Question of the Day.... 5-6

[Diesel]

I believe in getting to the flashpoint.  Not the DC movie.   Today, we're doing just that. 

What do you think we should do about Quin's system and our players. 

I know Landry and Ressler will have the final say.. but from a fan's perspective how do you see it?

I have several Answers and you may have your own answer.   But you can give multiple answers. 

 

[Guest]

I would take a "wait and see" position.  While everything going our way next year, with the current team, isn't likely, I think it is likely enough that some impressive combination happens of:
JJ improves, AJ improves, OO improves, Dre improves, JC's 3pt % improves, Bogi is healthy for most of the year, Trae and DJ mesh better, Quin's system works better than Nate's, Bey provides quality off the bench, new assistant coaches help, our new 15th pick draft choice is helpful, etc.
There are just so many opportunities for things to improve internally, I would wait until the February trade deadline to see what we really have.  

[Diesel]

1 hour ago, LongTimeFan said:

JJ improves, AJ improves, OO improves, Dre improves, JC's 3pt % improves, Bogi is healthy for most of the year, Trae and DJ mesh better, Quin's system works better than Nate's, Bey provides quality off the bench, new assistant coaches help, our new 15th pick draft choice is helpful, etc.
There are just so many opportunities for things to improve internally, I would wait until the February trade deadline to see what we really have.  

Like you say.. 

I can see this happening with Quin.  I'm especially interested in seeing the maturation of AJ. 

We don't often talk about it, but AJ has all the tools.   He has great size.  He has great mechanics.  He has great patience with the ball.   What he lacks is defense.   That's a learned trait. 

Right now, if he can recover from hitting the wall... with Him and Bogi and Bey.. we have three bombaderes...

 

[Final_quest]

I say the same thing every offseason, even after we were in the ECF.  The front office needs to make effort to improve the roster.  The Celtics weren't a juggernaut until they added White, Brogdon, and Horford to their already solid core.  

[sturt]

52 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

The front office needs to make effort to improve the roster. 

Agreed. Keyword, "improve." (That's not the same thing as change for the sake of change, of course.)

 

52 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

The Celtics weren't a juggernaut until they added White, Brogdon, and Horford to their already solid core.  

Back up. Conflating a lot when you list those three.

1. Cs were 23-24 just 16 months ago (1/21/22). With Horford.

 

2. They went on an 11-2 run though. It seemed very suddenly everything began clicking for them.

3. Trade deadline hits, and they deal 2 FRPs and Josh Richardson, Romeo Landford to SAS for White... lop-sided trade in the short-term, obviously. Result... the 8 games above .500 at that point in time grows to 20 games above .500 by the end of the season, and of course, they end up in the NBA Finals.

Were they going to be good enough even without White? Well, they were already surging... playing at a .846 pace over 13 games... then "cooling off" to "just" a .762 pace over the remaining 21 games after the deadline and with White.

But conventionally speaking, most of us would agree White made them better.

 

4. Off-season hits, and they move spare parts, Daniel Theis and a FRP for Brogdon.

They finished this season 22 games above .500... .695 W/L%... actually, a considerable decline from the .800 (28-7) that they'd finished the previous regular season with, but again, conventionally speaking, many if not most of us would agree Brogdon made them better. (And Lord knows what Gallo would have done for them, of course... *whew*.)

 

Evidence suggests they were already a juggernaut... we just didn't know it when we beat them like a rented mule by 16 on 1/28/22. Most of us would agree that White made them better. Some, not necessarily most, would agree that Brogdon made them better (ie, Theis had been a decent asset, let's remember). But the evidence suggests that, overwhelmingly, the ingredients for BOS' recipe for success were already there when they were 23-24 just last season.

That's compelling. Or, it should be.

 

[Final_quest]

@sturt 

I probably won't convince you that the Brogdon, White, and Horford moves were key to Boston's progress, but I believe most commentators, analysts, and fans would agree they have made them significantly better.  Even if you leave Horford out of the discussion the dimension that Brogdon and White added to Boston strengthened them significantly.  

Still, I see a material difference between our core and Boston's.  Namely Tatum and Brown as the core talents with both of them being 2 way All NBA players. 

Making trades for the sake of trades will not improve our roster, but we definitely need more talent.  Boston has shooting and defense.  I'm not convinced we can say the same.  We are similar with regards to a .500 record during a given period, but that does not mean that every team with a .500 record will break out if they give their core time to develop.  I hear you saying our core is one that could/would make that leap, where others clearly wouldn't.  I think we still need to add to the core, but probably won't persuade you to agree.  

In any case I don't think we'll get a chance to know if staying pat is the right move.  New coach and new FO doesn't suggest that is the plan.  I guess we're back to a "real Hawks" 2.0 disagreement, but honestly even if I agreed with staying pat as the correct approach it practically will not happen.  You could convince some fans to believe in staying pat, but the decision makers of our franchise don't seem like they are going to do that.    

[sturt]

  

56 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I probably won't convince you that the Brogdon, White, and Horford moves were key to Boston's progress

I've said what I said, and walked you through precisely why the conclusion I come to is well-grounded.

If you want to argue my supporting points for the conclusion I gave, have at it. All I saw in the post above is "I think media people agree with me." So, yeah, that's not especially convincing.

 

58 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Namely Tatum and Brown as the core talents with both of them being 2 way All NBA players. 

They became that. They were not that 16 months ago. Growing discontent in BOS, in fact, that they just weren't ever going to become what they were projected to become... if you go back and read what was being said.

 

58 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

that does not mean that every team with a .500 record will break out if they give their core time to develop.

If the core is young enough (in this case ~2 years overall younger than BOS), and accomplished enough (in this case, having had a EC Finals appearance in the last 24 months, undefeated in play-in game appearances, and now, a highly-regarded showing vs the EC champs)...

You don't just pretend that's like any other .500 finish team.

 

58 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

New coach and new FO doesn't suggest that is the plan.

Now you're making stuff up. Newsflash, only Squawkers are suggesting what the plan is... no one in authority has said anything as-if a "plan" has been established. Closest that that's even been addressed was when Landry was asked about JC, and he gave the same pat answer he and his predecessor have ever given.

To the contrary, Landry emphasized that he, Quin, and the rest of the staff would be assessing things, but that the season had only ended about 16 hours prior to the presser. If anything, one could make a pretty strong argument that Landry sounded really, really encouraged by how the team had evolved so much in such a short time under Quin.

 

When I say that posters here underappreciate maturity, this is what I'm getting at... there's no evident accounting in your calculus for what these players will be as they get another year under their belt, let alone two years.

When I say that posters here underappreciate chemistry, this is what I'm getting at... there's no evident accounting in your calculus for the fact that, every time you replace Key Player X with Key Player Y, you inherently force the team to experience a learning curve... hopefully short, but maybe taking most of a season before seeing results originally envisioned.

 

Last thing... I do recoil a bit at the idea of calling it "standing pat," though I know what you mean (I think).

I do not endorse "standing pat," as-if there's no interest in looking at ways to improve the roster. Always looking at ways to improve the roster.

Instead, what I endorse is, first, whatever Quin believes best.

Then, what I endorse second and without knowing what Quin believes is best is a very conservative approach to roster improvement.

In other words, I'm only biting on big moves involving key pieces if those big moves are almost irrefutably going to put the team in a stronger position to contend in 23-24. That's a high standard, and one that's rarely met through a trade because the other team ordinarily is also one looking to improve and/or because our own payroll seriously impedes the likelihood of a proposed trade getting done.

That's because, circling back, we're practically bound to get better internally as-is... we're that  young, and that  accomplished for a team that  young.

 

[Final_quest]

You can believe what you want about Boston.  I did read your take it's not really worth getting into the XYZ of why I don't agree with most of it. 

Regarding the Hawks plan, Landry Fields is not going to come out and say we plan to change the roster significantly.  The FO doesn't always or usually state their playbook.  Media speak is often subjective without substance, imo. 

I was listening to Brad Rowland and Tyler Jones basically laughing and saying, "One thing we know for sure is they are not gonna run it back."  In Brad's case that could be internal knowledge, but a new coach and new FO almost always means change to the personnel.  At least I can say it's not just Hawksquawk saying to expect change.  What you may like about what they said is they believed Quin will take an active role in any trades or acquisitions.

Again Boston has defense and shooting, we're not comparable in that regard.  It's gonna be difficult to improve those two aspects of our roster with the guys we seem committed to.  

[sturt]

43 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I did read your take it's not really worth getting into the XYZ of why I don't agree with most of it. 

I'm sure it's not... hehe.

 

43 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Landry Fields is not going to come out and say we plan to change the roster significantly.

True. Nor say they do not. In fact, it's kinda unusual for any GM ever to announce within 16 hours of exiting the playoffs, "We have a plan."

(Reminder. You intimated that they do, and it's not to stand pat....)

6 hours ago, Final_quest said:

New coach and new FO doesn't suggest that is the plan.

 

43 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Media speak is often subjective without substance, imo.

I was listening to Brad Rowland and Tyler Jones basically laughing and saying, "One thing we know for sure is they are not gonna run it back."  In Brad's case that could be internal knowledge

How does one reconcile that first sentence with the next two? Uncertain.

 

  

44 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

a new coach and new FO almost always means change to the personnel

Um. A new season almost always means change to personnel.

The question isn't change. The question is how drastic the change is to be.

You're right that new FO often means new coach... and that's happened.

We'll have to see what the new coach thinks about his personnel. I don't rule anything out.

(You, apparently, do.)

 

  

47 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Again Boston has defense and shooting, we're not comparable in that regard.  It's gonna be difficult to improve those two aspects of our roster with the guys we seem committed to.  

How comparable were they two years ago?

That matters.

 

 

 

[Diesel]

51 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I was listening to Brad Rowland and Tyler Jones basically laughing and saying, "One thing we know for sure is they are not gonna run it back."  In Brad's case that could be internal knowledge, but a new coach and new FO almost always means change to the personnel.  At least I can say it's not just Hawksquawk saying to expect change.  What you may like about what they said is they believed Quin will take an active role in any trades or acquisitions.

One thing though.  Brad is much like many of us... I listen to him be spastic sometimes and realize that he's a fan before a media member.   That means that when you listen to him as a media member, he has a hard time separating what Brad the fan wants and believes.   I dare not trust all of the things I hear from him. 

[Diesel]

I think Money would be the biggest hurdle to us running it back. 

Even if we started running it back, by the deadline, we'd be making moves... unless we were just running over the league. 

 

[Final_quest]

31 minutes ago, sturt said:

 How comparable were they two years ago?

That matters.

 

 

 

Here is Boston's results the past several years:

 

That is a total of 6 finishes in the top 4 of the conference and they could be headed to their 5th ECF in 7 years.  You want to pick the one moment where they had a .500 record in a 7 year span, and claim we are on the same trajectory?  

Also, Brad Rowland is part of the media, but his job is to decipher the media speak of coaches, players, and Hawks FO.  The type of media speak I am talking about our meaningless statements like this: "We're gonna work hard this summer and improve our game" and "We're gonna look to improve the roster if we find opportunity."

People like Brad do the opposite and make actual definitive statements on what they think the Hawks will do.  He was literally laughing at the thought of us running it back saying, "We know for sure they will make a change to the top 8 of the rotation."  Why do you think he believes that?  

[sturt]

Okay, you seem to hinge your response on two items here. (I give you credit, you may be allergic to engage specific points made--for good reason, since they're stout points, and who wants to argue on tilted ground like that--but at least you're trying.)

 

Last thing first... you lift up the immortal Brad Rowland as being aligned with your perspective.

Okay, Brad Rowland is part of the media. Sure. He's been a good fan. Like most of us. From what is publicly understood, Brad was a blogger (... perhaps being paid, but not much...BR? SB Nation? can't recall...) who happened to be open to engaging an internet media company at just the moment they were looking to grow a podcast network. He contracted with them, and that would seem to be his main source of income. Who knows, maybe that venture has grown such that he's making beaucoup bucks. I'd like to think so.

Is Rowland a journalist? Would The Athletic or AJC or one of the local TV channels be beating on his door for a steady journalistic role with them? Don't want to be disparaging toward Brad. But objectively, they haven't, at least not yet. Brad is a podcaster. That's what he is. He offers his commentary/perspective by audio, not unlike what all of us do here by writing what we do. I suppose he also gets the occasional "stringer" role, ie a kind of sports writer temp job... like when a newspaper like AJC is covering dozens of high school football games at one time, they'll pay a few people to be their stringers since they cannot possibly cover everything using their regular staff.

Does Rowland bring some expertise... are his takes superior in some way? Again, not to be disparaging, but Brad's takes are on the same level with any of ours, except he makes a little money from putting his comments into audio form, hoping to ride the Hooked On podcasting wave into a well-paying career. Wish him well with that, I really do. But if he has some basketball playing or coaching background that would impress us all, he's been far too humble and quiet about that. As far as I'm aware, he has an undergrad in sports management from West Georgia.

Maybe most important to your assertion here is the question, does Brad Rowland have some history of breaking news, or some history of insider status such that he's been able to give some heads-up about pending announcements or transactions? Iow, is there evidence that he has some degree of special insight/connection to Hawks HQ decisions?

I know of no example of that. Maybe I missed something. But if I did, it is at least very safe to say that it's been very rare.

So, kudos to the two of you that you agree. But honestly, speaking only for me and not to be insulting, there are a handful of posters here whose opinions consistently are exceptionally more compelling in comparison to Brad's.

 

First thing last... let's just review some context and re-state the tipping point questions...

1. Did the Cs media and fans reach a point of frustration and impatience after such a so-so season in 2020-21 and such a so-so 50-ish games to start 2021-22... and thus, a point similar to where some people like you find yourselves today? Were they becoming concerned that their faith that Tatum and Brown would be able to lead them back to glory was misplaced and that it was foolhardy and futile to continue to envision eventual success?

Yes. That happened.

 

2. Were they wrong?

Yes. That also has happened, obviously.

 

I can offer many proofs of this, but dang, I've already written so much... allow me to merely offer this screenshot from January 5, 2022... a mere 16 months ago... as Exhibit A. (And besides, you pay attention to the NBA. You knew I was asserting things accurately to begin with, I'm confident.)

 

 

Finishing up, double-dog-dare ya to debunk my major assertions... that NBA fans in general, but Hawks fans in this case... significantly underappreciate the importance of maturity in a team's success... and... significantly underappreciate the importance of chemistry/continuity, or maybe better stated, underappreciate the degree to which major changes--even net positive ones--can take time to have positive effect.

Those assertions are weight-baring pillars to my belief that the FO will be conservative in their roster moves this off-season, pending next February's trade deadline when success or failure will be consequential. Remember, at the trade deadline, the team as currently constituted will be effectively at the aggregate age of last year's Celtics... who, about that time, began to rocket through the rest of the season to an NBA Finals appearance.

[sturt]

3 hours ago, Diesel said:

I think Money would be the biggest hurdle to us running it back. 

Even if we started running it back, by the deadline, we'd be making moves... unless we were just running over the league. 

 

 

As said previously today in something I posted, the capacity for speculation about moves... not just moves, but moves that improve the team... will first and foremost come down to how much one trusts Antony Peter to be willing to pay tax.

Now, the new CBA from what I've understood--feel free to correct my understanding, of course--is much kinder to teams that are attempting to keep their own players; and the real hard decisions will have to be made by those exceeding the 2nd apron.

Our current status:

 

[Final_quest]

Brad Rowland could be a fan blog with zero pay, but he probably gets some compensation because there are multiple ads played during his podcast.  My take is he doesn't intend to break news as an insider, although I think he could based off some of his comments.  From what I've seen he will only comment on insider talk if it becomes public, but doesn't have a goal to "break news". What was clear to me is he didn't even consider the idea that "We are not going to run it back." as anything other than what was plain and obvious.  That it wasn't even a mystery. 

I agree with him and personally don't need to see a "breaking news story" as evidence that we have a plan to move on from a key player or two.  The only reason I brought up Brad Rowland is because you stated only people on Hawksquawk think we are going to shake up the roster.  Since the Hawks get almost no coverage anywhere, it's difficult to "show proof" of what people think "the plan" is. 

I'm actually surprised there is any dedicated fan who has your view.  Although I get the wisdom in only making a move if it benefits your team.  That doesn't change that two years ago we set out to retain our roster, and this year we are NOT going into the offseason with that same goal.  The sentiment should be that there will be a big effort to move a key player or two.  

You want "proof", I get it.  I would just say Quin Snyder hasn't publicly stated he is going to bring in a mostly new coaching staff, but we all believe that's what will happen.  Even without a breaking a news story like "Insider source says Snyder to replace coaching staff".  Hawks looking to move on from key players in the offseason is the same level of "duh". 

Apart from Brad's podcast I haven't seen any content on a preview of Hawk's offseason.  Would be interested if you know of literally anything else that exists that has covered this topic so far.  

[JayBirdHawk]

30 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

The only reason I brought up Brad Rowland is because you stated only people on Hawksquawk think we are going to shake up the roster.  Since the Hawks get almost no coverage anywhere, it's difficult to "show proof" of what people think "the plan" is. 

Steve Koonin interview from 04/28. He talks about 'what we need' [TIFWIW].....listen at 7:00 mark:

https://omny.fm/shows/dukes-bell/steve-koonin-there-are-quite-a-few-great-things-to

 

[JayBirdHawk]

22 hours ago, LongTimeFan said:

I would take a "wait and see" position.  While everything going our way next year, with the current team, isn't likely, I think it is likely enough that some impressive combination happens of:
JJ improves, AJ improves, OO improves, Dre improves, JC's 3pt % improves, Bogi is healthy for most of the year, Trae and DJ mesh better, Quin's system works better than Nate's, Bey provides quality off the bench, new assistant coaches help, our new 15th pick draft choice is helpful, etc.
There are just so many opportunities for things to improve internally, I would wait until the February trade deadline to see what we really have.  

If last season taught us anything with the premature Huerter trade, Ressler is opposed to paying the tax. They didn't take a wait and see approach by the deadline.  I'll be waiting and watching to see how it plays out again.

[Spud2nique]

35 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Steve Koonin interview from 04/28. He talks about 'what we need' [TIFWIW].....listen at 7:00 mark:

https://omny.fm/shows/dukes-bell/steve-koonin-there-are-quite-a-few-great-things-to

 

Koonin is cool .

[sturt]

1 hour ago, Final_quest said:

You want "proof", I get it.  I would just say Quin Snyder hasn't publicly stated he is going to bring in a mostly new coaching staff, but we all believe that's what will happen.  Even without a breaking a news story like "Insider source says Snyder to replace coaching staff".  Hawks looking to move on from key players in the offseason is the same level of "duh". 

Um.

No.

Think with me here... it's not that complicated...

If I tell you I'm letting to all of my staff, there's every reason to believe I'm bringing in a whole new staff. No, it doesn't preclude me from re-hiring someone, but it is reasonable to believe everyone, or at least almost everyone, will be new.

So, for your suggestion to be valid, the equivalent would be that Landry has told us that he's letting go of all of our players (which he can't wave a magic wand and do, of course, but the point remains).

At that  point, it would be natural to assume the Hawks are bringing in new players.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

If last season taught us anything with the premature Huerter trade, Ressler is opposed to paying the tax. They didn't take a wait and see approach by the deadline.  I'll be waiting and watching to see how it plays out again.

Yep, I suspect the team will adjust the roster so that they aren't in the tax to start the season, though after trading Huerter for that same reason last year (and then having Bogi absent longer then they probably anticipated to start the year) they may be a bit more lenient and keep folks around until at least December. 
I answered Diesel's poll question as I thought he had posed it, ie, what "I" would do versus what I thought the team will do.
"I" would still keep the roster intact, plus add the draft choice, to see what we really have with some internal, organic growth under Quin's system and new staff.
But it is more likely that at least one high-salaried player will get traded to get the salary budget under the cap pre season.  JC or CC are the likely candidates.  If they wait until December, and AJ is looking ready, then possibly Bogi.