Official Game Thread: Hawks at Warriors

[NBASupes]

5 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

Who's giving a pass? Diesel said those wins prove we are elite. They obviously don't. That's all the other poster was pointing out. Our team fully healthy wasn't playing amazing ball, we were around 16th in orating and 11th in Drating having faced a weak schedule wtih an  SRS (point differential weighed by strength of schedule) of 15.

We were a mediocre team with an infalted record and now that we have faced some adversity with injuries we have obviously collapsed because we aren't good. A fully healthy Hawks team with Bogi and Cap playing 82 games might get us 48-50 wins. That's the ceiling for this team and it's an impossible ceiling  becacuse Bogi and Cap are hurt often, 

It's rare that any team is healthy like that. Golden State 73 win squad might have been the most healthy squad in NBA history. The NBA is very hard in today's league. Very taxing on the body

[JayBirdHawk]

11 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Ya'll gotta stop looking for a scapegoat.

No scapegoating from me.  Since last season (B4 DJ) after the first 10 or so games - I hated Nates offensive approach of hunting mismatches and midrange shots and he brought in his own staff.  So my stance has not changed.

[JeffS17]

34 minutes ago, Jody23 said:

but Steph didn't have the off ball game we know him for now prior to Kerr. 

Steph played off ball in college his first two years.  The whole reason he returned to Davidson in year 3 was to play more ball dominant to improve his draft stock.  He came to the NBA with those skills and the warriors developed him further.

[NBASupes]

2 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

No scapegoating from me.  Since last season (B4 DJ) after the first 10 or so games - I hated Nates offensive approach of hunting mismatches and midrange shots and he brought in his own staff.  So my stance has not changed.

Blaming coaches is a scapegoat. Always has and always will be. Unless someone stands out like Steve Nash, generally, it is pretty obvious to see where the issues lay and with us, it's very obvious 

Edited January 3, 2023 by NBASupes

[JeffS17]

A mid-season JC trade for someone that can shoot 3s would make a big difference in our offense.  Even a lesser player that fit better would be a big improvement.  I can't believe we didn't get Lauri man.  If reports are true that offered Lauri and 2 firsts for JC, that's an all-time GM fumble, and it sounds like Landry was making the calls...

[AHF]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

Blaming coaches is a scapegoat. Always has and always will be. Unless someone stands out like Steve Nash, generally, it is pretty obvious to see where the issues lay and with us, it's very obvious 

I don't follow your train of logic here.  Blame is due to players in their part and coaches in their part unless you think coaches are irrelevant.  I've seen enough of how Nate approaches offense to know I want someone else responsible for that side of our strategy.  I've seen enough comments by former players of his and missteps on his part to know I think you can do better as far as the relationship side of coaching.  

Blaming everything on coaches is scapegoating.  I don't blame everything on Nate.  I'm just convinced he is more of a problem than an asset at this point.  The way our offense has evolved since Nate took over as head coach has not been good.  When he revamped his coaching staff it took a turn for the worse, not for the better.  He deserves his share of the blame and that is not scapegoating.  It is not irrational to ask that Nate bear his share of the blame.  That goes for things like being a slave to his rotation, to the offense, to the recurring issue of putting bad defenders in the game on key defensive possessions, etc.

I'm more open to the idea that you think people are putting too much of the responsibility on Nate but that is a conversation where reasonable minds can differ.  I'm 100% in disagreement with the idea that any blame pointed at coaches is scapegoating unless the coach is a total disaster.  That would be like saying players are blameless unless they are total disasters.  The players own their own share of the blame from Trae's shooting woes and shot selection this season to JC's 3pt shot to Hunter's lack of rebounding and defensive disruption to Clint's struggles with bunnies to the weaknesses of our young players to JHol's regression, etc. etc.  Everyone is fairly entitled to their share of credit and blame in proportion to their contributions.

[JayBirdHawk]

7 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Blaming coaches is a scapegoat. Always has and always will be. Unless someone stands out like Steve Nash, generally, it is pretty obvious to see where the issues lay and with us, it's very obvious 

No.  The issues he has now have travelled with him and unfortunately he did not hire a staff to elevate his weaknesses.

There's a reason you had Nate in your avatar though, so let's just agree to disagree. 

[ABH]

Everyone has big games against us...

[JayBirdHawk]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

I don't follow your train of logic here.  Blame is due to players in their part and coaches in their part unless you think coaches are irrelevant.  I've seen enough of how Nate approaches offense to know I want someone else responsible for that side of our strategy.  I've seen enough comments by former players of his and missteps on his part to know I think you can do better as far as the relationship side of coaching.  

Blaming everything on coaches is scapegoating.  I don't blame everything on Nate.  I'm just convinced he is more of a problem than an asset at this point.  The way our offense has evolved since Nate took over as head coach has not been good.  When he revamped his coaching staff it took a turn for the worse, not for the better.  He deserves his share of the blame and that is not scapegoating.  It is not irrational to ask that Nate bear his share of the blame.  That goes for things like being a slave to his rotation, to the offense, to the recurring issue of putting bad defenders in the game on key defensive possessions, etc.

I'm more open to the idea that you think people are putting too much of the responsibility on Nate but that is a conversation where reasonable minds can differ.  I'm 100% in disagreement with the idea that any blame pointed at coaches is scapegoating unless the coach is a total disaster.  That would be like saying players are blameless unless they are total disasters.  The players own their own share of the blame from Trae's shooting woes and shot selection this season to JC's 3pt shot to Hunter's lack of rebounding and defensive disruption to Clint's struggles with bunnies to the weaknesses of our young players to JHol's regression, etc. etc.  Everyone is fairly entitled to their share of credit and blame in proportion to their contributions.

[terrell]

50 minutes ago, AHF said:

That is a huge issue for Trae off the ball and why I said I didn't think that would really work when there was talk about it this offseason.  That said, I see a lot of DM standing around when he doesn't have the ball as well.  I do think there is a combination of the "system" encouraging it and individual responsibility of the player.  I would definitely want to see Trae in another system before I conclude he can't be successful.  (That could be moving effectively off the ball which he does none of today or could be a system where he is the primary ballhandler whenever he is on the floor but the system does more than Nate-ball.  Chris Paul has been the primary ballhandler for his career and clearly his offenses have been more than Nate-ball by virtue of the scheme more than by virtue of Paul being a great off-ball player.)

This.

Theyre both PG's...

[Diesel]

22 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

Who's giving a pass? Diesel said those wins prove we are elite. They obviously don't. That's all the other poster was pointing out. Our team fully healthy wasn't playing amazing ball, we were around 16th in orating and 11th in Drating having faced a weak schedule wtih an  SRS (point differential weighed by strength of schedule) of 15.

We were a mediocre team with an infalted record and now that we have faced some adversity with injuries we have obviously collapsed because we aren't good. A fully healthy Hawks team with Bogi and Cap playing 82 games might get us 48-50 wins. That's the ceiling for this team and it's an impossible ceiling  becacuse Bogi and Cap are hurt often, 

What???

I said those wins prove that we can be better than Mid when we have all of our players playing....   That's not elite???

My point was why are we judging our team based on a loss when we are missing key players?

 

If Marvin Harrison Jr. were playing in the 4th, OSU beats UGA.   Do I now say that Stroud and OSU are bums because they lost to UGA?

No... because you have seen what they can do when totally healthy. 

As far as what we might win...  We don't know..... Stop acting like you do. 

MOST OF THIS TEAM IS NEW.

Because of injuries, we don't know how good we can be because we've never really had a chance to develop Chemistry.   As soon as we get one player back, another two players go to the IL.  My point is that... based on the record, Clint is our most important non-superstar.   When he's gone, our whole defense sukcs.   But you guys come out and create pages and pages of in depth predictions based on losses we took when Clint wasn't playing...  Such as ... we're a mid team.  or  We may win 43 if we were healthy??  That's called baseless BS because the truth is you don't know.   Just say it...  I don't know how good we could be because we haven't seen what we can be when the whole team is healthy. 

 

 

 

 

 

[terrell]

10 minutes ago, Diesel said:

What???

I said those wins prove that we can be better than Mid when we have all of our players playing....   That's not elite???

My point was why are we judging our team based on a loss when we are missing key players?

 

If Marvin Harrison Jr. were playing in the 4th, OSU beats UGA.   Do I now say that Stroud and OSU are bums because they lost to UGA?

No... because you have seen what they can do when totally healthy. 

As far as what we might win...  We don't know..... Stop acting like you do. 

MOST OF THIS TEAM IS NEW.

Because of injuries, we don't know how good we can be because we've never really had a chance to develop Chemistry.   As soon as we get one player back, another two players go to the IL.  My point is that... based on the record, Clint is our most important non-superstar.   When he's gone, our whole defense sukcs.   But you guys come out and create pages and pages of in depth predictions based on losses we took when Clint wasn't playing...  Such as ... we're a mid team.  or  We may win 43 if we were healthy??  That's called baseless BS because the truth is you don't know.   Just say it...  I don't know how good we could be because we haven't seen what we can be when the whole team is healthy. 

 

 

 

 

 

Youre living in a fantasy land if you think this injury prone bunch is gonna all stay healthy for weeks at a time.. Unrealistic with a team with CC, Dre, JC, and Bogi on it..  I call it the Hawkspital for a reason.. smh

Edited January 3, 2023 by terrell

[marco102]

2 hours ago, NBASupes said:

Is it possible to play anything else than hero Ball with Trae? 

Yes, because if it was just Trae doing it, you may have a point.  Murray is doing the same thing.   It's obviously coaching.  Coaching is telling them to slow things down and run clock.  In years' past we had Gallo to bail us out. We don't have that anymore.

[NBASupes]

1 minute ago, marco102 said:

Yes, because if it was just Trae doing it, you may have a point.  Murray is doing the same thing.   It's obviously coaching.  Coaching is telling them to slow things down and run clock.  In years' past we had Gallo to bail us out. We don't have that anymore.

Gallo was critical for 4th quarters. That is true. Like I said. When you give these super contracts, it hurts depth especially vet depth. This was always going to happen

[JayBirdHawk]

2 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

Gallo was critical for 4th quarters. That is true. Like I said. When you give these super contracts, it hurts depth especially vet depth. This was always going to happen

...for teams unwilling to pay the Luxury Tax.  It didn't have to happen, but it's what Tony was unwilling to do.

[NBASupes]

Just now, JayBirdHawk said:

...for teams unwilling to pay the Luxury Tax.  It didn't have to happen, but it's what Tony was unwilling to do.

This is where I have to side with Tony. Would depth turn us into a contender, no. So it made sense from a business stance. I just don't believe Tony realize how much winning is a sum of parts other than just Trae magic. 

[terrell]

When NBA players decide to play AAU ball in an NBA game.... Foul hunting fom the 3 pt line in crunchtime?

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by terrell

[JeffS17]

Just now, NBASupes said:

Gallo was critical for 4th quarters. That is true. Like I said. When you give these super contracts, it hurts depth especially vet depth. This was always going to happen

And you have to give it out.  Trae knows how much money he's making Ressler.  They have analytics teams for that stuff.  The supermax was originally sold as helping small market teams (always bullshit argument, CP3 championed it then immediately signed one lmao), but it just hurts those teams.  Now teams that give supermaxes and can't afford (or dont want to) go above luxury floor are crippled basketball-wise.  Look at Beal up in Washington or Dame in Portland or Westbrook in OKC -- now Trae in Atlanta.  It's really hard to compete without going into the tax when one player takes up so much space.  IMO the difference between a max and supermax should be exempt from hitting the cap space for teams that drafted the player.  I wish they'd revise this in the next CBA negotiations.  We are punished for drafting well.

[NBASupes]

4 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

And you have to give it out.  Trae knows how much money he's making Ressler.  They have analytics teams for that stuff.  The supermax was originally sold as helping small market teams (always bullshit argument, CP3 championed it then immediately signed one lmao), but it just hurts those teams.  Now teams that give supermaxes and can't afford (or dont want to) go above luxury floor are crippled basketball-wise.  Look at Beal up in Washington or Dame in Portland or Westbrook in OKC -- now Trae in Atlanta.  It's really hard to compete without going into the tax when one player takes up so much space.  IMO the difference between a max and supermax should be exempt from hitting the cap space for teams that drafted the player.  I wish they'd revise this in the next CBA negotiations.  We are punished for drafting well.

Right now, we are barely under the LT for next year and we go over once we sign our draft pick. That's why I know someone like JC, Capela, or Bogi will be traded at the deadline for a Kevin Huerter special. We might get better pieces instead of expiring trash and a 1st but it won't be core pieces at all. 

Edited January 3, 2023 by NBASupes

[marco102]

4 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

And you have to give it out.  Trae knows how much money he's making Ressler.  They have analytics teams for that stuff.  The supermax was originally sold as helping small market teams (always bullshit argument, CP3 championed it then immediately signed one lmao), but it just hurts those teams.  Now teams that give supermaxes and can't afford (or dont want to) go above luxury floor are crippled basketball-wise.  Look at Beal up in Washington or Dame in Portland or Westbrook in OKC -- now Trae in Atlanta.  It's really hard to compete without going into the tax when one player takes up so much space.  IMO the difference between a max and supermax should be exempt from hitting the cap space for teams that drafted the player.  I wish they'd revise this in the next CBA negotiations.  We are punished for drafting well.

That's what I've always thought.  That really would help small market teams while rewarding the players.