Welcome Back, Captain Kirk!

[macdaddy]

1 minute ago, hawksfanatic said:

Howsabout we don't pull a Bradley and miscount things, mmmkay?

The Hogs did not trade 2 first round picks. Unless you're referring to Adreian Payne, which is a person (drafted by "Ferry") and not a draft pick. But then again, you're also missing the 2nd rounders that the Hogs picked up in trades. If you want to assess the situation, then we better actually understand the situation.

I think the whole "Bradley's assessment .... is a point that deserves to be discussed" is complete bullshit here. He's a moron and his "assessment" is about the same as my nephew who looks up in the sky, points, and says "airpwane! airpwane!" No dipshit, that's not how the word is pronounced and further it's a helicopter.

You can say Bradley's a moron over and over but that's not really a point.   I have no opinion on that.   But he's not the only one who is questioning the moves that have been made since Ferry has been gone.   I love this team but putting our heads in the sand and saying 'we like our core' is getting old.    I wasn't in favor of any big overhaul at the deadline but i certainly expected some small moves to shore up the bench for the playoffs.   If we think we have any chance of beating Cleveland outside of injury or a 3 point barage then we're fooling ourselves.   And the wait till next year is tiring.

Here's Peachtree hoops:

Quote

Simply put, Kirk Hinrich isn't particularly good at basketball anymore and he may not be any type of on-court upgrade over Shelvin Mack. However, Mack was buried at the end of the bench until an injury or blowout prompted an appearance, and as long as Hinrich is given the same treatment, the actual basketball impact of this week's trade should be minimal. What will change that analysis, though, is if Budenholzer and the staff elect to entrust Hinrich with minutes at shooting guard, and it is difficult to see how that decision would improve the basketball team.

http://www.peachtreehoops.com/2016/2/19/11059390/kirk-hinrich-trade-atlanta-hawks-chicago-bulls-expectations-analysis

[GrimeyKidd]

12 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

You can say Bradley's a moron over and over but that's not really a point.   I have no opinion on that.   But he's not the only one who is questioning the moves that have been made since Ferry has been gone.   I love this team but putting our heads in the sand and saying 'we like our core' is getting old.    I wasn't in favor of any big overhaul at the deadline but i certainly expected some small moves to shore up the bench for the playoffs.   If we think we have any chance of beating Cleveland outside of injury or a 3 point barage then we're fooling ourselves.   And the wait till next year is tiring.

Here's Peachtree hoops:

http://www.peachtreehoops.com/2016/2/19/11059390/kirk-hinrich-trade-atlanta-hawks-chicago-bulls-expectations-analysis

 

I dont particularly believe peachtree. 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

You can say Bradley's a moron over and over but that's not really a point.   I have no opinion on that.   But he's not the only one who is questioning the moves that have been made since Ferry has been gone.   I love this team but putting our heads in the sand and saying 'we like our core' is getting old.    I wasn't in favor of any big overhaul at the deadline but i certainly expected some small moves to shore up the bench for the playoffs.   If we think we have any chance of beating Cleveland outside of injury or a 3 point barage then we're fooling ourselves.   And the wait till next year is tiring.

Here's Peachtree hoops:

http://www.peachtreehoops.com/2016/2/19/11059390/kirk-hinrich-trade-atlanta-hawks-chicago-bulls-expectations-analysis

You seem to miss the point that the "analysis" is wrong.

If you can't even get things to add up or correctly report a trade, how is that supposed to be taken seriously or even offered as "analysis"? You do realize that Rowland isn't criticizing the trade though, right? And he hasn't stuck his foot in his mouth by offering that the Hawks traded away a 2nd round pick? Which is what Bradley did. Which is wrong.

If you have a point to make, then it needs to be an actually correct point. Don't bring up things that are flat out wrong as "facts" and then attempt to say "ahhh yes, mmmmhmmmm good point!" when in fact, it's not a good point because it's wrong. No 2nd round picks were touched in this trade and I'm still not sure what the hell you're referring to with the Hawks having traded 2 first round picks. Because, yaknow, they didn't.

Oh and let's not forget about how this move actually O P E N S   U P   C A P   S P A C E   T H I S   O F F S E A S O N, which Bradley fails to mention. Thus giving an incomplete analysis. Oh but sure, Bradley "brings up a good point!" that he fails in getting even half of the moving pieces for this deal right. But don't mind me, I just know what's going on here. am grumpy.

[AHF]

That was my first reaction to Bradley's statement:

"We traded Holiday, Mack and a 2nd for Hinrich."  No we traded Mack for a 2nd and then flipped the 2nd and Holiday for Hinrich which opens a roster spot.  So they net for that transaction is:

Holiday and Mack out

Hinrich and FA in

While perhaps a let down against expectations, there isn't much to nitpick on that trade.  Holiday was worthless this  year and Mack never played so not much downside to this one even if the upside is very limited.

The idea that we should be discussing the totality of the moves post-Ferry is a fair one but the lead-in from Bradley was just wrong.

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said:

You seem to miss the point that the "analysis" is wrong.

If you can't even get things to add up or correctly report a trade, how is that supposed to be taken seriously or even offered as "analysis"? You do realize that Rowland isn't criticizing the trade though, right? And he hasn't stuck his foot in his mouth by offering that the Hawks traded away a 2nd round pick? Which is what Bradley did. Which is wrong.

If you have a point to make, then it needs to be an actually correct point. Don't bring up things that are flat out wrong as "facts" and then attempt to say "ahhh yes, mmmmhmmmm good point!" when in fact, it's not a good point because it's wrong. No 2nd round picks were touched in this trade and I'm still not sure what the hell you're referring to with the Hawks having traded 2 first round picks. Because, yaknow, they didn't.

Oh and let's not forget about how this move actually O P E N S   U P   C A P   S P A C E   T H I S   O F F S E A S O N, which Bradley fails to mention. Thus giving an incomplete analysis. Oh but sure, Bradley "brings up a good point!" that he fails in getting even half of the moving pieces for this deal right. But don't mind me, I just know what's going on here. am grumpy.

A 2nd round pick was touched in this trade.  It is the one we acquired from Utah.

I think you know the first round picks he is talking about but I'll help clarify:  Payne (#15 pick) and the 2015 #15 pick.  When you talk about the latter, you need to discuss the two 2nd round picks along with THJr. even if you think that isn't much value.

Agreed on the cap space and roster spot implication of this particular trade.

[GrimeyKidd]

And we could get a bought out player or d league player. Whats not to like

[AHF]

Just now, GrimeyKidd said:

And we could get a bought out player or d league player. Whats not to like

Or even a pick setting big from Europe!

[GrimeyKidd]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

Or even a pick setting big from Europe!

I just like that we have the option. People were so strung on Splitter and are mad that we now have the option to replace him with depth OH GOD SCAARY. And Hinrich is a lot better than people are making him out to be

[Mdizzle5]

7 minutes ago, GrimeyKidd said:

And we could get a bought out player or d league player. Whats not to like

Noice! Damn near the whole bench is D-League players! Who says we need our own developmental team when we load up our bench with D-Leaguers!

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

A 2nd round pick was touched in this trade.  It is the one we acquired from Utah.

I think you know the first round picks he is talking about but I'll help clarify:  Payne (#15 pick) and the 2015 #15 pick.  When you talk about the latter, you need to discuss the two 2nd round picks along with THJr. even if you think that isn't much value.

Agreed on the cap space and roster spot implication of this particular trade.

Was it not glaringly obvious that I was referring to 2nd round picks for the Atlanta Hawks, ie the team that this entire message board is built upon? Of which, no 2nd round picks were harmed.

And if you're going to refer to Adreian Payne as a draft pick, then you're just an ass and wrong as I've already referenced this point previously.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, AHF said:

That was my first reaction to Bradley's statement:

"We traded Holiday, Mack and a 2nd for Hinrich."  No we traded Mack for a 2nd and then flipped the 2nd and Holiday for Hinrich which opens a roster spot.  So they net for that transaction is:

Hawks never touched a 2nd round pick. Trade was just misreported, big surprise.

[AHF]

2 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said:

Was it not glaringly obvious that I was referring to 2nd round picks for the Atlanta Hawks, ie the team that this entire message board is built upon? Of which, no 2nd round picks were harmed.

And if you're going to refer to Adreian Payne as a draft pick, then you're just an ass and wrong as I've already referenced this point previously.

I don't see a meaningful distinction as to where the pick originated (I view the Wizards' 2016 2nd round pick that we own as a better asset than our own pick) but I get it if you are saying that this particular second round pick never really was in our pocket.  In either case, we both agree that we had the choice between the 2nd from Utah or swinging it with Holiday to get Hinrich and we chose the latter.  

Payne isn't a pick, but I think you are being overly technical about the issue.  It is obvious he is criticizing how the #15 pick was utilized.  We drafted Payne with that asset over guys like Hood, then barely played him, and then traded him for a future pick that will be a #15 in the best case scenario and will be a second round pick in the worst case scenario.  It is glaringly obvious that the poster thinks that is poor management of the original #15 pick.  Personally, I think it was a disaster of a pick followed by a decent trade of damaged goods.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

Payne isn't a pick, but I think you are being overly technical about the issue.  It is obvious he is criticizing how the #15 pick was utilized.  We drafted Payne with that asset over guys like Hood, then barely played him, and then traded him for a future pick that will be a #15 in the best case scenario and will be a second round pick in the worst case scenario.

Let's walk this to the logical conclusion:

Hawks then traded away a 2 Non-draft Picks for the #7 Overall Draft Pick.

How is that not a win?!?!?!?!??

[AHF]

8 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said:

Let's walk this to the logical conclusion:

Hawks then traded away a 2 Non-draft Picks for the #7 Overall Draft Pick.

How is that not a win?!?!?!?!??

13 years versus 7 months

[Guest]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

13 years versus 7 months

You're not familiar with sunk costs huh.

Payne was not a draft pick. It's not a semantics argument. A draft pick implies a team has the ability to, yaknow, pick the player. You kinda can't do that after Payne has been, ahem, *picked*.

[NBASupes]

53 minutes ago, AHF said:

That was my first reaction to Bradley's statement:

"We traded Holiday, Mack and a 2nd for Hinrich."  No we traded Mack for a 2nd and then flipped the 2nd and Holiday for Hinrich which opens a roster spot.  So they net for that transaction is:

Holiday and Mack out

Hinrich and FA in

While perhaps a let down against expectations, there isn't much to nitpick on that trade.  Holiday was worthless this  year and Mack never played so not much downside to this one even if the upside is very limited.

The idea that we should be discussing the totality of the moves post-Ferry is a fair one but the lead-in from Bradley was just wrong.

If the FA is Veraejo, it's a win. 2 months of him>Moose as our back. None of the others in the trade are getting PT anyway. 

[RedDawg#8]

I'm ok with the deadline moves. I'm also ok with Splitters injury because I don't think he was a difference maker for us but his presence alone was going to prevent the staff from wanting to upgrade our rebounding issues/find a place in the rotation for another big. We now have both an open roster spot and need for a big man. I want Varejao, he does everything we need very well except block shots at an elite level but he is no slouch there. He has more size than Splitter and is even more of a true post threat for us there, brings activity, energy, toughness, and a ton of veteran playoff experience. He is even a foreign guy with our staff loves so much. By all accounts he makes TOO much sense for us. NOW, with that said, additional moves or not, we still need to tinker with the lineup. I still think we should go more defensive minded and bring in Thabo to the starting lineup and Korver to the bench. It just makes too much sense to have our best defender and only true SF in games to match up with Lebron. Baze can not and should not be asked to do that. Get Thabo with the starters now and build chemistry. If Bazes production continues to slip then bring Korver back at SG but I just think that offensive minded approach has hurt us. Defense carried us last year and it is no coincidence that we were significantly worse when Thabo wasn't playing.

 

That's my two cents based on realistic moves that we can make at this point that addresses some of our biggest issues.

 

 

Horford, Varajeo,  Moose, Tavares

Millsap, Scott,

Thabo, Korver,

Bazemore, Hardaway, Patterson

Teague, Schröder, Hinrich

Edited February 19, 2016 by RedDawg#8

[Guest]

How healthy is Andy?  How healthy can he stay?  Is Lee not a better option?  He'll obviously come in pissed off and showed really well in the Finals vs the LeeBrons.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, kg01 said:

How healthy is Andy?  How healthy can he stay?  Is Lee not a better option?  He'll obviously come in pissed off and showed really well in the Finals vs the LeeBrons.

We can dump Patterson and sign both Lee and Andy.

Or can we apply for the Injured player exemption. @hawksfanatic for Splitter to clear a roster spot and sign both?

[AHF]

6 minutes ago, hawksfanatic said:

You're not familiar with sunk costs huh.

Payne was not a draft pick. It's not a semantics argument. A draft pick implies a team has the ability to, yaknow, pick the player. You kinda can't do that after Payne has been, ahem, *picked*.

The point you are missing is that to his underlying whether Payne is a pick or a sunk cost is a distinction without a difference.  You are technically correct.  Payne isn't a pick and it is wrong to describe him as one.  However, his point is that they didn't make good use of the #15 pick that was used on Payne.  Unless you think Payne was a good choice, then you agree with that and are just arguing over how the value should be bucketed (pick versus player).

I agree it is a sunk cost and you know that.  I said it was a disastrous pick and a decent trade.  The reason the trade was decent is because Payne is a sunk cost and we pulled the trigger in time to collect some value while there was still the notion that he could possibly be a good player (unlike Jenkins who we couldn't deal for value after we realized he was never going to contribute).  If we had just flipped the #15 pick directly for a  pick that will fall between #15 and #60 sometime years in the future that would have been a straight disaster (without anything decent).