2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[JeffS17]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

why would we think about moving anyone in order to mitigate against vague future risks like declining trade value?

The risk, in my opinion, isn't the potential declining value of Capela as much as it is OO is no longer on his rookie scale contract next year and we will have waayyy too much salary tied up at center.  There's a heavy opportunity cost of having a bunch of salary tied up in two guys that cannot be on the court at the same time.  It's not as big of an issue for other positions because most wings/guards can slot into at least 2 different positions, giving you lineup variety and shared minutes.

Waiting until the trade deadline means you have fewer suitors, and waiting until next offseason means you're losing a lot of leverage given teams will understand we have to trade Clint.  Plus there's an argument to be made to having OO play with and develop chemistry with the starters if he is going to be here long term (I sure hope this is the case).  I don't think any of us have the Hawks contending this year and it's largely a reset year, so it would make sense to do that.

All of that of course does not take into account the deals we may or may not have on the table for Capela, so to answer @JayBirdHawk's question, ideally, I would trade Capela (+ Hunter but thats another topic) into 1, maybe 2, high quality rotation pieces that fit better, assuming no superstar type players are available in a consolidation trade.  A stretch 5 backup for OO that could share the court with him in some scenarios would be nice, a quality backup PG for Trae, a quality PF rotation player (that could likely share the court with JJ playing SF when needed), etc.  I don't have a perfect answer to this question because we're in an awkward transitional state right now where a lot of guys are playing for minutes, but those are holes that we could fill that make the entire roster gel better.

[AHF]

11 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

The risk, in my opinion, isn't the potential declining value of Capela as much as it is OO is no longer on his rookie scale contract next year and we will have waayyy too much salary tied up at center.  There's a heavy opportunity cost of having a bunch of salary tied up in two guys that cannot be on the court at the same time.  It's not as big of an issue for other positions because most wings/guards can slot into at least 2 different positions, giving you lineup variety and shared minutes.

Waiting until the trade deadline means you have fewer suitors, and waiting until next offseason means you're losing a lot of leverage given teams will understand we have to trade Clint.  Plus there's an argument to be made to having OO play with and develop chemistry with the starters if he is going to be here long term (I sure hope this is the case).  I don't think any of us have the Hawks contending this year and it's largely a reset year, so it would make sense to do that.

All of that of course does not take into account the deals we may or may not have on the table for Capela, so to answer @JayBirdHawk's question, ideally, I would trade Capela (+ Hunter but thats another topic) into 1, maybe 2, high quality rotation pieces that fit better, assuming no superstar type players are available in a consolidation trade.  A stretch 5 backup for OO that could share the court with him in some scenarios would be nice, a quality backup PG for Trae, a quality PF rotation player (that could likely share the court with JJ playing SF when needed), etc.  I don't have a perfect answer to this question because we're in an awkward transitional state right now where a lot of guys are playing for minutes, but those are holes that we could fill that make the entire roster gel better.

I'm always open to trades with good returns but in the absence of a good offer I'm not taking a bad offer now to avoid theoretical bad offers at the trade deadline or next offseason.  If we find out that we had great offers for CC and passed on them then I think it would be fair to criticize that.  But I haven't seen any evidence of that and so I'm not going to presume that is the case.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, RedDawg#8 said:

My motivation is less about freeing up minutes for OO and more about consolidating to add high end talent.

This I can get behind.

[JayBirdHawk]

38 minutes ago, JeffS17 said:

All of that of course does not take into account the deals we may or may not have on the table for Capela, so to answer @JayBirdHawk's question, ideally, I would trade Capela (+ Hunter but thats another topic) into 1, maybe 2, high quality rotation pieces that fit better, assuming no superstar type players are available in a consolidation trade.  A stretch 5 backup for OO that could share the court with him in some scenarios would be nice, a quality backup PG for Trae, a quality PF rotation player (that could likely share the court with JJ playing SF when needed), etc. 

I'm actually looking for names attached to these hypothetical trades to make it make sense.

Easy to say, we should move him...more difficult in reality in getting a return that makes sense.

[theheroatl]

7 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

This I can get behind.

well yeah.. CC is a good centerpiece for us to upgrade our frontcourt somehow

 

[Spud2nique]

19 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'm actually looking for names attached to these hypothetical trades to make it make sense.

I’m willing to put Capela, Hunter ,Bruno, Mills, Mathews or Matthews on the block for the right players… the right players for me are:

DFS (Dorian)

O’Neill (Rolls Royce)

(too many wangs for the Nets and Quin coached both).

Alex Caruso - Annoying a hell when you’re playing against him but he would excel behind Trae and give us an edge.

 

Last but not least.. OG (my guy from the 17’ draft) I liked him then and now. He wants to dribble and handle the ball more.

I’ll have to mix and match to formulate trades but I would like any of those 4 guys they would fit in well.

Thoughts?

How’s that @JayBirdHawk?  

[Spud2nique]

2 hours ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Im not re-hashing the Siakim noise, but an All Star level forward or big is the most ideal addition to this roster. 

CC+ a youngster with upside ( AJ/JJ/Bufkin, etc..) and filler or I’d even do CC+Dre and filler for the right piece coming back.

What about OG? Always loved dude since Indiana.

[JayBirdHawk]

36 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

DFS (Dorian)

O’Neill (Rolls Royce)

8ppg players? And we become a very small team?

[TheFuzz]

For OG? Sure. Getting OG won't be easy though. He is a free agent next year, so dealing Hunter/Capela for quality expiring (Hield is interesting) I could get behind.

I think there's a reasonable chance JJ+OO is a very high level 4/5 combo as soon as this year if they play to their defensive potential. Offensively they're very strong, defensively they've got all the tools

[marco102]

2 hours ago, JeffS17 said:

The risk, in my opinion, isn't the potential declining value of Capela as much as it is OO is no longer on his rookie scale contract next year and we will have waayyy too much salary tied up at center.  There's a heavy opportunity cost of having a bunch of salary tied up in two guys that cannot be on the court at the same time.  It's not as big of an issue for other positions because most wings/guards can slot into at least 2 different positions, giving you lineup variety and shared minutes.

Waiting until the trade deadline means you have fewer suitors, and waiting until next offseason means you're losing a lot of leverage given teams will understand we have to trade Clint.  Plus there's an argument to be made to having OO play with and develop chemistry with the starters if he is going to be here long term (I sure hope this is the case).  I don't think any of us have the Hawks contending this year and it's largely a reset year, so it would make sense to do that.

All of that of course does not take into account the deals we may or may not have on the table for Capela, so to answer @JayBirdHawk's question, ideally, I would trade Capela (+ Hunter but thats another topic) into 1, maybe 2, high quality rotation pieces that fit better, assuming no superstar type players are available in a consolidation trade.  A stretch 5 backup for OO that could share the court with him in some scenarios would be nice, a quality backup PG for Trae, a quality PF rotation player (that could likely share the court with JJ playing SF when needed), etc.  I don't have a perfect answer to this question because we're in an awkward transitional state right now where a lot of guys are playing for minutes, but those are holes that we could fill that make the entire roster gel better.

Those of us in the keep Capela corner aren't against trading him. 

We just aren't for trading him for the sake of trading him and not getting something in equal or greater value in return. 

It's easy to say yes let's trade him, but what's the return on him? 

Trade Capela for a 2nd round pick and have Bruno as your back up just because? 

No, thanks to that. 

Edit:  Also not saying your point isn't valid. We will lose negotiating power the longer we wait.  The salary cap rising may help us out a bit. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by marco102

[mountainjim]

I am in the keep JJ corner. (saw him included as a trade piece in a post above)

[RedDawg#8]

2 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

What about OG? Always loved dude since Indiana.

Nothing against OG, I am sure he is a great person, but, I am fatigued by the constant hype to try and acquire him over the years. 

That, and I do not want to take another phone call from the Raptors or Masai anymore. Him and Danny Ainge can go screw off somewhere as far as I am concerned.
 

 

[kg01]

6 minutes ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Nothing against OG, I am sure he is a great person, but, I am fatigued by the constant hype to try and acquire him over the years. 

That, and I do not want to take another phone call from the Raptors or Masai anymore. Him and Danny Ainge can go screw off somewhere as far as I am concerned.
 

 

Folks wanna pay OG more than Hunters getting?  For similar production and availability? Interesting ....

#kgvsspud2.0 

[marco102]

2 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Folks wanna pay OG more than Hunters getting?  For similar production and availability? Interesting ....

#kgvsspud2.0 

[gurpilo]

We don't need to trade Capela just to trade him. We have 3 good frontcourt players but they are not a good fit.

JJ-Capela is probably the best duo, although they lack size and spacing but I would say they might be average on the league.

JJ-OO is probably next but they clearly lack size and the spacing is not good.

OO-Cap is a real strong defensive duo but the offense.... If OO can play PF well might be the best duo but his shooting is Work in Progress.

At the end I think JJ and OO are keepers, if OO can develop his Game as PF he might be elite due to his defensive fundamentales but as a C he is going to have real problema with some matchups as Embiid, Zubac, Jokic, even Ayton, Adams, Gobert, Allen, Nurkic, Robinson, Kessler, Valanciunas...

Ideally we need to change Capela for a stretch C with size. Simeone as Myles Turner, he would be perfect fit for OO and JJ.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, kg01 said:

Folks wanna pay OG more than Hunters getting?  For similar production and availability? Interesting ....

#kgvsspud2.0 

OG is a significant step up so I would pay more. (While the differences aren't huge in any one area they add up:  OG scores more, shoots better, passes better, rebounds better, way more disruptive on D, etc).  The real question is how much more would be needed to keep him.  They are the same age so that isn't a factor.

But you can't have both of them so if you are dealing for OG then Hunter has to go as part of that deal.

[Spud2nique]

2 hours ago, RedDawg#8 said:

Him and Danny Ainge can go screw off somewhere as far as I am concerned.

I was with you till you went “like” huntin here  

[kg01]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

OG is a significant step up so I would pay more. (While the differences aren't huge in any one area they add up:  OG scores more, shoots better, passes better, rebounds better, way more disruptive on D, etc).  The real question is how much more would be needed to keep him.  They are the same age so that isn't a factor.

But you can't have both of them so if you are dealing for OG then Hunter has to go as part of that deal.

Ok, now explain how to account for the fact that he wants a bigger role in the offense.  Go ... 

[TheFuzz]

10 hours ago, kg01 said:

Ok, now explain how to account for the fact that he wants a bigger role in the offense.  Go ... 

I hesitate here, too, but maybe in a Snyder motion offense he can get the touches he wants. I think he's a play finisher rather than playmaker though

[Diesel]

On 10/18/2023 at 7:28 AM, TheFuzz said:

Don't know if this has been said yet, but I think CC is professional enough to come off the bench IF OO earns it (I'm not totally convinced he has tbh, his defense needs to be good). CC is cheap enough in the new cap to be a bench player and good enough we shouldn't just dump him. 

There is a growing band of absurdness here that is so monolithic in it's thinking.   The thought is that in order for OO to do well, CC must be traded for whatever we can get.   It's the either/or policy that rules around here.  Those that subscribe to this absurdness does not like to consider Both/And and they don't consider merit. 

You have spoken the truth here @TheFuzz.   CC and OO can share time at the Center position in this upcoming cap and OO has not earned the starting position because his defense and rebounding is not even close to what CC provides.   Is he a good player, yes, he is a good player.  However, his contract or his draft position should NOT determine what happens in the rotation.