Will Trae lead us to a Championship?

[sturt]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

Can't really judge if several of these are right or wrong right now.  (It is possible we choose not to go after a max player hoping to entice a pair next summer, for example.)  

I would bet, however, that your statement of a 35-ish player is probably more of a general guideline to get an experienced vet for that role.  Maybe 35-ish but probably anywhere from 30-37 would be fine depending on the player.  Matters more that the player have experience and some gravitas / leadership skills to go with his play.

I'd disagree slightly, but not for the reason you might suspect. The top priority can be judged. Whether or not the top priority can be fulfilled is a different question. If AD became available for some weird reason, the priority could be fulfilled. Almost no one would doubt that. And whether or not BI will prove to be a near-max player reportedly (citing the ESPN story from a couple of weeks ago) remains in doubt.

[AHF]

40 minutes ago, sturt said:

I'd disagree slightly, but not for the reason you might suspect. The top priority can be judged. Whether or not the top priority can be fulfilled is a different question. If AD became available for some weird reason, the priority could be fulfilled. Almost no one would doubt that. And whether or not BI will prove to be a near-max player reportedly (citing the ESPN story from a couple of weeks ago) remains in doubt.

Agree that I'm sure TS has a heirarchy of contingent priorities.  But in that middle range of most probable outcomes where AD isn't available, I could see him going either direction on max offers.  I could see him going after someone like BI or passing entirely based on who is out there this offseason.  Have to think the Capela and Dedmon trades were about not wanting to pay max money for Drummond but there will be others at the top of a pretty thin pool.

I saw your post as laying out the priorities for the market TS expects to exist - i.e., a default scenario.  If AD or Beal or Giannis, etc. become(s) available, that would push him off his default approach to an alternative scenario.

[sturt]

25 minutes ago, AHF said:

I saw your post as laying out the priorities for the market TS expects to exist - i.e., a default scenario.  If AD or Beal or Giannis, etc. become(s) available, that would push him off his default approach to an alternative scenario.

Yes, you had that right... his default list of priorities.

If he can't satisfy #1, then automatically, he can't satisfy #2. If he can't satisfy #1 or #2, then, #3 becomes the top priority, then #4.

And based on the degree to which he's able to meet those priorities, or not, this July, the July 2021 priority list emerges.

So, there is no "alternative" needed because the priorities are the priorities. The capacity to fulfill those priorities are out of his control, but that list is what he will work off of, imo.

[AHF]

28 minutes ago, sturt said:

Yes, you had that right... his default list of priorities.

If he can't satisfy #1, then automatically, he can't satisfy #2. If he can't satisfy #1 or #2, then, #3 becomes the top priority, then #4.

And based on the degree to which he's able to meet those priorities, or not, this July, the July 2021 priority list emerges.

So, there is no "alternative" needed because the priorities are the priorities. The capacity to fulfill those priorities are out of his control, but that list is what he will work off of, imo.

My point is that his default priorities may not include signing a max player at all if he wants to preserve cap room to lure two of them here next offseason ala LeBron/Bosh/Wade or Durant/Kyrie or others that brought max players together in the same offseason.  So it could be that his default priority list does not include #1 or #2 in any form except as a contingency plan where someone he doesn't expect to be available becomes available.  Could also be that he has non-max player(s) at the top of his priorities list.  (Like he would rather get Capella at $17.5M than Drummond at max; second option would be signing Christian Wood for $12M or less; but a fall back plan would be to go after Drummond at max).

[sturt]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

My point is that his default priorities may not include signing a max player at all if he wants to preserve cap room to lure two of them here next offseason ala LeBron/Bosh/Wade or Durant/Kyrie or others that brought max players together in the same offseason.

We simply disagree, then, on his priorities.

He's not going to wait on getting two in 2021 if one of those players that he considers to be worthy of a near-max or max contract is available in 2020.

Schlenk's not taking that risk, imo. To the contrary, that would be foolhardy, given that he works for a franchise that is practically the definition of "pedestrian" by NBA standards--not a big market (nor small), not an iconic franchise (nor a recent expansion).

Take what you can get as soon as you can get, because the likelihood of getting any at all is not good.

[AHF]

22 minutes ago, sturt said:

We simply disagree, then, on his priorities.

He's not going to wait on getting two in 2021 if one of those players that he considers to be worthy of a near-max or max contract is available in 2020.

Schlenk's not taking that risk, imo. To the contrary, that would be foolhardy, given that he works for a franchise that is practically the definition of "pedestrian" by NBA standards--not a big market (nor small), not an iconic franchise (nor a recent expansion).

Take what you can get as soon as you can get, because the likelihood of getting any at all is not good.

We agree on this.  I just don't know that there is anyone he would put in that bucket that he thinks will be available.  I think it is a real possibility that he looks at the list of who he thinks will be available and says, "nobody worth it."  We'll find out by seeing whether he aggressively moves out with a max offer on day 1.

[sturt]

1 minute ago, AHF said:

I just don't know that there is anyone he would put in that bucket that he thinks will be available. 

Then we do agree.

I keep saying this... but let me try another way...

You might go to the car lot wanting to buy a luxury car... that's your priority.

Whether the lot actually has one on their lot is a different question. The priority, though, didn't change... just the capacity to fulfill the priority.

[Thomas]

The "Art of War" was a bit more straight forward don't you know. And sports truly is a war no matter what level.

[AHF]

27 minutes ago, sturt said:

Then we do agree.

I keep saying this... but let me try another way...

You might go to the car lot wanting to buy a luxury car... that's your priority.

Whether the lot actually has one on their lot is a different question. The priority, though, didn't change... just the capacity to fulfill the priority.

He has a plan for who is going to be available in FA.  Based on that, he has a priority list of targets.  I don't know that any are luxury cars.  

He wants to get one in the long run but may be planning for 2021 and not to shop for them this year because this year's models don't meet his needs.  It isn't that there won't be guys who sign max deals.   It may be that he chooses not to shop for them because he doesn't want an Infinity or Lexus and will wait for the 2021 BMWs.

[sturt]

41 minutes ago, AHF said:

It may be that he chooses not to shop for them because he doesn't want an Infinity or Lexus and will wait for the 2021 BMWs.

I don't think he's that ignorant that he can afford to be so choosy about the luxury cars.

2020, there might not even be one available, but if there is, he has the advantage because of the limitations in terms of his competitors.

2021, there are likely to be several available, but he has the disadvantage that there are too many competitors, many of them more attractive than ATL.

My assertion is that the priority is the priority, and... hitting the metaphor bonanza here... he'll value the one in the hand over the two in the bush. If he worked for NYK, maybe not, but he works for ATL.

If we disagree, oh well. It happens.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

I don't think he's that ignorant that he can afford to be so choosy about the luxury cars.

2020, there might not even be one available, but if there is, he has the advantage because of the limitations in terms of his competitors.

2021, there are likely to be several available, but he has the disadvantage that there are too many competitors, many of them more attractive than ATL.

My assertion is that the priority is the priority, and... hitting the metaphor bonanza here... he'll value the one in the hand over the two in the bush. If he worked for NYK, maybe not, but he works for ATL.

If we disagree, oh well. It happens.

I guarantee he won't want Drummond even if the market judges him to be a max player or luxury car in this analogy.  He may well prefer other sub-max players over the max players that he expects will actually be available on the market or to go for the two in the bush.  We'll see.  Whether you and I see this is the same way is a bit off topic since we are predicting what TS will do and so it ultimately only matters how he sees things.  I don't have the same total confidence you do that he will make one or more max offers this offseason.  I could see it playing out either way whereas if AD was available or we were talking about next offseason's crew I would have zero reservation in joining you in predicting he would make one or more max offers.

[sturt]

17 minutes ago, AHF said:

I guarantee he won't want Drummond even if the market judges him to be a max player or luxury car in this analogy. 

Drummond isn't even thought to be an opt out candidate from what I've read (forgive my laziness at the moment to look up references), and the reasoning is that he cannot command a near-max contract in such a limited market.

But the point is well-taken that I probably should qualify slightly my wording to include that it is Schlenk's perception that the near-max or max player is, indeed, worthy of that amount. So, he doesn't just assume anything based on the price alone. (And that's consistent with what I've said all along.)

27 minutes ago, AHF said:

He may well prefer other sub-max players over the max players that he expects will actually be available on the market

He won't do this, imo... again, with the caveat that I just stated. He can spend money on sub-max players many if not most off-seasons. This is a unique opportunity to add a player from the upper tier of the league w/o having to give up anything but cap space.

29 minutes ago, AHF said:

I don't have the same total confidence you do that he will make one or more max offers this offseason.

Again, just to be clear... yes, "total confidence," with the caveat that there is someone he values at that standard of pay.

[JTB]

8 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

Getting to the Finals doesn't make you a champion though.  You have to win the chip.

 

Here's something to look at.  We see that in this 20 year period that 9 teams have won a ring.

• LA Lakers ( 5 )
• San Antonio ( 4 )
• Miami ( 3 )
• Golden State ( 3 )
• Cleveland ( 1 )
• Boston ( 1 )
• Detroit ( 1 )
• Dallas ( 1 )
• Toronto ( 1 )

These 9 teams have exhibited the tendency to play high level defense in their championship runs, and have made multiple Finals appearances ( except Toronto, who just got in last year ).

How many other different teams have made the Finals and what was their defensive ranking?

• Indiana ( 2000 ) - 13th . . . best player ( Reggie Miller ) . . . one appearance
• Philadelphia ( 2001 ) - 5th . . . best player ( Allen Iverson ) . . . one appearance
• New Jersey ( 2002 ) - 1st . . . best player ( Jason Kidd ) . . . . New Jersey would return in ( 2003 )
• Orlando ( 2009 ) - 1st . . . best player ( Dwight Howard ) . . . one appearance
• Oklahoma City ( 2012 ) - 11th . . . best player ( Kevin Durant ) . . . one appearance w/Thunder

That's it.

The reason why defense is so critical to winning a championship, is because you're normally going up against an all time offensive great player to win that ring.  And if you can't stop him ( or his All-Star teammate ), you must be able to slow down everyone else.   The 2018 Warriors team that won the chip, shouldn't have made it out of the Western Conference Finals. 

That was Houston's time, who had the #1 offense and #6 defense in the league.  Of course, when you lay a complete egg in Game 6, and shoot 7 - 44 ( and an epic 0 - 27 ) from 3 point range in Game 7, you deserve to lose.  And speaking of the Rockets, defense is the reason why this year's team has fallen off the map.   If you're Houston ( 2nd in offense - 15th in defense ), you're not winning a chip under most circumstances.  The same goes for Dallas ( 1st in offense - 17th in defense ).

 

 

 

 

Ok look all great points! I’m not saying we don’t need a top 10 defense to WIN IT ALL but I am saying we can have a defense that’s just outside of the top 10 and get to a finals as long as our offense is top 5.

Now Actually winning the championship that’s a different story ....I won’t disagree with anything u mentioned. BUT the thread is Titled “WILL TRAE LEAD US TO A CHAMPIONSHIP?”....the answer to that question (at least in my opinion) is yes he certainly can with a top 5 team offense and a team defense that’s only SLIGHTLY outside of the top 10.

...Trae is already a handful offensively....we get cam to reach his ceiling offensively, that will only make Collins more deadly offensively. Some consistent 3pt shooting from the other role players and this team being atleast 13th in team defense, that’s a finals appearance for the Eastern Conference.

Trae, Cam, Collins reaching full offensive potential is just too overwhelming of an offense...not to compare this with the warriors cause I know on most championship runs they played top 10 defense but at the same time when you have an offense like theirs that was overwhelming for the opponent it played in favor of making it easier to defend them. I’ve seen curry hit consistent 3s in back to back to back vs good defenses and overwhelm them on the other end on multiple occasions.

 I’m not going to say our hawks can be an historic offense like the warriors but I am going to say on a potential level if Trae, Cam, Collins actually get close to their maximum ceiling it’s very possible and that can’t be said with every team in the league in my opinion. Hawks can make their offense their defense in many ways like the warriors did.

[gurpilo]

If you are going to build around Trae you need good defenders specially at SG and C. I think we might have that on Reddish, Hunter, Collins and Capela. The problem is that we need 2 years to develop our 2 rookies and we don't know how is going to work Capela and Collins.

What can we do in the meantime, I agree the intention is to sign a max FA.

Is there any at 2020? I don't think so. Ingram is a not a good defender, I prefer to wait for Reddish and Hunter. Drummond, I prefer the value of Capela at his salary that Drummond at max contract although I agree Drummond might be a better player.

Is there any at 2021? I think so, Davis, Giannis, George, Leonard. All would be a huge upgrade.

I think on 2020 the goal must be to keep adding pieces to the team and develop th core pieces. Sign key role players that fit our team like Wood, Bertans, Ibaka, Baynes, Crowder, Harris, Bogdanovic... Sign at a reasonable price not jeopardizing our chances at 2021.

And finnally and most would not agree but Huertee need to go, his lack of defense do not fit, trade him now while he has some value.

[Lurker]

I think the answer to this is very TBD but I will reiterate something I've said before...preferably he's not your best player. Preferably he's playing with a star caliber wing that is your actual best player, and is looking to try to average something around 24 and 10+ assists.

Maybe that's Reddish, the progress he made looked very real but I don't think he will be able to tell us in which way he'll go for at least one more season, maybe about a half season. Honestly looks as if a lot is riding on where things go for him to me. If he's good instead of taking another step to possibly being great, you might find yourself walking to the other side of the circle unless you can pull off something in free agency. 

I'm not going to go crazy absurd, but I do think there's some risk that Trae's best role is like Isaiah Thomas (the today version, not the 90s version) or Jason Terry on Dallas in that his best role outside of a perfect situation is a bench role. There might honestly be a fine line between that and being something like a Nash/Lillard without the athleticism hybrid. I don't think we're going to know here about this line...honestly until we see a playoff series (which could be as soon as 20/21, MAYBE, but not as likely as I would have liked it to have been as we were going into 19/20, or as late as 3 seasons from now). 

They've done a build that's held plenty of risk, we'll see if the gambles pay off soon enough...

[gurpilo]

I really think this team with Capela and Collins for 72 games and 1 additional year on Reddish and Hunter will make the playoff next year.

Not doing anything great but keeping Goodwin, Huerter, Dedmon, Fernando and adding 2 Forwards (one might be Skal) will make the team a playoff team, if we add valuable pieces on FA like Wood, Ibaka, Bertans, Crowder or Harris and we hit our pick we might surprise a few and if we trade Huerter for equal value but better fit (less offense, more defense) watch out.

[sturt]

17 minutes ago, gurpilo said:

Ingram is a not a good defender,

 

[AHF]

20 hours ago, sturt said:

Drummond isn't even thought to be an opt out candidate from what I've read (forgive my laziness at the moment to look up references), and the reasoning is that he cannot command a near-max contract in such a limited market.

But the point is well-taken that I probably should qualify slightly my wording to include that it is Schlenk's perception that the near-max or max player is, indeed, worthy of that amount. So, he doesn't just assume anything based on the price alone. (And that's consistent with what I've said all along.)

He won't do this, imo... again, with the caveat that I just stated. He can spend money on sub-max players many if not most off-seasons. This is a unique opportunity to add a player from the upper tier of the league w/o having to give up anything but cap space.

Again, just to be clear... yes, "total confidence," with the caveat that there is someone he values at that standard of pay.

That caveat brings you to my side of the table.  I can 100% guarantee there will be people who get max or near max contracts this offseason.  However, there aren’t no brainers so I don’t know that TS will judge any of them worthy of the offer.  So he may not have “sign a max player” on his agenda for this offseason if he doesn’t value them at that level.

(As an aside on Drummond, it was heavily reported he is expected to opt out.  The season being shut down could affect that but it was widely reported when we were in discussions about trading for him.)

[sturt]

25 minutes ago, AHF said:

 I can 100% guarantee there will be people who get max or near max contracts this offseason.

Whoa. That one might be bet-worthy. You want to think about that one and get back to me? Because there is only AD who is guarantee-worthy, and he may or may not choose that it's in his best interest to opt into free agency this time. And, because this may end-up being the most buyers-market July ever, given how few teams project at this point to have cap space... driving prices down, not up.

[sturt]

Have read this take from more than one writer...

".....Drummond has a player option worth $28.75 million in the summer and by all accounts should be expected to opt in and return to the Cavs next season, eschewing the upcoming free agent market and the dearth of teams with minimal cap space (the Pistons are one of the few teams that could offer him a contract close to what he would seek, and obviously that won’t be happening) until the summer of 2021......"

https://hoopshabit.com/2020/02/26/cleveland-cavaliers-andre-drummond/