I expect Sap to be next to go.

[Guest]

I was gonna say something about this thread but it's been said already. :-) That's what you get for trying to one up my SAP thread...smh always trying to get attention. Sad.

[ViewsFromTheSquawk]

If we are trading Sap it best be for Blake Griffin or someone of that nature. We can't go wheeling our best player off for a rookie, and before some d-a harps down my throat saying Teague was our best player I just wanna extend a "I don't care" about you're opinion alert because it's.... WRONG

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, ViewsFromTheSquawk said:

If we are trading Sap it best be for Blake Griffin or someone of that nature. We can't go wheeling our best player off for a rookie, and before some d-a harps down my throat saying Teague was our best player I just wanna extend a "I don't care" about you're opinion alert because it's.... WRONG

  I have no more 'likes' but man your disclaimer made me lol.  Everybody has a right to have an opinion and everybody has a right to be wrong.

Agree, if we're trading Slap, it's gotta be for an established star or at least a young-ish near-star.

[gsuteke]

Milsap has grown on me.  Horford doesn't rebound worth a shit for a Center.  I'm fine with letting Al walk over trading Milsap.

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

No, Teague was traded because it's a waste of resources to keep two PGs and have non NBA starters at the wings.

Look around look around... We still have non-NBA starters at the wings.  Moreover, FAcy has never been kind to Atlanta.

Trust me.. The logic is sound... we got rid of Teague because like a Babcock we wanted to trade him while we could still get something for him..  Poor man's thinking.

[Lurker]

5 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Look around look around... We still have non-NBA starters at the wings.  Moreover, FAcy has never been kind to Atlanta.

Trust me.. The logic is sound... we got rid of Teague because like a Babcock we wanted to trade him while we could still get something for him..  Poor man's thinking.

You're not thinking about tomorrow or free agency. After tomorrow SG could be filled (and not filled by a draft and stash) and it could come out they're looking at SFs in free agency. There's a very good reason why I said in another thread about the Hawks standing "Ask me after tomorrow".

Edited June 23, 2016 by Lurker

[Diesel]

49 minutes ago, Lurker said:

You're not thinking about tomorrow or free agency. After tomorrow SG could be filled (and not filled by a draft and stash) and it could come out they're looking at SFs in free agency. There's a very good reason why I said in another thread about the Hawks standing "Ask me after tomorrow".

Much like everybody else, you don't know.  New Owners = Not looking to compete.

 

[Lurker]

6 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Much like everybody else, you don't know.  New Owners = Not looking to compete.

 

How are you supposed to know this automatically? How were the Hawks going to win a championship with Jeff Teague AND Dennis Schröder at the point guard spot when they are going to have a very difficult time of getting any free agents to agree to come here?

Explain to me how you keep an extended Jeff Teague and extended Dennis Schröder and get the upgrades you need. Just explain. I'll go ahead and tell you, you can't. It'll take throwing down the money for a Parsons and Biyombo at least and this team has the money for one FA that would cost a lot but NOT two. And this is not even talking about the factoid of how hard it is to get free agents to come here.

One of them was going to have to go eventually.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Lurker

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

How are you supposed to know this automatically? How were the Hawks going to win a championship with Jeff Teague AND Dennis Schröder at the point guard spot when they are going to have a very difficult time of getting any free agents to agree to come here?

Explain to me how you keep an extended Jeff Teague and extended Dennis Schröder and get the upgrades you need. Just explain. I'll go ahead and tell you, you can't. It'll take throwing down the money for a Parsons and Biyombo at least and this team has the money for one FA that would cost a lot but NOT two. LET ALONE the problem of getting free agents to come play here.

One of them was going to have to go eventually.

That #12 pick is really going to get us closer to the championship!!! 

 

[Lurker]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

That #12 pick is really going to get us closer to the championship!!!

Having two starting point guards on the team is really going to get us closer to the championship!!!

See how I can change this?

And you also didn't answer this:

Explain to me how you keep an extended Jeff Teague and extended Dennis Schröder and get the upgrades you need.

Go ahead. Do it, realizing that you can only sign one big free agent.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Lurker

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

Having two starting point guards on the team is really going to get us closer to the championship!!!

See how I can change this?

And you also didn't answer this:

 

You never noticed that those two PGs were our strength.  Now, we have made ourselves weaker for what?  A project?  A grab and stash??  Al Horford's Max??

You keep saying ask you tomorrow.   I think before you make any more arguments or definitive statements, YOU need to wait until tomorrow.

 

[Lurker]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

You never noticed that those two PGs were our strength.

Except they were not. The versatile frontcourt was.

And you only believe that because Jeff Teague is your sacred cow. You wouldn't be saying anything if Dennis Schröder was traded...but I'm not going to get into that.

Edited June 23, 2016 by Lurker

[Diesel]

3 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Except they were not. The versatile frontcourt was.

And you only believe that because Jeff Teague is your sacred cow. You wouldn't be saying anything if Dennis Schröder was traded...but I'm not going to get into that.

If we had traded Dennis for #12, I would still be cursing this front office.

#12 = #21 in this draft.  Both of them plus a future first won't move you up to the place where we need to be to get a player that we can build around.

 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Diesel said:

If we had traded Dennis for #12, I would still be cursing this front office.

#12 = #21 in this draft.  Both of them plus a future first won't move you up to the place where we need to be to get a player that we can build around.

 

I think it could be possible.  They'd have to catch somebody slippin' tho.  I could see SAC doing it considering, as @skimaskway23 noted, they aren't exactly handling this whole draft process well.  Then again, they're just the type of front office I could see just randomly selecting a foreign guy they've never seen in person only to have that guy decide not to come over.

[vdunkndunk]

Whether or not you like J. Butler, DeRozen, Hield, or some other wing prospect isn't the material question for me in this thread; the question is whether moving Sap is the best way to rebuild from where we are (outside of signing Durant or LeBron this summer, which isn't likely).

To me, Sap is our most attractive trade piece since he's still under contract and could make an immediate impact for another team. And Sap may also be the player we can most easily replace from within (assuming we're confident we can re-sign Horford) since Sap and Horford are somewhat duplicative, Horford's a year younger, and we can go over the cap* to re-sign Horford. And what I think we need to do is get better on the wing and bigger on the blocks.

So, assuming we're confident we're keeping Horford, I'd prefer to (1) move Sap to get an elite wing player or an elite center, whether it's an established player or an elite prospect ; and (2) use free agency to sign either an elite wing or an elite center, depending on what Sap brings (e.g., trade Sap for J. Butler and then sign Howard or Whiteside).

We've already watched Sap and Horford fail to dominate or downright get dominated in the playoffs by bigger players, and we lack a go-to scorer on the wings. Moving Sap while he's still under contract (rather than risk losing him for nothing next summer) is the best way I see to improve our weaknesses at other areas. If we keep Horford and Sap, I think we stay on the treadmill; and if we let Horford walk and get nothing in return I'm not sure that helps us either. Sap, at this point, promises to bring the most value in return should we trade him, and Horford could slide right into his spot at PF.

(*I'm not a capologist by any means and no longer pay close attention to this stuff, but part of my reasoning is based on my assumption that we can go over the cap to re-sign Horford, but, if he walked, the cap space he would clear could not be used as nearly as effectively.)

[Bankingitbig]

Chicago isn't trading Butler. That's pretty evident now that they got rid of Rose. Even if they were, why would they give up Butler for Sap + anything else you throw in? Butler is 26years old, plays one of the scarcest positions, is a 2-way player and is on an amazing contract for the next 3-years.

In all these trade scenarios, people are only looking from the perspective of the Hawks and not the other team. Only teams that would want Sap are teams that are looking to contend for a championship right now or teams that don't have a "superstar-like" veteran presence.