davis171

6 hours ago, thecampster said:

1st things first.....you don't "have" to spend 90%.  If you fail to spend 90% you are taxed the difference. Technically you could field all $1 million contracts and spend only $15 million. You'd just get charged a tax of $72 million and get it distributed to the players.

2nd thing....the cap is both a short game and a long game.  We currently have 5 first rounders in 2 years. A 2018 top pick earns $5.8 million.  The difference between the 30th pick ($1.16 mil) and the 13th pick ($2.18 mil) is $1 million and by all standards negligible. But the difference between picks throughout the lottery goes up substantially.  If the Hawks had the #1, #15 and #30 picks this year, they would be spending $8.99 million. Contrast that with dropping 3 spots in the 1st and second picks (4,18,30) and they are spending $7.1 million, a difference of $1.9 million.  But 3 years from now when the players are in their contract years and the Hawks are trying to be competitive, #1,#15,#30 cost you $17,412790.4 per year while #4,#18,#30 cost you $13,956,854.7 ($3.46 million less). Now although 1 and 15 should turn out to be a better player than 4 and 18, that extra $3.46 million would/could have been the difference in retaining/getting that one extra free agent. $3.46 million more in room could be the difference between Gordon Haywood and Paul Millsap.

3rd thing and I can't say this enough.  More or less salary is two parts of the same coin. If you have "more salary" the rules are more generous to you swapping parts of higher level players but less generous in signing.  Less salary gives you flexibility (up to a point) to sign talent but less flexibility when making trades for top talent.  IE...Two LT teams can swap high salaries easier than 1 high and 1 low team because the low team usually ends up into the cap by making the swap and doesn't have the talent to send back to make those swaps work for the other team.  If you have 8 players on rookie contracts (very possible for the Hawks in 2 years), you have to send out 4 or 5 players to take back 1 star contract but you have to maintain a minimum number of players on the roster throughout the season. Large amounts of rookie salaries makes dealing complicated to say the least. "Salary" is by far the hardest part of this puzzle that is tanking and one completely lost on the average fan.

So you really think they are trying to get a pick between 3-8 over 1-2 over a slight cap difference when history says the most talent is selected with the #1 pick. This maybe the most ludicrous argument I've ever seen. Why not hypothetically trade back? I'll be waiting......

22 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Believe me..you're talking nonsense...AD with a few good players can barely make the playoff. Its just not feasable now

Cool

In the significantly tougher west with no cap flexibility and a mediocre roster. If the Hawks manufactured a trade for AD we would have cap space to go into FA to find a guy or 2 to play next to him with the flexibility. I agree it probably isn't happening but no one last year thought the Pelicans would trade for Boogie or that Kyrie would be a member of the Celtics.

12 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Kawhi definitely ain't coming here next year sorry...We are just going to have to sort out what we have after the next 2 drafts and go from there...by that time Baze will be in his option year.  There is absolutely no reason to be concerned about Baze's contract right now

I'm not saying he is but if AD comes available or any other players at or above a star level via trade or or FA I want the hawks at least kicking the door and that requires tradable/intriguing contracts and assets. We have a lot of future picks and idk if we take all of them all I'm saying. I also love Kent so only if it makes sense but to put a lock around him would be foolish.

3 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Again we are no where near 41 wins nor do we have a superstar on our team...apples and oranges

But if for example Kawhi or AD became available and Kent's contract in someway hampered the ability to acquire them then it is a bad contract and thats the point. The hawks need to have only assets on the roster that ready us to make that kind of move. The hawks need to constantly be ready to make savvy moves and Kent's large contract isn't exactly something you can get creative with. 

4 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

The Rocket are ready to win now and have a bunch of vets on that team...no comparison between the current Hawks and the current Rockets. Don't start sounding like KB21. Lol!

They were rebuilding kinda if you remember. They went 41-41 and let Dwight walk who was their second best player. Had they signed Baze (they offered slightly more than the hawks) they never would have had the opportunity to sign CP3. That is the point AHF is making that the hawks may lose an opportunity with his number on the books.

7 minutes ago, hazer said:

Yes. Yes. And yes.

Dennis is not a good fit with Doncic due to both their weakest games on offense being 3pt shooting and we attempt a ton of 3s in Bud's system. Either Schröder or Bud has to go or Bud has to change his system (which I don't see happening.)

7 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Too bad that most of the fan base couldn't enjoy this.  I actually fell asleep on this game at halftime.   Shocked to see Dennis explode in the 4th like that.   

 

As for the tank . . . Bud played Dennis 35 minutes and Taurean 37 minutes.

 

I still say that the Hawks DO NOT want the top pick.   I wonder what is the monetary difference between paying for the 1st pick, compared to the 5th pick? ** checking **

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonbelzer/2017/06/23/2017-nba-draft-1st-round-rookie-salary-projections/#77d52ed7be15

If there aren't any clear cut Hall of Famers in this draft, they may not want to spend the extra 2.5 million a year to get the #1 pick, compared to the #5 pick.

This is ridiculous this is you not knowing NBA rules. There is a minimum amount of cap space NBA teams have to spend (almost certain it is 90%) every year 2.5 million if anything helps the hawks if they are trying to tank because it is less salary they have to add via FA.

8 minutes ago, hazer said:

Close enough to it, Robert Williams of A&M please and thank you.

He would be a terrible fit with Collins solid player though.

http://www.espn.com/nba/game?gameId=400975809 meanwhile the suns are losing by 30 at home to the Pistons who are 31-39

We are about to get a win against a western conference playoff team on the road.

1 minute ago, lethalweapon3 said:

Even Taur3an's started to figure it out!

~lwshootanother3

~lw3

lol! Ingles and Mitchell are a combined 2-15 from 3 against our stellar wings.

Donovan Mitchell needs to learn we his 3pt shot just isn't falling.

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Well, you have an idiot for a GM.  I would anticipate that he makes an idiotic coaching decision when Bud leaves.  

I'll make you a bet right now Mark Fox is not the next hawks head coach. You are just irrational and spit out facts that aren't true 90% of the time. Want to respond to why Dallas has the 5th oldest roster in the NBA but are terrible.

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

It looks like Schlenk has his replacement for Bud lined up.  Mark Fox is traveling with the team.  

Some of the stuff you say KB is just throwing it at a wall and praying you are right.

Js the 76ers tank worked in most people's eyes. 

2 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

You mean the Millsap return has killed Denver

WYM???????? He had 14 and 8 in 45 minutes last night but its okay he is an all around player!

6 minutes ago, hazer said:

Next year Hawks will probably be around 10th. Then back sniffing the playoffs (8th) in ‘19-‘20, 3rd year of the reset.

I'd say it is 2-4 years (after this year) if we do this right through the draft. I could see Schlenk exploring trades should players like Kawhi, AD, etc come available.

2 hours ago, Diesel said:

Atleast 5 years. As I look at the roster now...  maybe Collin will be here when we start turning around.

Why wouldn't Prince be here? You are throwing out a random number without doing any back research. The longest drought in the east is the 76ers at 5 years which ends this year with a roster that has more talent and upside than any hawks team has ever had I'd take that.

2 hours ago, NBASupes said:

All GS starters but Zaza is out which is all of their starters. We gonna have to sit Prince and Dennis v. SAC and GS. 

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22839991/stephen-curry-golden-state-warriors-eyes-return-action-atlanta-hawks 

Big loss again by Denver in double OT. Sap with the inspiring 14 and 8 and 2/3 a/t. Keep it up Denver!

5 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

That statement is false.  At least he was definitely lying at first.  ( video clip in that link as well . . he talks about "taking a step back" at the 6:14 mark )

http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2017/06/05/atlanta-hawks-gm-travis-schlenk/

 

Obviously he isn't going to say it to the media Mark Cuban just got a 600k fine for it. In this same article Schlenk says

Schlenk also talked about his relationship with head coach Mike Budenholzer and his feelings on center Dwight Howard. Schlenk said Howard was a “huge rim protector,” and “those guys are hard to find.” 

5 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Come on now Wretch.  I know you're a longtime fan. 

And it's the management decisions that should worry everyone.  Because one thing about Atlanta is that when you're losing, the fans aren't going to come out AT ALL.   This isn't Chicago or New York, in which you can still be top 10 in attendance, and still put on a losing product year after year.

In Atlanta, when you lose, fans don't show up . . . which means you lose money at the gate . . . which means that ownership decisions for improving the team are partially based on the financial stability of the team.  That's why you give draft picks away for cash considerations and refuse to even go over the Salary Cap, let alone dab into the Luxury Tax to put forth a better quality, but higher costing team.

It's going to be very interesting to see who Schlenk gambles on in free agency in these next few years.  He'll have to gamble on someone, because Ressler will start getting "restless".  Anyone who think we can be a non-playoff team for more than 3 seasons, and not see a major shakeup in the front office, or at the coaching position, is fooling themselves.

And the first head to roll will be this one . . .

 

 

Let me take that back.  The coach always gets fired before the GM.

 

Just want to say Schlenk 100% told Ressler that he planned to blow it up that is why he has the job.