2023-24 Insider Information Thread

[Mikey]

15 minutes ago, Final_quest said:

I encourage everyone to listen to the latest pod from ATL and 29 about roster deconstruction and reconstruction.  They talked about trying to "win" a Murray trade as in looking like we win on paper but failing to address the functional changes the roster needs.  Specifically mentioning that Ingram would look closer to a win, but may not help us become a better two way team.  Jones or Murphy might look like losing a trade, but could get our roster in a better situation to have a strong POA defensive unit.  

It was a refreshing conversation.  Roster deconstruction and reconstruction is a much better focus than getting hung up on if Tony will pay for another bench player.  We're not gonna win by masking roster flaws with MLE bench players.  We have three starters Capela, Murray, and Hunter that we have to look at making a painful transition to something that fits better.  That's where I hope and optimistically believe the front office is focused.

See these posts as well:

Expensive isn't just spending.  It's also the draft capital and players required to make a move.  We could have "paid" for Siakam and given up draft picks, Jalen, Okongwu, and/or Bufkin.  

What can we do with our cap situation, draft capital, and available players to reconstruct the roster?  That's the essential question of the off season.  

I've been trying to tell you guys this from the jump but every Murray trade on here you guys reject. They have to be okay losing the trade on paper because they overpaid and from a talent standpoint Murray isn't gonna return a player on paper as good as him. But can he return a much better fit and or additional assets to use.

It is about building the best TEAM. not collecting the most talent

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

and a rising star big in OO

Ya, people want to ship off my boy but I say..

DJ…Cap… Hunter first..

[kg01]

1 minute ago, Mikey said:

I've been trying to tell you guys this from the jump but every Murray trade on here you guys reject. They have to be okay losing the trade on paper because they overpaid and from a talent standpoint Murray isn't gonna return a player on paper as good as him. But can he return a much better fit and or additional assets to use.

It is about building the best TEAM. not collecting the most talent

It's possible to "lose" a Murray trade on paper but actually win it.

[Spud2nique]

2 minutes ago, kg01 said:

It's possible to "lose" a Murray trade on paper but actually win it.

I want the Hershel Walker trade package from Minny… GIMME AWWWLLL THAT YA GOT!

[Mikey]

5 minutes ago, kg01 said:

It's possible to "lose" a Murray trade on paper but actually win it.

correct. getting someone like Herb is likely a lose on paper by many people (not me) but they will be a much better team if they land a player like that

[JayBirdHawk]

Wait a minute, but don't most squawkers prefer Herb or Jones over Ingram? I'm confused . 

[kg01]

11 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Wait a minute, but don't most squawkers prefer Herb or Jones over Ingram? I'm confused . 

I think some are thinking we could get both.  I disagree and think Jones is the prize but will be unavailable.  

[AHF]

31 minutes ago, Mikey said:

I've been trying to tell you guys this from the jump but every Murray trade on here you guys reject. They have to be okay losing the trade on paper because they overpaid and from a talent standpoint Murray isn't gonna return a player on paper as good as him. But can he return a much better fit and or additional assets to use.

It is about building the best TEAM. not collecting the most talent

This makes sense with a Herb Jones or Trey Murphy trade.  That is absolutely not the case with the LA or NY trade scenarios that were heavily discussed at the trade deadline.  A trade like DJM for Quentin Grimes and a first round pick would be losing from every possible perspective and would lead to a team going in the crapper.  

A trade like Jones or Murphy might look like a losing trade to casual fans but would be a better team.  Grimes and a late first or a first that comes years down the road would be a disaster for the next 3 years if your goal is to improve the team's record.

[kg01]

1 hour ago, JeffS17 said:

Any trade that includes McCollum is unserious.  I would rather just develop our bench guards than have him suck up minutes from players that need to develop.  He's not a winning player and his fit with Trae would be horrendous -- they would set new lows for how bad a back court can be defensively.

I (shockingly) agree with all this, jeffe.

Honestly, if McCollum is in a Murray deal, I need Murphy and Jones to offset the negative value.  Then I probably immediately cut or trade McCollum. 

[AHF]

1 minute ago, kg01 said:

I (shockingly) agree with all this, jeffe.

Honestly, if McCollum is in a Murray deal, I need Murphy and Jones to offset the negative value.  Then I probably immediately cut or trade McCollum. 

If you trade for McCollum it is with a plan to flip him or Bogi to another team.  (I'd rather have Bogi).  I would definitely take McCollum if I could get Jones and Murphy.  I would pay another team to take him if needed.

[KB21]

51 minutes ago, AHF said:

This makes sense with a Herb Jones or Trey Murphy trade.  That is absolutely not the case with the LA or NY trade scenarios that were heavily discussed at the trade deadline.  A trade like DJM for Quentin Grimes and a first round pick would be losing from every possible perspective and would lead to a team going in the crapper.  

A trade like Jones or Murphy might look like a losing trade to casual fans but would be a better team.  Grimes and a late first or a first that comes years down the road would be a disaster for the next 3 years if your goal is to improve the team's record.

Yep.  

[Mikey]

1 hour ago, AHF said:

This makes sense with a Herb Jones or Trey Murphy trade.  That is absolutely not the case with the LA or NY trade scenarios that were heavily discussed at the trade deadline.  A trade like DJM for Quentin Grimes and a first round pick would be losing from every possible perspective and would lead to a team going in the crapper.  

A trade like Jones or Murphy might look like a losing trade to casual fans but would be a better team.  Grimes and a late first or a first that comes years down the road would be a disaster for the next 3 years if your goal is to improve the team's record.

except the deals werent only grimes and one pick lol. multiple versions were discussed and having additional picks to improve the team is not a bad thing

[REHawksFan]

2 hours ago, Final_quest said:

Jones or Murphy might look like losing a trade, but could get our roster in a better situation to have a strong POA defensive unit.  

Very few people, if any, would consider netting Jones or Murphy for Murray being a losing trade.  I get the point, but come on now.  The majority of this board strongly covets Herb Jones and Trey Murphy.  

Now if you tell me we gave up Trae for that, then yeah, that's losing.  And not just in the public opinion.  It's losing in reality.  But Murray?  Trade him and get me Herb Jones.  

[kg01]

20 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Very few people, if any, would consider netting Jones or Murphy for Murray being a losing trade.  I get the point, but come on now.  The majority of this board strongly covets Herb Jones and Trey Murphy.  

Now if you tell me we gave up Trae for that, then yeah, that's losing.  And not just in the public opinion.  It's losing in reality.  But Murray?  Trade him and get me Herb Jones.  

Know what?  I could see our (cl)ownership thinking trading Trae+ for Zion would be a good deal.  Because they'd assume the offcourt money and ticket sales would be a 'win' or a non-loss for their pockets.

It wouldn't change our prospects as a team since Zion would be gone as much as he'd be here. 

On the flipside, that would make NOP a title contender.

 

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

except the deals werent only grimes and one pick lol. multiple versions were discussed and having additional picks to improve the team is not a bad thing

Who else? The expiring contract of Fournier?

We're still waiting for the Huerter pick from 2 years ago to improve the team.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, Mikey said:

except the deals werent only grimes and one pick lol. multiple versions were discussed and having additional picks to improve the team is not a bad thing

They were absolute garbage offers that were reported.  I invite you to post those that weren't.

[AHF]

12 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Know what?  I could see our (cl)ownership thinking trading Trae+ for Zion would be a good deal.  Because they'd assume the offcourt money and ticket sales would be a 'win' or a non-loss for their pockets.

It wouldn't change our prospects as a team since Zion would be gone as much as he'd be here. 

On the flipside, that would make NOP a title contender.

 

Zion has been missing so much that I don't think you can really make a case for him as a huge ticket draw but you certainly can't make a case that he is on par with Trae in that regard.  

That is what happens when you miss 53% of your teams games since you've been in the NBA.  

Plus just look at the anemic attendance numbers and how connected Zion seems to be to the attendance numbers (hint: -- not an important factor):  

NO attendance 2023-24 27th in the league (Zion played 70 games)

NO attendance 2022-23 26th in the league (Zion only played 22 games)

NO attendance 2021-22 24th in the league  (Zion missed the entire season)

 

 

 

[AtLaS]

Love the idea of Murphy or Jones with Ingram.  I'm not sure NO is going to give up Ingram plus one of those guys, but it would be a great fit as we'd have a tall, long team around Trae.

Jones is a great defender but I'm not convinced he's a great shooter yet.  The previous 2 seasons he was at 33% from 3, this year seemingly the outlier at 41% and it was on low volume. 

Murphy has much more potential offensively as a creator and higher volume shooter, but will never be the defender that Jones is.

Either way I'd be happy as long with any combo of these guys as long we get someone else that can get a bucket besides Trae.  If we are trading Murray we need another offensive creator somewhere.  I think Ingram could be that guy.

[JeffS17]

13 minutes ago, AHF said:

They were absolute garbage offers that were reported.  I invite you to post those that weren't.

Which is why our front office declined those offers.  Yet people here still criticize them for not making enough moves, when these are the types of moves that have been available to us.  I think most of this board is still in somewhat of a denial of how little we could have done the past two years due to Schlenks overpays. Those extension overpays that had long-term ramifications and we're still unwinding them.  We're going to be in such a better place when Clint is off the books, and we get deeper into Hunters extension (his pay relative to the total cap gets smaller every year), particularly knowing that Landry has not made these same mistakes and has been signing reasonable deals.

[kg01]

8 minutes ago, AHF said:

Zion has been missing so much that I don't think you can really make a case for him as a huge ticket draw but you certainly can't make a case that he is on par with Trae in that regard.  

That is what happens when you miss 53% of your teams games since you've been in the NBA.  

Plus just look at the anemic attendance numbers and how connected Zion seems to be to the attendance numbers (hint: -- not an important factor):  

NO attendance 2023-24 27th in the league (Zion played 70 games)

NO attendance 2022-23 26th in the league (Zion only played 22 games)

NO attendance 2021-22 24th in the league  (Zion missed the entire season)

Heard.

I'll remind folks of something I saw last year.  At some point last season, Zion and Lebron had missed the same total career games due to injury.  Only, Lebron was in year 20 and zion was in year 4.

4 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

Love the idea of Murphy or Jones with Ingram.  I'm not sure NO is going to give up Ingram plus one of those guys, but it would be a great fit as we'd have a tall, long team around Trae.

Jones is a great defender but I'm not convinced he's a great shooter yet.  The previous 2 seasons he was at 33% from 3, this year seemingly the outlier at 41% and it was on low volume. 

Murphy has much more potential offensively as a creator and higher volume shooter, but will never be the defender that Jones is.

Either way I'd be happy as long with any combo of these guys as long we get someone else that can get a bucket besides Trae.  If we are trading Murray we need another offensive creator somewhere.  I think Ingram could be that guy.

Agree with a lot of this.  Just wanted to remind folks, iirc, the impetus for NOP moving on from Ingram was to create more pt for Murphy.

So, if we're lucky, it'd be Jones+ for Murray.