Half the season behind us, what FA targets are you most hoping on Schlenk's radar?

[Lurker]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

Many of us began this journey giving Schlenk the benefit of a doubt but also recognizing the truth that legitimate championship contending teams need at least one top tier NBA talent, and that, somewhat obviously, to the degree that you can possibly gain a second or a third, you make it increasingly likely that you'll summit that mountain into the NBA Finals.

Practically all of us began this journey exhausted by the hamster wheel years where we have been good enough to make the post-season, but almost never a threat to be taken seriously.

All of that to say, we might have enough talent already on the roster to some day summit, but that by no means is yet clear. Not even close.

And Schlenk has indicated almost all along that while the worst GM mistakes have been in making long, expensive deals with players who weren't worth it, he's also indicated the best possible scenario would be for some way some how a top tier talent to come to Atlanta. That is, after all, a big and good reason for carving out all that cap room for summers 2020 and 2021.

Use it. Or lose it.

The statement above that NOP plans to max Ingram is one of those "Well, of course they do" statements. Even for much lesser players, teams practically always say they plan to bring the guy back. Who's forgotten that the Hawks were definitely planning to bring back Horf? Anyone? Everyone? There is no disincentive to saying anything less than positive at this stage. But will NOP pay Ingram ~$35m/yr for 4 years or more? It's possible they could have to decide that. Or, will they pay Ingram ~$28m for 4 years or more even if he's again gotten injured at some point before the end of the season? Those two plausible situations would make his resigning in NOLA a bigger question mark than it already is... and, indeed, according to the ESPN report from just these last several days, "most executives" remain unpersuaded as to whether he'll be worth the max to NOP.

Finally... two things can be true at once. There is nothing about obtaining Ingram that would keep us from developing Reddish. Do both. The minutes loser in the scenario isn't even so much Hunter as it would be Huerter. But the benefit of having 4 or 5 solid wings through the course of an 82 game season these days, allowing you to weather injuries, is hard to overestimate.

I fully expect NOP to pay the full max for him. That's why he's out of the picture as far as I care.

[Thomas]

2 minutes ago, sturt said:

Many of us began this journey giving Schlenk the benefit of a doubt but also recognizing the truth that legitimate championship contending teams need at least one top tier NBA talent, and that, somewhat obviously, to the degree that you can possibly gain a second or a third, you make it increasingly likely that you'll summit that mountain into the NBA Finals.

Practically all of us began this journey exhausted by the hamster wheel years where we have been good enough to make the post-season, but almost never a threat to be taken seriously.

All of that to say, we might have enough talent already on the roster to some day summit, but that by no means is yet clear. Not even close.

And Schlenk has indicated almost all along that while the worst GM mistakes have been in making long, expensive deals with players who weren't worth it, he's also indicated the best possible scenario would be for some way some how a top tier talent to come to Atlanta. That is, after all, a big and good reason for carving out all that cap room for summers 2020 and 2021.

Use it. Or lose it.

The statement above that NOP plans to max Ingram is one of those "Well, of course they do" statements. Even for much lesser players, teams practically always say they plan to bring the guy back. Who's forgotten that the Hawks were definitely planning to bring back Horf? Anyone? Everyone? There is no disincentive to saying anything less than positive at this stage. But will NOP pay Ingram ~$35m/yr for 4 years or more? It's possible they could have to decide that. Or, will they pay Ingram ~$28m for 4 years or more even if he's again gotten injured at some point before the end of the season? Those two plausible situations would make his resigning in NOLA a bigger question mark than it already is... and, indeed, according to the ESPN report from just these last several days, "most executives" remain unpersuaded as to whether he'll be worth the max to NOP.

Finally... two things can be true at once. There is nothing about obtaining Ingram that would keep us from developing Reddish. Do both. The minutes loser in the scenario isn't even so much Hunter as it would be Huerter. But the benefit of having 4 or 5 solid wings through the course of an 82 game season these days, allowing you to weather injuries, is hard to overestimate.

Don't guess it is animal cruelty if the horse is already dead.

[sturt]

We are getting Ingram.

 

See. I can do it too.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

We are getting Ingram.

 

See. I can do it too.

I like my odds better.

[sturt]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

I fully expect NOP to pay the full max for him. That's why he's out of the picture as far as I care.

I've said it's 70% that they resign him.

You're entitled to your opinion, though, of course.

Not to be snarky, but one of those "is what it is" things... the difference is, I've tried to support my opinion with some factoids and logic, not just a hunch.

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I like my odds better.

Oh. Well, I suppose that does it, then. I give up.

 

(hehe)

[JayBirdHawk]

The way I see it:

It's more likely than not, that NOP resigns him.

It's more likely than not, that Schlenk doesn't offer him a RFA deal.

[sturt]

12 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

The way I see it:

It's more likely than not, that NOP resigns him.

It's more likely than not, that Schlenk doesn't offer him a RFA deal.

1. Agree.

2. It is entirely likely that comes down to Schlenk's own talent assessment, and nothing else.

Maybe Schlenk's assessment is that Ingram is too fragile, or that he has some fatal flaw that is going to prevent him from much if any further development.

I'm presuming Schlenk thinks highly of Ingram. If he does, there is zero downside to making the offer.

 

General observation that applies to practically all responses in this tangent of the thread... anyone can have a hunch, and anyone's hunch can plausibly end up being right. But so much more likely it is that reason triumphs over hunches, and reasoned conclusions prove to be right instead of hunches. All counterpoints to the reasons I've presented are welcome, but I just haven't hardly seen much of that for awhile. Spud gave some. Kudos to him.

 

[Spud2nique]

5 hours ago, sturt said:

Um. Have you slowed down to look?

Schlenk only has this off-season and next before two significant salaries are almost certainly going to be on the books (Collins and Young).

His capacity to sign a max free agent beginning off-season 2022 is severely compromised, at best.

 

2021 has to be wide open for us. Freak.

[sturt]

8 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Freak.

Good luck with that. Atlanta historically having proven to be such a magnet for top tier free agents in general.

 

Too much competition in 2021 from too many big market and iconic franchises to bode well. Same old story.

Meanwhile, don't look now, but we're Anthony Davis' only other alternative to LAL, assuming one assumes he's a max player.

Can't get him, of course. But there is one more FA who, depending on who you talk to, is considered a young max talent with an outside chance at being All-NBA... which again would have the effect of vaulting him into a stratosphere where ATL's only possible competition would be his current team.

 

Zooming out, this really is one of those, "don't bother me with the facts that lead to your conclusion, sturt, I just know what I feel about this, and that's why you're just wrong" things.

It just happens that way sometimes... hehe... sure, a little annoying, but it's just sports we're talking about, so whatever.

[sturt]

More silly talk.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2877985-1-free-agent-every-nba-team-should-already-be-thinking-about

 

[Spud2nique]

Top 3 guys in 2021... we need Freak!

 

Notable Players Who Are Potential 2021 Free Agents

 

Unrestricted

Giannis Antetokounmpo

Anthony Davis

CJ McCollum

Bradley Beal

Let’s face it..Anthony Davis is staying a Laker. That’s leaves Giannis, Beal and CJ..  

[sturt]

Maybe this got overlooked...

[Buzzard]

14 hours ago, sturt said:

Good luck with that. Atlanta historically having proven to be such a magnet for top tier free agents in general.

 

Zooming out, this really is one of those, "don't bother me with the facts that lead to your conclusion, sturt, I just know what I feel about this, and that's why you're just wrong" things.It just happens that way sometimes... hehe... sure, a little annoying, but it's just sports we're talking about, so whatever.

Two reasons I can think of real quick:

1- New Orleans offers him a max the first day: like 1 minute after the time FA starts. They can negotiate with their own player so this would not be a unusual circumstance.

2- It ties up our money for three days; and gives other teams a chance to move quicker on players we are more likely to get.

And furthermore, the only real logic you are using is you think Ingram is worth it. You can be just as wrong about knowing what Schlenk thinks as anyone else.

Edited February 28, 2020 by Buzzard

[sturt]

7 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

Two reasons I can think of real quick:

1- New Orleans offers him a max the first day: like 1 minute after the time FA starts. They can negotiate with their own player so this would not be a unusual circumstance.

2- It ties up our money for three days; and gives other teams a chance to move quicker on players we are more likely to get.

And furthermore, the only real logic you are using is you think Ingram is worth it. You can be just as wrong about knowing what Schlenk thinks as anyone else.

1. Right. No argument. That could happen. In fact, just above, I've put it at 70% chance NOP matches whatever offer there is.

But they've waited this long, and if one actually studies it, NOP is not in a position to throw more money at him than they absolutely have to, so there is every reason in the world for them to not sign him until another team has an offer on the table.

2a. We are one of 5 teams with money to spend. And we have more money than the max $28m, or even the $34.5 if it comes to that. There may possibly have never been a stronger buyer's market in the history of NBA free agency, and we are the team with the most flexibility. I hardly think we have to be in a hurry.

So there's that.

2b. There's also only a 2 day period, not a 3 day, for what it's worth. That got changed either last year or the one before.

3. What "furthermore" are you talking about? You can be dismissive, but don't be disrespectful. Read what I wrote, and then counterpoint the points made if you can... or, just say, I'm not willing to read all that... but don't disrespect me by pretending you've read and you didn't see any logic supporting the conclusion. That's just wrong. You're better than that.

No. The case is not just a matter of Ingram's talent. The case is largely a matter of the timing. In short, we have plenty of cap space and very little competition this off-season, though Ingram is the only player reasonably in play; we have plenty of cap space for 2021, but so does most of the league, and while there will be some very good players on the market, there's far too many competitors and not enough of those top tier player for us to reasonably think we can land a big fish; and by 2022, our cap space is severely impacted by whatever Collins will be getting in his next contract plus, almost certainly, there will be a Trae extension on the books.

That, together with the fact there is practically zero downside actually to making an offer to Ingram, and the lack of any other top tier FAs (unless Davis suddenly decides he doesn't like LA that much after all) makes it entirely logical to expect Schlenk to do so.

The only reason Schlenk wouldn't... again, already wrote this, so I hope you appreciate that I'm repeating it for you... is if Schlenk sincerely doesn't think Ingram is worth it. And we know that it's been reported by ESPN that, indeed, "many executives" are not yet persuaded that he is worth a max.

[Buzzard]

55 minutes ago, sturt said:

1. Right. No argument. That could happen. In fact, just above, I've put it at 70% chance NOP matches whatever offer there is.

But they've waited this long, and if one actually studies it, NOP is not in a position to throw more money at him than they absolutely have to, so there is every reason in the world for them to not sign him until another team has an offer on the table.

2a. We are one of 5 teams with money to spend. And we have more money than the max $28m, or even the $34.5 if it comes to that. There may possibly have never been a stronger buyer's market in the history of NBA free agency, and we are the team with the most flexibility. I hardly think we have to be in a hurry.

So there's that.

2b. There's also only a 2 day period, not a 3 day, for what it's worth. That got changed either last year or the one before.

3. What "furthermore" are you talking about? You can be dismissive, but don't be disrespectful. Read what I wrote, and then counterpoint the points made if you can... or, just say, I'm not willing to read all that... but don't disrespect me by pretending you've read and you didn't see any logic supporting the conclusion. That's just wrong. You're better than that.

No. The case is not just a matter of Ingram's talent. The case is largely a matter of the timing. In short, we have plenty of cap space and very little competition this off-season, though Ingram is the only player reasonably in play; we have plenty of cap space for 2021, but so does most of the league, and while there will be some very good players on the market, there's far too many competitors and not enough of those top tier player for us to reasonably think we can land a big fish; and by 2022, our cap space is severely impacted by whatever Collins will be getting in his next contract plus, almost certainly, there will be a Trae extension on the books.

That, together with the fact there is practically zero downside actually to making an offer to Ingram, and the lack of any other top tier FAs (unless Davis suddenly decides he doesn't like LA that much after all) makes it entirely logical to expect Schlenk to do so.

The only reason Schlenk wouldn't... again, already wrote this, so I hope you appreciate that I'm repeating it for you... is if Schlenk sincerely doesn't think Ingram is worth it. And we know that it's been reported by ESPN that, indeed, "many executives" are not yet persuaded that he is worth a max.

I think its been said many times by some and now I will say it as well, for our team Ingram is not worth it. We don't need another high powered offensive player who is a weak link on D. I think Ingram MIGHT be a great fit on a great defensive team. But even someone like Pops, if he had the money, might be wary of another DeRozan at a different position. To give an idea of what I am talking about here are some important on/off % for Ingram.

Opponent: When Ingram is on the floor:

eFG% is .533 on vs .525 when he is off the floor.

ORB% is 22.8 on vs 21.4 when he is off the floor.

DRB% is 77.9 on vs 73.6 when he is off the floor.

In every category above, the opponent is better when he is on the floor.

Now a pretty important offensive component for on/off:

Opponents Offensive rating 113.7 on vs 111.5 when he is off the floor. When he is on the court, the Pelicans Offensive rating is 111.9 on vs 111.3 when he is off; barely a difference. So despite his gaudy numbers the Pelicans are not a much better team when he is on the floor.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/ingrabr01/on-off/2020

 

So with this little bit of dada I would say Ingram is a weak link despite what his rebounding numbers actually suggest.

 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Buzzard

[Thomas]

Ingram not appreciating sharing the floor with Zion is strictly a guess as best as I can tell. But if that is indeed a growing issue for him then he would definitely like sharing the floor with Trae even less. Trae is breaking NBA records that have been around a while on a weekly basis. Trae should be wearing a cape. So why bring a future very expensive disgruntled cat onboard if it is even possible in the first place? 

[sturt]

9 hours ago, Buzzard said:

who is a weak link on D

 

Let me preface what I'm about to say by doing something I never do... i.e., repeat myself.

It does indeed come down to how Schlenk assesses Ingram and his potential.

Maybe he looks at him and agrees with those who see a young Kevin Durant. Or, maybe he's one of those of the "many" executives the ESPN reporter spoke to who don't actually consider him worth the max, just as some here don't.

But do please be consistent and acknowledge, folks, that many of you are arguing against yourselves--on the one hand "he's not that good," and on the other "he's way too good for NOP to not offer him a max." Choose a side and stay there, please, or look foolish.

My point has assumed Schlenk considers him an elite player and my premise is that Schlenk does intend to pursue a top tier talent with the cap space he has been so miserly and disciplined in making sure he has... and that common sense says his opportunity for doing so is going to close quickly after having the 2020 and 2021 free agency pools to dive into. 

Okay, here's what I really want to say...

I agree that we need defensive chops. I'm not a Doug Moe disciple. I want to see anyone we add from this point forward to be a defensive asset.

Brandon Ingram has been playing out of position for practically all of his minutes for the last two seasons. Go back and look at the 5-man rotations for him in 82games and the percent of minutes spent at each position, and you'll find he's been facing power forwards most all of this season--and he doesn't have the frame for that night after night after night, at least not at this stage of his career. Look at the previous season, and you'll find he was getting almost all of his minutes at shooting guard where, at least he's probably better matched, but still not ideal.

I like him as he was drafted to be, a small forward. Put him there and leave him there. I don't think he will merely hold his own there, I think we'll find he's actually capable of making an All-Defensive Team some day. In ATL, that's where he would most likely get most of his minutes, and we would thrive with him there.

My biggest concern is his durability, not his defense. Recently, he's been having some knee concerns, evidently. Us Hawk fans have had more than our share of disappointment over the years with quality acquisitions who, once in ATL, barely got onto the court.

That, to me, would be the most valid reason for Schlenk to decide to not pursue Ingram.

[sturt]

4 hours ago, Thomas said:

Ingram not appreciating sharing the floor with Zion is strictly a guess as best as I can tell. But if that is indeed a growing issue for him then he would definitely like sharing the floor with Trae even less. Trae is breaking NBA records that have been around a while on a weekly basis. Trae should be wearing a cape. So why bring a future very expensive disgruntled cat onboard if it is even possible in the first place? 

Might've missed this...

 

 

(... btw, re: my Adrian Dantley analogy... many forget that he actually did play with both of those guys... or, I should speak for myself, that I did. )

[sturt]

So who is who?

 

Which strengths assessment was Draft Express giving about the one player, and which for the other when they were each preparing to be drafted?

 

And how about weaknesses?

 

Note: One of these is probably the player you're thinking. The other might not be, but he has been getting some love in this thread (... just as he should).

 

 

[sturt]

Coming back to my computer after lunch, and what?!?... no guesses?