Question of the Day.... 5-6

[sturt]

46 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

 

First, let's be clear... he was asked his opinion... each person can make his/her own assumption whether the COO was speaking from having visited with basketball ops people and was rehearsing what they told him they believe, or from having visited with Quin and coaching staff and rehearsing what they told him they believe... ie, the chefs in the kitchen formulating the menu... or speaking from his own personal perspective.

But if we go with the former and assume he was rehearsing what others have suggested to him... here's what I heard...

1. He/they are "bullish" on the current roster, his word.

2. He/they value guys who can get their own shot.

3. He/they aspire to having a Jimmy Butler type on the roster... and Trae doesn't count b/c even though he has some dog in him, they want someone with size... and apparently, even Jimmy Butler himself wouldn't qualify (!)... b/c Koonin explicitly suggests "a big who is a bad ass."

 

Btw... and again, even if Koonin is speaking from the perspective of the decision-makers... that's not any elaborate "plan", but a single acquisition.

Where am I wrong in any of that takeaway?

[sturt]

8 minutes ago, LongTimeFan said:

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.

Not if they're going to contend.

And if they're not going to contend this season... when?

I don't make dramatic statements for the heckuvit... if not this season, I might have to consider other entertainment options. This is, in that case, a train going nowhere almost for certain.

I'm the optimistic type, so when Soth(?) tells me that Ressler Junior has persuaded Ressler Senior to pay tax this season, I'm going to assume that's the case. Because I want to. Others can do what they want. Of course.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, sturt said:

Not if they're going to contend.

And if they're not going to contend this season... when?

I don't make dramatic statements for the heckuvit... if not this season, I might have to consider other entertainment options. This is, in that case, a train going nowhere almost for certain.

I'm the optimistic type, so when Soth(?) tells me that Ressler Junior has persuaded Ressler Senior to pay tax this season, I'm going to assume that's the case. Because I want to. Others can do what they want. Of course.

Good point.
Also, IF they plan to contend this season, BUT they still want to be financially prudent, they could possibly do so by packaging two higher priced players for one less highly priced stud (Collins and CC for Ayton - NOT that I'm advocating for that, but IF it was possible, or some other similar trade, then that would address both the cap avoidance and contending goals).

[JayBirdHawk]

2 hours ago, Final_quest said:

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.  

Hawks beat writer for the AJC gives her thoughts:

 

 

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, sturt said:

 

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.

Forgive me.  Did Snyder already state he’s letting the coaching staff go?  If he did, my point is simply we already knew that was gonna happen, but when?  A: The moment he was hired.

My point is when you hire a new coach and GM the very next thing to expect is some roster changes.  You don't need to make a prepared statement.  Same as when a new coach is hired you know he's gonna hire new assistants.  

You can wait for a statement or insider breaking news article on "the plan".  I'm just going to expect a couple trades.  Besides when does the GM ever publicly state that he intends to trade a specific player?  

[Final_quest]

1 hour ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Hawks beat writer for the AJC gives her thoughts:

 

 

She literally said, “You can’t keep doing the same thing and expect different results.”  Expecting changes again.  
 

Steve Koonin said we need guys who can dribble and get their shot, a big bruiser.  Mentioned Trae, Murray, and Bogi as capable, no one else.

[sturt]

30 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Did Snyder already state he’s letting the coaching staff go?  If he did, my point is simply we already knew that was gonna happen, but when?  A: The moment he was hired.

Dog with a bone, ain't ya... hehe.

1a. Define "knew." Specifically in contrast to "strongly suspected." I think there's a difference, but maybe you don't.

1b. Define "staff." Specifically in contrast to "individual assistant coaches." I'm sure there's a difference, but maybe you don't.

 

There was plenty of reason to suspect, but in this case, there had been... media (for whom you hold great regard, I'm told)... speculation that some number of assistants' contracts' horizon extended to 2024... and thus, that it would be erroneous to assume... or suspect... that the entire staff would be replaced after 22-23.

 

36 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

My point is when you hire a new coach and GM the very next thing to expect is some roster changes.  You don't need to make a prepared statement. 

We agree(!).

But to be precise, we agree less because you promote your assistant GM (who presumably had a heavy hand in shaping the roster since his arrival on staff), and because he hired a new coach, but because practically every team  makes some roster changes every off-season.

Again, for the third or fourth time. The question is not roster changes, but how severe... how many, if any, key assets are sent out and for whom.

 

41 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

You can wait for a statement or insider breaking news article on "the plan".

Check me on this, because I'm too lazy to go confirm it... but "the plan" was your  terminology originally, not mine. I was responding to you. Not the other way around.

 

[sturt]

39 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

She

Your regard for people who are merely messengers and opiners is a little strange to me. Unless a person comes to the table with some credentials that make their insight... whether we are talking about what will happen or what should happen, either way... clearly necessarily superior to any of ours, then without any reason for assigning their opinion superior merit, why would any of us assign it to them anyway?

Dunno.

 

[sturt]

43 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

Steve Koonin said we need guys who can dribble and get their shot, a big bruiser.  Mentioned Trae, Murray, and Bogi as capable, no one else.

He did.

 

[sturt]

4 hours ago, LongTimeFan said:

Good point.
Also, IF they plan to contend this season, BUT they still want to be financially prudent, they could possibly do so by packaging two higher priced players for one less highly priced stud (Collins and CC for Ayton - NOT that I'm advocating for that, but IF it was possible, or some other similar trade, then that would address both the cap avoidance and contending goals).

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.

[Final_quest]

23 hours ago, sturt said:

  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.

The only reason I would point to Brad Rowland and whatever the Hawk's beat writer said is because of your assertion in bold.  You rejected my statement that a new FO and new coach means they are gonna shake up the roster.  You said I was "making stuff up".  I guess my point is you seem to believe someone in authority needs to publicly and explicitly state a "plan" to believe a roster shake up should be expected.  I believe people can think for themselves without waiting for a statement.  

[sturt]

33 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

The only reason I would point to Brad Rowland and whatever the Hawk's beat writer said is because of your assertion in bold.  You rejected my statement that a new FO and new coach means they are gonna shake up the roster.  You said I was "making stuff up".  I guess my point is you seem to believe someone in authority needs to publicly and explicitly state a "plan" to believe a roster shake up should be expected.  I believe people can think for themselves without waiting for a statement.  

To be fair to what I've said, you'd have needed to bring up that I consider Koonin someone close enough to "authority" for their comments to matter.

To the rest of your response there, essentially I'm hearing, "I'll believe what I want to believe, and you can't make me not."

Is that fair?

And, regardless, that is all correct... you will, and I can not. I can only provide supporting reasons to reach a different conclusion. My work is done here.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, Final_quest said:

She literally said, “You can’t keep doing the same thing and expect different results.”  Expecting changes again.  
 

Steve Koonin said we need guys who can dribble and get their shot, a big bruiser.  Mentioned Trae, Murray, and Bogi as capable, no one else.

There are other articles, blogs, writers who are giving there thoughts on what the Hawks should/can do this offseason......for me it will come down to how willing Ressler is to pay the LT and how much.

 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/news/hawks-trae-young-trade-rumors-offseason-free-agents-draft/k3kg5oyyzyl85cf2ke7gthop

 

https://hoopshype.com/lists/hawks-offseason-primer-trae-youngs-future-dejounte-murray-and-onyeka-okongwu-extensions-and-more/

 

[sturt]

Pardon me.

Just didn't want this to get lost.

It seems super relevant and compelling, at least to those of us with an appreciation for the gravity of team maturity, team chemistry, and team (and fan) patience.

 

 

[sturt]

23 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

There are other articles, blogs, writers who are giving there thoughts on what the Hawks should/can do this offseason......for me it will come down to how willing Ressler is to pay the LT and how much.

 

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/news/hawks-trae-young-trade-rumors-offseason-free-agents-draft/k3kg5oyyzyl85cf2ke7gthop

 

https://hoopshype.com/lists/hawks-offseason-primer-trae-youngs-future-dejounte-murray-and-onyeka-okongwu-extensions-and-more/

 

 

Saw this yesterday, but didn't bother. @lethalweapon3 (you still out there somewhere?) years ago persuaded me that Marks is more PT Barnum than he is GM material, in spite of his NBA background. And just generally I have a bias for locals over the national media where it concerns the Hawks. Nationals rub me the wrong way commonly with their disturbing lack of insight, or outright apparent bias against our guys.

 

But. Having said that.

This, together with @LongTimeFan's recent posts prompts me to propose a new unofficial rule.

 

We (including me, of course) need to make our posts in this vein explicitly clear on whether we're speaking about (a) what the Hawks will do, in our opinion... or or or... (b) what we want the Hawks to do.

Me? I both expect and want the Hawks to do whatever Quin wants done. I've said that multiple times now. I'll be satisfied regardless, as long as it's clear that any moves made have his stamp on them.

If Quin calls and asks, I want them to not make the mistake of failing to recognize the age of this roster, and that we're plausibly on the cusp of them turning the corner to widely-regarded contender status; and I want them to not make the mistake of damaging too much, whatever moves are made (and there will be moves made of some kind, minor or major or in-between) the chemistry that's been built over the last 3 years.

I expect that Koonin's comment is a prevailing attitude of his boss. So, what do I think they'll do? I think there will be some effort made in that direction. But I also suspect it's going to be hard to find someone that actually checks all the boxes, and that some people are going to be seriously disappointed, either because the player(s) obtained do not seem to make us stronger on paper, or because there will be a prevailing attitude that we overpaid.

I do believe we'll pay tax because we almost have to... it's difficult if you play with the salaries in an Excel sheet to figure how this team contends at a payroll less than the projected $164m (tax threshold).

[Final_quest]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

To be fair to what I've said, you'd have needed to bring up that I consider Koonin someone close enough to "authority" for their comments to matter.

To the rest of your response there, essentially I'm hearing, "I'll believe what I want to believe, and you can't make me not."

Is that fair?

And, regardless, that is all correct... you will, and I can not. I can only provide supporting reasons to reach a different conclusion. My work is done here.

The support for my statement is decades of history with regards to anytime a franchise hits a restart button, and common sense that anyone can see the writing on the wall.  Someone with authority will not usually make a formal statement with words, the actions do the talking.  

Extending a coach and gm with a contract means stay the course.  Firing a coach and gm means expect change.  That is how people in authority make statements. 

[Final_quest]

40 minutes ago, sturt said:

I do believe we'll pay tax because we almost have to... it's difficult if you play with the salaries in an Excel sheet to figure how this team contends at a payroll less than the projected $164m (tax threshold).

This I agree with.  We’d have to have a mini fire sale to avoid the tax.  Plus you would need a couple teams under the cap to absorb salary. 

[JayBirdHawk]

28 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

This I agree with.  We’d have to have a mini fire sale to avoid the tax.  Plus you would need a couple teams under the cap to absorb salary. 

Mini firesale? Maybe or maybe not. Here's my quick down and dirty idea (yes I know the other team has to agree)

$174.9 million in salary including the number #15 pick and 15 players.

Release Bruno and Mathews for $4.5 mil so that leaves $170.4 million. 

Trade CC ($21.1 mil) to LAC for Zubac ($10.9 mil) and Covington ($11.6mil). We will need to reroute Covington to another team, I'm sure he has a market.

That leaves the Hawks with $170.4-$21.1+$10.9 = $160.2 million and under the Luxury Tax with 14 players.

Move OO into the starting lineup, Zubac backs him up. Sign a vet min for player #15.

[Final_quest]

29 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Mini firesale? Maybe or maybe not. Here's my quick down and dirty idea (yes I know the other team has to agree)

$174.9 million in salary including the number #15 pick and 15 players.

Release Bruno and Mathews for $4.5 mil so that leaves $170.4 million. 

Trade CC ($21.1 mil) to LAC for Zubac ($10.9 mil) and Covington ($11.6mil). We will need to reroute Covington to another team, I'm sure he has a market.

That leaves the Hawks with $170.4-$21.1+$10.9 = $160.2 million and under the Luxury Tax with 14 players.

Move OO into the starting lineup, Zubac backs him up. Sign a vet min for player #15.

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.  

[sturt]

49 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

(yes I know the other team has to agree)... Trade CC ($21.1 mil) to LAC for Zubac ($10.9 mil) and Covington ($11.6mil).

Okay. So why does LAC do this. And in the interest of critical thinking, why doesn't  LAC do this in your opinion? Let's see if we can agree on something(s).

 

49 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

We will need to reroute Covington to another team, I'm sure he has a market.

As long as we're willing to send draft picks out to help conjure up that market, sure. Just like how we finally got JDay off the roster.

Covington is going to be 34 this season, and while he's not in the same decline as JDay was, he's coming off a season when he only played in slightly more than half of LAC's games, totaling less than 1000 minutes for the first time since his rookie season... and his salary is 2X the concern.

It was right to not share your optimism about JDay's market, and same applies here.

And this is key to your vision... if you can't move Covington, then the whole premise of getting beneath the tax line falls flat.

Where am I wrong in that?

 

49 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Zubac

So, Zubac checks your box as a bad ass big? One who, again referencing Koonin, can dribble and get his own shot?

You sure about that?

Fwiw, RAPTOR considers Zubac's defense these last 3 seasons approximately equivalent to Capela's. And. Clearly a step behind Capela's offense.

But maybe you're suggesting that Yeka's offense is going to so surpass Capela's in a starting role, that it all balances out (?).

Plausible. I'd have to study it more.

 

I applaud the effort, Jay.