando just seems like the obvious choice doesn't it?  They need a PG and have a glut of bigs.  Hawks can take on Bismack and a pick.  Win win.  

The media is really no different than the fans on here.  Those that think Luka is / was the best player of the draft class HATE the trade for the Hawks and those that didn't think Luka was clearly better than Trae or have questions about him don't hate the trade.  All those grades are based on the writer's preconceived opinion Luka and Trae.  

Personally, I preferred Luka over Trae but it was just that - a matter of preference.  I haven't made up my mind that either will be clearly better than the other so I willing to roll with the franchise and take the extra pick next year.  If nothing else, Trae should bring some excitement to an otherwise underwhelming team situation.  

1 hour ago, benhillboy said:

Conte said that yesterday.  Apparently he’s been involved in basketball decisions for the past 6 months.  I don’t like it at all.  Bud nor Ferry would stand for that.

I don't get it.  I've read all day that Schlenk was putting together the East's version of the Warriors and Trae is the biggest part of that narrative.  But now we are supposed to believe that Schlenk REALLY wanted Luka and owners wanted Trae?  Don't buy it.  Doesn't make any sense.  

Now Schlenk said himself that the team was divided between Luka and Trae and that I believe, but he also said they liked both and had them on the same tier.  So if they rated them both similarly and could take Trae AND get a pick, that's a no brainer.  We can argue all day whether Trae and Luka should be rated similarly, but that's literally what Schlenk said in his presser.  Not sure what the benefit would be to lie about it so I'll take him at his word on that one.  And in that scenario, it makes sense to grab the pick from Dallas as well.  

I don't think this has to be some big conspiracy or controversy.  It doesn't have to be Schlenk vs Owners.  Just because they disagree on preference doesn't mean one forced their will on the other.  

6 hours ago, Wurider05 said:

This draft is a blatant attempt to clone the Warriors just as we tried to clone the Pistons and San Antonio to no success. Schlenk is another Danny Ferry--guy who thinks that they are smarter that everyone else. No way in hell should that pick from Dallas should have been protected but he wanted Young that bad to be his "Curry". Cuban will spare no expense to get his team competitive again and they will be in the playoffs next year--mark my words.  The Warriors were created through time,circumstance, bad ankles, and luck.  We could have did a whole lot better than what we did last night. At the very least we could should have went BPA. We hired a defensive coach but want a offense styled team. What the hell is going on? I want things to work out but my common sense is telling me otherwise. I really hope that I am wrong but I think that we left way more talented players out there for Schlenk's vision. With similiar usage in college Tyler Dorsey could have been Trae Young and I question the talent gap between the two. Again not issues with Trae but I have an issue that we didn't get the best player we could have gotten with the 3rd pick. 

This post is all over the place.  First you complain that the pick shouldn't be protected and then lament that Cuban will have Dallas in the playoffs next year which makes your first complaint irrelevant.  Then you top it off by saying Tyler Dorsey could have been Trae Young?  Holy hell. 

None of us know how all this will turn out so it seems pretty logical to me to give it some time to breathe.  I personally had rather have Luka but more than anything I want the GM to trust his own analysis and his scouts and go with who he believes in.  If it doesn't work, it's all on him.  But it does no one any good for him to believe in Trae but draft the "popluar" choice in Luka.  

Just to set the record straight for those too lazy - er busy - to take 30 seconds to look it up, Trae  shot .422 last season with 86% ft and 36% 3pt.

1 minute ago, High5 said:

We've experienced a lot of gut punches as Hawks fan, but this one is one of the worst. I really wanted Doncic and Sacramento handed him to us. Really, really disappointed. That said, Young could blow up and make us all look stupid. Here's to hoping. 

I preferred Luka as well, but let's not act like Luka is a consensus superstar. Trae  could easily be just as good or better.  The overreactions are ridiculous.

56 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Is that one hell of a coup or what!?!

I love the enthusiasm, but it's FAR more likely they leave the draft with Doncic OR Bamba OR Porter/Young than with multiples of them.  All the trade talk is just that - talk.  There's nothing saying Schlenk or Memphis would even consider 4+Parsons for Cap Space.  So Memphis just gives away 4 and walks away with nothing but CAP relief?  Come on man....

20 hours ago, parfait said:

Hmm, another bold statement based on ______?_____ facts.

They will have an improving front court that has already put up numbers (Collins and Prince).

A veteran backcourt with athleticism (Schröder and Bazemore).

The addition of veterans added either on 1 year deals or as salary dumps.

And a head coach who emphasizes defense, which is the easiest way to team improvement with lesser talent onboard.

All of that points to a slight increase in wins, to the upper 20's/low 30's.

Hardly  a backslide to some sort of "historically bad" win total in the teens.

Remember, the so-called "tank" is only a function of year one of a rebuild. That is now out of the way.

The goal moving forward is squeezing as many wins, and as much development, as possible out of a young core, without adding any bad contracts.

There is no further need to lose as part of the rebuild. That was the directive for Year 1 only.

That's how a proper rebuild works. You don't need a high lottery pick every year (which is what Sam Hinkie got wrong).

You just need multiple 1st-rounders, you need to hit on a majority of them, and then you develop them.

And that's all the Schlenk has preached from the beginning.

 

Considering this is the same franchise that won 13 games during the last "rebuild" I find it extremely hard to believe next season will be "historically" bad.  I tend to agree that we will see an increasing win trend over the next few seasons.  I realize that doesn't fit the narrative of the resident eeyore but there's a good young core of talent on this roster that isn't going to be historically bad.  Especially when you add in a top 5 (hopefully) pick this year.  

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

Like the previous 3-4 years with the all the racist statements and in fighting among the previous owners?

Difference between dysfunctional ownership and even front office and dysfunctional coach.  I really don't like the idea of any coach being forced to be here if they don't want to do the job.  Talk about a recipe for disaster.  I think more of Bud than you do, but if he doesn't want to be here, I don't want him being forced to be.  

44 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

I want the highest of a pick swap for 1st and 4rd pick. Also the 16th pick in this draft. We get that, see ya Bud. 

I could see the swap OR the pick.  If they got both I'd be as close to satisfied with the trade as possible (I don't want Bud to go so nothing short of an unprecedented haul would get me overly excited).  

1 hour ago, marco102 said:

I'm of the mindset that the Hawks can demand a kings ransom because they dont have to let Bud go, so why not ask for somthing super high and see if the suns will bite.

Because the Hawks MAY NOT be in a position to demand anything.  IF Bud makes it known that him coaching a Ressler-owned team is an untenable situation and he's not going to do it, then he can force the Hawks to either trade him or risk a very messy, dysfunctional organization for two years.  Who wants an unhappy coach for two years?  No one wants that.  If the Hawks are forced to trade, they won't have any leverage to demand anything.