KB21

No they didn't. Their record is organic. It wasn't a forced move. They still focus on winning habits, which tanking teams do not do.

Wemby is developing because they aren't actively trying to play to lose games like we did with the idiot Pierce and the idiot Schlenk for choosing that route.

A deal like that isn't going to happen, period. Because if he does get put on the market, other teams will be interested that have a lot more long-term assets than we do.

That team is better than the current iteration of Orlando without them adding a lead guard. It's also better than what the Knicks will be when regression sets in next season, IMO. They are in for a big regression. It's better than what Miami will likely have next season. That team would likely be a 5th seed with young guys like Sarr, Castle, and Holland waiting in the wings.

Two things. Holland will not be a four in the NBA and replace Sheppard with Castle.

Wrong! This option is the best option if you move away from Trae. You stay competitive and create an environment where player development is done correctly. The option you want to go with, you might as well fire Quin and hire another stooge like Lloyd Pierce to intentionally lose games. The problem with that is that you don't develop young players properly without a competitive environment.

There's a fourth option. You do that Trae to SA trade and keep Murray to remain competitive. You don't have to completely blow up the roster after trading Trae, if that were to happen. Make SA give us Vassell in the deal and they can keep the pick swap in '26.

That duo was 30-13 before they fired Adrian Griffin and hired Doc Rivers.

Do the Spurs include Devin Vassell in the deal for Trae? I've worked the trade through the trade machines, and even though the Spurs are under the cap, they will have to send back someone like Vassell or a less attractive collection of contracts to make the deal work. I'd be more interested in Vassell even at the cost of one less first round pick. Adding Vassell to Murray keeps you competitive and keeps you from bottoming out. Vassell is also a far better option that trying to force Ingram to Atlanta.

If we do the trade for Giannis, we will absolutely have to use the MLE. The TPEs will likely be unusable because we will not have any picks to give.

If it happens, it is what it is. Who’s to say that this group doesn’t accelerate like the OKC young guys? If you bring them into an environment that is conducive to proper player development, and you never know what might happen. That’s what we lacked between Bud and Quin. Proper player development.

Back to my question earlier, this would be my vision. Take Alex Sarr with the first pick and get your defensive anchor. With the 4th pick, I’m taking Stephon Castle. He would be our perimeter defender that we have lacked. With the 8th pick, I am taking Ron Holland. My other thought is to shoot for upside and go with Zaccharie Risacher and Tidjane Salaun.

The issue is the picks we can legitimately offer are years away.

I just don’t see a way the Hawks can make an offer that will entice Milwaukee to trade Giannis.

No, because you can’t emphasize what they want to emphasize and then try to lose games.

So, let’s hypothetically say that they do this trade with the Spurs where Atlanta gets #4 and #8 in this draft, our firsts back in 25 and 27, and we remove the pick swap in 26. Let’s focus on those instead of the salary filler we get in the deal. Who are you taking at 4 and 8? What does this look like in 25 with potentially 2 picks? I would assume that you are keeping JJ, OO, and KB as the focal points. You keep DJ to keep the team from bottoming out. You continue to develop Mo and Vit. So, let’s hypothetically say that they do this trade with the Spurs where Atlanta gets #4 and #8 in this draft, our firsts back in 25 and 27, and we remove the pick swap in 26. Let’s focus on those instead of the salary filler we get in the deal. Who are you taking at 4 and 8? What does this look like in 25 with potentially 2 picks? I would assume that you are keeping JJ, OO, and KB as the focal points. You keep DJ to keep the team from bottoming out. You continue to develop Mo and Vit.

Which is why Landry likely will not do it.

I just went back and listened to Landry's post deadline press zoom. Two things stood out to me. He kept talking about growth from within and how that was a more sustainable model than just making a move to essentially make a move. He also pretty emphatically stated that he's not building this team around one guy. He's building around the aspects that he feels is important. With all the talk that is going on now, that made me raise my eyebrow.

I can't see it happening. We don't have the assets to trade. We can't trade our 2026 pick because we don't have a pick in 2025 or 2027. I doubt Milwaukee trades him for #1 this year, a pick in 2028, and a pick in 2030.

The Bucks failed because they fired Mike Budenholzer.

I don't think he will be on the market. If he does ask out, the Hawks will only trade him if the deal makes sense for them. I don't think Landry nor Quin have any intention to tank the team. I think it's more likely that they keep both Trae and DJM than trade Trae.

We absolutely can though, because we don't have to trade Trae. If San Antonio wants to d*ck around and be a 30–35-win team over the next two years, they can do that. We will just keep Trae.

Does anyone else hate watching Woj on TV? He's got a nervous tick or something.

From my POV, they get Trae and immediately become a top 4 team in the West with Trae and Wemby as the two stars. In fact, I would say San Antonio and Oklahoma City become the favorites to win the West. San Antonio doesn't get there this fast with any other point guard option.