The cobbled together, stuff we held on to during the playoffs mega super rumor and team direction thread.

[AHF]

On 5/18/2022 at 12:32 AM, RandomFan said:

This you?

We used to run this joke like a decade ago but it is well past its time.  Part of the reason we did it was that Spud shared a RL pic and was jacked.

Respect to the Spud.

[Dynamo]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

Like I've said before,  The hawks staff needs to get their azzes in the lab and stay out of the media.  This front office is becoming the laughing stock of the NBA world.  Get your d-mn players ready for next season guys.  Put the onus on yourself for a change and stop blaming the players all of the time.  If Spostra can get 4 undrafted free agents good enough to help a team win a championship, Y'all should be able to make the multiple 1st round picks better.  Good Grief!!

The Truth.

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

We used to run this joke like a decade ago but it is well past its time.  Part of the reason we did it was that Spud shared a RL pic and was jacked.

Respect to the Spud.

 Indeed.

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

He isn’t starter worthy and didn’t start because he was our best option at SG.  Most teams start the best player at a position.

We had the very unusual case of starting Huert because:

1) the bench badly needed a lead scorer and Bogi flourished in that role 

and

2) Huerter was garbage coming off the bench.

Again, most teams just play the better player (Bogi last season) in the starting lineup.

Can we politely ask the Heat to give us Herro for Huerter. 
 

ps I’m not watching so not sure if he’s doing well or not tonight and don’t care don’t @ me with anything score related. Unless it gets suspended. Lol. 
 

Pg- Trae

SG- Herro

ps don’t show this to kg. 

[JTB]

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Stuff like this is why John Hollkngwe is no longer a GM. 

The Hawks have a ready salary match in a Gobert deal with a Clint Capela-Hunter combo, so the real questions are how much the Hawks need to add on top in terms of assets and draft picks and whether that price is ultimately worth it. The bare minimum would be adding in Jalen Johnson (needed to complete a salary match) and the 16th pick in this year’s draft; the Jazz likely would push for at least one future Atlanta first on top of that, plus the future first Charlotte owes the Hawks from the Cam Reddish trade. If the Jazz really push it, they might ask for a swap of Kevin Huerter for the unwanted contracts of Rudy Gay and Nickeil Alexander-Walker, too.

So … how much is too much? Is it worth going all-in on a soon-to-be 30-year-old center who will make $47 million in 2025-26? Where is the line at which the Hawks should pass? Keep in mind the Hawks won’t be the only team after Gobert, if he is truly available; surely Charlotte, for instance, would have eyes for him.

 

Soooo.....let's see:

Capela, Hunter, JJ, Huerter, 2022 #16, 2023 Charlotte 1st and a future Atlanta 1st for Gobert, Rudy Gay and NAW. 

Thanks!

I don’t believe in any Gobert deal from Atlanta our front office is dumb enough to include Hunter and Capela our best perimeter defender and best rim protector for Gobert.

The logic just doesn’t make sense. Most know that Utah's perimeter defense is truly weak and Goberts presence makes  them look better than what they truly are.

 

why on earth would we bring in Gobert to the same problem in Atlanta??…perimeter defense is a weakness for us as well.

[HawkingAwesome]

No gobert

[HawkingAwesome]

Donovan Mitchell is the play or beal

[thecampster]

11 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Stuff like this is why John Hollinger is no longer a GM. 

The Hawks have a ready salary match in a Gobert deal with a Clint Capela-Hunter combo, so the real questions are how much the Hawks need to add on top in terms of assets and draft picks and whether that price is ultimately worth it. The bare minimum would be adding in Jalen Johnson (needed to complete a salary match) and the 16th pick in this year’s draft; the Jazz likely would push for at least one future Atlanta first on top of that, plus the future first Charlotte owes the Hawks from the Cam Reddish trade. If the Jazz really push it, they might ask for a swap of Kevin Huerter for the unwanted contracts of Rudy Gay and Nickeil Alexander-Walker, too.

So … how much is too much? Is it worth going all-in on a soon-to-be 30-year-old center who will make $47 million in 2025-26? Where is the line at which the Hawks should pass? Keep in mind the Hawks won’t be the only team after Gobert, if he is truly available; surely Charlotte, for instance, would have eyes for him.

 

Soooo.....let's see:

Capela, Hunter, JJ, Huerter, 2022 #16, 2023 Charlotte 1st and a future Atlanta 1st for Gobert, Rudy Gay and NAW. 

I just can't with Hollinger.  For "salary match" yes you'd need those players.  Unless of course the deal is set in principal today but consummated after the dead period in July.  Right now Clint + Bogi + pick works for salary matching.  After July 1 so does Clint and Huerter.  There is no universe where they are including picks on top of Jalen Johnson.  Half the teams in the league came sniffing around on Johnson during summer league last year asking for him to be included in deals.....Just such lazy writing.

[georgia]

We wanted Drummond not too long ago.   If we want another center, sign him.   He’s wayyyyyy cheaper than Gobert and Ayton.   

[JTB]

31 minutes ago, georgia said:

We wanted Drummond not too long ago.   If we want another center, sign him.   He’s wayyyyyy cheaper than Gobert and Ayton.   

He’s unplayable unfortunately for him.

[Mikey]

2 hours ago, thecampster said:

I just can't with Hollinger.  For "salary match" yes you'd need those players.  Unless of course the deal is set in principal today but consummated after the dead period in July.  Right now Clint + Bogi + pick works for salary matching.  After July 1 so does Clint and Huerter.  There is no universe where they are including picks on top of Jalen Johnson.  Half the teams in the league came sniffing around on Johnson during summer league last year asking for him to be included in deals.....Just such lazy writing.

Salary matching alone will not get you the best interior defender in the league lol. You will absolutely have to attached picks or players. Thats the cost of getting top 35 players in the league lol (even if his contract is enormous). JJ wont be included but they would definitely have to give a pick or 2

[Diesel]

10 hours ago, JTB said:

Thanks!

I don’t believe in any Gobert deal from Atlanta our front office is dumb enough to include Hunter and Capela our best perimeter defender and best rim protector for Gobert.

The logic just doesn’t make sense. Most know that Utah's perimeter defense is truly weak and Goberts presence makes  them look better than what they truly are.

 

why on earth would we bring in Gobert to the same problem in Atlanta??…perimeter defense is a weakness for us as well.

Either recognize that he's the three time DPOY and could have been DPOY every year he has played.... or recognize that he's not that much better than Clint so we don't need to trade for him...  But it can't be both. 

You can't say he's going to be much better than what we have and then decide that we're not paying for him?

I believe that the Hawks will put down Clint, Hunter, and a pick for Gobert.   That's why you have ownership saying we don't mind paying the tax. 

 This team could look completely different next year... 

with possibilities like:

Trae, Gobert, and Simmons.  Being the big three. 

 

As I have said before.. I would rather we not trade for Gobert, draft Mark Williams and let him be the third C of our rotation.   A go after a scoring defensive wing...

 

If not Williams, then we can pick up a 7 footer in FAcy for cheap. 

 

[theheroatl]

I’m not sure the Nets will part with Simmons until after 22-23.

Atlanta would have the best package for Gobert if the Jazz want it but I doubt Schlenk overpays. Same with Ayton. His trade grades have been pretty A & B level so far. 
 

Jazz probably won’t trade both stars and keep one or the other. More likely they keep Mitchell since the fan base is eating up the fodder that Gobert is the reason they can’t make it far in the playoffs.

If the Gobert deal goes through I bet they try and get Bruce Brown or some defensive wing since Hunter would definitely be sent to Utah.

Edited May 20, 2022 by theheroatl

[thecampster]

36 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Salary matching alone will not get you the best interior defender in the league lol. You will absolutely have to attached picks or players. Thats the cost of getting top 35 players in the league lol (even if his contract is enormous). JJ wont be included but they would definitely have to give a pick or 2

I kind of have a policy not to engage people on this board on cap/trade conversations but I am highly confident in what I'm saying based on a number of factors and since you decided to flick the tiger in the gonads, 

 

I'll lay it out.

 

When consummating trades, NBA teams look at a number of factors. Most people when trying to match salary attempt to match salary 1 for 1 but this is not the case.  Salaries can be matched .8 to 1 or 1 to 1.25 (+100k) in most cases.  NBA teams don't see value like you and I see value.  They slot players in a S/A/B/C/D/E format (or similar data points).  In a theoretical sense, 2 E's = a D and so on but you don't trade 8 D's to get an A even if the math works out.  On top of that, Most contending teams set their team's ideal team salary as (2 S (max), 1 A, 1 B and a combination of C's and D's to round it out.).  Where trades can be pushed more or less in your favor is if the player ability is greater than his Contract.  They use a matrix of value similar to what I'm showing below.

 

Using the above chart, Gobert is an A ability player but an S level salary.  Technically, he is a poor value. Rarely is an A or S level player a good value, typically only if they're on their rookie contract or were acquired after a buy out.  NBA teams understand this and accept it.

 

Clint is a B level player on a B level contract.  He is Neutral value (see the chart).  So although Gobert technically has more ability he charts lower in value, he can also keep you from getting another good, great or superior player.  Hunter is a C/B level player on a D/C level contract.  If he were locked in, Hunter would be a good value, but he's not locked in and will command more later so he's not as good a value as he seems.  Technically, a deal for Clint and Hunter is a neutral and good level contract + a good value draft pick for a poor level value player (even though is superior in ability).  In this scenario of value, Utah gets back neutral + good +good for poor value. 

 

Lets explore a few others.  This past season, Huerter was a good value as he was a C level player but on a D/E level contract. Although he had flaws, he was such a small bit of the salary cap his value was good.  However, his salary goes up considerably next year to the B level. His C level performance will drop this from a Great to Excellent value down to a poor value. Huerter will have to step it up.

By contrast, Bogi was a B level player when healthy but had times of lower performance. If Huerter was a mid C, Bogi was a high C to low B.  But a salary of B to A level pushes him to a neutral to poor value.  My contrast of Bogi and Huerter will probably take a turn next year, as since Huerter got paid, more is going to be asked of him to live up to that contract. The "value" comparison will change.

 

Lets contrast Trae here.

I see Trae as A level ability (S Offense, D defense (at best)).  Last year when only making $8 million, he was on a D/C level salary.  This is unicorn level output. Only a few people a year have this kind of disparity in their ability vs salary and most are on rookie contracts. This puts him in good to great value and is why we could afford to pay someone. Instead of 2 S level ability players we had a bunch of B/A's. Its also why stepping up in the playoffs is a roulette table. B level players are not on all the time.

 

Trading is not as simple as "he's great, you have to give up more to get him" and I've struggled to explain this to people on the regular. There are numerous factors, the 2 most important of which to teams are chemistry and the salary cap. As currently constructed, the Jazz are 4 players short for next season and are already slighting in to the LT.  Utah doesn't want to take back a max contract for Gobert but instead wants a few contracts to spread out their salary to minimize or eliminate their LT impact. If Utah believes they can package 16 and their pick to move up and they believe that player and the wing Atlanta includes will be upgrades to what they have, they'll accept the downgrade from Gobert to Clint.  

The problem that Utah is going to face is the impact drop off of Gobert to any shlub center they can sign is so great, they have to get back a center with a reasonable drop off in return. That is a very limited set of centers in the league. It has to be a top 15 center or the gap would be too large to make up as currently constructed and top 15 centers are rarely available to trade. Clint is one of the few available players who would meet that criteria and be better than neutral value.

 

No criticizing the lecture, you flicked the tiger. If you were here longer, you'd know it was a bad idea.

[JTB]

1 hour ago, Diesel said:

Either recognize that he's the three time DPOY and could have been DPOY every year he has played.... or recognize that he's not that much better than Clint so we don't need to trade for him...  But it can't be both. 

You can't say he's going to be much better than what we have and then decide that we're not paying for him?

I believe that the Hawks will put down Clint, Hunter, and a pick for Gobert.   That's why you have ownership saying we don't mind paying the tax. 

 This team could look completely different next year... 

with possibilities like:

Trae, Gobert, and Simmons.  Being the big three. 

 

As I have said before.. I would rather we not trade for Gobert, draft Mark Williams and let him be the third C of our rotation.   A go after a scoring defensive wing...

 

If not Williams, then we can pick up a 7 footer in FAcy for cheap. 

 

Gobert is that much better for the simple fact that he makes poor perimeter players look avg!…so kudos to the multi time DPOY..I like capela but he doesn’t have that kind of reputation but he is good defensively don’t get me wrong.

but moving on why on earth would we trade away Hunter too just bring Gobert into the same damn situation???
 

That doesn’t make sense at all. We should not be trying to imitate the Jazz defense even though they did finish number 10 in defense , the stats don’t match the true identity or value similar to our number 2 hawks offense stat don’t match the true identity or offensive value of the team. Unfortunately the stats are flawed by generational talents in their specific areas of offense and defense (Trae & Gobert).
 

when you watch those teams you see that Gobert is sole and only reason the Jazz are a top 10 defensive unit and Trae was the sole and only reason the Hawks were a top 3 offensive unit. This isn’t rocket science.

 

I do believe Goberts presence alone in replacement of Capela will statically make us a top 10 defense and likely produce more wins over the regular season because we will clearly be better IN the regular season BUT we also have to look at playoff impact and want to be good there too.

 

Gobert is in a Trae like position with the Jazz  but defensively….when shit goes wrong it’s all blamed on him and rightfully so since these are the stars but it’s unfair to Gobert just like it’s unfair to place all the offensive blame on Trae when he’s getting keyed in on defensively by the opponent and his teammates can’t consistently score in one on one coverage or hit open shots. In the same similar breath but defensively… Gobert becomes a target every playoffs by teams purposely forcing him out to the perimeter which they know takes away from what he does best at protecting the paint area and altering shots like crazy. Once Gobert is brought out to the perimeter full time , all game, that Jazz defense starts to fall hard because they already couldn’t stay in front of their man and now the defensive juggernaut isn’t there to protect them when they get beat off the dribble consistently.

 

Do you have any clue what Gobert would look like defensively if he had actual good perimeter defenders by his side???…he’s never had that! It would make a world of a difference…so that’s why I say hold on to Hunter and go get Brown to surround Trae and Gobert. I believe Atlanta would be LOCKDOWN CITY….that’s if Schlenk wants the defense approach.

I don’t typically agree with @Peoriabird and I’d still rather have Ayton because he’s more two way then Gobert but if we are going to get Gobert I say let’s go ALL defense around Trae and Gobert. Our offense may stay the same and still have the same issues but if we can turn up the defensive stops and actually get either Hunter or JC to do more offensively we may be in good shape on that end.

 

Trae

Brown

Hunter

Collins

Gobert

 

we can realistically  compete with the top teams in the nba with this unit! We probably turn into more of a defensive team but I’m fine with that.

[thecampster]

4 hours ago, thecampster said:

I just can't with Hollinger.  For "salary match" yes you'd need those players.  Unless of course the deal is set in principal today but consummated after the dead period in July.  Right now Clint + Bogi + pick works for salary matching.  After July 1 so does Clint and Huerter.  There is no universe where they are including picks on top of Jalen Johnson.  Half the teams in the league came sniffing around on Johnson during summer league last year asking for him to be included in deals.....Just such lazy writing.

Let me explain the Jalen Johnson thing using my above chart.  Jalen Johnson is right now probably a C to B level contributor if given minutes. Any team acquiring him would be doing so in order to play him.  Lets call him a C ability.  Being a lower 1st round pick, he has an E level salary.  C ability with E salary = Great value.  If salary were no issue, you could easily trade him straight up right now for a C ability player neutral value or a B ability player poor value.  Salary matching screws this up but if using it to drop salary on an LT team, these types of deals get done all the time.  The idea of throwing Johnson in is value = to throwing John Collins in. From a value perspective, teams see opportunity with the only risk is if the player doesn't live up to the value of the other player.  You could take 20 rookie salaries in the league right now drafted outside the lottery which are mostly untouchable.  JJ is one of them. If you (generic you) are casually reading this and don't understand it, I really can't invest the time to explain NBA futures trading on an individual basis.

Consider this a good place to start.  Reorg by Prod/GP.  Will show you how teams see value (last column).

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/center/gmpct-25/active/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sothron]

15 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Let me explain the Jalen Johnson thing using my above chart.  Jalen Johnson is right now probably a C to B level contributor if given minutes. Any team acquiring him would be doing so in order to play him.  Lets call him a C ability.  Being a lower 1st round pick, he has an E level salary.  C ability with E salary = Great value.  If salary were no issue, you could easily trade him straight up right now for a C ability player neutral value or a B ability player poor value.  Salary matching screws this up but if using it to drop salary on an LT team, these types of deals get done all the time.  The idea of throwing Johnson in is value = to throwing John Collins in. From a value perspective, teams see opportunity with the only risk is if the player doesn't live up to the value of the other player.  You could take 20 rookie salaries in the league right now drafted outside the lottery which are mostly untouchable.  JJ is one of them. If you (generic you) are casually reading this and don't understand it, I really can't invest the time to explain NBA futures trading on an individual basis.

Consider this a good place to start.  Reorg by Prod/GP.  Will show you how teams see value (last column).

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/valuation/2021/center/gmpct-25/active/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hitting people the chart. I love it. People know about the NFL draft values for draft picks but there are analytics and charts for trade value on players. 

[ShooterSays]

1 hour ago, thecampster said:

I kind of have a policy not to engage people on this board on cap/trade conversations but I am highly confident in what I'm saying based on a number of factors and since you decided to flick the tiger in the gonads, 

 

I'll lay it out.

 

When consummating trades, NBA teams look at a number of factors. Most people when trying to match salary attempt to match salary 1 for 1 but this is not the case.  Salaries can be matched .8 to 1 or 1 to 1.25 (+100k) in most cases.  NBA teams don't see value like you and I see value.  They slot players in a S/A/B/C/D/E format (or similar data points).  In a theoretical sense, 2 E's = a D and so on but you don't trade 8 D's to get an A even if the math works out.  On top of that, Most contending teams set their team's ideal team salary as (2 S (max), 1 A, 1 B and a combination of C's and D's to round it out.).  Where trades can be pushed more or less in your favor is if the player ability is greater than his Contract.  They use a matrix of value similar to what I'm showing below.

 

Using the above chart, Gobert is an A ability player but an S level salary.  Technically, he is a poor value. Rarely is an A or S level player a good value, typically only if they're on their rookie contract or were acquired after a buy out.  NBA teams understand this and accept it.

 

Clint is a B level player on a B level contract.  He is Neutral value (see the chart).  So although Gobert technically has more ability he charts lower in value, he can also keep you from getting another good, great or superior player.  Hunter is a C/B level player on a D/C level contract.  If he were locked in, Hunter would be a good value, but he's not locked in and will command more later so he's not as good a value as he seems.  Technically, a deal for Clint and Hunter is a neutral and good level contract + a good value draft pick for a poor level value player (even though is superior in ability).  In this scenario of value, Utah gets back neutral + good +good for poor value. 

 

Lets explore a few others.  This past season, Huerter was a good value as he was a C level player but on a D/E level contract. Although he had flaws, he was such a small bit of the salary cap his value was good.  However, his salary goes up considerably next year to the B level. His C level performance will drop this from a Great to Excellent value down to a poor value. Huerter will have to step it up.

By contrast, Bogi was a B level player when healthy but had times of lower performance. If Huerter was a mid C, Bogi was a high C to low B.  But a salary of B to A level pushes him to a neutral to poor value.  My contrast of Bogi and Huerter will probably take a turn next year, as since Huerter got paid, more is going to be asked of him to live up to that contract. The "value" comparison will change.

 

Lets contrast Trae here.

I see Trae as A level ability (S Offense, D defense (at best)).  Last year when only making $8 million, he was on a D/C level salary.  This is unicorn level output. Only a few people a year have this kind of disparity in their ability vs salary and most are on rookie contracts. This puts him in good to great value and is why we could afford to pay someone. Instead of 2 S level ability players we had a bunch of B/A's. Its also why stepping up in the playoffs is a roulette table. B level players are not on all the time.

 

Trading is not as simple as "he's great, you have to give up more to get him" and I've struggled to explain this to people on the regular. There are numerous factors, the 2 most important of which to teams are chemistry and the salary cap. As currently constructed, the Jazz are 4 players short for next season and are already slighting in to the LT.  Utah doesn't want to take back a max contract for Gobert but instead wants a few contracts to spread out their salary to minimize or eliminate their LT impact. If Utah believes they can package 16 and their pick to move up and they believe that player and the wing Atlanta includes will be upgrades to what they have, they'll accept the downgrade from Gobert to Clint.  

The problem that Utah is going to face is the impact drop off of Gobert to any shlub center they can sign is so great, they have to get back a center with a reasonable drop off in return. That is a very limited set of centers in the league. It has to be a top 15 center or the gap would be too large to make up as currently constructed and top 15 centers are rarely available to trade. Clint is one of the few available players who would meet that criteria and be better than neutral value.

 

No criticizing the lecture, you flicked the tiger. If you were here longer, you'd know it was a bad idea.

S Level post right here and free to all to read = Excellent Value.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, thecampster said:

 Rarely is an A or S level player a good value, typically only if they're on their rookie contract or were acquired after a buy out.  NBA teams understand this and accept it.

First, claps on the great content in these posts.  Much appreciate you bringing the discussion and detail behind your thoughts.  Wanted to say that up front so as not to give the impression that my one minor quibble represents me pushing back hard on the "real" thrust of the posts.

Second, my one minor quibble is with the above statement as it applies to the very best players.  Because there are maximum salaries, some of the best deals from a value perspective in the league are the contracts for S level players.  If the salary cap was $100M and you had prime LeBron as a FA under a CBA that did not contain maximum salaries, you might find teams willing to pay $60M to get prime LeBron because he is that valuable.  Because his contract is capped at $30M, you are capturing a ton of value.  That is contrast to someone like Gobert or Joe Johnson who gets paid at or sometimes a bit above a number that would quantify the value they bring on the floor.  So your superstar players represent fantastic value and make team building for a championship roster easier by capping out their pay at a level below what their production would merit as free agents under a CBA with no maximum salary restrictions.

[thecampster]

15 minutes ago, AHF said:

First, claps on the great content in these posts.  Much appreciate you bringing the discussion and detail behind your thoughts.  Wanted to say that up front so as not to give the impression that my one minor quibble represents me pushing back hard on the "real" thrust of the posts.

Second, my one minor quibble is with the above statement as it applies to the very best players.  Because there are maximum salaries, some of the best deals from a value perspective in the league are the contracts for S level players.  If the salary cap was $100M and you had prime LeBron as a FA under a CBA that did not contain maximum salaries, you might find teams willing to pay $60M to get prime LeBron because he is that valuable.  Because his contract is capped at $30M, you are capturing a ton of value.  That is contrast to someone like Gobert or Joe Johnson who gets paid at or sometimes a bit above a number that would quantify the value they bring on the floor.  So your superstar players represent fantastic value and make team building for a championship roster easier by capping out their pay at a level below what their production would merit as free agents under a CBA with no maximum salary restrictions.

No I 100% get that and agree...hence why I said teams know and accept it because the oddity of the S/A level players is their ability to take over. Its so hard to quantify.