Tanking / Building a Championship Discussion

[KB21]

Just now, Afro said:

If your goal after trading Trae is to remain competitive, yes. 

But not just that pick. Any pick but our own. 

Trading for our picks, but remaining good, just means we are actively trying to make the package we got for Trae worse. To me, that doesnt make any sense. 

There is no trade Trae scenario that will net you multiple potential high first round picks.  He's not going to go to a bad team.  He wants to win.  

[Afro]

Just now, KB21 said:

There is no trade Trae scenario that will net you multiple potential high first round picks.  He's not going to go to a bad team.  He wants to win.  

Well its a good thing some good teams hold other teams picks lol

[Hawkish]

2 minutes ago, Afro said:

If your goal after trading Trae is to remain competitive, yes. 

But not just that pick. Any pick but our own. 

Trading for our picks, but remaining good, just means we are actively trying to make the package we got for Trae worse. To me, that doesnt make any sense. 

I was just making the point that we could add potential high picks while being competitive.  Not arguing — just adding additional avenues to consider.

[REHawksFan]

7 minutes ago, Afro said:

The teams they got the picks from did....Thats how they got top picks. Who tanked isnt really relevant. The fact they were high is whats relevant. 

But its also ironic since we want to trade for the Spurs 4 and 8. Y'all think its *better* if those picks were 13th and 54th? 

Seriously?  You want draft picks as high as possible.  You also want your team to be as good as possible.  So what's the best of both worlds?  The Celtics.  You trade established, older players for unprotected picks.  You still win with your good, young players. You hope the picks based on some other team's success/failure end up in the lottery. 

The point is the Celtics never tanked.  They benefited from other teams sucking and having their picks.  But they were able to stay good or some version of building toward good without ever tanking.  That's the point. 

In this case, you seem very caught up over getting our own picks back.  Hell, I'd take the 2025 Lakers pick over any future pick the SAS would offer.  That thing could legitimately get you a lottery ticket.    

[BangHolman]

2 minutes ago, Afro said:

Its far better than the opposite. You're arguing against actual proven data man. 

 

 

More teams stay in the lottery than make the jump.

It's kinda like in football how the same teams always seem to need a new QB every 3-4 season. Poor culture.

[Hawkish]

Just now, Afro said:

Well its a good thing some good teams hold other teams picks lol

SA was playing Chess (and us Checkers) when they traded us DJ.

[Afro]

5 minutes ago, BangHolman said:

This is a IF Trae asks out scenario question of trading him for our picks back, but staying competitive, instead of moving DJ and entering full flop mode too.

The argument is continuing to push for the play-offs with DJ/JJ/Bogi/Sarr/Hunter/OO/4/8 etc

Again, so don't get your own picks back. 

This is coming over from the other thread. Im going to compare 4 and 8 in this draft to Hunter and Reddish. 

You think trading Trae for Hunter, Reddish, and 3 other 15-25 picks is a good trade? 

[Afro]

4 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Seriously?  You want draft picks as high as possible.  You also want your team to be as good as possible.  So what's the best of both worlds?  The Celtics.  You trade established, older players for unprotected picks.  You still win with your good, young players. You hope the picks based on some other team's success/failure end up in the lottery. 

The point is the Celtics never tanked.  They benefited from other teams sucking and having their picks.  But they were able to stay good or some version of building toward good without ever tanking.  That's the point. 

In this case, you seem very caught up over getting our own picks back.  Hell, I'd take the 2025 Lakers pick over any future pick the SAS would offer.  That thing could legitimately get you a lottery ticket.    

Yes, that is my entire point lol. 

If you're not gonna tank, don't trade Trae for your own picks back, find other picks. That's how this discussion started. 

Edited May 15 by Afro

[BangHolman]

1 minute ago, Afro said:

Again, so don't get your own picks back. 

This is coming over from the other thread. Im going to compare 4 and 8 in this draft to Hunter and Reddish. 

You think trading Trae for Hunter, Reddish, and 3 other 15-25 picks is a good trade? 

IF he wants out, I want 4, 8, '25, end '26 pick swap, and Vassell from SAS to pair with what we have.

We maintain a competitive roster, bring in youth this season, and then continue pushing for the play-offs next season.

[Afro]

4 minutes ago, BangHolman said:

More teams stay in the lottery than make the jump.

It's kinda like in football how the same teams always seem to need a new QB every 3-4 season. Poor culture.

If we're going down the rabbit hole of "how do most teams compete" you're going to have to become a fan of another team because those avenues aren't open to the Hawks lol. 

By and large all of the best players in the NBA were lottery picks. Most teams are built off of them. I'm not trading Trae in the hopes that someday we get lucky enough to find a Jokic in the 2nd round. 

[Afro]

Just now, BangHolman said:

IF he wants out, I want 4, 8, '25, end '26 pick swap, and Vassell from SAS to pair with what we have.

We maintain a competitive roster, bring in youth this season, and then continue pushing for the play-offs next season.

So you're actively making 25 and 26 worse. That is my entire point lol. I don't agree with trading with the Spurs just for us to try to make half of our return worse. 

 

[REHawksFan]

1 minute ago, Afro said:

So you're actively making 25 and 26 worse. That is my entire point lol. I don't agree with trading with the Spurs just for us to try to make half of our return worse. 

 

4 and 8 aren't our picks.  And Vassell is a good young player.  That's what you are trading Trae for.  If you don't want our picks back, take their 25 and 26 pick if it makes you feel better.  You are arguing the wrong thing, imo.  The 25 / 26 picks are not vital (as long as we aren't tanking).  

[Hawkish]

12 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Seriously?  You want draft picks as high as possible.  You also want your team to be as good as possible.  So what's the best of both worlds?  The Celtics.  You trade established, older players for unprotected picks.  You still win with your good, young players. You hope the picks based on some other team's success/failure end up in the lottery. 

The point is the Celtics never tanked.  They benefited from other teams sucking and having their picks.  But they were able to stay good or some version of building toward good without ever tanking.  That's the point. 

In this case, you seem very caught up over getting our own picks back.  Hell, I'd take the 2025 Lakers pick over any future pick the SAS would offer.  That thing could legitimately get you a lottery ticket.    

This is my most default, natural strategy.  Trade good players before they lose value.  Have your producers backed up by future starters— a reloading program, rather than rebuild.  
 

I want the ‘25 LA pick.  Go get it — It will likely be better than the pick we gave the Spurs. 
 

 

Edited May 15 by Hawkish

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

Seriously?  You want draft picks as high as possible.  You also want your team to be as good as possible.  So what's the best of both worlds?  The Celtics.  You trade established, older players for unprotected picks.  You still win with your good, young players. You hope the picks based on some other team's success/failure end up in the lottery. 

The point is the Celtics never tanked.  They benefited from other teams sucking and having their picks.  But they were able to stay good or some version of building toward good without ever tanking.  That's the point. 

In this case, you seem very caught up over getting our own picks back.  Hell, I'd take the 2025 Lakers pick over any future pick the SAS would offer.  That thing could legitimately get you a lottery ticket.    

The reason the Spurs are being talked about is, outside of one of our insiders actually saying that SA is willing to move the picks, because they have the picks that can be moved.  OKC is the only other team that I know of that can move picks in consecutive drafts like San Antonio can.  

For example, we can probably get picks from the Lakers, but because of the Stepien Rule, we would be looking at maybe picks in 2026, 2028, and 2030.  How would that be a better deal than taking Vassell or even Johnson/Graham with a return of our picks along with 4 and 8?

The Pelicans?  Maybe that Lakers pick in 2025 will have significant value if James bolts town.  So, let's say we make a deal with New Orleans and they give us the 21st pick this year, the Lakers pick in 25, and Milwaukee's pick in 26.  Obviously, we would have to take back contracts, and I think the only way I would do this is if they include Herbert Jones in the deal as well.  

10 minutes ago, Afro said:

Again, so don't get your own picks back. 

This is coming over from the other thread. Im going to compare 4 and 8 in this draft to Hunter and Reddish. 

You think trading Trae for Hunter, Reddish, and 3 other 15-25 picks is a good trade? 

You seem to think there is an avenue where we can get multiple lottery picks back in a Trae trade.  

[BangHolman]

3 minutes ago, Afro said:

So you're actively making 25 and 26 worse. That is my entire point lol. I don't agree with trading with the Spurs just for us to try to make half of our return worse. 

 

The best player we drafted since Trae was 20. As others have stated, player development and scouting matter the most.

[Afro]

2 minutes ago, REHawksFan said:

4 and 8 aren't our picks.  And Vassell is a good young player.  That's what you are trading Trae for.  If you don't want our picks back, take their 25 and 26 pick if it makes you feel better.  You are arguing the wrong thing, imo.  The 25 / 26 picks are not vital (as long as we aren't tanking).  

You're trading Trae for a bunch of players you hope are good role players and Vassell who already is a good role player.

How is that team ever supposed to truly compete for a title? 

[REHawksFan]

2 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The reason the Spurs are being talked about is, outside of one of our insiders actually saying that SA is willing to move the picks, because they have the picks that can be moved.  OKC is the only other team that I know of that can move picks in consecutive drafts like San Antonio can.  

For example, we can probably get picks from the Lakers, but because of the Stepien Rule, we would be looking at maybe picks in 2026, 2028, and 2030.  How would that be a better deal than taking Vassell or even Johnson/Graham with a return of our picks along with 4 and 8?

The Pelicans?  Maybe that Lakers pick in 2025 will have significant value if James bolts town.  So, let's say we make a deal with New Orleans and they give us the 21st pick this year, the Lakers pick in 25, and Milwaukee's pick in 26.  Obviously, we would have to take back contracts, and I think the only way I would do this is if they include Herbert Jones in the deal as well.  

My point is just that worrying over the conflict of taking back your own picks vs trying to be a better team is worrying about the wrong things.  You don't reacquire your picks from SAS with intent on using them UNLESS YOU ARE TANKING.  I would not be in favor of that.  So you reacquire them for the purpose of using them in other trades.  It gives you flexibility.  

But regardless, the real trade is Trae for Vassell, 4, and 8 plus whatever other salary needs to be included.  Getting our own picks back gives us flexibility but I don't look at those as anything other than useful assets for other trades. 

[KB21]

1 minute ago, BangHolman said:

The best player we drafted since Trae was 20. As others have stated, player development and scouting matter the most.

BINGO!  We wouldn't know how good Jalen is if we had kept our previous poor coach around.  We have a great coach now, and Jalen's game blossomed in his one year with Quin.  There is more in Jalen as well.  

[Afro]

2 minutes ago, BangHolman said:

The best player we drafted since Trae was 20. As others have stated, player development and scouting matter the most.

Thats not a good argument, guys lol. So we're trading Trae to end up with Vassell and JJ(if were using our history as a projection).

This is EXACTLY how you build the Bud Hawks. And guess what happens then. 

[KB21]

1 minute ago, REHawksFan said:

My point is just that worrying over the conflict of taking back your own picks vs trying to be a better team is worrying about the wrong things.  You don't reacquire your picks from SAS with intent on using them UNLESS YOU ARE TANKING.  I would not be in favor of that.  So you reacquire them for the purpose of using them in other trades.  It gives you flexibility.  

But regardless, the real trade is Trae for Vassell, 4, and 8 plus whatever other salary needs to be included.  Getting our own picks back gives us flexibility but I don't look at those as anything other than useful assets for other trades. 

My point is to have the picks available to you to either use on a player or trade for a player.  Where the picks end up has no bearing, IMO.