Is it naive to

[NBASupes]

3 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

That should not be a big thing as that is stating the Obvious.  Every player needs 'help' even the biggest stars. 

Considering the rumors, it's a big deal. 

[JayBirdHawk]

14 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

They didn't want to say it but they threw the season from a FO stance to see what they had and what they wanted to move forward with. Trae could have played through the injury but this season wasn't worth it. 

 No no no

All offseason and the start of the season they sold us on 'avoiding the playin'. 

Then as soon as DJ was trade eligible- all the rumors started.

Then it was playing DJ and Bogi 40+ minutes to try and win games down the stretch.

Then it was all we gotta do is get to the playin and make the 8th spot. Why bring Trae back but not sign Vit if you want to win?

What they said vs what they did just seemed directionless. Just floating along with a broken rudder going wherever the current took them.

I'm not sold.

[JayBirdHawk]

41 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

They didn't want to say it but they threw the season from a FO stance to see what they had and what they wanted to move forward with

One other thing to add...if they were throwing the season, should have started OO once JJ returned from his wrist injury. I said time and again, we needed to see what that pairing looked like and what we had in OO to make a more informed decision going into the offseason.

[NBASupes]

3 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

 No no no

All offseason and the start of the season they sold us on 'avoiding the playin'. 

Then as soon as DJ was trade eligible- all the rumors started.

Then it was playing DJ and Bogi 40+ minutes to try and win games down the stretch.

Then it was all we gotta do is get to the playin and make the 8th spot. Why bring Trae back but not sign Vit if you want to win?

What they said vs what they did just seemed directionless. Just floating along with a broken rudder going wherever the current took them.

I'm not sold.

They did think they would win early on but I am talking Jan and ASB

[AHF]

8 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

One other thing to add...if they were throwing the season, should have started OO once JJ returned from his wrist injury. I said time and again, we needed to see what that pairing looked like and what we had in OO to make a more informed decision going into the offseason.

And you were right.  Some posters are advocating OO as a starter but we got a handful of injury starts for him and that is it.   Not nearly enough to get a meaningful sample.  Still an unknown as a starter unless you are willing to buy in with like 5 games worth of information in which case you were probably buying in with zero games.

We didn’t see any extended run of Hunter at the 2 or 4 if you like him there for the future.   No extended run of JJ at the 3 if you like him there. 
 

This played out very much like they were going for it all season.  When JJ, OO and Trae were all hurt late in the season the writing was on the wall but we played guys a dangerous amount of minutes as if we cared a ton about making the playoffs then we crippled the playoff team by not bringing Vit in.

There was no consistent plan.

[sturt]

13 hours ago, AHF said:

This post is so good, Jay.  Hawks seem incapable of picking a direction and sticking with it.

By "Hawks," you mean "owner?"

There's an epicenter to it all, no?

[macdaddy]

Quin, Landry, players, want to be successful.  So there's always a chance.  Is this organization set up to become an perennial elite team.  Hell no.  We know that already.  But we have 2 studs on the team, reasonable payroll, and a few trade chips.   There's no reason we can't be a 50 win team.   We have to maximize the Trae years because it's foolish to think we're going to move on from him without going back to the lottery for a bit. 

[AHF]

23 hours ago, sturt said:

By "Hawks," you mean "owner?"

There's an epicenter to it all, no?

No.  I don't think Ressler was demanding that DJM play dangerously high minutes down the stretch of the season or that he was dictating what the team would do with Vit.  It is more than just Ressler, imo.

[sturt]

On 4/20/2024 at 3:58 PM, JayBirdHawk said:

Only if they are WILLING to do the hard work and have a singularly focus to put the best possible team on the floor.

TPE and MLE gotta be in uniform.

Pick a direction, stay the course, and don't be distracted with 'stuff'. 

Reminder we started the season with them telling us: avoid the play-in, then by the deadline when they made no trades  it was 'development'  and roster evaluation' (but yet was playing Bogi and Murray a ton of minutes), then at the play-in it was, let's try to win and get into the 8th spot but then they didn't sign Vit to be eligible to play.

Say one thing but actions says another. A very confusing, non directional season!

@AHF, I understand, but that's not as congruent with the above original comment you complimented as is my assertion. And yes, the sh!t flows downhill. It cannot be a surprise when, given the fundamental goal of the big kahuna is a healthy spreadsheet, that you have trickle-down effect on month to month, week to week, day to day goals.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, sturt said:

@AHF, I understand, but that's not as congruent with the above original comment you complimented as is my assertion. And yes, the sh!t flows downhill. It cannot be a surprise when, given the fundamental goal of the big kahuna is a healthy spreadsheet, that you have trickle-down effect on month to month, week to week, day to day goals.

I think Ressler has been a problem with sticking to a plan if media reports about his role in certain transactions are credible.  So I don't absolve him.

But I do think our front office doesn't do a good job of this either such as with the items I mentioned that were entirely within their purview.  

So I would say we have a problem with failing to identify and commit to a plan and that is a product of both our ownership and our management.  That combined group of decisionmakers is who I refer to when I say "Hawks" and not merely one or the other.

[REHawksFan]

20 minutes ago, AHF said:

I think Ressler has been a problem with sticking to a plan if media reports about his role in certain transactions are credible.  So I don't absolve him.

But I do think our front office doesn't do a good job of this either such as with the items I mentioned that were entirely within their purview.  

So I would say we have a problem with failing to identify and commit to a plan and that is a product of both our ownership and our management.  That combined group of decisionmakers is who I refer to when I say "Hawks" and not merely one or the other.

This is going to sound insane and I'm fully aware of it, but hear me out....

The Hawks making a run to the ECF is the singular event that set off a chain reaction of bad decisions.  Had the Hawks only made the 2nd round and then lost to Philly or had they lost to NYK, it is highly likely that they don't decide to level up on their rebuild timeline and start skipping steps.  It is also at least possible that they don't hire Nate to be the full time HC and who knows who they bring in.  

But going as far as they did earlier than expected reset everyone's expectations.  They hired Nate (an unequivocally average, old school coach), raised the expectations to build off the ECF run, and short cut a lot of the typical steps in the rebuild (like allowing time for internal growth).  The next year they got bounced by Miami when they didn't have a 2nd ball handler so they did the reactionary thing and traded the future for DJ and here we are.  

The point is, I think the ECF run is the thing that started the FO down the road of changing directions.  And it's highly likely that this decision didn't come with universal acceptance within the organization.  So they start changing plans mid stream, hire more people with more voices, and it's chaotic and rudderless.  Or so it seems.  

Create plan

Start plan

Continue plan

Implement plan

Complete plan

 

Deviate from plan is not part of the process. But making the ECF in Year 3 of the plan was also not part of the process.  So here we are.   

 

Edited April 22 by REHawksFan

[sturt]

18 minutes ago, AHF said:

So I would say we have a problem with failing to identify and commit to a plan and that is a product of both our ownership and our management.  That combined group of decisionmakers is who I refer to when I say "Hawks" and not merely one or the other.

 

So. You believe Tony Ressler is that hands-off? I don't think you do. We've talked a lot about this.

Really, you don't think that Landry Fields spends a lot of his time trying to decipher what's going to please or displease his boss, and keep himself from being the next in the series of GMs that Ressler gives up on, claiming frustration b/c of reason X, Y or Z? You don't think that when Nicky says something in a meeting that it's not taken as-if Moses relaying what he heard on Mount Sinai... and thus, words of wisdom for the "decision makers," quote/unquote?

The dysfunction, my friend, is innate in the way that the owner has set up the org chart and culture. I've experienced this kind of situation more than once (unfortunately).

You cannot not have dysfunction. Because it's designed that way because the top dog has his/her priorities.

It's arguably even a little worse than when you have explicit and transparent owner meddling, because in addition to the owner's meddling, you add this layer where there's a perceived need to hide the open secret.

 

 

[Atlantaholic]

On 4/20/2024 at 8:22 PM, AHF said:

This post is so good, Jay.  Hawks seem incapable of picking a direction and sticking with it.

It's been the biggest reason from the downgrade from Schlenk. You can criticize a lot of moves and picks from Schlenk but the underlying philosophy was always completely consistent. You can't get anywhere without direction, that's step 1.

[sturt]

7 minutes ago, Atlantaholic said:

It's been the biggest reason from the downgrade from Schlenk. You can criticize a lot of moves and picks from Schlenk but the underlying philosophy was always completely consistent. You can't get anywhere without direction, that's step 1.

Based on what Ressler revealed to Schultz over a year ago now, an easy conclusion is that Ressler began to feel that Schlenk had become increasingly autocratic in his decision-making... and for an owner like Ressler, he's not gonna like that. And later, when the owner is feeling compelled to explain himself following reports of his mole son having significant influence, naturally he's going to talk all about Schlenk having been allergic to underlings' perspectives... perspectives that the helicopter owner/dad sometimes endorsed over his GMs... which, in turn, angered him to varying degrees.

Fields is in a place, then, where he cannot not be in a constant day-to-day state of measuring how much his boss continues to trust him, among the youngest GMs in the league (if not still "the" youngest?). His player experience and his apparent intelligence (Stanford product) are positives that no doubt helped him ascend the ladder as quickly as he did. LF's youth and limited executive experience likely were just as appealing... ie, positives to an owner who desires strong but covert influence. Where Schlenk could always claim to be the most legitimated expert in any Hawks meeting room having to do with personnel, there's no such irrefutable authoritative voice there now... and for a meddling owner whose priority is black ink... cue KC and the Sunshine Band...

 

[AHF]

38 minutes ago, sturt said:

 

So. You believe Tony Ressler is that hands-off? I don't think you do. We've talked a lot about this.

Really, you don't think that Landry Fields spends a lot of his time trying to decipher what's going to please or displease his boss, and keep himself from being the next in the series of GMs that Ressler gives up on, claiming frustration b/c of reason X, Y or Z? You don't think that when Nicky says something in a meeting that it's not taken as-if Moses relaying what he heard on Mount Sinai... and thus, words of wisdom for the "decision makers," quote/unquote?

The dysfunction, my friend, is innate in the way that the owner has set up the org chart and culture. I've experienced this kind of situation more than once (unfortunately).

You cannot not have dysfunction. Because it's designed that way because the top dog has his/her priorities.

It's arguably even a little worse than when you have explicit and transparent owner meddling, because in addition to the owner's meddling, you add this layer where there's a perceived need to hide the open secret.

 

 

I don't think Ressler dictated that DJM play dangerously large minutes down the stretch.  Frankly, I'd be surprised if Fields dictated it and expect that it was a decision made by Snyder.  I also doubt Ressler cares much about whether we made Vit available for the playoff roster or not and that this was a decision by Fields to tank the playoff game and ensure the #10 slot in the lottery.  The mismatch of Snyder going for the playoffs and Fields tanking the playoffs are not things I lay at Ressler's feet.  These are decisions made at levels far below Ressler in the organization.

Things like whether to trade for DJM, where to set the budget, whether to pay the tax, thus whether to trade JC and Huerter, etc. I expect do involve Ressler or in this case the Resslers since I think two of them have some level of involvement in recent years.

I don't see a consistent pattern of decisions and actions at any level of that hierarchy since the pre-ECF run under Schlenk where we seemed to have a clear plan to build through the draft over time.  

53 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

This is going to sound insane and I'm fully aware of it, but hear me out....

The Hawks making a run to the ECF is the singular event that set off a chain reaction of bad decisions.  Had the Hawks only made the 2nd round and then lost to Philly or had they lost to NYK, it is highly likely that they don't decide to level up on their rebuild timeline and start skipping steps. 

 

I think that is very realistic.  While I barked about overpaying for DJM, I do still like the idea of an All-NBA defender at the 2 next to Trae who can score and facilitate the offense.  The biggest miscalculation I think was that DJM could play SG.  He really can't but he is talented enough that he is still very productive from that spot even though it is clear now that he needs to be at the PG position.  But everything went herky jerky after the ECF run with us going in, half-in and out pretty regularly.

[Vol4ever]

On 4/20/2024 at 3:55 PM, JTB said:

 

Let’s say the owner changes and is a fully committed to spending whatever it takes to make the hawks better .

let’s play hypothetically owners are opening the wallet up.

do we have a capable front office that can make good roster moves to build a strong team ???

last I read the front office was trying to make nba 2k trades in real life. I don’t know about you two but I believe we have two problems. Cheap ass owner & a front office of fan boys with no real nba business experience.

 

Another question is this!…what if it’s too late for it to even matter that resseler is willing to pay into the luxury tax?…too late in the process where teams aren’t willing to negotiate with us knowing that we are in a tight place, a sink hole if you will.

while I don’t believe we have a great front office, I also believe Ressler shot his own team in the foot by taking too long to commit to spending the necessary funds to get us to the next level. I mean even if we have a great FO, do they really have enough time in 1 offseason to make meaningful moves to retain Trae or rebuild around Trae/Murray? 

do we have a capable front office that can make good roster moves to build a strong team ???

My answer is no.   Worse than Pete Babcock.  

[Vol4ever]

On 4/20/2024 at 5:15 PM, NBASupes said:

It's not a hard fix

Get Edey or to a lesser extent, Clingan. Edey fixes all of our critical issues. Clingan fix most of our critical issues. 

Supes, you really campaigning for Edey.   Will he even be available?   

[Gray Mule]

We can agree or disagree about our owner.  Any answer we arrive at moves us no closed to our goal of winning it all.  We, the Hawks, have too many good players and not enough great players.  We have -0- all-star players.  We are a sub .500 team and are apparently stuck solidly in our position.  Will we do anything this summer?  Stay tuned.

[NBASupes]

24 minutes ago, Vol4ever said:

Supes, you really campaigning for Edey.   Will he even be available?   

I've been campaigning for Edey and I am perfectly fine with Clingan

Edey should be, Clingan might be. The process kicks off in May so we will know more details. As of right now Clingan is getting 5-15 range grades from GMs

[Final_quest]

2 hours ago, REHawksFan said:

This is going to sound insane and I'm fully aware of it, but hear me out....

The Hawks making a run to the ECF is the singular event that set off a chain reaction of bad decisions.   

 

Yes, they overpaid to retain their rookie contracts  Mostly Collins and Hunter that got too much. Then we tried to redeem the situation by trading our draft capital for Murray.  
Left us with no money to spend and no picks to trade.