Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

Best Trade/Worst Trade in Hawks History.


Diesel

What was the Worst/Best trade in Hawks History?  

41 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

The trade of Joe isn't even close to the worst in my opinion.   He was considered untradeable at the time.    I went with Mookie as the best.  that was franchise changing right there.  As ahf mentioned though probably should be the trade to acquire nique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
29 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

The trade of Joe isn't even close to the worst in my opinion.   He was considered untradeable at the time.    I went with Mookie as the best.  that was franchise changing right there.  As ahf mentioned though probably should be the trade to acquire nique.

Totally agree.  We were hitting the reset button and that trade made perfect sense.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Nique was 34, in the likely twilight of his career. Manning was 27, in the likely prime of his career.

The offense w/ Nique completely revolved around him, even at 34... love him, of course, but he was about as ball dominant as they come.

Manning was more of a team player whose production came within the flow of the offense.

Both had suffered injuries before in their careers that were significant.

Both were on the cusp of free agency.

The draft pick was the #25 pick, and so we were effectively losing out on drafting 9 players we otherwise could have, since our next pick was #34.

 

To no one in particular... and remember it's not you, it's me, and that's why it's pointless to pursue a broader discussion with me here in the open-air forum...

Given the same factors/situation today, and not knowing hindsight as we do, I would still have made the same decision that Babcock did. True confession. I believe it made all the long-term sense in the world, though maybe not the short-term.

 

And, Nique, if you're reading this, my account was hacked, I swear.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
44 minutes ago, sturt said:

Nique was 34, in the likely twilight of his career. Manning was 27, in the likely prime of his career.

The offense w/ Nique completely revolved around him, even at 34... love him, of course, but he was about as ball dominant as they come.

Manning was more of a team player whose production came within the flow of the offense.

Both had suffered injuries before in their careers that were significant.

Both were on the cusp of free agency.

 

 

To no one in particular... and remember it's not you, it's me, and that's why it's pointless to pursue a broader discussion with me here in the open-air forum...

Given the same factors/situation today, and not knowing hindsight as we do, I would still have made the same decision that Babcock did. True confession. I believe it made all the long-term sense in the world, though maybe not the short-term.

 

And, Nique, if you're reading this, my account was hacked, I swear.

My issues with this thinking in the short-term is that it did not sufficiently acknowledge how precious the rare chance at actually winning a title.  You had a once in a decade situation where no other elite contender existed in the East.  The Celtics and Pistons runs were done.  The Bulls were in the middle of their dominance but had pressed pause while Jordan sat out.  That was the single year without Jordan as he was back putting up 31.5 ppg by the time the playoffs rolled around the next season and back to winning 3 more rings the season after that.  It was your one window to win a ring and you compromised it by dealing for Manning.  If you look at the rest of the Hawks roster, you should know they weren't winning a ring sharing the ball.  Mookie and Plastic Man weren't big scorers.  Willis was a good but limited scorer.  Beyond that it was all role players so there was a need for an alpha dog with a roster of supporting players.  I legitimately don't think most of the league had a chance to win a ring during the 6 ring run of the Bulls other than the 1 season without Jordan and the next where he came back in medias res.  Babcock didn't value that open window like he should or at least misjudged what he must have thought would be an enhanced case at winning a ring with Manning.  

For the long-term, you were trading for a guy who was an UFA and giving up a first round pick for the privilege of doing it (Charlie Ward was picked right there as far as potential value).  There was no guarantee Manning was going to return.  While Nique was also an upcoming free agent, you knew he valued playing in Atlanta and his legacy as a Hawk.  Manning didn't give 2 s--ts about being a Hawk.  You had to know you might be left without both Manning and your first round pick and end up worse off than letting Nique walk.  And that is what happened.

To trade away your franchise player during a season where you are a frontrunner to make the NBA Finals in a year without Jordan, you better be damn sure you are going to win in either the short-term or long-term but Babcock lost on both accounts.  Mortgaged your chance at a legit run at a ring and were left with less than nothing.

Now I will say that the long-term risk of losing him for nothing is something that Babcock was less mistaken for missing on.  He should have been able to see our team would not have the horsepower come the playoffs with Manning's game but he probably felt confident he would resign him for the long-term.  But I feel fully justified viewing it with the benefit of hindsight for the purposes of this thread.  Babcock made a ton of decisions that turned out to be terrible with the benefit of hindsight.  In fact, it is precisely the benefit of hindsight that lets us know just how terrible Babcock's record as a drafter was and lets you know he was arguably the worst evaluator of draft talent in NBA history.  Hindsight is appropriate as part of your evaluation of a trade when marking which one was ultimately the best or worst for a franchise.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AHF said:

Worst Trade

Correction: I'd note that it was Luka for Trae and Cam, not just Trae and Luka straight up.  Definitely not the worst trade for me. 

Pick: I had to go for Nique because of a few factors that amount to assessing the stakes of the trade:  (1) this was the face of the franchise and you got a garbage return - within the season we got a guy who averaged 15.7 ppg the rest of the way and gave up one who averaged 29.1 the rest of the season; (2) this was a year where we were title contenders and you ended up with a losing record in the playoffs after this trade despite being the #1 seed in the East; (3) this was your window with no Jordan, no Bird and no Isiah in the East; and (4) Manning then bolted after the season leaving you with nothing.

Underrated:  One trade I'd list as being underrated terrible for the Hawks is the Hawks dealing two unprotected firsts for Lorenzen Wright.  The first pick was Quentin Richardson who I would say was better than Wright by himself.  The second pick ended up being a lottery pick with elite talent on the board, including Amare Stoudamire, Caron Butler, and Carlos Boozer all much better players.

Omission:  I think you covered  yourself here by listing the Bill Russell trade as having been deliberately excluded.  Not sure why Dr. J's name is mentioned.

Best Trade

Pick:  Had to go for Mookie here.  This was a fair market value trade not driven by salaries like the deals for Joe Johnson or Kyle Korver and it was wildly lopsided.  The Joe trade was much closer even if you view it as a fair market value trade.  The Suns got Boris Diaw and picks that became Rajon Rondo and Robin Lopez.  That is a lot of value.  I don't know how anyone can get that excited about Deke for Theo and Kukoc.  Theo was a disappointment in Atlanta.  Never a real impact guy.  Kukoc was good but not great and played a single season worth of games for us (76 total games and averaged less than 10 ppg for the vast majority of them).  The only other trade I would consider other than the Mookie deal would be the Kevin Willis deal for Smitty and Long.  Smitty was a stud with us and Long was a fantastic role player who did everything pretty well and took nothing off the table.  That trade helped elevate the team even though Willis was a good player.  It is worth noting that we dealt Willis at just the right time as he never averaged as many ppg again as he did in each season the prior 5 years for us and he never averaged double digit rebounds again from the season after we traded him.  Look at it this way, in 1995-96 Willis averaged 10.6 points and 8.5 rebounds per game while Grant Long averaged 13.1 ppg and 9.6 rpg for the Hawks -- and the Hawks had Smitty on top of that.  The key for me is that Rumeal Robinson was hot garbage so it is all gravy with Mr. Blalock.  Mookie all the way here for me.

Underrated:  How about the trade of Stacey Augmon and Grant Long for a pair of first round picks?  We obviously scrapped those picks since we had a garbage GM but we could have taken Andrei Kirilenko, Manu Ginobili, James Posey, etc.  More importantly, that trade allowed us to sign Dikembe Mutombo as a FA who became arguably the most important Hawk of the decade after Nique while winning multiple DPOY in Atlanta. 

Omission:  Ummmm....not sure if John Drew and Freeman Williams for Nique rings a bell but that should absolutely have been on the list and I would say should be the pick.

You win. Couldn't have said it better myself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, AHF said:

My issues with this thinking in the short-term is that it did not sufficiently acknowledge how precious the rare chance at actually winning a title.  You had a once in a decade situation where no other elite contender existed in the East.  The Celtics and Pistons runs were done.  The Bulls were in the middle of their dominance but had pressed pause while Jordan sat out.  That was the single year without Jordan as he was back putting up 31.5 ppg by the time the playoffs rolled around the next season and back to winning 3 more rings the season after that.  It was your one window to win a ring and you compromised it by dealing for Manning.  If you look at the rest of the Hawks roster, you should know they weren't winning a ring sharing the ball.  Mookie and Plastic Man weren't big scorers.  Willis was a good but limited scorer.  Beyond that it was all role players so there was a need for an alpha dog with a roster of supporting players.  I legitimately don't think most of the league had a chance to win a ring during the 6 ring run of the Bulls other than the 1 season without Jordan and the next where he came back in medias res.  Babcock didn't value that open window like he should or at least misjudged what he must have thought would be an enhanced case at winning a ring with Manning.  

For the long-term, you were trading for a guy who was an UFA and giving up a first round pick for the privilege of doing it (Charlie Ward was picked right there as far as potential value).  There was no guarantee Manning was going to return.  While Nique was also an upcoming free agent, you knew he valued playing in Atlanta and his legacy as a Hawk.  Manning didn't give 2 s--ts about being a Hawk.  You had to know you might be left without both Manning and your first round pick and end up worse off than letting Nique walk.  And that is what happened.

To trade away your franchise player during a season where you are a frontrunner to make the NBA Finals in a year without Jordan, you better be damn sure you are going to win in either the short-term or long-term but Babcock lost on both accounts.  Mortgaged your chance at a legit run at a ring and were left with less than nothing.

Now I will say that the long-term risk of losing him for nothing is something that Babcock was less mistaken for missing on.  He should have been able to see our team would not have the horsepower come the playoffs with Manning's game but he probably felt confident he would resign him for the long-term.  But I feel fully justified viewing it with the benefit of hindsight for the purposes of this thread.  Babcock made a ton of decisions that turned out to be terrible with the benefit of hindsight.  In fact, it is precisely the benefit of hindsight that lets us know just how terrible Babcock's record as a drafter was and lets you know he was arguably the worst evaluator of draft talent in NBA history.  Hindsight is appropriate as part of your evaluation of a trade when marking which one was ultimately the best or worst for a franchise.

 

I've stated this for nearly 30 years now. The trade was so hysterically bad that no contending team has attempted to make such a deal in midseason since.

Nique was an icon here and should've been given every opportunity to win a ring in the twilight of a HOF career. For his thanks, not only did they ship him out in the midst of a championship run but sent him away to NBA-Siberia. And to add more stank to this septic tank-flavored popsicle, they brought in a guy who when first approached after arriving in town instantly brought up that the Hawks were not one of the teams he remotely thought of signing with after becoming a free agent. 

If any move should've been made at the trade deadline, it should've been to bring in more perimeter firepower (Mr. Augmon, I'm looking at you!!!) or better frontcourt talent off the bench (ditto for you, Mr. Keefe), not a guy who was hurt and mostly unmotivated unless Larry Brown was there to insert a foot up his hindparts. 

It was no secret that although the Hawks were still winning games after the trade, they were a shell of what they were before. It became obvious once the playoffs started and it took five games to beat a one-legged Steve Smith and Glen Rice-led Heat team. And the Pacer series, good grief. NBC had a ball blasting the Hawks for not competing as a fully healthy #1 seed should on national TV. I could all but guarantee that those wipeout losses wouldn't have happened had Nique been here on his last legit shot at a title.

Malfeasance is what this trade was. Game. Set. Match...

Edited by Dejay
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a lot of good trades like the Capela trade for example. 

Bad trades, gotta be SAR/Gasol deal. I wanted Gasol badly and I always hated SAR. I hated him just as much as Rider if not more for what we gave up. Smitty was old and we weren't winning nothing. I was cool with moving him. 

 

Nique deal to Clippers was bad timing more than bad value. It lead to us getting Deke but it was such bad timing. We could have kept him, let him go in the offseason and get Deke. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted for the Rumeal trade but I really like a lot more trades you didn't list over these trades. 

 

The Bibby trade

The Jamal Crawford trade

The Capela trade

I even like the Flip Murray trade. 

Edited by NBASupes
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, AHF said:

Worst Trade

Correction: I'd note that it was Luka for Trae and Cam, not just Trae and Luka straight up.  Definitely not the worst trade for me. 

Pick: I had to go for Nique because of a few factors that amount to assessing the stakes of the trade:  (1) this was the face of the franchise and you got a garbage return - within the season we got a guy who averaged 15.7 ppg the rest of the way and gave up one who averaged 29.1 the rest of the season; (2) this was a year where we were title contenders and you ended up with a losing record in the playoffs after this trade despite being the #1 seed in the East; (3) this was your window with no Jordan, no Bird and no Isiah in the East; and (4) Manning then bolted after the season leaving you with nothing.

Underrated:  One trade I'd list as being underrated terrible for the Hawks is the Hawks dealing two unprotected firsts for Lorenzen Wright.  The first pick was Quentin Richardson who I would say was better than Wright by himself.  The second pick ended up being a lottery pick with elite talent on the board, including Amare Stoudamire, Caron Butler, and Carlos Boozer all much better players.

Omission:  I think you covered  yourself here by listing the Bill Russell trade as having been deliberately excluded.  Not sure why Dr. J's name is mentioned.

Best Trade

Pick:  Had to go for Mookie here.  This was a fair market value trade not driven by salaries like the deals for Joe Johnson or Kyle Korver and it was wildly lopsided.  The Joe trade was much closer even if you view it as a fair market value trade.  The Suns got Boris Diaw and picks that became Rajon Rondo and Robin Lopez.  That is a lot of value.  I don't know how anyone can get that excited about Deke for Theo and Kukoc.  Theo was a disappointment in Atlanta.  Never a real impact guy.  Kukoc was good but not great and played a single season worth of games for us (76 total games and averaged less than 10 ppg for the vast majority of them).  The only other trade I would consider other than the Mookie deal would be the Kevin Willis deal for Smitty and Long.  Smitty was a stud with us and Long was a fantastic role player who did everything pretty well and took nothing off the table.  That trade helped elevate the team even though Willis was a good player.  It is worth noting that we dealt Willis at just the right time as he never averaged as many ppg again as he did in each season the prior 5 years for us and he never averaged double digit rebounds again from the season after we traded him.  Look at it this way, in 1995-96 Willis averaged 10.6 points and 8.5 rebounds per game while Grant Long averaged 13.1 ppg and 9.6 rpg for the Hawks -- and the Hawks had Smitty on top of that.  The key for me is that Rumeal Robinson was hot garbage so it is all gravy with Mr. Blalock.  Mookie all the way here for me.

Underrated:  How about the trade of Stacey Augmon and Grant Long for a pair of first round picks?  We obviously scrapped those picks since we had a garbage GM but we could have taken Andrei Kirilenko, Manu Ginobili, James Posey, etc.  More importantly, that trade allowed us to sign Dikembe Mutombo as a FA who became arguably the most important Hawk of the decade after Nique while winning multiple DPOY in Atlanta. 

Omission:  Ummmm....not sure if John Drew and Freeman Williams for Nique rings a bell but that should absolutely have been on the list and I would say should be the pick.

We traded two unprotected 1st for Lo Wright. WTF! This damn franchise man. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AHF said:

Totally agree.  We were hitting the reset button and that trade made perfect sense.

Diesel loves Joe more than I do so you gotta realize, he was more hurt by that. The one thing that's clear is Diesel was more passionate about the Hawks 10-20 years ago than now. Probably our most passionate fan even if he was a doodoo brain more than not. 

That Joe trade was a work of art by Ferry. Sadly, he sucked at making the picks. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

We had a lot of good trades like the Capela trade for example. 

Bad trades, gotta be SAR/Gasol deal. I wanted Gasol badly and I always hated SAR. I hated him just as much as Rider if not more for what we gave up. Smitty was old and we weren't winning nothing. I was cool with moving him. 

 

Nique deal to Clippers was bad timing more than bad value. It lead to us getting Deke but it was such bad timing. We could have kept him, let him go in the offseason and get Deke. 

Nique got traded years before Deke. I am getting old and forgetting stuff. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Nique got traded years before Deke. I am getting old and forgetting stuff. 

Me too because i just thought "Really?  nique led to Deke?  I guess he's right.  now where's my phone...oh it's in my hand"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Dejay, just added you to the PM sent to AHF. Not sure if I save any face having been so severely word-whipped, but I would just re-emphasize, if the question is "what would you do," that's what I would've done (... and if you'll humor me by reading, you'll see why). That's probably, though, a different question than the hindsight question indicated in the OP.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...