Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

Colonel Schlenk a Wiz


Spud2nique

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, AHF said:

He was let go so he could be replaced by Landry (with the owner's son taking a more prominent role along with Kyle Korver).  Basically the proverbial "change in direction."  When that happens, it is usually met with a press release about the person leaving to spend time with their family or to generically pursue other opportunities as a polite way of saying they were fired.  

Anyone who thought he did a terrible job as GM (as some did) is certainly fine to hold that against him, but my personal view is that he did an excellent job and was one of the better GMs the Hawks have had in my lifetime.  Even if I didn't think so, I would still generally wish him well in his next job just like I do with Nate and Nate's staff even though I was glad we made those changes.

Eh...I didn't like how it went down with the FO and I'm not sure Landry will come close to what TS did in his time in Atlanta. That said, he left some meat on the bone and I guess most GM's do.  I'm neither here nor there with him being gone though.  It's now up to the new brass to validate their views.  Been a Hawk fan this long so this too shall pass.  One way or the other.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 minutes ago, deester11 said:

Eh...I didn't like how it went down with the FO and I'm not sure Landry will come close to what TS did in his time in Atlanta. That said, he left some meat on the bone and I guess most GM's do.  I'm neither here nor there with him being gone though.  It's now up to the new brass to validate their views.  Been a Hawk fan this long so this too shall pass.  One way or the other.

No arguments here.  I'm definitely hoping it proceeds as an upgrade into the next phase of this team and not a step towards bottoming out as happened when Ferry was ousted and Budcox installed in his place.  That was a disaster.  Landry, KK, and Snyder need to make sure history doesn't repeat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
34 minutes ago, deester11 said:

Eh...I didn't like how it went down with the FO and I'm not sure Landry will come close to what TS did in his time in Atlanta. That said, he left some meat on the bone and I guess most GM's do.  I'm neither here nor there with him being gone though.  It's now up to the new brass to validate their views.  Been a Hawk fan this long so this too shall pass.  One way or the other.

Summons up the hypothetical....

Let's say for the sake of the question that this roster gets to the promised land next season with only one change of any significance to the rotation, and that Bey (obtained after Schlenk was gone) remains.

Who gets the most credit for that achievement? The former GM... the current GM... or, yes, the owner?

 

 

45 minutes ago, AHF said:

Nate

You're to be forgiven, but might need to make a mental note going forward to clarify that you're referring to Demon Nate.

For many if not most, now when they hear, simply, "Nate," their minds go to Nate Knight, that highly regarded former Hawk out of Bill & Mary, having cleansed their minds otherwise from what they consider the darkest period in 65 years of Hawks basketball.

 

you-know-im-right.gif&ehk=rCn%2BHUppqPua

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
33 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Consider this me hijacking the thread to call for the reinstatement of Danny Ferry!!!

There's an argument that says Danny should've instead chosen to offend by posting gansta pics on his Instagram.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sturt said:

Summons up the hypothetical....

Let's say for the sake of the question that this roster gets to the promised land next season with only one change of any significance to the rotation, and that Bey (obtained after Schlenk was gone) remains.

Who gets the most credit for that achievement? The former GM... the current GM... or, yes, the owner?

 

  

You're to be forgiven, but might need to make a mental note going forward to clarify that you're referring to Demon Nate.

For many if not most, now when they hear, simply, "Nate," their minds go to Nate Knight, that highly regarded former Hawk out of Bill & Mary, having cleansed their minds otherwise from what they consider the darkest period in 65 years of Hawks basketball.

 

you-know-im-right.gif&ehk=rCn%2BHUppqPua

 

 

 

 

TS..gets 40%, LF, Ressler KK 60%.  FAIR? LOL...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2023 at 1:07 PM, AHF said:

I thought hw was much more hit than miss.  You covered the misses but:

Trae was a great pick at #5 (even if you consider Luka the superior player and worth the lottery pick price TS could still have done the trade and then taken Mo Bamba, Wendell Carter, Kevin Knox, etc. instead)

JC was a great pick at #19

Huerter was a good pick at #19

OO was a good pick at #6

Jalen was a great pick at #20

AJ was a great pick at #16

Name a better run of draft picks in our history.  TS probably had more success in drafts than any other GM in Atlanta history .  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/2/2023 at 1:07 PM, AHF said:

I thought hw was much more hit than miss.  You covered the misses but:

Trae was a great pick at #5 (even if you consider Luka the superior player and worth the lottery pick price TS could still have done the trade and then taken Mo Bamba, Wendell Carter, Kevin Knox, etc. instead)

JC was a great pick at #19

Huerter was a good pick at #19

OO was a good pick at #6

Jalen was a great pick at #20

AJ was a great pick at #16

The jury is sort of still out on JJ and OO... Neither have done all that much. OO really didn't improve that much this year. JJ hasn't proved himself to be much more than a lower end bench player, but they both still have youth on their side. Aj had a decent rookie year.

So, my opinion could change in the future.

However, I don't think saying that Travis could have done worse than Trae is a great argument.

The team has some Really overpaid guys.... The team overperformed for one playoff run in all of the time Travis was here. The rest is mediocre at best.

Travis seemed to be better at mid first round picks than he was at lotto picks. I think that is a big problem to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Plainview1981 said:

 

Travis seemed to be better at mid first round picks than he was at lotto picks. I think that is a big problem to have.

That’s only a problem if you’re constantly selecting lotto picks. And let’s be honest, if that’s the case then you have other bigger issues. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bird_dirt said:

That’s only a problem if you’re constantly selecting lotto picks. And let’s be honest, if that’s the case then you have other bigger issues. 

Missing on lotto is one way to stat mediocre or bad. That's what this team has done.

They had a good second half a few years ago because Schlenk fired a bad coach that he hired and the team got hot under the honeymoon phase of a new coach. Then back downward since. 

 

 

Edited by Plainview1981
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Plainview1981 said:

The rest is mediocre at best.

you're referring to the years after he inherited the pile of hot garbage that BudCox created. He turned that crap around faster than most rebuilds we've seen. Remember the 2000s? Have you heard of the Orlando Magic? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2023 at 2:34 PM, warcore said:

you're referring to the years after he inherited the pile of hot garbage that BudCox created. He turned that crap around faster than most rebuilds we've seen. Remember the 2000s? Have you heard of the Orlando Magic? 

He didn't really turn much around. The Hawks success during his tenure boiled down to a few hot months of play from a team that was happy to see a bad coach go. This team has been dreadful to watch since the playoff run. 

 

Say that the Hawks are better than they were in the 2000's is a pretty low bar.

No, a gm will never be perfect, but his drafting record is mixed at best, the Hawks were overall a mediocre team. Clint was a nice addition, but eh.... I'm not seeing what was all that good 

Yeah, it could have been worse over the last 5 years, but... eh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Plainview1981 said:

He didn't really turn much around. The Hawks success during his tenure boiled down to a few hot months of play from a team that was happy to see a bad coach go. This team has been dreadful to watch since the playoff run. 

 

Say that the Hawks are better than they were in the 2000's is a pretty low bar.

No, a gm will never be perfect, but his drafting record is mixed at best, the Hawks were overall a mediocre team. Clint was a nice addition, but eh.... I'm not seeing what was all that good 

Yeah, it could have been worse over the last 5 years, but... eh.

It wasn't just better than the Billy Knight era.  The following era we were drafting guys like John Jenkins, Adreian Payne, and Jordan Crawford.  Do we even need to go into the Babcock era of Hawk's drafts?

Travis draft record with Collins, Huerter, Trae, got us a core that took us to a winning team in two years.  The only big swing and miss was Cam and he at least traded him for another 1st before it was too late.  Literally every other pick is defendable and useful.  Basically five starters with JJ and AJ still on deck as at least rotation level players that could become starters.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Final_quest said:

It wasn't just better than the Billy Knight era.  The following era we were drafting guys like John Jenkins, Adreian Payne, and Jordan Crawford.  Do we even need to go into the Babcock era of Hawk's drafts?

Travis draft record with Collins, Huerter, Trae, got us a core that took us to a winning team in two years.  The only big swing and miss was Cam and he at least traded him for another 1st before it was too late.  Literally every other pick is defendable and useful.  Basically five starters with JJ and AJ still on deck as at least rotation level players that could become starters.  

We just have different ways of looking at it. I don't really call what the Hawks have done the last two years "winning". This team was (IMO) Winning for a few months. Leading to and in that playoff run a few years ago. That's the time frame in which this was a winning team. Fighting for a bottom seed with the newr rules and mediocre records isn't winning to me.

Yeah, Pete Babcock didn't draft that well, but I don't remember him having as many higher picks... And overall, the teams during the late 90's were better than the Hawks under Schlenk. 

 

I just can't look at the whole picture under Schlenk and see this as a era of winning.

It's basically a 41-44 kind of team the last 3 years in a league with a lot of parity.

I understand that Schlenk took over a rebuilding situation, but I'm not confident that Travis was going to be able to get the Hawks to being a top seed kind of team. Based on what I saw from him. Even if you come up with reasons for his draft picks, he wasn't able to build that kind of roster that could get to the top in the conference.

All of these picks he has made in his time here and Hunter is the 2nd best player. Hunter in an era in the past would be a 12 PPG 3D role player

Edited by Plainview1981
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 minutes ago, Plainview1981 said:

Yeah, Pete Babcock didn't draft that well, but I don't remember him having as many higher picks... And overall, the teams during the late 90's were better than the Hawks under Schlenk. 

Babcock was brutally bad.

#3 Traded for Shareef

#6 Dermar Johnson

#8 Traded for Lorenzen Wright (along with #18)

#9 Stacy Augmon

#10 Rumeal Robinson

#10 Adam Keefe

#10 Jason Terry

#15 Anthony Avent

#15 Doug Edwards

#16 Alan Henderson

#17 Cal Bowdler

#18 Traded for Lorenzen Wright

#20 Roshown McLeod

#20 Dion Glover

#22 Ed Gray

#28 Priest Lauderdale

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Plainview1981 said:

We just have different ways of looking at it. I don't really call what the Hawks have done the last two years "winning". This team was (IMO) Winning for a few months. Leading to and in that playoff run a few years ago. That's the time frame in which this was a winning team. Fighting for a bottom seed with the newr rules and mediocre records isn't winning to me.

Yeah, Pete Babcock didn't draft that well, but I don't remember him having as many higher picks... And overall, the teams during the late 90's were better than the Hawks under Schlenk. 

 

I just can't look at the whole picture under Schlenk and see this as a era of winning.

It's basically a 41-44 kind of team the last 3 years in a league with a lot of parity.

I understand that Schlenk took over a rebuilding situation, but I'm not confident that Travis was going to be able to get the Hawks to being a top seed kind of team. Based on what I saw from him. Even if you come up with reasons for his draft picks, he wasn't able to build that kind of roster that could get to the top in the conference.

All of these picks he has made in his time here and Hunter is the 2nd best player. Hunter in an era in the past would be a 12 PPG 3D role player

I want to add that OO has the talent, but seems content with just being a productive player. Maybe Snyder can get him to care about achieving more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AHF said:

Babcock was brutally bad.

#3 Traded for Shareef

#6 Dermar Johnson

#8 Traded for Lorenzen Wright (along with #18)

#9 Stacy Augmon

#10 Rumeal Robinson

#10 Adam Keefe

#10 Jason Terry

#15 Anthony Avent

#15 Doug Edwards

#16 Alan Henderson

#17 Cal Bowdler

#18 Traded for Lorenzen Wright

#20 Roshown McLeod

#20 Dion Glover

#22 Ed Gray

#28 Priest Lauderdale

We all know the terrible moves Pete made. 

He still overall had better teams in the late 90's than what Schlenk fielded.

If we look at the era Schlenk has lead the team it has been a 41-44 kinda team during the best years the last few years, and the team is currently a mess.

It's not that great or even really good.

Even if he had been given 3 more years, I see no reason to think he would be able to take the team to the next level.

 

Edited by Plainview1981
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
7 minutes ago, Plainview1981 said:

We all know the terrible moves Pete made. 

He still overall had better teams in the late 90's than what Schlenk fielded.

If we look at the era Schlenk has lead the team it has been a 41-44 kinda team during the best years the last few years, and the team is currently a mess.

It's not that great or even really good.

Even if he had been given 3 more years, I see no reason to think he would be able to take the team to the next level.

 

First, Schlenk's team went deeper in the playoffs and had a higher playoff winning % than Babcock's.

Second, do you think that just maybe Babcock's success owed more than inheriting Doc Rivers, Kevin Willis, Dominique Wilkins and others than it did to his own moves?

Babcock inherited a team that won:

50 games in 86

57 games in 87

50 games in 88

52 games in 89

And then took them from there to win:

41 games in 90

43 games in 91

38 games in 92

41 games in 93

 

I just don't see how this is a favorable comparison between TS and Babcock in any way.

  • Like 1
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...