What's with all the Adoration for Schlenk?

[Eddielives]

I think this is just a lot of sour grapes.  It was the same with Smoove.  There were those that just looked at stats and seemed to become emotionally attached to players.  Didn't matter how much evidence there was for their negative affects on the team.  The bond was there like a man crush.  If you still have to be told that Dwight is a bad teammate and his game and stats aren't as relevant to today's game as they would have been 10 years ago, then I don't think you can understand until you're willing to understand.  Unless you're omniscient, you cannot say whether Schlenk was lying when he said that this was the best deal.  If you think there were better deals, you're in possession of supernatural powers of knowing.  And to suggest just keeping these guys on the bench?  Yeah, that will work out just lovely.  No way that could have any negative effects on the team at all.  Just keep them there like slaves and they'll be happy good teammates.  Seriously, this is just ridiculous.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, Sothron said:

I want to give Schlenk a full season before I judge him. I don't think that is asking too much to hold off on an opinion before it can be truly informed and developed over a season.

Right now, I'd say he has made some good decisions in drafting Collins, not matching THJ, only give spare parts deals to Dedmon and Ersan and Moose and letting Millsap walk.

He also made bad decisions by giving away Dwight and taking back a bad deal and going down in the draft to do it. I also think buying out Crawford was a huge mistake. Even if Crawford pouted and refused to play for us it wouldn't matter because his contract was like gold for next offseason when teams desperate for cap relief would be willing to trade for it.

So right now I'd say he has been more positive than negative. Give him a full season before judging him.

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

I'm willing to re-visit this once we know the actual number. God help us that I don't have to concede that point.

But for now, I don't, and you should be sober enough to acknowledge that we don't know yet what we don't know.

This is where you're just totally exposed and dog-determined to evaluate on the basis of talent.

No. Again, you know stuff that you just blatantly ignore.

In this case, you know that there's a salary cap.

I feel ridiculous to even feel I have to say this... you can do things with a contract at $12m that you cannot do with a contract at $23m.

"Well, if the talent attached to the $12m is lousy, then you're just as stuck, though."

No.

You aren't.

Again, you know this, and I feel ridiculous to even have to say it... there is such a thing as trade filler in this environment that makes talent very much a secondary consideration.

Ever hear of Terrell Brandon? We were part of one of the original trade-filler trades.

 

 

 

I understand fully about getting cap flexibility for a move.  However, don't forget we took on Marco and Plumlee.   Guaranteed contracts.  We saved a whopping 3.4 Million this year.  What I say is that we wasn't planning on spending that money on anything of value... Hence we again traded a 2nd rounder for a probable late first rounder and took on 14.2 Million in contract for Crawford and Stone... So we needed cap flexibility to get Stone?  or was it Moose?  Tell me what great move did we make with all this flexibility that you talk about?

 

[hazer]

2 hours ago, Thomas said:

In William Hurt's voice:

"I'm just trying to keep the conversation lively."

Remember "The Big Chill" folks?

I have a theory, but there's no way I can prove it...

[Buzzard]

27 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I understand fully about getting cap flexibility for a move.  However, don't forget we took on Marco and Plumlee.   Guaranteed contracts.  We saved a whopping 3.4 Million this year.  What I say is that we wasn't planning on spending that money on anything of value... Hence we again traded a 2nd rounder for a probable late first rounder and took on 14.2 Million in contract for Crawford and Stone... So we needed cap flexibility to get Stone?  or was it Moose?  Tell me what great move did we make with all this flexibility that you talk about?

 

Dwight is making 23.5 million. You are acting like moving that is the easiest thing in world while totally ignoring how hard it really is. The Raptors just paid a 1st and a 2nd round pick to Brooklyn to take on DeMarre's 15 million a season ( 30 million total left ) contract.

Unless one is talking about CP3 or Paul George, most teams ( as in almost all ) do not want anything to do with that much money being paid out to a a non all star talent.

Edited July 14, 2017 by Buzzard

[hazer]

2 hours ago, marco102 said:

Man, Diesel knows how to keep the conversation going around here.

Yeah, that theory thing I just mentioned. If I ever figure out a way to prove it :)

[hazer]

57 minutes ago, Eddielives said:

I think this is just a lot of sour grapes.  It was the same with Smoove.  There were those that just looked at stats and seemed to become emotionally attached to players.  Didn't matter how much evidence there was for their negative affects on the team.  The bond was there like a man crush.  If you still have to be told that Dwight is a bad teammate and his game and stats aren't as relevant to today's game as they would have been 10 years ago, then I don't think you can understand until you're willing to understand.  Unless you're omniscient, you cannot say whether Schlenk was lying when he said that this was the best deal.  If you think there were better deals, you're in possession of supernatural powers of knowing.  And to suggest just keeping these guys on the bench?  Yeah, that will work out just lovely.  No way that could have any negative effects on the team at all.  Just keep them there like slaves and they'll be happy good teammates.  Seriously, this is just ridiculous.

Not just ridiculous, but deliberately obtuse.

[Thomas]

On a happy go lucky note that trade improved our three point game fairly well. Marco off the bench instead of Baze off the bench. Dwight vs Plumlee is 0 vs 0 percent. So we have a net gain.

[KB21]

Trading Dwight was not the wrong move, and the Hawks were never actually going to get anything of value in a trade for Dwight.  In any deal, the Hawks were going to have to give something up of value and then take on something undesirable.  For those that do not understand the cap reasons for the trade, you should read hawksfanatic's post on the salary cap after the trade and how it actually DOES give the Hawks more flexibility.  Without that trade, we cannot complete the trade with the Nuggest and Clippers.  We were able to do that because on the first day of the new year for the league, the Hawks were operating with cap space because they opened it up by dealing Dwight and renouncing other free agents.  

[benhillboy]

Different strokes I guess.  Like when Halle Berry was considered the finest Black Woman ever but she was built like a cornstalk with a Meg Ryan head.

Edited July 14, 2017 by benhillboy

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, Buzzard said:

What is pathetic is you are now grasping at straws and quoting fans instead of non biased national reporting. No one in the national media bashed either team for this move as they understood what both teams two very different goals were.

 

What does the national Media think?

Sports illustrated.

Quote

Hawks: D+

Charlotte: B

 

In sum, Atlanta traded out an expensive impact player for an expensive non-impact player, it dropped 10 spots in the draft order, it took on an extra year of eight-figure commitments to Plumlee, and it created a hole in the middle. There’s definitely value in being free of Howard’s moodiness and offensive fit issues, but not that much value. Millsap should run away to a real contender as quickly as possible and not look back.

RealGM

Quote

Grade for Hawks: D-

Grade for Hornets: B+

 

The desperation of the Hawks to simply get rid of Howard was evident with how bad this trade is in its simplest terms. Trading back 10 slots is plain enough, but trading for Plumlee after he’s already been salary dumped once and has one extra season on his deal compared to Howard shows Travis Schlenk’s anxiety that he was going to be stuck in a situation where he may have to follow the path Stan Van Gundy took when he took over the Detroit Pistons with Josh Smith. 

ABCNews

Quote

Atlanta Hawks: D

Charlotte Hornets: A-

Based on Howard's wins above replacement player (WARP) and rating in ESPN's real plus-minus (RPM), I project him as about fairly paid next season and a little overpaid in 2018-19. By contrast, Plumlee brings little on-court value. After falling out of the Milwaukee Bucks' center rotation last season before he was traded to Charlotte, I project him right around replacement level for the remainder of his contract, meaning he'll be paid in excess of $35 million more than he's worth over the next three seasons.

So since the Hawks are taking on the worse contract and the worse players, why are they also trading down in the second round?

If Atlanta was so desperate to be rid of Howard, the Hawks probably would have been better off telling him not to report next season and wait out his contract rather than make this trade. Maybe no market ever would have materialized for Howard's services, but at least his deal ended a year sooner than Plumlee's.?

CBSNews

Quote

Charlotte:  Grade: B

Atlanta: Grade: B+

 

It's not great that they had to slide down 10 picks in the draft. It's not great that Plumlee will still be making $12.5 million in 2019-20. That said, I actually like it. As great as Howard was defensively during the regular season, he actively harmed his team in the playoffs against the Washington Wizards, damaging the Hawks' spacing on offense and transition defense. He pouted when coach Mike Budenholzer elected to go small, but it's possible that Atlanta might have actually gotten out of the first round had the Hawks done that more often. After that, the Hawks were never going to get a bunch of good assets in return for him. 

Foxsports

Quote

Atlanta Grade: Grade: C

Charlotte Grade: Grade: A

 

 

Belinelli will provide three-point shooting (36 percent last year), but even after a bounce-back season in Charlotte, the 31-year-old veteran will only be on the roster for a year before he and his $6.6 million salary hit free agency in 2018.

Combine that with trading down 10 spots in this year’s draft and it’s hard to get excited here, even from a salary/personnel dump standpoint. The Hawks didn’t have to attach any assets to move him, which is a positive, and they have a good chance to land a young center with this year’s No. 19 overall pick, but nothing more than a passing grade seems appropriate.

Please stop propagating that anybody but you and the other homers think that we won this trade or that it was even a good trade.   The National Media disagrees with you.

[Eddielives]

1 minute ago, Diesel said:

What does the national Media think?

Sports illustrated.

RealGM

ABCNews

CBSNews

Foxsports

Please stop propagating that anybody but you and the other homers think that we won this trade or that it was even a good trade.   The National Media disagrees with you.

"What do they know?"  - Diesel in response to the consensus of media response to Tim Hardaway's contract with the Knicks

Above post - Diesel quoting national media to support his arguments.  

[Diesel]

52 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Trading Dwight was not the wrong move, and the Hawks were never actually going to get anything of value in a trade for Dwight.  In any deal, the Hawks were going to have to give something up of value and then take on something undesirable.  For those that do not understand the cap reasons for the trade, you should read hawksfanatic's post on the salary cap after the trade and how it actually DOES give the Hawks more flexibility.  Without that trade, we cannot complete the trade with the Nuggest and Clippers.  We were able to do that because on the first day of the new year for the league, the Hawks were operating with cap space because they opened it up by dealing Dwight and renouncing other free agents.  

The Cap flexibility that you speak of was 3.4 Million dollars.  We would have been able to do the Crawford Fiasco and Sign Ersan.  We gave our new C more than 3.4 Million.    3.4 Million dollars when the Cap is 100 Million.. is Nothing. 

[Buzzard]

47 minutes ago, Diesel said:

What does the national Media think?

Sports illustrated.

RealGM

ABCNews

CBSNews

Foxsports

Please stop propagating that anybody but you and the other homers think that we won this trade or that it was even a good trade.   The National Media disagrees with you.

I never said we won. What I am saying it is impossible to win a salary dump of 23.5 million when the player is not an all-star. Hell do you think the Clippers consider themselves winners with Gallinari and assets over Paul right now? Do you think the Raptors think they are winners shipping off Carroll and two picks?

Write it any way you want; now go find a statement of mine where I said we gained a better player and won this trade. All I have ever said is we gained cap and cheaper easier to move assets. Now tell me I am wrong just because you can turn Dwight into a 23.5 million a year 12th man.

Edited July 14, 2017 by Buzzard

[parfait]

6 hours ago, Diesel said:

I'm sorry... all he has done thus far is have a firesale.

 

Every GM knows how to have a successful firesale.. 

BK had a very successful Firesale.

Ferry had a very successful Firesale. 

Babcock even knew how to have a firesale when he felt the time was needed. 

 

So a firesale is not new and it's not what should be applauded... However, you can make mistakes in a firesale..... 

I think Schlenk has done that.  Both with the Dwight trade and with the Crawford Buyout, I think Schlenk has made mistakes in the firesale.  Both of those guys had value and Schlenk misjudged their value.  Yet... Adoring fans want to give him the biggest congratulation for moving those contracts and taking bad deals in the process.  ON the Dwight trade, we took back a bad, longer contract and loss a draft spot.  Moneywise it was a trade of 46 Million to 37.5 Million.  That 8.5 Million difference in this economy is MEANingless.   Not to mention, we will be paying Plumlee 12.5 Million dollars in a time where Dwight would have been gone.  Both Dwight and Crawford's contract would have been more valuable next year but we squandered that... WHY?  Here's the problem... we're not trying to be competitive.   It's not like we have said FA in our target and needed to clear cap space to get him..  We're just having a firesale and hoping to tank.   So this adoration for Schlenk because he is able to trade players is unfounded.   Anybody can get rid of Salary.. especially when you trade a top rebounder for a guy who gets you 2ppg and 2 rpg and cost you 12.5 Million dollars per to do it.   Or when you pay a guy 22 Million dollars to leave.

I don't believe anyone has any actual adoration for Schlenk. The jury is definitely still out. And you're right, even Billy Knight did a decent job with the initial teardown.

But a number of us at least are giving Travis the benefit of the doubt, which you don't seem to be doing. He comes with a good pedigree and great recommendations. And in the broad sense he is doing the right thing: avoiding bad contracts and accumulating assets.

He many not have gotten optimum value for Howard, but it seems pretty clear that his initial investigation of Hawks culture revealed that Howard needed to be removed from the locker room (and the defensive rotation) asap.

Regarding THJ, that contract was universally panned. No responsible GM would sign him to that contract.

Regarding Crawford, if no one was offering value (and no contenders have cap space) so how could he have gotten anything for him?

Where Schlenk can really separate himself from Ferry, and certainly Knight, is if he drafts well. Ferry missed on 3 of 4 first round picks. And Knight blew the franchise's only high lottery picks in recent decades. Schlenk is looking good so far with at least Collins, and he was the lead personnel guy in a department out west that drafted pretty well in recent years.

Travis Schlenk doesn't require our adoration. But the benefit of the doubt is the least that we can give him as we hope for the ship to get turned in the right direction.

[AHF]

29 minutes ago, parfait said:

Regarding Crawford, if no one was offering value (and no contenders have cap space) so how could he have gotten anything for him?

 

At the risk of repeating this too many times, it is precisely the lack of cap space that other teams will have next offseason that made him so valuable.  His salary for next year is not guaranteed beyond 3M.  That means trading for him and cutting him creates roughly 11M in space for a team.  People will be wanting that space next year and Crawford's contact would have been gold.

The quandary becomes what to do with him this year but next season people would be clamoring to give value for his cap relief.

[Buzzard]

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

At the risk of repeating this too many times, it is precisely the lack of cap space that other teams will have next offseason that made him so valuable.  His salary for next year is not guaranteed beyond 3M.  That means trading for him and cutting him creates roughly 11M in space for a team.  People will be wanting that space next year and Crawford's contact would have been gold.

The quandary becomes what to do with him this year but next season people would be clamoring to give value for his cap relief.

I also think a contender or pretender wanting to push the envelope might have sent something for him at the trade deadline. It is all second guessing but that is what I was hoping for as a possible alternative.

Edited July 15, 2017 by Buzzard

[KB21]

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

The Cap flexibility that you speak of was 3.4 Million dollars.  We would have been able to do the Crawford Fiasco and Sign Ersan.  We gave our new C more than 3.4 Million.    3.4 Million dollars when the Cap is 100 Million.. is Nothing. 

https://www.peachtreehoops.com/2017/6/21/15847320/atlanta-hawks-salary-cap-dwight-howard-trade-miles-plumlee-marco-belinelli

Quote

The Flexibility of the Deal

Travis Schlenk is clearly one to value flexibility with respect to the salary cap. He broke down an approximately $23.5 million contract into a $6.6 million and $12.5 million. That’s an immediate savings of $4.4 million on the 2017-18 cap and more manageable contracts in a potential trade. The next year sees an $11.4 million savings on a salary cap currently projected by the NBA to be at $102 million. This does come at the cost of reducing the amount of potential cap space in 2019-20 by $12.5 million, although by that time the salary cap is projected to be up to $111 million.

This is an important time to note that cap space can be utilized for more than simply signing free agents. Cap space greatly relaxes the constraints on trades and opens up the possibility to renegotiate current contracts in a way to appease players (a-la Russell Westbrook this past off-season).

Schlenk has positioned himself to at least have the option of utilizing cap space. Prior to this trade, Schlenk’s options were more limited in the near future but now Schlenk at least has a viable option to make further trades and or signings. And that option value is certainly valuable even though it may be difficult to quantify.

 

[Buzzard]

33 minutes ago, KB21 said:

https://www.peachtreehoops.com/2017/6/21/15847320/atlanta-hawks-salary-cap-dwight-howard-trade-miles-plumlee-marco-belinelli

 

Not resigning Sap and dumping half of Howard's annual salary has made us more flexible. Next season we only have nine guaranteed salaries and that is if Dedmon opts back in. It will be another round robin flurry of activity at draft time with our picks and during FA with our cap.

If we have to rebuild, at least we are rebuilding with multiple draft picks and some cap space to start with. The following season, 2019/20 is when things might get dicey depending on if we are still carrying Bazemore 19.2, Schröder 15.5, and Plumlee 12.5 ; and then how much it takes to keep Prince and Bembry.

But that will be Bazemore and Plumlee's last year and their contracts might be worth something to someone; if not us. I am pretty sure if some of us on this board are thinking three seasons ahead, so is our new GM. So we will see what happens.

Edited July 15, 2017 by Buzzard

[Lurker]

When are you going to quit crying about Dwight Howard being gone?