PF and C required

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

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.

No.  More like the losing environment of the Minnesota Timberwolves, Philadelphia 76ers, and Sacramento Kings. 

[AHF]

Just now, KB21 said:

No.  More like the losing environment of the Minnesota Timberwolves, Philadelphia 76ers, and Sacramento Kings. 

The Kings who traded a bunch of their picks and did deals for Rudy Gay, Rajon Rondo etc. trying desperately to win before they were ready and whose blueprint we are not following?

The Sixers who systemically rid themselves of all young players on their team so they could tank deep to the very top of the lottery and whose blueprint we are not following?

The T-Wolves who have only recently started managing themselves well?  Well, at least the T-Wolves model resembles what we will do even if execution is the main differentiator between them and the Warriors.

What will determine our success or failure is not the fact that we sign older veteran free agents or that we go into the lottery - it is what opportunities are available to us and whether we execute on them.  Management like the Kings will never succeed under any scenario because they are incompetent.  

[REHawksFan]

24 minutes ago, KB21 said:

....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.

Portland:  3 Playoff seasons => 2 lottery years (28 / 33 wins) => 4 Playoffs

Memphis:  3 PO => 4 lotto (22 / 22 / 24 / 40) => 7 straight Playoffs

Pacers:  9 straight Playoffs => 4 lotto (35 / 36 / 36 / 32 wins) => 6 of last 7 in playoffs

Denver:  10 straight playoffs => 4 lotto (36 / 30 / 33 / 40 wins) => ready to make playoffs next year

Boston:  4 playoffs => 2 lotto (24 / 33 wins) => 9 of 10 years in playoffs including 1 title\

Utah:  20 straight playoffs => 3 lotto (42 / 26 / 41 wins) => 4 playoffs => 5 of 6 lotto leading up to last year in the playoffs

Sea/OKC:  11 of 12 years in playoffs => lotto 4 of 7 years (25 / 44 / 40 / 37 wins) => playoffs => 4 lotto (35 / 31 / 20 / 23) => 7 of 8 playoffs

 

All of these examples had teams in the playoffs, slipped into the lottery to RETOOL (not tank or rebuild) and then went right back into the playoffs.  The time in the lotto ranged from 1 year to 4 years.  Going into the lottery IS NOT a horrible thing and it does not signify tanking or long periods of losing.  Just stop with that nonsense.  

Bottom line:  the last 3 NBA Championships were won by the GS Warriors and the Cleveland Cavaliers.  Neither of those teams win those titles if they didn't go into the lottery to get their best players - LBJ, Kyrie, Triston, Steph, Klay, Dramond, and KD.  Your logic that going into the lottery is a bad thing is foolish.   

[KB21]

21 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Portland:  3 Playoff seasons => 2 lottery years (28 / 33 wins) => 4 Playoffs

Memphis:  3 PO => 4 lotto (22 / 22 / 24 / 40) => 7 straight Playoffs

Pacers:  9 straight Playoffs => 4 lotto (35 / 36 / 36 / 32 wins) => 6 of last 7 in playoffs

Denver:  10 straight playoffs => 4 lotto (36 / 30 / 33 / 40 wins) => ready to make playoffs next year

Boston:  4 playoffs => 2 lotto (24 / 33 wins) => 9 of 10 years in playoffs including 1 title\

Utah:  20 straight playoffs => 3 lotto (42 / 26 / 41 wins) => 4 playoffs => 5 of 6 lotto leading up to last year in the playoffs

Sea/OKC:  11 of 12 years in playoffs => lotto 4 of 7 years (25 / 44 / 40 / 37 wins) => playoffs => 4 lotto (35 / 31 / 20 / 23) => 7 of 8 playoffs

 

All of these examples had teams in the playoffs, slipped into the lottery to RETOOL (not tank or rebuild) and then went right back into the playoffs.  The time in the lotto ranged from 1 year to 4 years.  Going into the lottery IS NOT a horrible thing and it does not signify tanking or long periods of losing.  Just stop with that nonsense.  

Bottom line:  the last 3 NBA Championships were won by the GS Warriors and the Cleveland Cavaliers.  Neither of those teams win those titles if they didn't go into the lottery to get their best players - LBJ, Kyrie, Triston, Steph, Klay, Dramond, and KD.  Your logic that going into the lottery is a bad thing is foolish.   

Like I have said in the past, I guess you guys have forgotten about the last time we decided to tear down a very good, playoff team.  You are going to have to go through the misery again of being a perennial lottery team.

[KB21]

23 minutes ago, AHF said:

The Kings who traded a bunch of their picks and did deals for Rudy Gay, Rajon Rondo etc. trying desperately to win before they were ready and whose blueprint we are not following?

The Sixers who systemically rid themselves of all young players on their team so they could tank deep to the very top of the lottery and whose blueprint we are not following?

The T-Wolves who have only recently started managing themselves well?  Well, at least the T-Wolves model resembles what we will do even if execution is the main differentiator between them and the Warriors.

What will determine our success or failure is not the fact that we sign older veteran free agents or that we go into the lottery - it is what opportunities are available to us and whether we execute on them.  Management like the Kings will never succeed under any scenario because they are incompetent.  

It's not the model or how you execute the opportunity.  It's the fact that you allow yourself to be a bad team in an attempt to get a higher pick and you allow that losing culture to invade the organization.  It's also a fact that you are more likely to get a Jahlil Okafor or Ben McLemore by going this route than you are of getting a Kevin Durant.

But you know what, this is what you guys want.  You want the 5-6 years of misery that accompanies this decision making.  You want to lose the best aspect of this organization in Mike Budenholzer because of the losing that will pile up in an effort to get young players time on the court.

[REHawksFan]

5 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Like I have said in the past, I guess you guys have forgotten about the last time we decided to tear down a very good, playoff team.  You are going to have to go through the misery again of being a perennial lottery team.

So you can't refute the facts I've laid out so you resort to claiming the past will repeat itself?  Weak.  Also, I didn't know Billy Knight and the ASG were running the Hawks now.  Good to know. 

The GSW were a joke of a franchise until they weren't (thanks to being in the lottery).  The Clippers couldn't get out of their own way for decades until they did (by being in the lottery and getting the Paul / Griffin / Jordan picks right).  The Cavs were horrible for large parts of their history.  And then they weren't (after drafting LBJ, Kyrie, Thompson in the lottery). 

Stop living in the past.  The Hawks have a different GM, different ownership, and a different script they are following.  If you want to be miserable just assuming you know what is going to happen (even though you continually get the premise wrong), knock yourself out. I'll wait to see how this plays out before I deem it an utter failure.  

And there's certainly the risk of it failing.  I recognize that unlike you that cannot even admit the simple fact that missing the playoffs does not equate to tanking.  I guess I'm just willing to wait and see what happens rather than trying to claim I can predict the future.  I'll leave that to you.     

 

 

[REHawksFan]

16 minutes ago, KB21 said:

You want the 5-6 years of misery that accompanies this decision making.  You want to lose the best aspect of this organization in Mike Budenholzer because of the losing that will pile up in an effort to get young players time on the court.

Just stop with this nonsense.  For every Philly that took several years (they were actually tanking unlike the Hawks), I'll give you Ind or Portland that took 2 or 3 years (not tanking).  Or Utah, or Toronto, or Memphis. 

Please just stop with the 5-6 years crap. 

[Kimsey]

The narrative of competing at all cost doesn't fit with the Hawks timeline right now. This roster  of young guys under direct financial control consists of:

Bembry - 23

Collins - 19

Hardaway - 25

Dorsey - 21

Prince - 23

Dennis - 23

Stone - 20

 

Gazemore and Plumlee are contracts Schlenk has to sit on until something presents itself. He needs flexibility for the 2018 and 2019 offseason. 

[Sothron]

Oh look, another thread @KB21 has turned into yet another tangent on rebuilding vs playoff mediocrity.

To the actual point of the thread: I am totally fine starting Collins at PF and hope they do start him. We need someone at center to make up for his lack of defense. That's why Noel would be a great fit. I also would be fine with Mason Plumlee who has a lot of the tools Bud wants in a big man. He also sets great picks so Dennis should be happy.

[DS5]

3 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Oh look, another thread @KB21 has turned into yet another tangent on rebuilding vs playoff mediocrity.

To the actual point of the thread: I am totally fine starting Collins at PF and hope they do start him. We need someone at center to make up for his lack of defense. That's why Noel would be a great fit. I also would be fine with Mason Plumlee who has a lot of the tools Bud wants in a big man. He also sets great picks so Dennis should be happy.

I'd be ok with either Mason Plumlee or Willie Reed at the 5. I don't think Noel is realistic, even if we try to max him, which I don't think it's a good idea, Mavs will probably match.

[Sothron]

6 minutes ago, DS5 said:

I'd be ok with either Mason Plumlee or Willie Reed at the 5. I don't think Noel is realistic, even if we try to max him, which I don't think it's a good idea, Mavs will probably match.

Mavs will match a max deal on him because they have no choice. If we sign him and they match we at least knock another team's cap down for future free agents or trades. We need to tie up people's cap like how the Nets are doing every offseason. At some point teams can't match everyone.

I'd be happy with Willie Reed as well.

[Packfill]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

Like I have said in the past, I guess you guys have forgotten about the last time we decided to tear down a very good, playoff team.  You are going to have to go through the misery again of being a perennial lottery team.

As long as Billy Knight is not doing the drafting the return to the playoffs should be a bit quicker this time around.  

[KB21]

52 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Just stop with this nonsense.  For every Philly that took several years (they were actually tanking unlike the Hawks), I'll give you Ind or Portland that took 2 or 3 years (not tanking).  Or Utah, or Toronto, or Memphis. 

Please just stop with the 5-6 years crap. 

...and for every Portland and Indy, I can give you a Sacramento, Minnesota, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Charlotte.

[Peoriabird]

Why focus on stats determining  how many years a team spent in or out of the lottery vs spending time on what dramatically changed the team's trajectory like a team transitioned onto a New ownership group and this ownership hired an innovative smart GM who then found a hall of fame coach? Sounds like yall think the above doesn't matter and  either being in or out of the lottery is the only factor that counts

[Sothron]

Can the rebuilding arguments please be moved into the official rebuilding topic since we now have one?

[marco102]

I'm hoping for Willie Reed and Ersan to be the starting powerforwards.

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, Sothron said:

Can the rebuilding arguments please be moved into the official rebuilding topic since we now have one?

1???? You mean 100

[REHawksFan]

My apologies to the board.  I'll bow out now.  I just have a habit of arguing with people that are completely illogical.  Done now. 

[Sothron]

6 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

My apologies to the board.  I'll bow out now.  I just have a habit of arguing with people that are completely illogical.  Done now. 

Trust me, you aren't the problem but I appreciate your willingness to not derail this topic further.

[Dragitoff]

So.....back to the original topic.  Has anyone seen anything linking us to anyone recently other than Olynyk, Noel, and Reed?  Seems like there was some speculation about Rocky's (Zaza) return and KB and others have went on and on about Plumlee, but I thought that was all speculation rather than substantiated rumors. 

One more name to toss into the "good fit" category would be Spencer Hawes.  Seems like he could be had for very little and would fit Bud's offensive style well.  Had some solid years.  Personally, I'd rather go with Olynyk if we're going with a true stretch 7 footer, but he might be a good backup plan.