Welcome to Atlanta (again), Mr. Dedmon

[DrReality]

10 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Kb chill, damn son. We're developing the kids while getting vets to help us win and develop them faster. Your level of patience is nil

Is he capable of chillin?  

[AHF]

8 hours ago, capstone21 said:

Im not really excited about this trade.  I thought Sac way overpaid for him and he is declining.

I can’t complain too much about that.  I’ve advocated overpaying for contributing vets on one year deals next season and that is what we are doing with Dedmon.

[Gray Mule]

Now, waiting to see who is released, to be available to be picked up, if we want them.

 

[tomac]

Put me in the minority that actually like Jabari's game. His defense was horrible, but he was a solid scorer. Ultimately his endless list of injuries may have cut his time short here.

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, PSSSHHHRRR87 said:

.  I liked Len, but Dedmon is about the same player. 

Gonna have to disagree. Dedmon works the pick and roll and pick and pops much better than Len. Dedmon doesn’t consistently get rejected by the rim. Dedmon impacts winning more than Len, I don’t think it’s too close.

[KB21]

3 hours ago, tomac said:

Put me in the minority that actually like Jabari's game. His defense was horrible, but he was a solid scorer. Ultimately his endless list of injuries may have cut his time short here.

Jabari is an empty stats player who isn’t very good or capable of helping a team win.  He’s another that should be a cautionary tale for those who think drafting in the top 5 every year is a good idea.

[Atlantaholic]

14 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Un-freakin-believable! I did not see this coming.

The most surprising thing is we got 2nds.

I would have been fine with the trade had it just been for the picks (or for Dedmon) alone. 

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

2 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Gonna have to disagree. Dedmon works the pick and roll and pick and pops much better than Len. Dedmon doesn’t consistently get rejected by the rim. Dedmon impacts winning more than Len, I don’t think it’s too close.

I see it for what it is. For now, yes, Dedmon will be able to contribute more than Len has because he will be our starter... Hell, we may not even see Capela this season. Len failed as a starter this season and at least Ded is healthy. He's also better than Jones and Bruno at the 5. Going forward though, once Capela is healthy and is our starter, Ded will come off the bench and contribute about a well as Len has. Come in, play defense, get a few boards, hit a few shots, and help keep us in the game while the starters rest... which is all Len gave us

[Atlantaholic]

12 hours ago, capstone21 said:

Im not really excited about this trade.  I thought Sac way overpaid for him and he is declining.

Who cares about the price tag atm? We are by far the richest team in the NBA heading into next offseason with or without Dedmon. After next year, he is off the books. Seems like a low risk move here. Worst case scenario, he sucks and we have no choice but to give his minutes to Bruno. Len and Parker were completely dead weight. Len was already "whatever" before he started to miss big chunks of time, Parker is a net negative out there with his complete lack of defense. Just getting the two picks for those two guys is a win, and if Dedmon regains his form than it could be a huge win, especially next year where we are clearly aiming for a playoff spot. 

[sturt]

13 minutes ago, KB21 said:

He’s another that should be a cautionary tale for those who think drafting in the top 5 every year is a good idea.

You know, for someone who is generally intelligent, you can say more than your share of absolutely moronic things, my friend.

As-if... we should just appeal to the NBA to let us draft every year 26-30, since that's obviously how you get good and stay good.

Duh.

Is drafting top 5 enough?

It's not enough. It's more complicated than that. But if you study it objectively, and not in a subjective way that presumes a desired conclusion, history says the most probable way a team can acquire an elite talent capable of being that lead dog that takes his team to the NBA Finals is to have a top 5 pick, or better, a top 3, or better a top pick.

There is so so so much more that goes into the equation than drafting top 5, not the least of which is that you have to have a GM who is above average in terms of young-player assessment, not just average...

Do we have that?

Early evidence says very possibly... but we're about to find out with greater certainty.

But beyond that, the other currency aside from the draft is using cash, and player acquisition through free agency, of course... and that's the more problematic avenue since the players who have esteemed themselves cost more money now and in the future for some number of years.

For a non-iconic franchise, competing for elite talent in the free agency market is a matter of being able to pay more. If not for the max being a matter of absolute legislated formula, we might be better able to do just that. The max, then, effectively works to our disadvantage, as it does for 80% of our competition. And it doesn't appear to be going away any time soon.

[KB21]

16 minutes ago, sturt said:

You know, for someone who is generally intelligent, you can say more than your share of absolutely moronic things, my friend.

As-if... we should just appeal to the NBA to let us draft every year 26-30, since that's obviously how you get good and stay good.

Duh.

Is drafting top 5 enough?

It's not enough. It's more complicated than that. But if you study it objectively, and not in a subjective way that presumes a desired conclusion, history says the most probable way a team can acquire an elite talent capable of being that lead dog that takes his team to the NBA Finals is to have a top 5 pick, or better, a top 3, or better a top pick.

There is so so so much more that goes into the equation than drafting top 5, not the least of which is that you have to have a GM who is above average in terms of young-player assessment, not just average...

Do we have that?

Early evidence says very possibly... but we're about to find out with greater certainty.

But beyond that, the other currency aside from the draft is using cash, and player acquisition through free agency, of course... and that's the more problematic avenue since the players who have esteemed themselves cost more money now and in the future for some number of years.

For a non-iconic franchise, competing for elite talent in the free agency market is a matter of being able to pay more. If not for the max being a matter of absolute legislated formula, we might be better able to do just that. The max, then, effectively works to our disadvantage, as it does for 80% of our competition. And it doesn't appear to be going away any time soon.

The dynamic of what you get at the top of the draft has changed over time.  Long gone are the days where you would get Hakeem Olajuwon or Michael Jordan at the top of the draft and have NBA ready players.  Instead, now you are taking an underdeveloped talent who has no clue how to play the game. It’s rare to get a Doncic or a Davis at the top of the draft in these days.  You are more likely to get a Wiggins, Parker, Russell, Ingram, or Okafor.  

[Lurker]

7 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Schlenk is now doing things he should have done last summer.  Strange GM

Which is not necessarily a bad thing, he might have realized by using the Hawks apparent in-house and not open to the public advanced analytics that said stuff like for example, Alex Len's impact would replace Dewayne Dedmon's impact smoothly, that he thoroughly pooped the bed on last year's offseason and put himself in a position where his job is on the line in 20/21 and he's in emergent need of being able to put the team in position of being able to show legit progress.

It's obvious he knows that he swung and struck out multiple times last offseason. He's talked about it and now made these moves. Good. Now maybe he should pair in-house analytics with actually using a pair of eyes in construction from here on. There's no problem with using analytics, but sometimes it should be paired with eyes as well.

[RedDawg#8]

33 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Jabari is an empty stats player who isn’t very good or capable of helping a team win.  He’s another that should be a cautionary tale for those who think drafting in the top 5 every year is a good idea.

Ehh, I mean injuries definitely played a factor in his career early. Plus, its hard to say he cant impact winning until you see him in a winning environment.

He is a guy that maybe you cant build around a la a Iggy, JR Smith, Shaun Livingston, etc... (lottery picks that never amounted to much as the main pieces), but can definitely contribute and add value to a winning situation in a complementary role. Those players are just as important, and they have to find their way in the league unlike other high picks that take off and never look down.

[sturt]

15 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The dynamic of what you get at the top of the draft has changed over time.  Long gone are the days where you would get Hakeem Olajuwon or Michael Jordan at the top of the draft and have NBA ready players.  Instead, now you are taking an underdeveloped talent who has no clue how to play the game. It’s rare to get a Doncic or a Davis at the top of the draft in these days.  You are more likely to get a Wiggins, Parker, Russell, Ingram, or Okafor.

 

Nonsense.

There has always been ample bad misses at the top of the draft.

Always.

Having said that, you aren't wrong to say that drafting primarily 19 year-olds is different than drafting primarily 22 year-olds like it once was. You're absolutely right about that part.

It does offer added opportunity for teams to develop talent on their own--except that they just don't. The pressure to win now is too much. Hence... the players who predictably and consistently get serious floor time to develop themselves is limited to those players whose draft slot demands that they get that degree of opportunity.

Maybe in the future, the developmental league becomes a stronger means to that end.

Some context has changed, but it remains as true as ever that drafting top 5 is the best player acquisition method to achieve the desired result. The chart I provided in that earlier thread was built on the last 20 years' results, not the MJ or Olajuwon era.

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Ehh, I mean injuries definitely played a factor in his career early. Plus, its hard to say he cant impact winning until you see him in a winning environment.

He is a guy that maybe you cant build around a la a Iggy, JR Smith, Shaun Livingston, etc... (lottery picks that never amounted to much as the main pieces), but can definitely contribute and add value to a winning situation in a complementary role. Those players are just as important, and they have to find their way in the league unlike other high picks that take off and never look down.

It’s really a function of coming to the league without actually understanding how to play the game properly or being ready for the NBA at all.  It’s all a result of the AAU racket, IMO.  AAU basketball the way it is today is destroying basketball.

[Atlantaholic]

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The dynamic of what you get at the top of the draft has changed over time.  Long gone are the days where you would get Hakeem Olajuwon or Michael Jordan at the top of the draft and have NBA ready players.  Instead, now you are taking an underdeveloped talent who has no clue how to play the game. It’s rare to get a Doncic or a Davis at the top of the draft in these days.  You are more likely to get a Wiggins, Parker, Russell, Ingram, or Okafor.  

"long gone are the days where you would draft Olajuwon or Jordan"

What does this even mean?? So teams picked Olajuwon and Jordan caliber players on the regular back in the 80's?? My brain hurts. 

Why am I even responding to this? lol

 

 

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

Why am I even responding to this? lol

 

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

"long gone are the days where you would draft Olajuwon or Jordan"

What does this even mean?? So teams picked Olajuwon and Jordan caliber players on the regular back in the 80's?? My brain hurts. 

Why am I even responding to this? lol

 

 

It should be very clear what that means.  

[Atlantaholic]

18 minutes ago, KB21 said:

It’s really a function of coming to the league without actually understanding how to play the game properly or being ready for the NBA at all.  It’s all a result of the AAU racket, IMO.  AAU basketball the way it is today is destroying basketball.

OK. And yet, out of the 10 active players with the best odds at making the Hall of Fame as of right now according to Basketball-reference, 9 of them were picked top 5, with the only exception being Curry who was picked 7th.

Complete list:

1. Lebron (1st pick)
2. Chris Paul (4th Pick)
3. Kevin Durant (2nd Pick)
4. Westbrook (4th)
5. Harden (3rd)
6. Curry (7th)
7. Howard (1st)
8. Carmelo (3rd)
9. Vince Carter (5th)
10. Pau Gasol (3rd)

Seems like a pretty good spot to pick a hall of fame player. But I guess all of that is in the past now. 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Atlantaholic

[bleachkit]

14 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

OK. And yet, out of the 10 active players with the best odds at making the Hall of Fame as of right now according to Basketball-reference, 9 of them were picked top 5, with the only exception being Curry who was picked 7th.

Complete list:

1. Lebron (1st pick)
2. Chris Paul (4th Pick)
3. Kevin Durant (2nd Pick)
4. Westbrook (4th)
5. Harden (3rd)
6. Curry (7th)
7. Howard (1st)
8. Carmelo (3rd)
9. Vince Carter (5th)
10. Pau Gasol (3rd)

Seems like a pretty good spot to pick a hall of fame player. But I guess all of that is in the past now. 

Kawhi Leonard has to be on that list, he went 15th.

Edited February 6, 2020 by bleachkit