Mikey

Just now, KB21 said:

Ask Detroit how helpful that is.  

You problem is you think all drafts and front offices are equal. 

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

This is why teams who pick high in the lottery tend to continue to pick high in the lottery.  Atlanta has a golden opportunity right now.  They got lucky and won the lottery.  They can take a future star in Sarr.  There is no need to try and get a #1 pick in the next two drafts.  It never works.  It has never worked.  It will never work.  

Not to mention we don’t even need 1. We just need to get into 1-6 range for next class 

12 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

This framing is just off, dude.  That is how every single team wins a championship.  They consistently improve their record because their players develop together, get better, and build chemistry.  This is how the Spurs do it, this is how Golden State did it, this is how the Nuggets did it, etc.  Name a team that intentionally lost games with a losing culture then became competitive and won a chip?  Has that ever happened?  Look at Philly, Detroit, Charlotte, Knicks, Rockets, Magic, etc.  The list goes on.  

 

Not to mention you act like I said we need to string multiple years of tanking together? I said we need to maximize our odds of being bad for a ONE year to land a top pick to add to this core. Not keep Murray around to be the 12th best team 

if yoy want to try your luck drafting franchise talent 8-14 every year go for it. That is not realistic. Picks 1-3 maximize those chances 

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

This is why teams who pick high in the lottery tend to continue to pick high in the lottery.  Atlanta has a golden opportunity right now.  They got lucky and won the lottery.  They can take a future star in Sarr.  There is no need to try and get a #1 pick in the next two drafts.  It never works.  It has never worked.  It will never work.  

Sarr is not a franchise guy. He is NOT the player you build around. He is a player you build WITH

10 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

This framing is just off, dude.  That is how every single team wins a championship.  They consistently improve their record because their players develop together, get better, and build chemistry.  This is how the Spurs do it, this is how Golden State did it, this is how the Nuggets did it, etc.  Name a team that intentionally lost games with a losing culture then became competitive and won a chip?  Has that ever happened?  Look at Philly, Detroit, Charlotte, Knicks, Rockets, Magic, etc.  The list goes on.  

 

This example is an anomaly not the standard. You don’t draft franchise players in the secodn round or 13th overall 

7 minutes ago, KB21 said:

You wanted an example of a team who built from being competitive to being a championship team.  I gave you an example.  I'll give you another example.  Milwaukee.  Two of the more recent championship teams.  Neither tanked.  Neither team had the #1 overall pick like the Hawks do now.  

Go look at the best players in the league and history. More often than not they are top 1-3 picks. If you think you’re just gonna luck into drafting the best players at a random spot in the draft then idk what to tell you. The hawks aren’t just gonna be competitive next year and land the best player in the class at pick 12 or whatever. But if they are bad and developing young players then add Flagg or whoever at the mix 1-3 they have a better chance at being good 

this is inherently truly and if you are saying otherwise you just are lying. Nobody is saying we need to actively be losing games for a string of years. We have our core what we just need is someone to be that guy and if the hawks trade for our picks back getting it in a loaded 25 and 26 draft class is much more possible with better odds 1-8 then being a play in team or luck into the 8th spot 

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Denver Nuggets.

Next?

They drafted their best player in the second round. Good luck using that philosophy for team building

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Warriors - Didn't tank.  They were bad for 100 years before they lucked into Steph Curry with the 8th pick.

Spurs - Didn't tank.  Star players were hurt, and they lost because of that.  They added Duncan to Robinson, Elliot...etc when they returned from injury.  

Are we really going to rehash an argument I've already won?

Name a team that has won a championship being competitive. Just constantly in the 10-17ish range. It doesn’t exist 

you’re gonna say the bucks but just like the warriors who you say lucked into curry, they lucked into Giannis 

1 minute ago, Hawkish said:

Mikey — Do you think Quin would be on board with a youth-er movement?

For an extended period of time absolutely not. For one year he could get behind it 

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

Do you like being this wrong?  The is one guaranteed way to never win a championship.  Tanking.  

Wait till you realize what the warriors did before they were a dynasty. Or what the spurs did to land Duncan. 

1 hour ago, Afro said:

You're trading Trae for not high picks?

That's what doesnt make any sense for me.

You're actively rooting to trade our star for 2 picks in a bad draft, and some #15th picks(or worse)

 

If your sole goal is to be good and the position of the picks doesnt really matter, trading solely with the Spurs doesnt really make any sense. 

Shit, if middling 1sts is the goal, just trading DJM for whatever pick package you can get makes far more sense. 

[insult removed]

1 hour ago, JeffS17 said:

There's a big difference between the Spurs trying to win with not a ton of talent versus letting Trae chuck up shots from 35 feet while the rest of the roster gets cardio

Yes, I just got off a virtual board call, I get some meetings might be in person but there's no reason to assume they will be.  Trae is 25, not 65.

The same thing would happen with the hawks I don’t get how y’all do understand. They would be playing Quin ball with jalen and sarr at the forefront. Not watching Murray jack 25 shots a game and not be a high level playmaker while simultaneously take minutes from Kobe and any other guard and make them the 7th seed. There youngins will play and learn but lose that’s how it ALWAYS works 

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

No.  You don't need high lottery picks.  You just need picks, a great culture where winning habits are developing, and great scouting/analytics.  

[insult removed] The jokics of the world are anomaly’s. You need top picks 

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

OKC didn't tank either.  They had 1 top 3 pick in this rebuild.  SGA was acquired in a trade.  Josh Giddey was the 8th pick.  Jalen Williams was the 13th or 14th pick.  Cason Wallace was the 12th pick.  

Got to love these fans who think bottoming out and being bad for the next 5-6 years is the best way to build a championship team.  No one has ever blitzed their roster to bottom out and gone on to win a championship.  

Where their pick lands doesn’t define what they were doing. Hawks landed 1 we didn’t tank. We had 3,6,and 8 in years we actually tanked. Pick placement means nothing but good spin just like I said you would. 

Not to mention nobody has to tank for 5-6 years when you already have most of your core. You literally have no idea what “tanking” is. You play your young guys a ton of minutes, naturally they lose and you have a chance of adding high level talent. The process worked to do that. Hawks turned a roster with Dwight Howard as their best player to Trae young. Sixers turned a roster with nobody to embiid. The point is churning your roster to add high level talent. Every team that’s tanked as done that. You have to add the *right* talent if you want to win the chip. There is no one right way to win a championship. There is a guaranteed wrong way and that’s staying in the middle just like you want 

Just now, KB21 said:

I mean, if you really want to start the tanking discussion back up, go ahead.  I told all of you back when we did it foolishly in 2017 that it was far more likely that they would rebuild again before they ever became a championship level team.  That's what tanking does.  It's a foolish strategy that offers no benefit long term.  See the 76ers.  

Yup tell that to OKC. You don’t have a single clue what tanking is or what it’s for 

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

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.  

Organic to the fact they intentionally wanted to be bad. But you’ll spin this convo however you want just like you did with edeys good numbers at the combine. 

Just now, KB21 said:

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.  

Guess Trae didn’t develop while we were losing games! The spurs legit tanked they didn’t sign a POINT GUARD to give their superstar even decent guard play all season. They INTENTIONALLY LOST GAMES. 

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

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.  

Do you think wemby isn’t developing on a bottom team rn? Your coaching staff and environment is what’s important to development not the win loss. You know why the pistons suck? Because they have awful coaches and front office. you know why okc is good despite being bottom feeder in recent szns? because they hired the right coach to develop their players.

Intentionally keeping Murray to hurt your odds and take away minutes from your young guys is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. As long as Quin and staff are there the players would develop 

2 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

How is building around a young core of Trae, JJ, and Sarr the worst plan?  

How is building around a young core of Trae, JJ, and Sarr the worst plan?  I think each option has it's plusses and minuses.  

Not saying it as horrible path. It’s a fine one but relatively speaking it’s the worst. Pick a side of going all in or rebuilding don’t try to play both sides 

6 hours ago, Sothron said:

The source cleared me to reveal the name of the superstar.

It is Giannis. 

I am not saying it is going to happen but it is being discussed and it depends on if Giannis wants to come to Atlanta. This is from my source and from @NBASupes source. 

It also leaves the option to trade for BI and the team would look roughly something like:

Trae

Bogi/Kobe

Ingram/Hunter

Giannis

OO

 

The longer  version of what I've heard can come down to three options for our roster:

The above option, the "Push All The Chips In" is what I call it. We will be a  good team, no question, but with a scary future with no firsts for a long time.

 

2nd Option:

We trade Murray and AJ  to NO for BI and the Lakers 2025 unprotected first

We keep Trae. We do NOT trade for Giannis. We use the #1 pick on Sarr.

Team would be:

Trae

Bogi/Kobe

Ingram/Hunter

Sarr/either Capela or OO

 

3rd option:

We blow it all up. SAS have offered 4, 8 and all our picks back for Trae. We move him. We keep the #1 pick. We move Murray not to the Pelicans but to the Pistons or another team I've been told not to mention that has picks/young guys.

Roster would be:

(this is my postulating at possible draft results)

Reed Sheppard

Bogi/Kobe

Hunter/#8 pick in this draft

Sarr/OO

We have all our picks back as well as picks and young guys from moving Murray to either the Pistons or mystery team.

 

Which option do you guys and gal prefer? I think the 3rd option is the best one but the 2nd option is more safe. The first option MIGHT win us a title...but then we'll be in purgatory for years with no draft picks.

If someone can make a poll with these three options, please do so, you have my blessing. These are the three big scenarios the Hawks FO is discussing now and in the upcoming time to the draft.

If you can get Giannis you get giannis. If you can rebuild you rebuild. Path 2 is easily the worst 

there is your aggregation

3 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

You can't be an aggregator with original content bro. An aggregator is hoopshype.

He's clearly not a paid insider. That's obvious. 

I think what you guys are trying to say, is he's not credible. I don't know if I agree. Maybe he isn't but the miss rate is high with almost everyone including Woj. It's hard to say. 

He is an aggregator. He shares reports on twitter from all national reporters. Its literally in all his tweets about anything. He may also cover a team or the league but that isn't what he does on twitter. His twitter is just resharing content from other people

2 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

But some really fit Quin scheme

Doesn’t matter lol. Quin wants to win now