We've NEVER had a team with an aggregate ceiling this high

[niremetal]

31 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Also, I'd trade every player on our team for 3 guaranteed titles.  Dynasties are so so rare. I'm not tryin to be greedy. Hold out for the dynasty and you are more likely to win none than multiple. 

Also...in what universe is 3 titles NOT a dynasty? By that standard, the Warriors are not a dynasty, the Shaq/Kobe Lakers were not a dynasty (although they each won additional titles with totally different teammates later), etc. Hell, even the 90s Bulls had no one other than MJ and Scottie in common between the first and second 3-peats. If we were to keep even 4 players from this young squad together long-term and win even 1 title, we'd be in ratified air. If we did that and won 4+, that would be unprecedented going back to the Showtime Lakers. 

[AHF]

8 hours ago, RandomFan said:

Erm, easily I'd trade a package of players for Giannis, KD, Jokic, or Bam Adebayo, probably Tatum too. 

I'd add Embiid to that list too and put him high on that list even with the injury risk.  He and Trae would be a deadly 1-2.

[JayBirdHawk]

13 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Develop our youth like Toronto and Miami 

The GLeague has to be really about developing young players for the future pipeline.

[NBASupes]

30 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

The GLeague has to be really about developing young players for the future pipeline.

Agreed. That's why even the players we bring to the GLeague matter now. College Park has to actually feed Atlanta. 

The best at doing it is: Sioux Falls, Raptors 905, and Austin Spurs.

[sturt]

13 hours ago, sillent said:

Who is the "superstar" you would trade any of our young core for?

To me anyone of those "top 19" would be flawed for our team. They are either aging (LeBron, Durant, Curry). Injury prone (AD, Joel Embiid, Kawhi) or still need a little work (Giannis). Redundant (Kyrie, Dame) or really don't have an upside as high as our players.

And that's the thing.

Won't say there are no "guarantees," but there are very few, and naturally, they come at such a price tag that, if you bet wrong, you've significantly crippled your capacity for some number of years to recover from that.

 

What seems to get so very lost in most of these discussions that I've read is that

(a) it's not exactly ridiculous to assert that our 2020-21 team legitimately was a threat to win it all. Even without the guy that some consider to be our second best player. And, even without the guy that some consider to project to have a superstar ceiling. Even without those two significant pieces.

And. (b) It's not exactly ridiculous to assert that 21, 22 and 23 yr-olds tend to continue to develop, or at worst plateau. In other words, even without those two pieces, the players we did have logging most of the minutes in all those post-season victories are reasonably going to become somewhat to substantially better than they showed last season.

And. (c) It's not exactly ridiculous to assert that, because these guys have "grown up" together, there is an inherent chemistry that's been baked-in to the mix that is not automatically replicated when you begin to re-engineer the roster in big ways.

 

 

In other words, we're pretty damn good.

Now.

And likely... likely... to be even better.

If you're going to play with that mix, do so with great... great... caution.

We're so easily infected with grass-is-greener-ism, and we default to the misconception that you just can't possibly home-grow a championship level team... ie, that #7 pick Stephen Curry was always understood to be superstar Stephen Curry... that #11 pick Klay Thompson was always understood to be Klay Thompson... that #35 Draymond Green was always Draymond Green.

 

I like our guys. I like our coach. I like our GM. I like our owner. Let's go.

 

[Spud2nique]

Made a thread about it two years ago and still stand by it today. Giannis is the only guy in the league I would trade to be on the Hawks for our young assets. 
 

I posted that two years ago, I’ll add Jokic to the list although neither is going anywhere.

2 guys for me:

Giannis

Jokic

 

I don’t want that little cupcake follower KD ever and Embiid, I’m a bit worried about injury with him, still.

[Dejay]

15 hours ago, sillent said:

Thanks for showing the list.

It brings me to another question that baffles me every time I hear it brought up.

Who is the "superstar" you would trade any of our young core for?

To me anyone of those "top 19" would be flawed for our team. They are either aging (LeBron, Durant, Curry). Injury prone (AD, Joel Embiid, Kawhi) or still need a little work (Giannis). Redundant (Kyrie, Dame) or really don't have an upside as high as our players.

I could possibly see Zion as a "superstar" guy we have our eye on but I wouldn't trade any group of our current young players for any of the top 19.

I can easily see Trae, Cam and even Dre as superstars. John should be an allstar this up and coming season. Huerter and OO can definitely be high level starters. Sharife and Jalen definitely have the potential to be elite.

Even our "role" players like Skylar Mays could be a good starter or high level bench guy on other teams.

I'm glad many more fans are starting to recognize what we have. Also for those of us that have been long time fans and have been thru many struggles and disappointments I hope you're aware that this is not any of those teams.

It's a new day in the A and get ready to go  from underdogs to top dogs for atleast the next 5 - 10yrs. We are miles ahead of the competition and these next 2 off seasons  should finalize that.

It's a day that many of us have been waiting on for a very long time...

[sillent]

8 hours ago, REHawksFan said:

This is a good post. 

Trading potential stardom for actual stardom is a good strategy.  It's pretty naive to just assume all of our players will reach their currently perceived ceilings. The likelihood of that happening is nominal. 

It's nice that you think you are a visionary or whatever but you are being extremely naive by assume all our players reach their peak. That doesn't happen. Trading potential for actual elite players is a wise move. 

Also, I'd trade every player on our team for 3 guaranteed titles.  Dynasties are so so rare. I'm not tryin to be greedy. Hold out for the dynasty and you are more likely to win none than multiple. 

Who said all of our players would reach their peak? Who says all our players even need to reach their peak to bring better value to us than what y'all assume some of those other players will?

I just know how to scout talent and most importantly I understand life. Iron sharpens Iron. When you have so much talent in house it does nothing but continue to push each other.

It's more naive to believe that players past their prime or that work well in other systems would be our saving grace. There's no such thing as guaranteed titles but the best way to get close is to set your team up in the way we've constructed for maximum success.

We can put some wagers on the table if you're so confident that what we have want or isn't working. I'm used to being against the odds. I'm also used to winning. To me that's where the difference lies. To take a line from Dusk till Dawn "Are you such a loser to where you don't recognize when you've already won". Not calling out anybody but you don't break up a team before it peaks.

You break up a team once you realize it's  about to peak. In house has the advantage because they know the work ethic of players. They see the performance on a daily and etc... 

The way some of y'all want to trade I'm starting to suspect y'all are fans of other teams. It may just be the lack of understanding what a dynasty looks like which is why I've attempted to enlighten. Take it or leave it but if you stand by it bet it up.

[REHawksFan]

30 minutes ago, sillent said:

Who said all of our players would reach their peak? Who says all our players even need to reach their peak to bring better value to us than what y'all assume some of those other players will?

I just know how to scout talent and most importantly I understand life. Iron sharpens Iron. When you have so much talent in house it does nothing but continue to push each other.

It's more naive to believe that players past their prime or that work well in other systems would be our saving grace. There's no such thing as guaranteed titles but the best way to get close is to set your team up in the way we've constructed for maximum success.

We can put some wagers on the table if you're so confident that what we have want or isn't working. I'm used to being against the odds. I'm also used to winning. To me that's where the difference lies. To take a line from Dusk till Dawn "Are you such a loser to where you don't recognize when you've already won". Not calling out anybody but you don't break up a team before it peaks.

You break up a team once you realize it's  about to peak. In house has the advantage because they know the work ethic of players. They see the performance on a daily and etc... 

The way some of y'all want to trade I'm starting to suspect y'all are fans of other teams. It may just be the lack of understanding what a dynasty looks like which is why I've attempted to enlighten. Take it or leave it but if you stand by it bet it up.

Look man.  You are missing the point altogether. No one said they "want to break up the team."  That's you projecting on us.  Not true.  You were the one that said you wouldn't trade for any of the current elite players.  Some of us just think that's the wrong take.  I'm not LOOKING to break up the team.  But that's partly because none of the players that are clearly better than our core are available.  So there's no point.

But yeah, if in some hypothetical world, KD, Giannis, Embiid, or the like demand a trade, I would have no problem trading 2 or 3 of our core (not named Trae) plus picks for any one of those guys.  Despite what you think, an established Superstar in his prime is better odds to win a title than a maybe superstar in his infancy (and that's precisely what all of our guys are except Trae). 

As far as titles go, YOU were the one that said you could trade for KD and maybe win 3 titles or keep the core intact and win 5 or 7 titles.  I mean, do you even hear yourself?  You're handing out NBA Championships to the Atlanta Hawks like they are skittles.  And that's based on your personal belief in guys that haven't even made an all-star team, let alone made All NBA.  

Like I said, I'm all for enthusiasm and excitement about our core.  I LOVE these guys and have no interest in breaking up the band unless its for a bona fide superstar that isn't currently available.  But come on dude.  Saying the hawks could feasibly win 5-7 titles is over the top at this point in time. 

[Final_quest]

Guys.  Sillent does this every year.  You can set your watch to it.  Completely unrealistic optimism.  I love it.  Just when you think it can't get more over the top we get a prediction like 7 titles.  

[sillent]

16 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Look man.  You are missing the point altogether. No one said they "want to break up the team."  That's you projecting on us.  Not true.  You were the one that said you wouldn't trade for any of the current elite players.  Some of us just think that's the wrong take.  I'm not LOOKING to break up the team.  But that's partly because none of the players that are clearly better than our core are available.  So there's no point.

But yeah, if in some hypothetical world, KD, Giannis, Embiid, or the like demand a trade, I would have no problem trading 2 or 3 of our core (not named Trae) plus picks for any one of those guys.  Despite what you think, an established Superstar in his prime is better odds to win a title than a maybe superstar in his infancy (and that's precisely what all of our guys are except Trae). 

As far as titles go, YOU were the one that said you could trade for KD and maybe win 3 titles or keep the core intact and win 5 or 7 titles.  I mean, do you even hear yourself?  You're handing out NBA Championships to the Atlanta Hawks like they are skittles.  And that's based on your personal belief in guys that haven't even made an all-star team, let alone made All NBA.  

Like I said, I'm all for enthusiasm and excitement about our core.  I LOVE these guys and have no interest in breaking up the band unless its for a bona fide superstar that isn't currently available.  But come on dude.  Saying the hawks could feasibly win 5-7 titles is over the top at this point in time. 

Atleast you actually added superstars. KD, Embiid and Giannis are superstars. When I originally responded it was because none of the players suggested were.

Back to those superstars though KD is in his prime but for how long? Also is he going to stay healthy and does he stagnate the growth of our overall team? More importantly y'all are saying you're making trades because we can't afford to keep players as if KD is coming cheap.

Embiid is another great player, definitely in his prime but also very injury prone. Is that really a risk worth taking when depth compensates for injuries?

Giannis is phenomenal but without a consistent shot(not saying he won't get there) he could stagnate our offense and floor spacing. If I were to trade for anybody it would be Giannis but that's also betting on his potential to work within our offense and have a better 3ball.

If we're betting on potential why not stick with what we have? Cam and Dre have the size and length to guard a KD and Durant and they are also offensive weapons that should only get better. More importantly they will cost alot less because they are still under the age to get the type of max Giannis and KD have. It's like we're running into the fire we fear. 

Also because our team is so deep it's highly unlikely that we get 4/5 Allstars at once meaning we should be able to get our guys at a discounted price. The less depth the more guys have to step up and the more they step up the more money they will demand.

It will cost us more in the long run playing the game that way and it's unnecessary.

[REHawksFan]

2 minutes ago, sillent said:

More importantly y'all are saying you're making trades because we can't afford to keep players as if KD is coming cheap.

Just to be clear, this is NOT what I'm saying.  I'm saying I'd rather take the established, currently elite today player over the young, might one day be elite player.  I just can't get on board with this fantasy that the Hawks are going to win 5-7 titles by keeping the core in tact.  Not right now when only Trae out of the whole bunch has even been an all star.  That's just not the way the NBA works.  And given that, the added incentive of keeping the core together is just not there for me. 

YES, I truly believe that having KD instead of Hunter, Huerter, and Gallo (for example) would give the hawks a better chance to win a title.  Maybe multiple titles.  

YES, I truly believe having Embiid instead of Capela, Hunter, and OO would give the Hawks a better chance at a title, maybe multiple titles. 

YES, I truly believe having Giannis instead of  Capela, JC, and Reddish would give the Hawks a better chance at a title, maybe multiple titles. 

It's not that I have anything against our players.  I LOVE our guys.  I would love nothing more than for them to stay together and win a couple of titles.  But if we are talking about what gives the Hawks the greater chance to win one, let alone multiple, titles I'll go to my grave believing having the established Superstar is a better plan than having a guy (or multiple guys) that aren't even all-stars but might one day grow into one.  

IF the Hawks go out and win the next 3 NBA Championships on the backs of Trae, Hunter, and Reddish becoming SUPERSTARS on the level of KD, Giannis, and Embiid, then fine.  Have your dynasty conversation and it's likely not one person here would object.  But having this 5-7 titles conversation when all but Trae on the roster haven't even sniffed an All-Star game appearance is more absurdity than reality.  

Nothing against you.  I love the excitement and enthusiasm.  

[sturt]

Repeating what has already been said or at least hinted-at in this thread by virtually every poster...

Who is this elite player who hasn't just within the last year, if not last week, been extended by his current team... and with that, fairly well establishing that his current team has practically no expectations to think of parting with him before this Hawks roster either proves itself worthy of the current general optimism, or doesn't?

Seeing/hearing none, is it safe to say that that vein of discussion is moot... at least until next off-season?

 

 

[sillent]

32 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Just to be clear, this is NOT what I'm saying.  I'm saying I'd rather take the established, currently elite today player over the young, might one day be elite player.  I just can't get on board with this fantasy that the Hawks are going to win 5-7 titles by keeping the core in tact.  Not right now when only Trae out of the whole bunch has even been an all star.  That's just not the way the NBA works.  And given that, the added incentive of keeping the core together is just not there for me. 

YES, I truly believe that having KD instead of Hunter, Huerter, and Gallo (for example) would give the hawks a better chance to win a title.  Maybe multiple titles.  

YES, I truly believe having Embiid instead of Capela, Hunter, and OO would give the Hawks a better chance at a title, maybe multiple titles. 

YES, I truly believe having Giannis instead of  Capela, JC, and Reddish would give the Hawks a better chance at a title, maybe multiple titles. 

It's not that I have anything against our players.  I LOVE our guys.  I would love nothing more than for them to stay together and win a couple of titles.  But if we are talking about what gives the Hawks the greater chance to win one, let alone multiple, titles I'll go to my grave believing having the established Superstar is a better plan than having a guy (or multiple guys) that aren't even all-stars but might one day grow into one.  

IF the Hawks go out and win the next 3 NBA Championships on the backs of Trae, Hunter, and Reddish becoming SUPERSTARS on the level of KD, Giannis, and Embiid, then fine.  Have your dynasty conversation and it's likely not one person here would object.  But having this 5-7 titles conversation when all but Trae on the roster haven't even sniffed an All-Star game appearance is more absurdity than reality.  

Nothing against you.  I love the excitement and enthusiasm.  

I have no problems with your belief. Just an honest question. What puts that much doubt in your mind that we don't have all the tools necessary now?

What team is that much of a powerhouse that you see is that much better than us and why?

We didn't get swept by the champions and honestly if it weren't for a few things the narrative could be alot different. If we were that afraid of the Bucks or didn't think we could beat them would Trae really be cocky enough to shimmy and throw alleys off the back board...

Would we be able to beat the champs a 2nd time after such a move? Without Trae would we even win a game?

Would that series and the narrative be different if Dre was out there with Cam?

We beat the #1 76ers team with neither.

We took the Bucks to 6 with a hobbled Bogi who even at his best is not a better defender than Dre and Cam. We took the Bucks to 6 with Huerter, Bogi and Trae. That's not the best defensive recipe. Next yr around that time more than likely guys who were our starters will be coming off the bench. Defense still wins championships.

Is it that hard to believe if we had our 2 best wing defenders shutting down a Middleton and Jrue that we wouldn't atleast be in the finals?

If we're being honest with ourselves we played the whole yr without seeing the best of us. Not once was our entire group healthy but our depth still got us far.

Who has gotten that much better to put that much fear in our hearts to think we can't go even further? Especially when healthy?

If we were at full capacity or clearly inferior to our competition I'd completely agree with y'all. Reality has shown that wasn't the case. I can understand those who may not be as optimistic as I am because things happen. What I can't understand is the mentality that acts like we aren't capable of doing more than we've already done.

If we went as hard as the Knicks did all year and just weren't up to par I'd understand. What many fail to understand is despite the pundits we underachieved. We can blame it on health. We can blame it on youth or whatever but point is teams have yet to face us at max capacity that whole season.

Now we're entering a season hungrier, with more chemistry and realistic expectations of individuals getting better as well as the overall team. We are nowhere near peaks. Even Trae knows he can get and be alot better.

Besides the media what is the reason for so much doubt? We are not any of our old Atlanta teams. The 60 win team was great but I saw them peak after January. I've yet to see us come near our peak which gives me high optimism.

What gives you doubt?

[REHawksFan]

39 minutes ago, sturt said:

Repeating what has already been said or at least hinted-at in this thread by virtually every poster...

Who is this elite player who hasn't just within the last year, if not last week, been extended by his current team... and with that, fairly well establishing that his current team has practically no expectations to think of parting with him before this Hawks roster either proves itself worthy of the current general optimism, or doesn't?

Seeing/hearing none, is it safe to say that that vein of discussion is moot... at least until next off-season?

 

 

I think it's been pretty clearly stated that the conversation is a hypothetical one.  And thus, yes, it is moot.  But hypothetical conversations can still be instructive to gain a better understanding of what people think about our team or a given player. 

[REHawksFan]

12 minutes ago, sillent said:

I have no problems with your belief. Just an honest question. What puts that much doubt in your mind that we don't have all the tools necessary now?

What team is that much of a powerhouse that you see is that much better than us and why?

We didn't get swept by the champions and honestly if it weren't for a few things the narrative could be alot different. If we were that afraid of the Bucks or didn't think we could beat them would Trae really be cocky enough to shimmy and throw alleys off the back board...

Would we be able to beat the champs a 2nd time after such a move? Without Trae would we even win a game?

Would that series and the narrative be different if Dre was out there with Cam?

We beat the #1 76ers team with neither.

We took the Bucks to 6 with a hobbled Bogi who even at his best is not a better defender than Dre and Cam. We took the Bucks to 6 with Huerter, Bogi and Trae. That's not the best defensive recipe. Next yr around that time more than likely guys who were our starters will be coming off the bench. Defense still wins championships.

Is it that hard to believe if we had our 2 best wing defenders shutting down a Middleton and Jrue that we wouldn't atleast be in the finals?

If we're being honest with ourselves we played the whole yr without seeing the best of us. Not once was our entire group healthy but our depth still got us far.

Who has gotten that much better to put that much fear in our hearts to think we can't go even further? Especially when healthy?

If we were at full capacity or clearly inferior to our competition I'd completely agree with y'all. Reality has shown that wasn't the case. I can understand those who may not be as optimistic as I am because things happen. What I can't understand is the mentality that acts like we aren't capable of doing more than we've already done.

If we went as hard as the Knicks did all year and just weren't up to par I'd understand. What many fail to understand is despite the pundits we underachieved. We can blame it on health. We can blame it on youth or whatever but point is teams have yet to face us at max capacity that whole season.

Now we're entering a season hungrier, with more chemistry and realistic expectations of individuals getting better as well as the overall team. We are nowhere near peaks. Even Trae knows he can get and be alot better.

Besides the media what is the reason for so much doubt? We are not any of our old Atlanta teams. The 60 win team was great but I saw them peak after January. I've yet to see us come near our peak which gives me high optimism.

What gives you doubt?

Honestly?  I don't doubt that the Hawks can win an NBA championship as currently constructed.  I think they certainly CAN win one.  But I'll add the caveat that it takes a bit of luck or good fortune with injuries AND matchups to make it happen.  Let me ask you, are you certain that the Bucks beat the Nets if Harden, Kyrie, and KD are all healthy?  Are you certain that the Suns beat the Clips if Kawhi is healthy?  Or what about the Lakers if AD was healthy?  Are you certain that the Hawks, if healthy, beat all of those teams?  I'm not.  I think they'd have a chance, but I'm not certain they would have won a title.  

So the answer to your question is more about what things need to happen to give the hawks the best chance to win a title.  And to me, having the best players is one of the most important things to winning a championship as it just makes your margin for error some much greater.  And yes, I agree that the current roster COULD turn into the best players over time.  But they aren't right now.  And my hesitation is more about thinking that is less probable that multiple of the current players achieve their ceilings than it is to say KD or Giannis or Embiid would fit well with this team and win a title.  

IF we are talking about which is most likely, I'll take the better current players over the multiples of players that may or may not turn into great players. 

IF I tell you that none of the Hawks young players ever get any better than they are today, are they good enough to win a title?  I'd say maybe, if a lot things break their way.  IF I tell you that all of the young hawks reach their potential, are they good enough to win a title?  Absolutely and most likely multiple.  But the truth of what will happen is likely in the middle somewhere.  And I'm not currently convinced that it's a more likely scenario than if the Hawks trade for a superstar to pair with Trae and the remaining young players.  That's my point. 

[sillent]

1 hour ago, REHawksFan said:

Honestly?  I don't doubt that the Hawks can win an NBA championship as currently constructed.  I think they certainly CAN win one.  But I'll add the caveat that it takes a bit of luck or good fortune with injuries AND matchups to make it happen.  Let me ask you, are you certain that the Bucks beat the Nets if Harden, Kyrie, and KD are all healthy?  Are you certain that the Suns beat the Clips if Kawhi is healthy?  Or what about the Lakers if AD was healthy?  Are you certain that the Hawks, if healthy, beat all of those teams?  I'm not.  I think they'd have a chance, but I'm not certain they would have won a title.  

So the answer to your question is more about what things need to happen to give the hawks the best chance to win a title.  And to me, having the best players is one of the most important things to winning a championship as it just makes your margin for error some much greater.  And yes, I agree that the current roster COULD turn into the best players over time.  But they aren't right now.  And my hesitation is more about thinking that is less probable that multiple of the current players achieve their ceilings than it is to say KD or Giannis or Embiid would fit well with this team and win a title.  

IF we are talking about which is most likely, I'll take the better current players over the multiples of players that may or may not turn into great players. 

IF I tell you that none of the Hawks young players ever get any better than they are today, are they good enough to win a title?  I'd say maybe, if a lot things break their way.  IF I tell you that all of the young hawks reach their potential, are they good enough to win a title?  Absolutely and most likely multiple.  But the truth of what will happen is likely in the middle somewhere.  And I'm not currently convinced that it's a more likely scenario than if the Hawks trade for a superstar to pair with Trae and the remaining young players.  That's my point. 

I honestly wanted to face the Nets even before Kyrie and Harden went down. I was of course hoping we had Cam and Dre as well when I wanted that matchup. I felt we matched up better with them than the Bucks.

I do believe we could've beat the Clippers if everyone on each team was healthy.

I honestly expected the Lakers to get one more ring if they all were healthy.

The world would've been more on notice if we beat the Nets and gave the Lakers a good battle.

Instead people are questioning because so many different variables happened.

It's understandable. Your thoughts/beliefs are understandable.

What's not understandable to me is people wanting to trade off what is known for unknowns before the season even starts. Imagine if we did that when we were 14 -20? Even than it would've been more understandable.

The fact that we shored up needs and should only be better from a season ago is the baffling part. If people honestly believe our players aren't going to get better than their under 23/24 selves that's cool but not likely statistically. That pretty much means everyone besides Trae are definitely under 18-20 pts per game players if they've peaked now.

If the league just got extremely better to the point we may struggle to keep up I'd understand. 

If we made drastic changes or even a player to our roster that may mess up our chemistry I'd understand.

The fact that we've done pretty much everything right this offseason (locked up core pieces, added missing pieces, lost noone of value) just makes it hard for me to understand why people think we will be moving backwards.

Add in the fact that we've yet to have 1 game with our full roster this yr or last literally adds insult to injury.

I pray we have minimal injuries next yr but even so I know we have enough overall to keep pushing. If KD or any other of those star players go down can the same be said?

Yes a little luck is needed because of injuries and etc... Talented depth is the insurance for that. Meaning luck seems to tilt in the favor of those most prepared. We are a team most prepared at every position and for that reason I like those odds. Not saying one of those players can't help us but if they go down we are worse off. All of our eggs would be in one basket and all the luck in the world wouldn't keep me as confident as knowing we have backup plans.

[niremetal]

40 minutes ago, sillent said:

What's not understandable to me is people wanting to trade off what is known for unknowns before the season even starts. Imagine if we did that when we were 14 -20? Even than it would've been more understandable.

The fact that we shored up needs and should only be better from a season ago is the baffling part. If people honestly believe our players aren't going to get better than their under 23/24 selves that's cool but not likely statistically. That pretty much means everyone besides Trae are definitely under 18-20 pts per game players if they've peaked now.

These two paragraphs kind of sum up the reasons for my bafflement at this discussion.

When people are talking about the need to keep our "knowns" or our "core," they usually mean young/rising players like Cam, Dre, and maybe Huerter; those are the guys who the argument is we should hold onto, not Bogi, Gallo, or Capela--guys who actually played a much more central role in our second-half turnaround and playoff run than Cam, Dre, and Huerter did. The talk is as though our young guys aside from Trae and JC are proven quantities. They are not.

Dre had a great 17-game run in January before he got hurt. Yeah, that's right--17 games. Approximately one-fifth of one season. Since then, his knee has prevented us from being able to see if that was lightning in a bottle or something he can sustain over an 82-game season, after he actually starts showing up on teams' scouting reports as a guy to watch. Right now, he's the best bet to turn into an All-Star of the 3, but he's not close to a lock for that.

Huerter had a couple big games in the playoffs--most notably by exploiting a mismatch against Seth Curry over and over again in Game 7 against the Sixers. He's turned into a solid on-ball defender (though by no means a great one). He's proven himself a solid rotation player, but I still view late-season-Bogi as his absolute ceiling, and one he is not especially likely to reach given that his 3P% has been worryingly trending downwards since his rookie year.

Cam had a nice little 4-game run during the ECFs and has the highest ceiling of the three, but also the lowest floor because he just hasn't shown even a 10-game stretch of consistently average (much less good) offensive play yet in his career.

And contrary to what the second paragraph above says--TONS of guys peak/permanently plateau before they hit 25 and/or while they are on their rookie scale contracts. Again, just to use examples from my two favorite teams in the last 15 years--Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, Josh Childress, Greg Oden, Brandon Roy, Martell Webster, Nicolas Batum, CJ McCollum...hell, you can almost add JJ to that list (I'd say he hit his plateau at age 25). Guys getting hurt or simply being unable/unwilling to raise their game additional levels after they hit 23/24 is not exceptional. If anything, it's the norm. Pick a random NBA draft year and take a look at all the first rounders drafted #4 or lower, and count how many of them peaked by year 4. You'll be surprised.

So it's nuts to me to talk about our young guys (again, aside from Trae/JC) as "knowns" while guys with multiple All-Star appearances are "unknowns."

Like everyone else, I love our young core. A part of me is so excited by our collection of talent that I don't want to see us trade any of it away. But I'm also glad we have a clear-eyed GM in Schlenk who realizes that trading potential stars for proven stars is usually a good strategy, all other things being equal.

Edited August 17, 2021 by niremetal

[RedDawg#8]

This may upset some but honestly, having Jalen Johnson right now softens the blow for me if we do decide to trade away one of our young assets not named Trae.

A trade for a superstar today would cost the contract of 1 of Gallo, Bogi, Clint or JC combined with the potential of one or 2 players like Cam, Dre, Kev, or OO.

Any of those losses isn't as bad now knowing that we have another player with immense potential just waiting for a spot to open up in the rotation. 

Trae+ UnNamed Star +Remaining Players not traded + Jalen Johnson means we are still set up to win today, tomorrow, and beyond.

I am a lot more open to a trade now than I was before the draft.

Edited August 17, 2021 by RedDawg#8

[marco102]

28 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

This may upset some but honestly, having Jalen Johnson right now softens the blow for me if we do decide to trade away one of our young assets not named Trae.

A trade for a superstar today would cost the contract of 1 of Gallo, Bogi, Clint or JC combined with the potential of one or 2 players like Cam, Dre, Kev, or OO.

Any of those losses isn't as bad now knowing that we have another player with immense potential just waiting for a spot to open up in the rotation. 

Trae+ UnNamed Star +Remaining Players not traded + Jalen Johnson means we are still set up to win today, tomorrow, and beyond.

I am a lot more open to a trade now than I was before the draft.

I'm slightly more patient.  I'd rather see how everyone performs this year before trading away any of the young core.