StephenHawking

We just have to get rid of all the vets. Especially losing Dedmon would benefit the tank. And that's the difficult part with tanking. You got those vets who look great but you can't hold on to them in the long run because they hurt the tank. Heres a ranking of who's most important for winning games and consequently the best trade object for the tank(only considering players who are likely to be traded): 1.Dedmon (can win us 10+games) 2.Baze (can win us 5+games) 3.Ilyasova (can win us 3+games) 4.Belinelli (can win us 2+games) 5.Babbitt (can win us 1+games) Thats how I see it.

This time im also convinced tbh

I can see us pulling a couple of trades at the deadline to ensure the pick

I think selling Dedmon depends on who we want to draft. If we draft Ayton I'd sell high on Dedmon now. If we get Doncic I'd try to hold on

You really think there's a roster in the east that can compete with arguably the goat? What the Cavs missed in the finals was a big man who can crash the boards without being a nofactor anywhere else on the floor. He could cause serious damage simply because the warriors have nobody to guard him without giving up guarding other players.

Dedmon could be one of the missing peaces for the cavs to beat the warriors. Is there a good deal we could do with the cavs?

To support Peoriabird, people always did and always will underrate the Hawks for being a low attendance team who no one cares about and because ATL sports fans are the most depressed and pessimistic fans (understandably) around. The Hawks have a couple of good players and especially are pretty deep.

Man oh man Bud sucked it up in the end once again. Not only giving the Spurs easy 2 pts through freethrows, no he wasn't even able to draw up a inbound play to give the ball to a good freethrow shooter afterwards. He was lucky that the Hawks won that game.

I realized the way I'm thinking is way too philosophical/scientifical. There's a saying in Germany: Nothing is safe except death. It kinda undermines what I'm saying that actually it's not factual but more of a public opinion. However I realize how stupid of an argument that is and how we couldn't discuss basketball following that notion even if it's actually the right way of thinking(but way too exhausting)

I think I'm unable to elaborate the point I'm trying to make in a way that you get what I'm about. I understand your post and agree with it. Its more a problem with the word and it's meaning for me than if there's an actual gap between players performance because I know there's one. I can't get my point across however. Sorry

I get what your saying in a sense. Still I'd argue that talent or ability if you want to call it so are way to tough to identify to really make it a thing in the nba. Has a guy like IT or Kawhi outplayed his prognosed talent/ability? Yes indeed. Thats what makes it tough to say roster xyz is talentwise worse than roster zyx. I mean do we know if Prince/Collins/Dedmon and so on have the ability to step up their game to an extent where they are recognised as more talented as players on other teams? To me its just a stupid argument/discussion when people try to tell whether someones this or that talented and the team plays well because of coaching or ability. There are such fine linings inbetween those things that it's way too hard to identify for the occasional fan.

I mean its obvious that Schlenk build the roster to compete for the first draft pick. Bud otoh makes the exact same mistakes he made year after year. Its not like he never did that. He always made horrendous decisions on in game subbing. He always sucked on crunch time play calls. Its nothing new. Bud as coach wants to win games. Its not like his and the GMs vision don't go hand in hand. There's a reason why the whole hawks community calls every loss a W as well. Its the same reason why Schlenk won't mind a real W (knowing the roster is poorly build). Every game is a W for the hawks. Bud wants to win games. Schlenk makes it hard for him. Nothing weird about that.

I honestly don't think so. Everything Bud intends to do serves the purpose of winning I think. Schlenk is fine with losing but he would neither lose on purpose as in subbing out the best players or do the wrong play-calls.

Please tell me what's wrong with it? Was Oladipo as talented two years ago with the magic as he is now just because he suddenly gained stardom? I'll tell ya last year people wouldn't thought of him as talented as his level now suggest. Talent is a completely overused term in the nba. It becomes obsolete because it's not detectable. Maybe my wording with "Top-talent" was wrong as I simply wanted to refer to the top college players in mock drafts. Sorry bout that. Still talent is a word that makes no sense in any way. The top college athletes are those of whom you think their college play transfers to the nba. Is a player in the right situation more talented than a player in a bad situation? When is the situation the reason for his play when is it his talent? Who decides? People always say the Hawks players are good because of the situation not because of talent. Where is the stat measuring this stuff? Are you going off of Espn mocks before the season starts or whose deciding how talented a team is? The Hawks players are as good/bad as they are due to their play and ability to work within a team. The other thing that factures in is the schemes established by the coaches. These things make a team good or bad. Terms as overperforming or underperforming don't make sense

You ain't good just because there are a bunch of worse GMs in the league. Moreover I'd like to tell whether someones good or bad by judging his capabilities.

That would be complete nonsense. Bundle a promising sophomore lottery pick and an average pg starter in this league for a project like Colin sexton or something. That would get us nowhere. We have to maximize on talent and possible chances. Not go two for one and then hoping for sexton to become a starting caliber player like DS17 already is.

Never understood this argument. Who can tell how a team should perform? Who are we to say this group isn't as talented as other groups? Why are the Hawks always overachieving in your minds? Maybe they play right where they belong talent wise.

And people praise him for his work with rookies when in reality he has no greater achievements than any other coach in this league. Let's see: Schröder made good development (known that Atkinson is the key attributor to this) THJ (bad player to average player) Muscala (bad player to under average player) Bembry (nothing accomplished yet) Prince (slightly below average player for now) Collins (average player) Dorsey (nothing accomplished yet)

Bud seems to have that lifelong pass due to his coty honors. Next to nobody is digging into his bad habits and fails. They always strike back with its not on bud he's a great coach bla bla.

I'd like you to elaborate what makes him a good coach

It has to be addressed every once in a while that Bud is hella overrated as a coach imo. Sure I'm not aware of how other coaches perform but he seems to struggle at just about everything. - Never adjusts to in-game-situations (Gets outcoached every third qtr) -Unable to draw up good final shot plays -Completely overrated at developing talent (Hes pretty good in making bad players into average players but he seems unable to put players over the top) -Has strange relationships to players. (Playing Delaney all the time even though he sucked way too often in example) Just to make it clear. I'm okay with keeping Bud as a coach for now as we are trying to be bad anyway. Its the next season and season after what's bothering me. To get the best out of top talent you need to hand them the keys sometimes. The way he treats Collins hell be unable to develop his game. He can develop to an above average big as Hoeford and Sap were at best but nothing more. If we get even better talent this year in the draft I dont want them to sour on the bench when we play mediocre talent instead. Big players make big plays in big moments. Therefor the rookies have to play.

I mean it's not like he was making better crunch time decisions in the last two years..

What the hell is Bud thinking??? First of all why don't you sub in John Collins on the Dinwiddie Freethrows? He had 10 boards in 15 minutes and we go along with Ersan?! Secondly what in the world kind of play were they running out of the timeout? Going for two when your down 3 AGAIN? WHY? Anyway a good loss for the tank community

On another note I digged Dorseys play. Hopefully he'll get more playtime and becomes the 3pt scorer he projects to be

Truly awful game. Gotta get in on Coach Bud too. I freaking hate how we underutilise JC. What the heck he supposed to do only getting the ball behind the 3pt line. That unselfish play has to stop. He uses JC like he's Plumlee on a bad day. Collins could dominate this league straight up. Worries me to see Collins getting the ball on the elbow and not even taking one glimpse at the basket.