Hawks Free Agent Targets

[sturt]

1 minute ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I would just like to add...IMO the odds the Hawks sign Ingram is less than the probability of NOP not matching the offer if we do.

At least, when I repeat myself, it's because people bring up the same objections, which in turn, call for the same counterpoints.

That's very different than just repeating my same opinion over and over again w/o being prompted for it and more importantly w/o any actual counterpoint to the counterpoints already made over and over.

At least.

[sturt]

2 minutes ago, Thomas said:

ESPN is good for box scores and ....well....box scores.

Trying awfully hard here to avoid engaging what precious little intel we have on the topic.

Not that that should surprise, except that I am surprised that you would be the person doing that, my friend.

Look... some people around these parts almost daily quote bloggers uttering their opinions as if they're somehow meaningful.

Far be it for anyone to take an actual legitimate reporter reporting his own discussions with multiple actual NBA execs seriously, right?

That's the bass-ackwards world that an online discussion board can become when people dig-in and refuse to engage.

 

[Spud2nique]

5 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

After a while it gets to the point where it is like arguing with your mate about something really stupid. You just need to shake your head and say " Yes honey, you are right"  and go back to watching the game.

Happy wife happy life smart man!

[JayBirdHawk]

12 minutes ago, Buzzard said:

After a while it gets to the point where it is like arguing with your mate about something really stupid. You just need to shake your head and say " Yes honey, you are right"  and go back to watching the game.

 

7 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

Happy wife happy life smart man!

My husband concurs! 

[sturt]

19 hours ago, Buzzard said:

Let Sturt enjoy the premise that we may chase Ingram and we may sign Ingram. That is his dream come true in this thread; let the man have his dream. I am.

No more senseless arguing and dealing with snide remarks about a lack of logic and intelligence over one player out of possibly twenty we may pursue.

Buzzard, I respect people who actually engage and try to participate in an adult point-counterpoint discussion of a given topic.

All due respect... emphasis on "due," which should be interpreted as-in practically every person deserves a basic human respect... I do not owe you any additional respect at this point in time, given that days ago you you hit a wall and slinked away, declaring something along these same lines as-if it gives a person a higher moral or rhetorical ground once he injects the golden ticket phrase, "I feel insulted," and that followed by "I'm just going to close my eyes now and pretend you're not even there."

Never mind, your arguments were assaulted... but you? Never. Didn't happen, doesn't happen.

It was a cowardly reaction... yes, cowardly in the dictionary definition of cowardly, because it fits, not just throwing a term out there to get an emotional reaction. A cowardly reaction to a situation where you didn't have any way to counterpoint what was posted.

You appear to have this same thing that Spud has where you don't seem to get it that sometimes an adult person gains the most respect from other adults when s/he's psychologically able to step up to say, "Okay, I suppose you have a point," or words to that effect.

Rather, what happened was that you had no way to reconcile your "dream come true" against the counterpoints offered back to you.

I've spent a lot of words by now debunking this notion that you so desperately want to advance that I'm some Ingram lover... that's just shallow logic, or not paying attention to what I've written, or both. To the contrary, in short, I'm the one of the two of us closely studying what Schlenk has said, as opposed to going off and drinking kool-aid and dreaming up what it would be like to have player X, Y or Z on the roster.

The point is not that on my side of the internet.

But rather the point on my side is to try to take Schlenk's recent and past words in the many interviews conducted over these years and figure out how his brain is most likely working, given the context of the off-season in front of us, as well as the next one after that.

Finally, lest you get all huffy again as-if inappropriately personally attacked with these words... it's a sign of basic human respect that I'm even writing this. If I thought you were too juvenile to engage, I wouldn't bother. I would just read what you write, and laugh it off, like I would any child who might choose to post here. I'd think myself ridiculously mean to be taking on a child's attempt at logic.

Oh. Wait.

You can't read this anyway.

Never mind.

[Thomas]

4 hours ago, sturt said:

Trying awfully hard here to avoid engaging what precious little intel we have on the topic.

Not that that should surprise, except that I am surprised that you would be the person doing that, my friend.

Look... some people around these parts almost daily quote bloggers uttering their opinions as if they're somehow meaningful.

Far be it for anyone to take an actual legitimate reporter reporting his own discussions with multiple actual NBA execs seriously, right?

That's the bass-ackwards world that an online discussion board can become when people dig-in and refuse to engage.

 

To help with that thorn may I suggest....

 

SILVER OAK CABERNET NAPA 

A wine of extraordinary intensity and depth, it has a dark garnet color and a concentrated nose of cassis, roasting coffee, chocolate, violets and sandalwood. It is extremely rich on the palate, with a full body and a long, fruity intense finish. Ready to drink on release.

 

 

[sturt]

19 hours ago, Thomas said:

To help with that thorn my I suggest....

 

SILVER OAK CABERNET NAPA 

 

When people have substance they can use to make counterpoints and advance an otherwise average-quality-conversation, they do that.

That's what is respectful and what makes sense.

It's second nature.

It happens quite a bit around here. Not always. But quite a bit.

And when they don't have substance... well... of course, they don't.

Any of that.

Rather, they find other ways to respond.

Attempts at humor is one of the more popular ones, and all the better when they get a little... even just a little... peer reassurance that no one else can do any better than that.

 

 

 

It causes me to think of something I recently heard Adam Corolla say.

Asked about whether he feels awkward about how many comedians lean strongly to the left, he told the interviewer not to be quite so easily inclined to that conclusion. He said that there is a clique of comedians who are, indeed, outward about their politics and those tend to lean left, but all those that aren't so outward? He told the interviewer (paraphrasing) that he should be inclined to think that those comedians' silence probably means they lean right on a lot of issues just as he does, based on his interactions with them.

The relevance is this...

There are a couple or three people here who have been really intense, and at some times exhaustively willing to thumb their nose at the substance I've brought to this particular vein of discussion on this board. Maybe four or five, even.

If one takes that to be somehow important, though, I would caution to notice the silence of those who aren't willing to thumb their nose to it.

 

 

Reasonable people don't take deflection and resistance to reason to be especially persuasive or admirable.

And that's a good thing. As a rule, reason should trump attempts at comedy and deflection, whether we're talking sports or if we're talking something that actually matters.

All I got.

 

[Thomas]

18 minutes ago, sturt said:

Rather, they find other ways to respond. Attempts at humor is one of the more popular ones, and all the better when they get a little... even just a little... peer reassurance that no one else can do any better than that.

 

This is not a dissertation, it is a sports forum. If your not happy then you are human. 

 

18 minutes ago, sturt said:

All I got.

Not likely....Dickens.... 

[sturt]

13 minutes ago, Thomas said:

This is not a dissertation, it is a sports forum.

 

35 minutes ago, sturt said:

When people have substance they can use to make counterpoints and advance an otherwise average-quality-conversation, they do that. That's what is respectful and what makes sense. It's second nature. It happens quite a bit around here. Not always. But quite a bit.

And when they don't  have substance... well... they don't. Any of that.

Rather, they find other ways to respond.

 

[Thomas]

19 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Sturt: All I got.

As said....not likely....

[sturt]

Oh, but it was.

That you decided to respond with a comment that merited repeating something of what I had is a choice you made.

 

Humor = deflection

Word count = deflection

 

I get it, though. Sometimes substance just doesn't do for you what you wish it did. So you go a different route.

We just have different ways of dealing with that situation, though.

[Thomas]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

Oh, but it was.

That you decided to respond with a comment that merited repeating something of what I had is a choice you made.

 

Humor = deflection

Word count = deflection

 

I get it, though. Sometimes substance just doesn't do for you what you wish it did. So you go a different route.

We just have different ways of dealing with that situation, though.

OK, you got me. I appreciate wine more than you do I believe. So anyway on a less irritating note, how is the novel going? This may sound like a jab but it is not really. Free Kindle is my livelihood as a cheap assed consumer for night time enjoyment before the Cabernet takes me away. Would enjoy one of yours if not Hawks related of course. 

[sturt]

15 hours ago, Thomas said:

Would enjoy one of yours if not Hawks related of course. 

I'm confused.

Lemmee get this straight.

You're sayin you want more to read from meeeee???

Am I bein punked (again) ?

[AHF]

Let me ask this question.  I know some players have been traded during their rookie contracts but has any player who was good enough to make an All-Star team not been resigned by the team that held his RFA rights following the conclusion of their initial rookie deal?  Ie has a single one of them been allowed to simply walk away to another team that was a higher bidder for their services?  I did a very cursory look from 2010 to the present but didn’t see any.  May have missed them because it was cursory.

[sturt]

11 hours ago, AHF said:

Let me ask this question.  I know some players have been traded during their rookie contracts but has any player who was good enough to make an All-Star team not been resigned by the team that held his RFA rights following the conclusion of their initial rookie deal?  Ie has a single one of them been allowed to simply walk away to another team that was a higher bidder for their services?  I did a very cursory look from 2010 to the present but didn’t see any.  May have missed them because it was cursory.

It's a valid question.

And/but right away I'm struck by the thought that it would seem to be an especially rare situation that a player meeting that description wasn't extended in the first place...

And rarer still, where there was some extant division of thought among NBA executives in general about whether the player in that circumstance had shown sufficient production/development to merit a max contract...

And for any given year, there would be some ebb and flow in the number of teams that would even have the capacity to offer a max contract (... and thus, push the player's current team to the wall).

Probably, then, a more interesting question than it is a relevant one to the extent that the question is designed to predict what will happen in the Ingram situation (as it appears it is).

But again, it is interesting, so I'm all for one of our community gathered here taking on the research project if someone wants to step up and do that.

EDIT: Spud appears to be interested.   Go for it, my man.

EDIT: Oh... other volunteers? Great!

Well, Spud gets dibs, but if he doesn't (and yeah, he probably won't), then surely feel free Jay and JTB.

 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

Let me ask this question.  I know some players have been traded during their rookie contracts but has any player who was good enough to make an All-Star team not been resigned by the team that held his RFA rights following the conclusion of their initial rookie deal?  Ie has a single one of them been allowed to simply walk away to another team that was a higher bidder for their services?  I did a very cursory look from 2010 to the present but didn’t see any.  May have missed them because it was cursory.

Without looking, I would guess -  NO!

[Buzzard]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

Let me ask this question.  I know some players have been traded during their rookie contracts but has any player who was good enough to make an All-Star team not been resigned by the team that held his RFA rights following the conclusion of their initial rookie deal?  Ie has a single one of them been allowed to simply walk away to another team that was a higher bidder for their services?  I did a very cursory look from 2010 to the present but didn’t see any.  May have missed them because it was cursory.

I would think not but there may be a outlier somewhere. Even players like Kemba, Kyrie, etc who were considered youngish all stars at the time were on their 2nd or even 3rd contracts when they were traded.

It is to damn hard to get all-stars, even more so for small market teams.

[sturt]

2 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Without looking, I would guess -  NO!

Whoa! No one saw that coming, did they?

 

No kidding, isn't it some combination of disappointing and disturbing when people can be found to be so intent to push for the validity of logic, reason and stated fact when it resonates with their desired conclusion... say, concerning the case for the current coach remaining employed here... and yet, so disinterested and even dismissive when the same doesn't resonate with their desired conclusion?

You'd like to see people have more consistency than that in how they think, or at least I think a lot of us would.

[AHF]

I do think the history of RFAs coming out of their rookie deals bears on the likelihood of Ingram leaving NO.  The RFA status is a very powerful tool for player retention.  Here are the list of relevant players who were allowed to walk in FA that I can see and how much they commanded in FA:

Jahlil Okafor - 2 year, minimum salary ($1.5M in year 1)

Mario Hezonja - 2 year minimum contract

Willie Cauley-Stein - 2 years, ~$2.2M/year

Emmanuel Mudiay - 1 year minimum contract

Stanley Johnson - 2 years, $3.7M/year

Frank Kaminsky - 2 years, $4.9M/year

Trey Lyles - 2 years, $5.5M/year

Jabari Parker - 2 years, $6.5M/year

Julius Randle - 1 year, $8.6M

Nik Stauskas - Waived

Noah Vonleh - 1 year, $1.6M

Elfrid Payton - 1 year, $3M

Doug McDermott - 3 years, $7.7M/year

-------------

At this point, I lost interest in tracking the lottery picks who had been allowed to leave.  Let's just draw the obvious conclusion and note that all of these players disappointed the teams that held their RFA rights and none of those teams wanted them back even for numbers less than $10M per year (usually much less).

So that brings me back to my earlier point about the more highly desirable people.  Will cover in next post.

[Spud2nique]

11 hours ago, sturt said:

EDIT: Spud appears to be interested.   Go for it, my man.

EDIT: Oh... other volunteers? Great!

Well, Spud gets dibs, but if he doesn't (and yeah, he probably won't), then surely feel free Jay and JTB

I’M AIN’T BUYIN YOUR SOAP LADY!!!!!!!   (slams)!!!

Edited April 27, 2020 by Spud2nique