Jump to content

2015 Free Agency: Optimistically but realistically what we might anticipate


sturt

Recommended Posts

All well-taken, and unless I'm missing something, you agree that the Hawks are, indeed, invested in the SA philosophy--albeit, by your assessment, not very well.

 

But the question then comes back to you... what if the players they wanna keep are players they believe they need? What if, to their SA-philosophy-minds, they believe in the core they have and are not inclined to believe it is in their best interests to reconstruct the roster?

 

Here's the thing I would say to that, and to all of the rest of those fixated on the fact we bowed out in the ECF this year, and who are absolutely convinced that that was this roster's ceiling... go back and review the Spurs history... here's what you'll find...

 

2015-06-29_1347.png

 

To the point that CLE was also playing without starters, I acknowledge that, but so, then, what do we know about when BOTH teams DID have their starting line-up at full-strength?

 

11/15 CLE 127 | ATL 94 > CLE full-strength, ATL w/o DeMarre Carroll

12/17 ATL 127 | CLE 98 > CLE w/o Mike Miller, ATL w/o Jeff Teague

12/30 ATL 109 | CLE 101 > CLE w/o LeBron James, ATL w/o Al Horford

3/6 ATL 106 | CLE 97 > Both teams full-strength

 

We can argue "yeah, but that's regular season." We can argue "yeah, but one of those wins was without LBJ, or it would have been 2 for each."

 

What we CAN'T argue is that WHAT WE KNOW at minimum is consistent with the conclusion that, when full-strength, Atlanta is Cleveland's equal... and the data that we KNOW says that they're better.

 

What the playoffs told us for a fact is that there are certain combinations of Cleveland players and certain combinations of Atlanta players that, if forced to take the floor, will result in Cleveland wins and Atlanta losses.

 

And, I would opine based on that... we really have no business thinking about any major reconstruction of this roster if we can possibly keep from it.

 

The only one of those games that really means anything is the last meeting.

 

I believe the other three meetings some key players were hurt or they were before Cleveland made their trades.

 

Besides, the playoffs is a different animal. Even the Warriors scored 10 PPG less in the playoffs than they did in the regular season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you not even see the irony there?

 

The team that just won the championship went smaller, not bigger, in order to beat Cleveland.

Their smaller team actually rebounds though.  Ours do not.  They also shoot the lights out.  We do not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their smaller team actually rebounds though.  Ours do not.  They also shoot the lights out.  We do not.

But of course.

 

They were also healthy. But that doesn't fit your narrative.

Edited by RandomFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cleveland wasn't healthy either and they beat us 4-0.  That doesn't fit your narrative either?

It fits my narrative just fine, because I've acknowledged that plenty of times. And also pointed out that unlike Cleveland, we didn't have the best player on the planet to carry our team through an injury riddled series. If healthy, ATL buries that Cleveland team we faced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It fits my narrative just fine, because I've acknowledged that plenty of times. And also pointed out that unlike Cleveland, we didn't have the best player on the planet to carry our team through an injury riddled series. If healthy, ATL buries that Cleveland team we faced.

Not the way we played the second half of the season.  Even if we got past Cleveland, Golden State is easily the more talented team.  I'm just saying that if we just re-sign DMC and Millsap,  with no other additions, our odds are no better than they were last year.  You can't count on having a healthy team, because sometimes it just doesn't work out that way.  Cleveland does have the "best player on the planet", plus they are the league darlings.  In my judgment, we need a bigger player at C or PF, or at least bigger backups in order to have a chance of beating good rebounding teams.  How many series did we see Cleveland get 5 or more attempts on the same possession?  If we can't get the ball away from them, we are at a huge disadvantage.

Edited by Watchman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the way we played the second half of the season.  Even if we got past Cleveland, Golden State is easily the more talented team.  I'm just saying that if we just re-sign DMC and Millsap,  with no other additions, our odds are no better than they were last year.  You can't count on having a healthy team, because sometimes it just doesn't work out that way.  Cleveland does have the "best player on the planet", plus they are the league darlings.  In my judgment, we need a bigger player at C or PF, or at least bigger backups in order to have a chance of beating good rebounding teams.  How many series did we see Cleveland get 5 or more attempts on the same possession?  If we can't get the ball away from them, we are at a huge disadvantage.

 

You also can't expect all 6 of your top players to be out or majorly hampered by a serious injury either, like we were. That is completely different from having an injury or two, which would be expected.

 

And I'm just saying that we haven't even seen what this team can do in the playoffs when relatively healthy; who who are we to say they wont be better next year or not? We haven't even seen what they can really do yet!

Edited by RandomFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also can't expect all 6 of your top players to be out or majorly hampered by a serious injury either, like we were. That is completely different from having an injury or two, which would be expected.

 

And I'm just saying that we haven't even seen what this team can do in the playoffs when relatively healthy; who who are we to say they wont be better next year or not? We haven't even seen what they can really do yet!

I hope you're right.  I just keep thinking of the multiple layups that Millsap missed.  Would I like to keep Millsap and DMC? You betcha, but we have to get someone who can rebound, and someone who can finish on drives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Politics. Explain, please. Who is exerting this political pressure to keep him on the roster, and for what motive? International politics... Macedonia is somehow (money under the table?... holding one of Bud's relatives hostage?...) exerting influence in order to... ummm... I dunno... maybe they think they can turn Antić popularity into tourism? Or, do you mean office politics? Someone has some dirt on Bud, and Antić' roster slot amounts to compensation to keep quiet?

Definition of POLITICS

 

a :  the total complex of relations between people living in society

 

b :  relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view <office politics> <ethnic politics>

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All well-taken, and unless I'm missing something, you agree that the Hawks are, indeed, invested in the SA philosophy--albeit, by your assessment, not very well.

 

But the question then comes back to you... what if the players they wanna keep are players they believe they need? What if, to their SA-philosophy-minds, they believe in the core they have and are not inclined to believe it is in their best interests to reconstruct the roster?

 

 

 

 

" sorry partner, we the champs"

 

11169028-large.jpg

 

 

 

" gonna surround myself with BETTER players and win a chip"

 

1371841217000-USATSI-7311537-1306211502_

Edited by atlhawks1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you're right.  I just keep thinking of the multiple layups that Millsap missed.  Would I like to keep Millsap and DMC? You betcha, but we have to get someone who can rebound, and someone who can finish on drives.

See, this is what I mean. You criticize that Millsap missed multiple layups, yet fail to acknowledge that his injured shoulder might have played a huge part in that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Well, that sucks. That's because we don't have Bird rights or is it because of something else?

 

Assuming about $24m cap space to work with, about $13m is taken up with Sap's hold, leaving us with about $11m to sign DMC (or others).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The only one of those games that really means anything is the last meeting.

 

I believe the other three meetings some key players were hurt or they were before Cleveland made their trades.

 

Besides, the playoffs is a different animal. Even the Warriors scored 10 PPG less in the playoffs than they did in the regular season.

I addressed that, didn't I?

 

 

 

 

We can argue "yeah, but that's regular season." We can argue "yeah, but one of those wins was without LBJ, or it would have been 2 for each."

 

What we CAN'T argue is that WHAT WE KNOW at minimum is consistent with the conclusion that, when full-strength, Atlanta is Cleveland's equal... and the data that we KNOW says that they're better.

 

What the playoffs told us for a fact is that there are certain combinations of Cleveland players and certain combinations of Atlanta players that, if forced to take the floor, will result in Cleveland wins and Atlanta losses.

 

And, I would opine based on that... we really have no business thinking about any major reconstruction of this roster if we can possibly keep from it.

 

Edited by sturt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is what I mean. You criticize that Millsap missed multiple layups, yet fail to acknowledge that his injured shoulder might have played a huge part in that.

Sorry. If his injury affected his shot, then some of the misses might be understandable.  I really can't remember much of the regular season and don't recall if he couldn't hit a layup then or not.  Having said that -  If your shoulder hurts that bad, don't take the attempt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Definition of POLITICS

 

a :  the total complex of relations between people living in society

 

b :  relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view <office politics> <ethnic politics>

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politics

 

 

Yes... and....??? Nothing particularly illuminating in the definition... be more specific please in how you imagine "politics" is what kept Pero on the roster... it sounds like you must have thought that far, so just tell us, okay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

" sorry partner, we the champs"

 

 

 

 

" gonna surround myself with BETTER players and win a chip"

 

 

 

That's pretty disrespectful. You have to acknowledge, don't you, that I went to some lengths to put together a lucid and coherent but unoffensive response. Respect that enough to offer a response that reflects directly on the points made. Simply saying, in essence, "None of what you just laid out matters, because CLE swept the playoff series" is, imo, staying at the surface because diving in to examine the deeper questions isn't productive to the conclusion you desire to hold onto.

Edited by sturt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's pretty disrespectful. You have to acknowledge, don't you, that I went to some lengths to put together a lucid and coherent but unoffensive response. Respect that enough to offer a response that reflects directly on the points made. Simply saying, in essence, "None of what you just laid out matters, because CLE swept the playoff series" is, imo, staying at the surface because diving in to examine the deeper questions isn't productive to the conclusion you desire to hold onto.

Let me save you some time here sturt. You do realize you are trying to play chess with a pigeon, right? lol crazy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Yeah, and that is really all we can do. It's completely pointless for a message boarder to put forth a list of HERE'S WHAT I WOULD DO ... OK that's great and maybe your strategy works? But we should only care about what the Hawks will do and/or predicting what they will actually do.

So the QO decision will tell us a fair amount. And I doubt we find out until tomorrow or Wednesday.

 

Soooooo... we now got told.

 

Conventional wisdom holding intact.

 

Next? Seems the focus should be on who is courting Sap, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just say I always assume the best, Random, until having absolutely no choice but to consider the alternative.

 

Yeah, trying to talk sense to creationists and anti-science nuttjobs beat that out of me years ago. I have a hard time sticking to the Principle of Charity these days.

Edited by RandomFan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...