Draft chatter with Travis Schlenk

[AHF]

1 minute ago, Peoriabird said:

But you concluded he was yet another lottery pick to win the mvp...and your argument was to reinforce the need for lottery chosen players to win championships am I not right?

Again lying about what I said.  This is beginning to piss me off.  Read what I said then quote it accurately please.  Making up straw man arguments and attributing them to me is not cool.

(Because - no that was not what I was arguing or what I said).

[Bankingitbig]

56 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

So we have to add bad luck and injury to our ever growing list of how to avoid being a treadmill team.  At this point, I might be happy being the treadmill team and by the way, Memphis consistently won 50 plus game per season and is still on the treadmill team list.

Yea..... I think you have to add luck as a pretty big factor to winning a championship. Thought that was fairly obvious.

I think people have done a decent job of illustrating to you how teams have become championship quality, but I haven't seen much from anyone in terms of how teams can make the playoffs for 10+ years in a row and then win a championship. In fact, I believe the Spurs are the only team in NBA history to technically do this by winning in 2014. I would argue that them getting Duncan as a #1 pick overall and getting lucky with Leonard was a big reason as to why this happened.

Not trying to say that we deliberately aim to miss the playoffs. I just think you have to take each situation case by case. And in the case of the current Atlanta Hawks, in my opinion, I think the best path forward is not tying up the salary cap to an aging Paul Millsap. Then you evaluate the rest of the roster and see if the other players fit your potential championship contending window (to an extent; I think vets can play a part in terms of developing young players), which I believe Dwight Howard does not, so I would try and gain assets for him.

Then you want to make sure your roster has the potential for improvement in the future, so you target players that you think have room for improvement (most likely young players) or maybe you think their abilities are a better fit for your system than their current team. You also want to remain flexible from a cap perspective because who knows maybe two stars will want to join each other in a future offseason and we want to make sure that we can accommodate that.

But trying to resign Millsap and Ilyasova just so you can make the playoffs again isn't going to get you anywhere.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, Bankingitbig said:

Yea..... I think you have to add luck as a pretty big factor to winning a championship. Thought that was fairly obvious.

I think people have done a decent job of illustrating to you how teams have become championship quality, but I haven't seen much from anyone in terms of how teams can make the playoffs for 10+ years in a row and then win a championship. In fact, I believe the Spurs are the only team in NBA history to technically do this by winning in 2014. I would argue that them getting Duncan as a #1 pick overall and getting lucky with Leonard was a big reason as to why this happened.

Not trying to say that we deliberately aim to miss the playoffs. I just think you have to take each situation case by case. And in the case of the current Atlanta Hawks, in my opinion, I think the best path forward is not tying up the salary cap to an aging Paul Millsap. Then you evaluate the rest of the roster and see if the other players fit your potential championship contending window (to an extent; I think vets can play a part in terms of developing young players), which I believe Dwight Howard does not, so I would try and gain assets for him.

Then you want to make sure your roster has the potential for improvement in the future, so you target players that you think have room for improvement (most likely young players) or maybe you think their abilities are a better fit for your system than their current team. You also want to remain flexible from a cap perspective because who knows maybe two stars will want to join each other in a future offseason and we want to make sure that we can accommodate that.

But trying to resign Millsap and Ilyasova just so you can make the playoffs again isn't going to get you anywhere.

Agree with everything you said but I have clearly stated that our new GM may choose to resign those 2 to trade friendly contract to have the option to move them later for younger assests.

[Peoriabird]

6 minutes ago, AHF said:

Again lying about what I said.  This is beginning to piss me off.  Read what I said then quote it accurately please.  Making up straw man arguments and attributing them to me is not cool.

(Because - no that was not what I was arguing or what I said).

No need to get upset...I may have miss quoted and misunderstood your previous post. If so I'm sorry. I'll look it up just to check.

[AHF]

8 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

No need to get upset...I may have miss quoted and misunderstood your previous post. If so I'm sorry. I'll look it up just to check.

Sorry if I overreacted.  Just felt like the 3rd or 4th time an argument was being attributed to me on this thread that was either not at all what I said or was a distorted version of what I said.  Just make sure you look at what people actually say before attributing something different to them.

I've been pretty clear that I think the foundation a team needs to lay for winning a ring is getting into the lottery and drafting a superstar who is good enough to be an MVP and/or Finals MVP - players that good give a huge advantage in roster building and are attractive to other stars to come join the club.  Almost every championship team has done this by winning 20-29 games and then drafting that cornerstone (although a few have done it by trading into the lottery).  The big exception is the 1-time championship Pistons (the prior multiple champ Piston teams fit the mold). 

Iggy does not meet the criteria and is not the cornerstone to the Warriors.  Iggy is in no way instructive as to how to build a team.  He was a good role player who got really hot in the finals series.  Curry does fit the criteria having won an MVP and is the cornerstone around which they built and who brings the bonus of being a bright enough star to attract a ring chaser superstar to join similar to Wade attracting LeBron after Wade had his Finals MVP and first ring.

 

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

Sorry if I overreacted.  Just felt like the 3rd or 4th time an argument was being attributed to me on this thread that was either not at all what I said or was a distorted version of what I said.  

I've been pretty clear that I think the foundation a team needs to lay for winning a ring is getting into the lottery and drafting a superstar who is good enough to be an MVP and/or Finals MVP - players that good give a huge advantage in roster building and are attractive to other stars to come join the club.  Almost every championship team has done this by winning 20-29 games and then drafting that cornerstone (although a few have done it by trading into the lottery).  The big exception is the 1-time championship Pistons (the prior multiple champ Piston teams fit the mold). 

Iggy does not meet the criteria and is not the cornerstone to the Warriors.  Iggy is in no way instructive as to how to build a team.  He was a good role player who got really hot in the finals series.  Curry does fit the criteria having won an MVP and is the cornerstone around which they built and who brings the bonus of being a bright enough star to attract a ring chaser superstar to join similar to Wade attracting LeBron after Wade had his Finals MVP and first ring.

I have no problem with what you just stated but I do have a problem when others injecting other players in that category like Chris Paul and Paul George to expand the notion that it's a simple formula and that it is a for gone conclusion that this is what should be done without question because the success rate is high enough to risk suffering through the catestrophic consequences

[AHF]

24 minutes ago, Bankingitbig said:

Yea..... I think you have to add luck as a pretty big factor to winning a championship. Thought that was fairly obvious.

I think people have done a decent job of illustrating to you how teams have become championship quality, but I haven't seen much from anyone in terms of how teams can make the playoffs for 10+ years in a row and then win a championship. In fact, I believe the Spurs are the only team in NBA history to technically do this by winning in 2014. I would argue that them getting Duncan as a #1 pick overall and getting lucky with Leonard was a big reason as to why this happened.

Duncan was the best playoff performer on the team every year they won a ring.  That is not a coincidence.  Here is where Duncan ranked on the roster during the playoffs:

1998 #1 in PER, #1 WS, #1 PPG, #1 RPG, #1 BPG

2003 #1 in PER, #1 WS, #1 PPG, #1 RPG, #1 BPG

2005 #1 in PER, #1 in PPG, #1 in RPG (x2 next guy), #1 in BPG (>x2 next guy)

2007 #1 in PER, #1 WS, #1 PPG, #1 RPG, #1 BPG

2014 #1 in PER, #1 WS, #2 PPG, #1 RPG, #1 BPG

 

Not sure they are going to win another ring following his retirement.  He was the driving force behind those rings.

[AHF]

10 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

I have no problem with what you just stated but I do have a problem when others injecting other players in that category like Chris Paul and Paul George to expand the notion that it's a simple formula and that it is a for gone conclusion that this is what should be done without question because the success rate is high enough to risk suffering through the catestrophic consequences

I think most people recognize the success rate is not high and it carries the downside of potential spending years in the lottery.  If they don't, they should.  But the success rate is higher than the historical 0% rate of a Memphis Grizzlies type of team growing around their non-superstar core and making the leap.

[GrimeyKidd]

So at 19 whos the BPA when u throw need out the window

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, GrimeyKidd said:

So at 19 whos the BPA when u throw need out the window

Agreed but at some point we need at least 1 serviceable big

[GrimeyKidd]

Just now, Peoriabird said:

Agreed but at some point we need at least 1 serviceable big

Patton has a workout with the hawks. Weirdly he hasnt had many. Sleeper? 

[DBac]

38 minutes ago, GrimeyKidd said:

So at 19 whos the BPA when u throw need out the window

In my opinion, it's Jawun Evans or Justin Jackson. Maybe OG Anunoby if he slips, but he's injured which hurts his value. 

[Peoriabird]

no more little point guards

[GrimeyKidd]

i say its 

Jackson
Allen

Kuzma

Leaf

Lydon

Patton 

Bell

Rabb

Ojeleye

As the 9 targets for 19. C viv mentioned we had 9. So im guessing. In no order btw

Edited June 16, 2017 by GrimeyKidd

[CP61]

39 minutes ago, GrimeyKidd said:

i say its 

Jackson
Allen

Kuzma

Leaf

Lydon

Patton 

Bell

Rabb

Ojeleye

As the 9 targets for 19. C viv mentioned we had 9. So im guessing. In no order btw

I say take out Rabb and Kuzma and replace them with Pasecniks and Anunoby. Kuzma is more a 31 type and Rabb hasn't worked out here, thank God. Neither has Anunoby, but his body is almost a carbon copy of Draymond but with slightly better length and athleticism. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, GrimeyKidd said:

So at 19 whos the BPA when u throw need out the window

Justin Jax

OG

Semi

 

[Peoriabird]

9 minutes ago, Spud2Nique said:

Justin Jax

OG

Semi

 

who is semi?  you mean Borisa Simanic @ 50

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

who is semi?  you mean Borisa Simanic @ 50

Semi Ojeleye 

[CP61]

2 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

who is semi?  you mean Borisa Simanic @ 50