Question of the Day.... 5-6

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, Final_quest said:

OK, it's not as big of a lift as I thought.  I see Ressler differently than most, and believe he's not actually a cheap skate.  I would make a simple bet with any doubters on the tax.  We're gonna pay it next year.  

Just one of many ways we can get under the tax without fire-saling. The question is are we going to be better? There a lots of different routes to go but won't be easy. I have no faith that Ressler is going to willingly pay the tax. I'm hoping I'm presently surprised.

[Vol4ever]

Imo we need some physicality in the post.   We need some toughness on defense in the low post.  We continue to see guards making layups.   Tree and Danny Rounds wouldn't let that happen.  

[Guest]

5 hours ago, sturt said:

Here's the problem... you're still over the tax line even with that thought.

Here's another problem... Ayton's known  for not being  a bad ass big.

Here's another problem... PHX and other contenders are in our same shoes, loathe to add new salary.

Here's another problem... the list of bad ass bigs that would come cheap enough and whose current team would welcome new salary is exceedingly slim.

"IF it was possible" is, of course, the pivotal phrase in that, then.

More likely... you're not going to end up with a big-money... and thus accomplished vet... "bad ass big."

It's either going to be a young-un with a bad ass big reputation, but who hasn't yet attained a resume' similar to a JC or CC ( @Diesel rushes in to shout Daniel Gafford!!!... hehe) ... or... going to be a rotation player in the general vicinity of a Montrezl Harrell, or like Jae Crowder might still be perceived.

Or, or, or.... Koonin was just stating his own opinion in the first place, and we shouldn't assume too much from that.

Who knows.

 

And.

To the heart of it all, who knows whether such a move would prove to be worthy of what we would end up giving in return.

We all know this. Trades, unlike FA or the draft, are routinely difficult to result in a net positive, simply b/c the other trading partner(s) is/are equally self-interested... and, too, at the possible additional cost of (a) team maturity and highly possible additional cost of (b) a chemistry learning curve that could extend well into the season.

Agree.

[Guest]

After further reading of the good thoughts of several of you, I think the Hawks will go over the tax, simply because it just won't be palatable enough to most of the front office, and probably even to Tony Ressler, to avoid it and be left significantly wanting,  competitively.

I also think they will not fill the 15th roster slot, going with three two-ways instead (since they don't count against the cap in almost any reasonable circumstance).

P.S. I will put myself in "timeout" for 48 minutes (length of an NBA game) and chant "Sturt must be given a clear understanding of my opinion of what to do vs speculation of the team's stance."

[sturt]

58 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Just one of many ways we can get under the tax without fire-saling.

Not sure about the "many" part in that. Not even sure about the "one" part in that, but I grant that it's conceivable that if you can find a team willing to take Covington's salary in exchange for also sending them draft picks, yeah. Maybe.

 

Those of you who are dying to make a major move might find some hope in HOU as a trade partner. That's the one team with some maneuverability, and if you've been paying attention, the word is out that they could be a serious player for Harden... and with that, the word is that, if successful in that, they'll pull out all the stops to return to contender status, and will be in the market then for players like some of ours.

They could help us with the tax situation, of course, but do they have pieces that make us a better team in 23-24? Hard to fathom that they do. In 25-26, perhaps, but once you embrace that idea, you might as well confess that you're content with running on the hamster wheel.

 

 

[sturt]

1 hour ago, Vol4ever said:

We continue to see guards making layups.

I would propose that a big part of that when we've seen it is simply confusion on defensive calls, not toughness per se. We have guys who, when in position, make plays there. But why aren't they in position when that happens? Someone didn't communicate, or someone didn't respond to the communication. I'm as pro-Q as anyone, but that's something he's going to have to take charge to clean up, no matter who's in our low post rotation.

[sturt]

55 minutes ago, LongTimeFan said:

P.S. I will put myself in "timeout" for 48 minutes (length of an NBA game) and chant "Sturt must be given a clear understanding of my opinion of what to do vs speculation of the team's stance."

(Actually, you'd made it clear... so, to the contrary of any timeout, that proposed unofficial rule stemmed from your wisdom having been on display.)

 

[Diesel]

12 hours ago, sturt said:

a big who is a bad ass."

Zion??

[Diesel]

The qualifications for a big bad ass is hard if you also consider injuries. 

Immediately what comes to mind is somehow getting PG13... but he hasn't played a whole season in like Forever. 

Zion would be a great pick up and N.O. might trade him because the writing is on the wall. 

Then we're back to our old friend Ben Simmons.   My Back... but he's not the scorer. 

When you talk about bad ass big that can get their shot, I don't think about Centers.   I think PFs. 

Can we be talking Bam?

Can we be talking KAT?

Can we be talking Cameron?

Can we be talking Jonathan Isaac?

Can we be talking Jeremy Grant?

 

IDK??  Cryptic talk has never been my strong suit. 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

9 hours ago, Diesel said:

IDK??  Cryptic talk has never been my strong suit. 

Get used to it. It's that time of year when Owner/GM speak means very little and anything they say should not be taken as fact - things change fast - just use as discussion points.

[AHF]

I don't think "running it back" will be enough to move us from bubble playoff team to contender but the moves you make need to be steps along the road to meaningful improvement which means either making trades that net positive impacts on the roster or that are first steps to that ultimate end.  I think a big plus to bringing Quin in with 1/4 of the season remaining was so that he could get an up close look at the team and our players and use that to inform our offseason strategy.  

So in answering this poll, it is less that I think we will or must make moves or stay the course with the current roster and more that I think we will see Snyder and Landry's view of the current roster in our offseason moves or lack thereof.  For example, if Snyder thinks JC is a keeper then we shouldn't see him being shopped and should see the team push back aggressively on rumors that he is being shopped.  If Snyder thinks we need to move on from JC either because he doesn't see him as a fit or because he sees Bey, Hunter, JJ, etc. as better options or because he thinks we have needs elsewhere or because he thinks we need the room to resign Bey and OO, etc. or any combination of factors, then we should see him shopped and likely moved.

So while I think internal growth won't be enough to get us there by itself, the degree to which we aggressively pursue deals will reflect where Snyder and Landry's heads are at on this and seeing that is one of the big revelations I am looking forward to seeing this year.

If they do ultimately conclude that changes need to be made, I think the three key determinations are what to do with:

DM

JC 

CC

So that could lead to many, many different permutations depending on what we change and what we target.

[Packfill]

32 minutes ago, AHF said:

I don't think "running it back" will be enough to move us from bubble playoff team to contender but the moves you make need to be steps along the road to meaningful improvement which means either making trades that net positive impacts on the roster or that are first steps to that ultimate end.  I think a big plus to bringing Quin in with 1/4 of the season remaining was so that he could get an up close look at the team and our players and use that to inform our offseason strategy.  

So in answering this poll, it is less that I think we will or must make moves or stay the course with the current roster and more that I think we will see Snyder and Landry's view of the current roster in our offseason moves or lack thereof.  For example, if Snyder thinks JC is a keeper then we shouldn't see him being shopped and should see the team push back aggressively on rumors that he is being shopped.  If Snyder thinks we need to move on from JC either because he doesn't see him as a fit or because he sees Bey, Hunter, JJ, etc. as better options or because he thinks we have needs elsewhere or because he thinks we need the room to resign Bey and OO, etc. or any combination of factors, then we should see him shopped and likely moved.

So while I think internal growth won't be enough to get us there by itself, the degree to which we aggressively pursue deals will reflect where Snyder and Landry's heads are at on this and seeing that is one of the big revelations I am looking forward to seeing this year.

If they do ultimately conclude that changes need to be made, I think the three key determinations are what to do with:

DM

JC 

CC

So that could lead to many, many different permutations depending on what we change and what we target.

I agree.

I also think that if they like any of the young players (OO, JJ, AJ, etc.) and believe in their development, then trading a vet to help shore up another roster hole and allowing the young guy a bigger role is an efficient use of cap, player development and assets.  They may also prefer trading a young guy or picks to bring in a contributor or two.  

I don't think the Quinn system and player development alone will get the Hawks to contender status.

[Diesel]

Running it back is never a good thought for any fanbase that didn't win the chip.   But let's discuss the reasons why Running it back may be good for us.

1. New Coach.  New Offense.  New Defense.  He knows what we have. 
2. Young player maturity:  OO, AJ, JJ, Bey are all young players who are in the process of maturing. 
3. Spacing and Communication are becoming a thing. 

I'm not going to say continuity because continuity isn't a big thing for us right now.  But I will say... Nobody has bowled me over with a proposal.   Many of the thoughts we have shared on Hawksquawk are either Lateral Moves or Moves Backwards.  We're out here proposing stuff to put players out of their natural position because we want to try to make something work. 

What I believe is that:

AJ, JJ, JC, Bey, DJ, and DH will be the natural shooters that Trae needs around him.  i.e. Guys that can shoot from 3 above 36%. 

When that happens, we will be tons better.   This year we only had 3 guys who played significant minutes over 36% from three.   That along with a predictable offense makes us easy to stop... but those times when our shooters were on... even in a predictable offense, we were hard to stop. 

Would I like a bad ass Big who was a walking bucket like Zion Williamson.. sure.  but if he were healthy, nobody would ever think about trading him. 

As it stands... IF JC gets back into his form... He's everything you want and hard to replace. 

Does CC disrupt JC's game.  Yes.  But that was with Nate.   What can Quin create?  The thing is that all of our guys can move.   We have rim runners and movement players. 

But the impatience of fans want us to do something before we even see what Quin has in mind. 

I believe our moves if any should cater to what Quin says he needs. 

 

 

[Final_quest]

I was really hoping Murray could be the 2nd star that would take us to championship level, but I still think we need a real All NBA type of player.  We could be a greatly improved team running it back, but the FO needs to go after someone like Embiid if he's available.  

I think what Koonin was saying is we need someone who can get dribble and create their own shot.  The only guy on our front court who can dribble is in development, Jalen.  Guys like Koonin ALWAYS talk up the team because his job is to sell the franchise.  I would ignore positive comments from him about how amazing our team is, etc.  I would pay attention to the type of players he said we should add.  

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, Final_quest said:

I was really hoping Murray could be the 2nd star that would take us to championship level, but I still think we need a real All NBA type of player.  We could be a greatly improved team running it back, but the FO needs to go after someone like Embiid if he's available.  

I think what Koonin was saying is we need someone who can get dribble and create their own shot.  The only guy on our front court who can dribble is in development, Jalen.  Guys like Koonin ALWAYS talk up the team because his job is to sell the franchise.  I would ignore positive comments from him about how amazing our team is, etc.  I would pay attention to the type of players he said we should add.  

Sure... would I like for us to get Jaylen Brown?  Definitely.   Would I like for us to get Embiid?  Definitely.  But what is the cost.  We don't want to be so thin that if one of our stars is misisng we are definitely losing. 

We also don't want to miss what we already have here. 

Now.. just think off all the bigs that can get their own shots. 

• Jokic is not walking through that door. 
• Giannis is not walking through that door. 
• Embiid is probably not walking through that door. 
• AD might hoble through that door. 
• Zion can probably be wheelchaired through that door. 
• Ayton may walk through that door and he will give up 53 points as he comes in.

 

[Vol4ever]

On 5/7/2023 at 6:53 PM, sturt said:

I would propose that a big part of that when we've seen it is simply confusion on defensive calls, not toughness per se. We have guys who, when in position, make plays there. But why aren't they in position when that happens? Someone didn't communicate, or someone didn't respond to the communication. I'm as pro-Q as anyone, but that's something he's going to have to take charge to clean up, no matter who's in our low post rotation.

It's effort also with some players.  Playing defense is tough, takes alot of effort and you probably gotta address that issue.  We play defense in spurts.  I'm sure Q will get it straightened out.  

[JeffS17]

I gotta be honest with you, I really don't want Embiid.  His fit is unquestionably good with Trae, but I don't like his game, I don't like that he's never in shape, I don't like that he disappears in the playoffs, and I don't like that he cannot stay healthy.  Now take into consideration we'd need to give up our remaining picks for him and solid rotation guys... and I just don't want it.  He probably doesn't want to come to ATL anyways so it's a moot point, but he's just not a fun player to cheer for imo and even if he makes our team better, I'd rather not trade for him.

I know the obvious response to this comment is "he's a literal MVP and we should do w/e it takes to get him if we have the opportunity", but that's just not the route I really want to go.  I think it's because I care more about liking the players on the team than I do maximizing the chance of a championship.  I get that this perspective isn't really conducive for discussion, but it's the same reason I don't want Kyrie on our team, or Dillon Brooks, or a good shooter that could space the floor like ...Grayson Allen... or a myriad of other dudes in the league.  It's also why it makes me sad trading guys like JC who are very likeable/respectable and bought into the city and the fans.

[Diesel]

3 hours ago, JeffS17 said:

, I don't like that he's never in shape,

@JeffS17  How can you say that Embiid is never in shape.  Never Before Have I ever seen a big man have to pick himself up off the ground as much as Embiid does.  Half of the game, Embiid is on the ground.  Some may say that he flops... I don't know.. I do know that he's getting up a lot.  You gotta be in good shape to get up that much. 

 

 

[JeffS17]

10 minutes ago, Diesel said:

@JeffS17  How can you say that Embiid is never in shape.  Never Before Have I ever seen a big man have to pick himself up off the ground as much as Embiid does.  Half of the game, Embiid is on the ground.  Some may say that he flops... I don't know.. I do know that he's getting up a lot.  You gotta be in good shape to get up that much. 

 

 

When I watch Philly, he's consistently gassed in the 4th.  Philly fans will tell you he is always playing through injuries (that somehow only affect him later in the game), but it was the same way in our playoff series too.  He was AWFUL in the 4th quarters.  His conditioning is not good.  More on the speculative side but he also always ducks the games in Denver lol dude would not be able to handle altitude.

[Diesel]

18 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

When I watch Philly, he's consistently gassed in the 4th.  Philly fans will tell you he is always playing through injuries (that somehow only affect him later in the game), but it was the same way in our playoff series too.  He was AWFUL in the 4th quarters.  His conditioning is not good.  More on the speculative side but he also always ducks the games in Denver lol dude would not be able to handle altitude.

No doubt... you gonna be tired if you're pulling yourself off the floor for 24 minutes.