Sap-Related 3 way Sign-and-trade OFFICIAL (Updated)

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, EazyRoc said:

Is that a bad thing ? Would you have rather given Millsap 30 mil a year at 34 ?

Made no comment on whether it's a good or bad thing. Just saying it's not accurate to convey the trade as being "getting something for Millsap." It clearly salves some folks nerves to say it that way but it is what it actually is, not necessarily what it's initially been portrayed as being.

[EazyRoc]

2 minutes ago, sturt said:

Made no comment on whether it's a good or bad thing. Just saying it's not accurate to convey the trade as being "getting something for Millsap." It clearly salves some folks nerves to say it that way but it is what it actually is, not necessarily what it's initially been portrayed as being.

Are we not getting something for Millsap ? A 1st round pick and a young C ? Am I hallucinating?

Edited July 4, 2017 by EazyRoc

[GameTime]

Schlenk prefers to trade Crawford

 

[Scott]

Atlanta should prefer a trade to save cap space or gain another asset.

[EazyRoc]

Just now, GameTime said:

Schlenk prefers to trade Crawford

 

I bet. Crawford still has value for teams that are in contention. It's just going to be hard to work deals for valuable assets in return from those teams. 

[Alex]

Just now, EazyRoc said:

I bet. Crawford still has value for teams that are in contention. It's just going to be hard to work deals for valuable assets in return from those teams. 

Just need to remain flexible.  That's all it comes down to.

Slink is a bozo.  

[GameTime]

2 minutes ago, EazyRoc said:

I bet. Crawford still has value for teams that are in contention. It's just going to be hard to work deals for valuable assets in return from those teams. 

Crawford for Shumpert + filler?

Edited July 4, 2017 by GameTime

[sturt]

3 minutes ago, EazyRoc said:

Are we not getting something for Millsap ? A 1st round pick and a young C ? Am I hallucinating?

Again.

You are hallucinating if you are failing to recognize that we are receiving assets from LAC in exchange for allowing them to park a bad contract on our cap space parking lot.

That's the deal.

DEN already made their deal with and commitment to Sap, independent of us.

[EazyRoc]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Just need to remain flexible.  That's all it comes down to.

Slink is a bozo.  

Crawford doesn't want to be here. How does that make Schlenk a bozo ? Get rid of him then and get something for him. Jamal Crawford is stil a good player off the bench.

Just now, GameTime said:

Crawford for Shumpert + filler?

I wouldn't mind the move personally depending on what the filler is and how their contracts are for.

[sturt]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Slink is a bozo.

Just wish people would reserve judgment at least until the guy gets through his first off-season.

Yes, naive optimist, I am.

Mind you, I've not exactly been frothing with praise, but I'm also not going to make any conclusive statements.

 

[NekiEcko]

10 minutes ago, Alex said:

Hope it falls through.  Hawks get the short end of the stick as it stands.

and how that, Alex because I like to know?

I mean we get a first rounder (3 total in the next draft), A Development Center, maybe a player or two from Denver and getting more assets from trading Jamal.  It is a good deal and it might open up even more deal down the line.

[GameTime]

Just now, EazyRoc said:

Crawford doesn't want to be here. How does that make Schlenk a bozo ? Get rid of him then and get something for him. Jamal Crawford is stil a good player off the bench.

I wouldn't mind the move personally depending on what the filler is and how their contracts are for.

I don't see the Cavs saying no to a Frye + R Jeff + future 2nd or Shumpert + RJ + future 2nd. They need more offensive firepower to beat GS. Shumpert barely saw the floor in the Finals.

[Alex]

1 minute ago, EazyRoc said:

Crawford doesn't want to be here. How does that make Schlenk a bozo ? Get rid of him then and get something for him. Jamal Crawford is stil a good player off the bench.

He's a bozo for being the loser on his first trade and now this one if it goes through.  It's a bad precedent to set early on that other teams can simply dump their salary cap problems onto the Hawks so long as the Hawks can get some sort of lame draft pick in return.  

[EazyRoc]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

Again.

You are hallucinating if you are failing to recognize that we are receiving assets from LAC in exchange for allowing them to park a bad contract on our cap space parking lot.

That's the deal.

DEN already made their deal with and commitment to Sap, independent of us.

Got it. We will find someone to take Crawford. However, You're getting a 1st and a young C for a bad contract with 2 years remaining. Even if we are stuck with Crawford (which I doubt we will) his expiring contract will have value the year after the next.

[Alex]

4 minutes ago, NekiEcko said:

and how that, Alex because I like to know?

I mean we get a first rounder (3 total in the next draft), A Development Center, maybe a player or two from Denver and getting more assets from trading Jamal.  It is a good deal and it might open up even more deal down the line.

Teams toss around late first round picks like they are going out of style because they are not a valuable asset.  Stock piling  late first round picks is a good idea if you are in the NFL.  

[EazyRoc]

2 minutes ago, Alex said:

He's a bozo for being the loser on his first trade and now this one if it goes through.  It's a bad precedent to set early on that other teams can simply dump their salary cap problems onto the Hawks so long as the Hawks can get some sort of lame draft pick in return.  

I don't look at it that way. I see it as a complete rejection of BudCoxs agenda and shedding us of their mistakes. I guess I have a little bit more patience and appreciate what he's doing because I wasn't happy with where we were headed before he came. We were going nowhere very very slowly.

[EazyRoc]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Teams toss around late first round picks like they are going out of style because they are not a valuable asset.  Stock piling  late first round picks is a good idea if you are in the NFL.  

If you get something more than a bench contributor for a late first, you've won. I agree with that. However, it's better than nothing. We are not going to be players in next years FA market so cap space won't help. The following year Crawford's deal becomes a valuable expiring contract (if I'm understanding the CBA correctly).

[sturt]

My suspicion is that Schlenk might be prizing the idea of having the ammunition to trade into a top 5 pick at some point, and every additional 1st you can get just makes it that much more plausible that that situation could evolve.

[Alex]

1 minute ago, EazyRoc said:

I don't look at it that way. I see it as a complete rejection of BudCoxs agenda and shedding us of their mistakes. I guess I have a little bit more patience and appreciate what he's doing because I wasn't happy with where we were headed before he came. We were going nowhere very very slowly.

I don't have issue with whatever it is he thinks he's doing, but my problem stems from him blowing smoke.  No reason to tiptoe around and try to call a rebuild something else when the writing on the wall is clear as day.  

[BrazilianHawk]

It's really funny to see some guys basking in the "glory" of getting a late first and a NBADL "stud" (it is what it is, folks!) for the 4-time All-Star PF who was our best player since the day he got his feet in the ATL. Not to mention he wanted to remain a Hawk for a contract much smaller than the max.

Really funny, indeed!

 

Don't hit me, @sturt, I understand we got nothing for Sap per se. Which IMHO is even worse.