How much more can we take as Hawks fans?

[Guest]

Sadly, I would stay through anything..I'm here forever ..:-|

[Wretch]

It just sucks how quickly you're willing to give up on this relatively young team growing into a top 4 team. Without Horf we were damn near a top 4 team last year, had we not blown the series vs Indy and gotten past a beatable Wiz team. This year we've got Horf, Payne and internal growth from Teague, Scott, Mack and hopefully Schröder and Moose. This team is by far the deepest we've had in over 20 years and there's a lot of youth so e should only get better. Plus another year under Budz system as well.

You're right JJ wasn't a dunker but you had Chilly, Smoove and Duck Booty who played in transition and dunked a lot, since they offered nothing else offensively.

 

I was going to compile a list of talent over the past 20 years taken outside of the lottery (where we're picking), but I lucked up and found someone who has done the work for me.  You guys love stats around here...so tell me what you can reasonably expect from a draft pick 15 or later (link).  I'm not hating on our players or giving up on them.  I think they can be solid and their draft position doesn't necessarily mean they CAN'T become a franchise changing talent.  The history of the draft just doesn't agree with the high expectations that folks have with these picks and I'm inclined to go with that until I see otherwise.

 

I'm not a hater.  I'm just being real about our chances.  I'm taking into account the history of the franchise, the pattern of the NBA's final four, and a fair analysis of our team.  I'm being realistic.  As is, with a healthy team, I think we're in the 3-6 seed range...but so is everybody else.  Moreover, to be a top 4 team, we'd have to be the favorites against Chicago (who we suck against) or Cleveland.  I'm sorry, but I can't share your optimism here.

 

I think we're a 2nd round team.  On Ferry's plan, I think we're set up to be that for a long time to come.  I'll still watch the team and root for it, but damn man...I think we deserve better than that.

[Vol4ever]

Well most of us have been fans for several years.   I'm hoping to keep Coach Bud at least.  Ferry I'm not so sure about and it has nothing to do with the political correctness bs, but I was really dismayed that we didnt do better over the summer acquiring talent.  This may have been because ownership would not let DF spend the money.   

[AHF]

Without Horf we were damn near a top 4 team last year, had we not blown the series vs Indy and gotten past a beatable Wiz team. 

 

With Horford, we were 16-13 - not close to a top 4 team.  Without him, we were a losing record team.  Is it theoretically possible we could have made the ECF?  I suppose, but the odds were not good.  Is it a surprise that we lost to Indy even after they were circling the drain?  No.  Either way, I look at a top 4 team as being different from a conference finalist.  I view top 4 as being one of the best 4 teams in the league and thus one of the 4 teams with the best odds of winning a title.  Last year, we got fortunately slotted in the playoffs (which we made by virtue of other teams sucking more than our own excellence) so that we had a great matchup against a floundering team and then would have been underdogs in the next series against a beatable foe.  I definitely admit I was rooting hard to see if we could make a run of it and couldn't complain about how well we did given our talent deficit.  But we were never close to one of the top teams in terms of ability to win a championship.

 

Our championship odds last year were:

 

Maybe Miami and the WC will all get hit by buses to 1

 

This year the odds are slightly better but still in that same range.

Edited September 17, 2014 by AHF

[Admin]

I was going to compile a list of talent over the past 20 years taken outside of the lottery (where we're picking), but I lucked up and found someone who has done the work for me.  You guys love stats around here...so tell me what you can reasonably expect from a draft pick 15 or later (link).  I'm not hating on our players or giving up on them.  I think they can be solid and their draft position doesn't necessarily mean they CAN'T become a franchise changing talent.  The history of the draft just doesn't agree with the high expectations that folks have with these picks and I'm inclined to go with that until I see otherwise.

 

I'm not a hater.  I'm just being real about our chances.  I'm taking into account the history of the franchise, the pattern of the NBA's final four, and a fair analysis of our team.  I'm being realistic.  As is, with a healthy team, I think we're in the 3-6 seed range...but so is everybody else.  Moreover, to be a top 4 team, we'd have to be the favorites against Chicago (who we suck against) or Cleveland.  I'm sorry, but I can't share your optimism here.

 

I think we're a 2nd round team.  On Ferry's plan, I think we're set up to be that for a long time to come.  I'll still watch the team and root for it, but damn man...I think we deserve better than that.

 

I posted a full breakdown sometime in the past year about how the Pacers did exactly that and how the Rockets pretty much did as well. So it can be done, with smart drafting, trades, free agent signings, good contracts, etc. 

[Admin]

With Horford, we were 16-13 - not close to a top 4 team.  Without him, we were a losing record team.  Is it theoretically possible we could have made the ECF?  I suppose, but the odds were not good.  Is it a surprise that we lost to Indy even after they were circling the drain?  No.  Either way, I look at a top 4 team as being different from a conference finalist.  I view top 4 as being one of the best 4 teams in the league and thus one of the 4 teams with the best odds of winning a title.  Last year, we got fortunately slotted in the playoffs (which we made by virtue of other teams sucking more than our own excellence) so that we had a great matchup against a floundering team and then would have been underdogs in the next series against a beatable foe.  I definitely admit I was rooting hard to see if we could make a run of it and couldn't complain about how well we did given our talent deficit.  But we were never close to one of the top teams in terms of ability to win a championship.

 

Our championship odds last year were:

 

Maybe Miami and the WC will all get hit by buses to 1

 

This year the odds are slightly better but still in that same range.

 

Perhaps that was too vague. A top 4 team makes the conference finals. Had we beaten Indy like we should have, we'd have been top 8. Beat a beatable Wiz and we're top 4. Not hard to see how we could have done that without Horf and certainly would have been better equipped to do so with him. 

 

And people can bring up 16-13 all day long, but we were running a brand new system with 2 new starters and without Josh for the 1st time. Of course it was going to take time to gel. 

[Wretch]

I posted a full breakdown sometime in the past year about how the Pacers did exactly that and how the Rockets pretty much did as well. So it can be done, with smart drafting, trades, free agent signings, good contracts, etc. 

 

I remember that specifically, but there's two big problems with your reasoning (that you didn't address back then either).  You keep saying Indiana and Houston, but they both used lottery picks (two in the case of the Rockets).  To which your response is, "Yeah, but they're not GOOD lottery picks so they don't count."  They do count...because that's the whole point of the argument, we need to be drafting in the lottery if we're hoping to land a franchise changing talent and build a contender.

 

There's only two ways your logic makes sense.  One, you're saying we could be a borderline playoff/lottery team and end up with that 11-14th pick - which is probably the worst place to finish.  Otherwise, your talking about trading for a pick/player in that range.  Though I will agree with you to a point there, these, by your own admission, aren't the best lottery picks...

 

Either way, you're talking about a whopping TWO teams vs. dozens of examples to the contrary.  Go ahead and toss the Pistons in there for good measure and make it three.  It's the road less traveled because it's less promising.  Me?  Call me insane, but I'd just follow the example set by most contenders.

[AHF]

Paul George = Top 10 Lottery Pick

 

Rockets built around a trade using = 2 lottery picks.

 

I see this as supporting the notion about lottery assets being key elements in team building.

 

The Pistons dealt some lottery talent in their player acquisitions but they stand as the brightest example of building a team without lottery talent since so many of their guys were acquired other ways than drafting or dealing their own lottery picks (Wallace - Grant Hill trade; Hamilton - Stackhouse trade; Billups - FA; R. Wallace - mid-round pick to ATL; Tayshaun - mid-round pick).

[AHF]

I still find it interesting that Dumars did one of the best jobs in NBA GM history putting that team together and then embarked on a epic journey of fail beginning with the Darko pick that ended that team's run and set Detroit on its continuing collision course with piss poor team construction.

 

My bet is that he sold his soul to the devil for that one team and then had nothing left to sustain his run.

[Admin]

I remember that specifically, but there's two big problems with your reasoning (that you didn't address back then either).  You keep saying Indiana and Houston, but they both used lottery picks (two in the case of the Rockets).  To which your response is, "Yeah, but they're not GOOD lottery picks so they don't count."  They do count...because that's the whole point of the argument, we need to be drafting in the lottery if we're hoping to land a franchise changing talent and build a contender.

 

There's only two ways your logic makes sense.  One, you're saying we could be a borderline playoff/lottery team and end up with that 11-14th pick - which is probably the worst place to finish.  Otherwise, your talking about trading for a pick/player in that range.  Though I will agree with you to a point there, these, by your own admission, aren't the best lottery picks...

 

Either way, you're talking about a whopping TWO teams vs. dozens of examples to the contrary.  Go ahead and toss the Pistons in there for good measure and make it three.  It's the road less traveled because it's less promising.  Me?  Call me insane, but I'd just follow the example set by most contenders.

 

I think the Pacers highest pick was like 13. Or maybe slightly higher, but either way that's a far cry from tanking for the top of the lottery. The Rockets weren't tanking for the top of the lottery either. They were picking in the teens as well. I firmly believe that a good GM can find the same type of talent at 15 as he can at 12 so I don't buy your argument that you have to be "in the lottery".

 

My whole point is that no matter where you pick, you pick good players with real NBA value. Pick guys who are worth more than their draft position. You do that time and time again and you'll be in great shape. 

[Admin]

I still find it interesting that Dumars did one of the best jobs in NBA GM history putting that team together and then embarked on a epic journey of fail beginning with the Darko pick that ended that team's run and set Detroit on its continuing collision course with piss poor team construction.

 

My bet is that he sold his soul to the devil for that one team and then had nothing left to sustain his run.

 

If BK hadn't been around to give them Rasheed they would have never even sniffed a finals appearance. There was only so much they could take from the Hawks to make their team championship worthy. 

[Wretch]

I think the Pacers highest pick was like 13. Or maybe slightly higher, but either way that's a far cry from tanking for the top of the lottery. The Rockets weren't tanking for the top of the lottery either. They were picking in the teens as well. I firmly believe that a good GM can find the same type of talent at 15 as he can at 12 so I don't buy your argument that you have to be "in the lottery".

 

My whole point is that no matter where you pick, you pick good players with real NBA value. Pick guys who are worth more than their draft position. You do that time and time again and you'll be in great shape. 

 

Paul George - 10th Pick, 2010 NBA Draft

 

James Harden was acquired for two lottery picks.  One of them was Houston's (via Milwaukee in a lottery pick swap), the other was from Toronto (Kyle Lowry) and it broke down like this:

- Top-3 protected in 2013

- Top-2 protected in 2014 and 2015

- No. 1 overall protected in 2016 and 2017

 

That's a REALLY good pick coming from a team fresh off of a 23 win season in 2012.

 

Unless you're saying we can trade for lottery picks (which I agree with you to a point) or you're saying we can be a borderline playoff/lottery team like Houston (certainly not the ideal situation), then you're not making much of a case here.  The point is that these are the picks/assets that get it done - especially those closer to the top of the lottery.

Edited September 17, 2014 by Wretch

[Admin]

Paul George - 10th Pick, 2010 NBA Draft

 

James Harden was acquired for two lottery picks.  One of them was Houston's (via Milwaukee in a lottery pick swap), the other was from Toronto (Kyle Lowry) and it broke down like this:

- Top-3 protected in 2013

- Top-2 protected in 2014 and 2015

- No. 1 overall protected in 2016 and 2017

 

That's a REALLY good pick coming from a team fresh off of a 23 win season in 2012.

 

Unless you're saying we can trade for lottery picks (which I agree with you to a point) or you're saying we can be a borderline playoff/lottery team like Houston (certainly not the ideal situation), then you're not making much of a case here.  The point is that these are the picks/assets that get it done - especially those closer to the top of the lottery.

 

I think my case is perfectly clear. There are plenty of options for building a team that don't rely on tanking for the top pick. We've rehashed this a hundred times at least so no sense in doing it again. Let's just see where Ferry's vision (or the next GM's vision if he keeps this course) takes us.