Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

Filling out the roster


sturt

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

No you don't. You have not considered Clarkson's $14 million (PO that he would more likely than not picp up) that's due next season that pushes us even further into the tax next season when Hunter's deal licks in. JHol and Mo are both expiring contracts.

As opposed to what Huerter's contract would do.

 

Right.

 

Here's the thing that one could more legitimately critique: How likely is it that Utah couldn't do better than that deal... in fact, how likely is it that they'd even do that deal w/o the 2nd being upgraded to a 1st. I'm less optimistic than I was when I first posted the trade idea. Don't think they would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, sturt said:

As opposed to what Huerter's contract would do.

I'm saying that's why they traded Huerter, not only to make it easier to get under the tax this year by trading for two smaller contracts but also for expiring contracts for next season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sturt said:

I'm honestly impressed.

I mean, by the effort.

Not so much the discernment... not likely to find anyone who believes DFS is someone DAL would consider parting with, and even if they were, not likely to be able to obtain him without creating new holes to have to fill in the rotation.

 

.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'm saying that's why they traded Huerter

You're welcome to your suspicions. I'm suspicious, too. But when asked about it, I believe what was at the top of Landry's mind was the first thing out of his mouth. That was the priority. Once they determined what teams would offer a 1st in a Huerter trade, it became a matter of which one offered the most appealing package.

 

2022-08-27_20-17-30.png

2022-08-27_20-20-31.png

2022-08-27_20-22-15.png

 

So, yeah, I also believe the rest of what Landry said... each situation is its own assessment of pros and cons, and the tax isn't on its own going to compel them to make a move or not make a move. It's, rather, better understood as a naturally important consideration in the overall decision.

 

Translation: If we assume that Schlields thinks Clarkson would fit (... again, I don't... ) and/but Utah required a FRP, that would be a deal breaker before getting out of the starting blocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I can't stop watching and laughing. 

Blooper’s pre game inspiration video..

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CgrFeMnAseT/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
 

Now this might actually be Sewell himself 😂 what the, peep the last defender 😂 that dude got wiped out.

Edited by Spud2nique
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

Blooper’s pre game inspiration video..

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CgrFeMnAseT/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
 

Now this might actually be Sewell himself 😂 what the, peep the last defender 😂 that dude got wiped out.

He's a biiiig boy. Why is he not wearing a helmet though?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 8/27/2022 at 10:26 AM, sturt said:

You and Jay are much too focused on the shooting % from my perspective. It's true that it's hard to overemphasize that aspect of a player's game when he's a wing. But... just my opinion... I think you succeed.

I think where the risk of me doing that is with someone like DM.  DM's lack of efficiency in scoring worries me but he brings so much more to the table with his defense, rebounding and playmaking that you can lose the forest for the trees by getting caught up in his low TS%.

Clarkson does nothing but chuck the ball at the hoop.  He is the perfect player for whom TS% is absolutely essential to him delivering value.  Last year for him is probably an outlier for how low it was but it is scary how bad that is if he repeats that production (or lack thereof) this season.  

Anyone can score by increasing their FGA.  A productive scorer raises the team's PPP / efficiency.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
On 8/27/2022 at 5:56 PM, JayBirdHawk said:

I'm saying that's why they traded Huerter, not only to make it easier to get under the tax this year by trading for two smaller contracts but also for expiring contracts for next season.

 

On 8/27/2022 at 9:32 PM, sturt said:

You're welcome to your suspicions. I'm suspicious, too. But when asked about it, I believe what was at the top of Landry's mind was the first thing out of his mouth. That was the priority. Once they determined what teams would offer a 1st in a Huerter trade, it became a matter of which one offered the most appealing package.

 

2022-08-27_20-17-30.png

2022-08-27_20-20-31.png

2022-08-27_20-22-15.png

 

So, yeah, I also believe the rest of what Landry said... each situation is its own assessment of pros and cons, and the tax isn't on its own going to compel them to make a move or not make a move. It's, rather, better understood as a naturally important consideration in the overall decision.

 

Translation: If we assume that Schlields thinks Clarkson would fit (... again, I don't... ) and/but Utah required a FRP, that would be a deal breaker before getting out of the starting blocks.

This debate is really the crux of the issue, imo.  If it wasn't about getting under the tax, then we should see the team add significant salary and a trade like Sturt's Clarkson target would fit.  But if it is about getting in a position to go under the tax line, then we should not expect to see that kind of move.

My takeaway from the deal was that it was about dollars and avoiding the tax by the deadline and I view the statements about the need to avoid the repeater penalty as the reality and statements about doing this for player value or picks are fluff to sell a deal that was not about getting better this season to the fan base.

What I do think is accurate and honest about the public statements is that the Hawks are in a position where they can be flexible.  They can add salary, they can go under the tax line....they can do whatever they want after this trade.  So we'll see where it goes.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, AHF said:

My takeaway

Of course it is... I get it.

But like the shooting element in the bigger picture of overall player talent assessment, you're finding a way, imo, to overdo it again in assessing the trade.

It's a thing. It's not the thing. That's consistent with Fields comments more so than what you've stated. You believe he's downplaying what you're persuaded is the actual leading reason... I said I have suspicions that it was downplayed, but I have zero problem believing that they went into the trade market looking to deal Huerter for a FRP--ie, since they just gave up so many picks. It's the most rational conclusion from where I sit.

Another way of thinking about it... by your measure, they would have went into the market looking for the most salary reduction they could possibly get... and then, they selected the best draft pick they could get from among those. I don't think that's what happened. I believe it was the other way around--and at that, the salary relief wasn't even necessarily any more important than the perceived talent they were getting in return.

 

3 hours ago, AHF said:

I think where the risk of me doing that is with someone like DM.  DM's lack of efficiency in scoring worries me but he brings so much more to the table with his defense, rebounding and playmaking that you can lose the forest for the trees by getting caught up in his low TS%.

Clarkson does nothing but chuck the ball at the hoop.

 

2022-08-29_12-12-18.png

2022-08-29_12-11-29.png

2022-08-29_12-09-57.png

2022-08-29_12-09-10.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Here are their projections:

image.png

image.png

image.png

Those projections align with my own view.  DM is two levels up from those two.  Bogi is significantly better than Clarkson ($73.4M to $51.6M value).  All 3 would be best suited to get their minutes at the same position (SG) so there is no need to look at Clarkson on our team unless you are considering a Bogi for Clarkson deal (giving away the better player for Clarkson's cheaper contract and better health record).

The one comment I'll make on offensive RAPTOR numbers is that usage rate is a huge factor.  If you aren't abysmal offensively, the more usage the higher your number.  This is similar to PER where the more shots you take the better for most players.

Clarkson's stats are definitely inflated by his usage rate:  26.3% / 29.7% / 26.7% the last 3 years.  Compare that to Bogi at 22.6% (3.7% lower) / 21.3% (8.4% lower) / 21.6% (5.1% lower) and you can see where the identical offensive RAPTOR numbers for the two of them last season diverge (i.e., they equalize through Clarkson taking more shots and Bogi making a better % of shots he takes). So you need to ask yourself if Clarkson can sustain his 3 year average of 27.6% usage rate if he came to the Hawks and I think that is a "no."  Unless you expect him to fire at the same rate he does with Utah where he is the clear #2 option on the team behind Donovan Mitchell, you should expect his offensive RAPTOR to suffer in the absence of a big improvement in his shooting %s.  Likewise, if Bogi went to a team like Utah you would expect his RAPTOR to rise due to a higher usage rate in the absence of a big drop in his shooting %s.

Anyway, this is all academic but I will certainly tip my cap to you if TS acquires Clarkson.  We have the assets to make it happen but whether we decide to walk down the path of a significant salary add or not is a key question for this season.  

As an aside, Justin Holiday is not in the same conversation as Clarkson as an offensive talent.   While I am much less excited about Clarkson than you are, I will absolutely acknowledge he is much better than Holiday and is a better overall player (even taking in the difference in defense). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
6 hours ago, AHF said:

I will certainly tip my cap to you if TS acquires Clarkson

No need... all I've ever really said is that it's plausible, and that it certainly would represent an improvement on paper over JDay... I'm just not so sure it would translate from paper to the floor, though. This one feels like it could backfire. And again, it's my perception that other teams would likely offer a 1st in such a deal, and I don't see ATL offering a 1st (being persuaded as I am of Fields' candor on that part).

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...