PF and C required

[ViewsFromTheSquawk]

Y'all really think master schlinter is gonna let us down? This man about to pull some slick shit and have K-Love and Nerlens Noel on our roster.... 

[AHF]

10 hours ago, KB21 said:

It's a foolish strategy that is based upon the premise that if you are bad enough, you will get a high pick and a guaranteed superstar player.  The problem with it is, most of the players drafted with those high picks do not become the unicorn you want.  

Only people who deliberately distort the premise of why you might want to go into the lottery describe anything as guaranteed in the draft.  It is the same kind of distortion that some use to claim that every team that goes into the lottery goes into a ten year cycle of misery.  There are a range of outcomes for both scenarios.  

[KB21]

16 minutes ago, AHF said:

Only people who deliberately distort the premise of why you might want to go into the lottery describe anything as guaranteed in the draft.  It is the same kind of distortion that some use to claim that every team that goes into the lottery goes into a ten year cycle of misery.  There are a range of outcomes for both scenarios.  

....and the least likely outcome is that you will get a franchise changing talent by tanking the roster out and intentionally losing games to get a high pick.  The most likely outcome is that you will be drafting in the lottery for a very long time.

[AHF]

30 minutes ago, KB21 said:

 The most likely outcome is that you will be drafting in the lottery for a very long time.

And you get those numbers from where?

I totally agree that getting a generational talent is a low probability but you realize that most teams in the playoffs last year have been in the lottery recently, right?  And that most of the teams that hadn't been there in the last 5 years didn't escape the first round?

Finals

Warriors - lottery 2012

Cavs - lottery 2014

Semi-Finals Exits

Boston - lottery 2014

San Antonio - not recent

2nd Round Exits

Wizards - lottery 2015

Toronto - lottery 2013

Utah - lottery 2016

Houston - lottery 2012

1st Round Exits

Chicago - lottery 2016

Indiana - lottery 2015

Milwaukee - lottery 2016

Portland - lottery 2013

Oklahoma - lottery 2015

Atlanta - Not recent

Memphis - Not recent

LAC - Not recent 

 

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

And you get those numbers from where?

I totally agree that getting a generational talent is a low probability but you realize that most teams in the playoffs last year have been in the lottery recently, right?  And that most of the teams that hadn't been there in the last 5 years didn't escape the first round?

Finals

Warriors - lottery 2012

Cavs - lottery 2014

Semi-Finals Exits

Boston - lottery 2014

San Antonio - not recent

2nd Round Exits

Wizards - lottery 2015

Toronto - lottery 2013

Utah - lottery 2016

Houston - lottery 2012

1st Round Exits

Chicago - lottery 2016

Indiana - lottery 2015

Milwaukee - lottery 2016

Portland - lottery 2013

Oklahoma - lottery 2015

Atlanta - Not recent

Memphis - Not recent

LAC - Not recent 

 

You should realize that, outside of the Warriors, those teams who were in the lottery are not successful now because they were in the lottery.  Cleveland is successful because LeBron went back home.  Boston is successful because instead of banking on young players, they brought in Jae Crowder and Al Horford.  Toronto is successful because they brought in Kyle Lowry, Patrick Patterson, and Serge Ibaka outside of the lottery. 

The teams that are doing what some of you want to do with the Hawks, which is completely building around youth, are the ones that are picking in the lottery year after year after year.

[Guard]

53 minutes ago, KB21 said:

You should realize that, outside of the Warriors, those teams who were in the lottery are not successful now because they were in the lottery.  Cleveland is successful because LeBron went back home.  Boston is successful because instead of banking on young players, they brought in Jae Crowder and Al Horford.  Toronto is successful because they brought in Kyle Lowry, Patrick Patterson, and Serge Ibaka outside of the lottery. 

The teams that are doing what some of you want to do with the Hawks, which is completely building around youth, are the ones that are picking in the lottery year after year after year.

You need vets AND young players man. Two out of the three teams you named has an important young player that is helping to shape their current team. Irving and Derozen. Where  would the Cavs and the Raptors be without those guys?

Boston is the only team that fits your point but they are an anomaly in how their currently set up and their potential in the future. Boston's winning will be sustainable large part due to their young lottery talents waiting in the wings and a key piece like Hayward only being 27. As players like Horford age, those young players will be godsends unless they bust.

Both youth and veterans are needed especially if you have title aspirations. Making this an either/or situation doesn't make sense. 

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, Guard said:

You need vets AND young players man. Two out of the three teams you named has an important young player that is helping to shape their current team. Irving and Derozen. Where  would the Cavs and the Raptors be without those guys?

Boston is the only team that fits your point but they are an anomaly in how their currently set up and their potential in the future. Boston's winning will be sustainable large part due to their young lottery talents waiting in the wings and a key piece like Hayward only being 27. As players like Horford age, those young players will be godsends unless they bust.

Both youth and veterans are needed especially if you have title aspirations. Making this an either/or situation doesn't make sense. 

I agree, and you aren't going to get veterans to be interested in coming to your organization if you tank and support losing efforts.  As a result, you will be stuck with youth that will not win.

[Alex]

35 minutes ago, KB21 said:

I agree, and you aren't going to get veterans to be interested in coming to your organization if you tank and support losing efforts.  As a result, you will be stuck with youth that will not win.

Could this be why the Hawks haven't signed anyone?

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, Alex said:

Could this be why the Hawks haven't signed anyone?

After reading Rob's write up at PTH, I think they haven't signed anyone because they don't have the cap room to do it right now.  However, even the thought that this may be a potential tank job will certainly make prospective free agents look elsewhere.

Edited July 6, 2017 by KB21

[Alex]

Just now, KB21 said:

After reading Rob's write up at PTH, I think they haven't signed anyone because they don't have the cap room to do it right now.

Link?

[KB21]

https://www.peachtreehoops.com/2017/7/5/15926252/atlanta-hawks-salary-cap-update-jamal-crawford-paul-millsap

[REHawksFan]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

I agree, and you aren't going to get veterans to be interested in coming to your organization if you tank and support losing efforts.  As a result, you will be stuck with youth that will not win.

Please show me multiple teams that have sustained success in the NBA without players that were drafted in the lottery.  Your whole argument is completely nonsensical.  The only one I can think of is San Antonio and they are clearly the outlier rather than the rule. 

Cleveland is great because they drafted LeBron in the lottery once upon a time AND because they drafted Kyrie in the lottery AND because they drafted Thompson in the lottery. 

The Warriors drafted Steph in the lottery, then Draymond, in the lottery then Thompson in the lottery.  Durant was also a lottery pick.

You are assuming the worst and then arguing from a position that your worst assumption is guaranteed.  Your premise is all wrong.  There's only 3 ways that I know of for the Hawks to get these type of lottery players - Draft them, Trade for them, or Sign them as FAs.  We all know that none of them are coming via FA.  So that leaves drafting them or trading for them.  You really can't do either without assets such as draft picks and good contracts.  That's what the GM is TRYING to accumulate now. 

 

[KB21]

1 minute ago, REHawksFan said:

Please show me multiple teams that have sustained success in the NBA without players that were drafted in the lottery.  Your whole argument is completely nonsensical and frankly, just idiotic.  The only one I can think of is San Antonio and they are clearly the outlier rather than the rule. 

Cleveland is great because they drafted LeBron in the lottery once upon a time AND because they drafted Kyrie in the lottery AND because they drafted Thompson in the lottery. 

The Warriors drafted Steph in the lottery, then Draymond, in the lottery then Thompson in the lottery.  Durant was also a lottery pick.

You are assuming the worst and then arguing from a position that your worst assumption is guaranteed.  Your premise is all wrong.  There's only 3 ways that I know of for the Hawks to get these type of lottery players - Draft them, Trade for them, or Sign them as FAs.  We all know that none of them are coming via FA.  So that leaves drafting them or trading for them.  You really can't do either without assets such as draft picks and good contracts.  That's what the GM is TRYING to accumulate now. 

 

Then tell me exactly why half the teams that drafted in the lottery this year were also drafting in the lottery 5 years ago?  This idea that you have to tank your roster out to get assets is foolish, because when you do that, you are committing yourself to losing over a long period of time in hopes that one of the players you take with those precious lottery picks turns into this unicorn, generational talent that is going to change the fortunes of your franchise.

[SalvorMallow]

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Then tell me exactly why half the teams that drafted in the lottery this year were also drafting in the lottery 5 years ago?  This idea that you have to tank your roster out to get assets is foolish, because when you do that, you are committing yourself to losing over a long period of time in hopes that one of the players you take with those precious lottery picks turns into this unicorn, generational talent that is going to change the fortunes of your franchise.

Only half?  With the absolutist way you're talking, I would assume 100% of teams that ever touch the lottery never get out.

[REHawksFan]

16 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Then tell me exactly why half the teams that drafted in the lottery this year were also drafting in the lottery 5 years ago?  This idea that you have to tank your roster out to get assets is foolish, because when you do that, you are committing yourself to losing over a long period of time in hopes that one of the players you take with those precious lottery picks turns into this unicorn, generational talent that is going to change the fortunes of your franchise.

Again, you are talking from a premise that isn't accurate.  You keep talking as if having a lottery pick = tanking.  Do you realize that every team not in the playoffs gets a lottery pick? Missing the playoffs next year and getting a Top 10 pick does not equate to tanking.  Truth be told, there's only been one team in recent history that has actually tanked as you are describing and that is Philly and the GM expressly stated that's not what he is doing here.  I'm not sure why you are so hell bent on claiming this is a tank.  

To answer your question, the reason why half the teams in the lottery this year were in the lottery 5 years ago is because damn near half the league is in the lottery every year and the other half have LOTTERY players that take them to the playoffs.  This isn't the NFL where teams go last to first in a year.  It takes time and a good front office and most likely a little luck along the way. 

 

EDIT:  And also, 5 years ago the Wizards, Cavs, Raptors, Pistons, and Jazz were all in the lottery.  Four of those five have made the playoffs multiple times since then.  It wasn't a death sentence for any of these teams.

Edited July 6, 2017 by REHawksFan

[KB21]

12 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Again, you are talking from a premise that isn't accurate.  You keep talking as if having a lottery pick = tanking.  Do you realize that every team not in the playoffs gets a lottery pick? Missing the playoffs next year and getting a Top 10 pick does not equate to tanking.  Truth be told, there's only been one team in recent history that has actually tanked as you are describing and that is Philly and the GM expressly stated that's not what he is doing here.  I'm not sure why you are so hell bent on claiming this is a tank.  

To answer your question, the reason why half the teams in the lottery this year were in the lottery 5 years ago is because damn near half the league is in the lottery every year and the other half have LOTTERY players that take them to the playoffs.  This isn't the NFL where teams go last to first in a year.  It takes time and a good front office and most likely a little luck along the way. 

 

EDIT:  And also, 5 years ago the Wizards, Cavs, Raptors, Pistons, and Jazz were all in the lottery.  Four of those five have made the playoffs multiple times since then.  It wasn't a death sentence for any of these teams.

....and how many years did those teams spend in the lottery before making the playoffs?  Those of you who are OK with this strategy now will be the ones howling when this team hasn't made the playoffs in 5 years after this process starts.

[Kimsey]

There is good news and bad news for 2018 free agency. The team will have loads of money, but the crop of free agents is pretty shitty. 

The most realistic option for center is Favors. He and Collins I wouldn't say are the best combo, but it's decent going forward. The draft will also provide good options, much better than this previous one.

Honestly screw competing for the 2017-18 season, it's all about developing guys who you think are going to be the core members. 

[JTB]

12 minutes ago, Kimsey said:

There is good news and bad news for 2018 free agency. The team will have loads of money, but the crop of free agents is pretty shitty. 

The most realistic option for center is Favors. He and Collins I wouldn't say are the best combo, but it's decent going forward. The draft will also provide good options, much better than this previous one.

Honestly screw competing for the 2017-18 season, it's all about developing guys who you think are going to be the core members. 

Exactly! That's what has me hyped for the upcoming season . I want to see if Dennis, THJ, Prince can be core players and lead this squad in the future.

[KB21]

14 minutes ago, Kimsey said:

There is good news and bad news for 2018 free agency. The team will have loads of money, but the crop of free agents is pretty shitty. 

The most realistic option for center is Favors. He and Collins I wouldn't say are the best combo, but it's decent going forward. The draft will also provide good options, much better than this previous one.

Honestly screw competing for the 2017-18 season, it's all about developing guys who you think are going to be the core members. 

...and what about the impact that a losing environment is going to have on player development?

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, KB21 said:

...and what about the impact that a losing environment is going to have on player development?

Like the losing environment that was in GS before they got the players they needed to build and started developing them?  The environment depends on having the right coach.  I haven't seen the slightest indication from Schlenk that he will tell Bud to anything other than go develop the players and try your best to win games.  If Bud starts sitting our best players for months at a time then I'll start worrying about developmental impairment from the environment.