Jump to content
  • Current Donation Goals

    • Raised $390 of $700 target

When does Landry’s hot 🥵 seat 💺 start?


Spud2nique

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

He is just prolonging and killing time to keep his job. When can we officially put him on the 🥵 💺
 

He’s and early candidate to get fired I hope, he stinks. He’s downright bad.

He needs to be on it now

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, Spud2nique said:

He is just prolonging and killing time to keep his job. When can we officially put him on the 🥵 💺
 

He’s and early candidate to get fired I hope, he stinks. He’s downright bad.

When I see the

- SL guys (Kobe, MoG, Zacc)

- when I see preseason games

- when I see what the final roster makeup will be, I will know what my expected wins will be.

Then I'll see what we look like after the first 15, then 30....then decide how warm or hot the seat needs to be.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

His seat is just fine. The organization was never in the mindset of becoming an actual title contender this year. We lucked into the #1 pick, and they were able to get the guy they really liked in ZR. We traded away DJ and got picks + length/defense that will help us improve this year. The only thing he has not done is upgrade the Center position. We were never going to make this blockbuster trade that the board wanted. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spud2nique said:

He is just prolonging and killing time to keep his job. When can we officially put him on the 🥵 💺
 

He’s and early candidate to get fired I hope, he stinks. He’s downright bad.

He started on the hot seat. Schlenk had it warm for him and they kicked him out. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

With Schlenk and Landry, I don't know where to begin evaluating them because we've had so much gawdawful meddling...and apparently a lot of chefs in the kitchen.  Who is actually making our draft picks?  Did Schlenk really pick Trae?  Did Landry pick Risacher?  We overpaid guys and then shaved salary left and right.  We say we're going to spend to build the team, but then we don't.  We're overpaying on trades and making trades because of ownership veto...  

I'm of the firm opinion that you have to leave a GM alone and let them work, yet we have done everything BUT.  In light of that, I would say his seat heats up when we know definitively that he's making decisions and those decisions cripple us.  Until then, I don't think it even matters who the Hawks GM is or how we evaluate what we officially do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hawks' GM is not on the hot seat.  How many head coaches and GM's have we had recently?  Too many!  I suppose that I'm mostly alone, but I like our GM.  Let's let him and our head coach work together for a while before we cry, "Abandon ship!"

Perhaps we all want to see more deals.  Whatever deal is made, someone is sure to yell, "This deal stinks!  We wuz robbed!"  The problem is, it takes two teams to agree before a deal can be made.  Pelican and Hawk trade should satisfy both teams.  Both seem to have gotten what they wanted.

If the owner says or does things, there is nothing anyone can do.  Changing our GM will not change this one bit.  As Wretch says, people should let our GM alone and let him do his job.

:smug:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

To me, it's an overreach to say that APR is outright lying, that he's making basketball decisions. I really doubt that.

But he's doing everything but that... I will continue to use the analogy of how I would walk (aka, manipulate) my dog... I had a general idea of the route for the evening, but he had some leash to veer off this way or that way so he could feel like he was the one in control. All I had to do ordinarily was to give a gentle tug to the right or to the left on occasion, or if there seemed to be some dog off a leash up ahead, I might be a little more aggressive, but just for the moment to get us turned around.

Remember, this is how APR wants it, by virtue of what he has said verbatim, and now that we have 8 years of behavioral history that attest to that--including the firing of someone when that someone wasn't properly open to APR's (or Nicky's?) guidance. If it wasn't Landry, it would be someone else that APR could feel confidence would take well to his "gentle tugs"... would not protest being "challenged" and rather would be receptive to questions and responsive to whatever metacommunication APR intended in those meetings.

Landry's going nowhere soon. This is how APR wants it.

To be fair, that's also how it should be unless one actually swallows that Landry himself is the one who has so wanted to reduce the talent inventory for the sake of the payroll. You have to hope... I mean that literally, you have to hope... you have no other choice... that Landry is going to prove to be a genius, given enough time.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Landry really is a puppet, don’t think that makes him immune to being on the hot seat.  Puppets get discarded when a better puppet comes along or when the fans completely turn on them.  
I think he’s here for another year at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Landry seems to have banked on building around Trae while most of the assets in our trade are of limited value during Trae’s current contract.  
 

Daniels and Risacher are the center pieces of his additions this year and going forward.  Nance will help win this year and then is gone.  Zeller probably hurts our chances of winning this year unless we can find somewhere to reroute him.  Liddel seems irrelevant but I would love to be surprised.

The Lakers pick probably doesn’t have much impact if any during Trae’s remaining two years (it won’t be anything this year and most rookies aren’t big positive impact players).  The super protected 2027 pick is irrelevant.  (Both could be traded for more immediate help but it would be strange not to simply get that help when you trade DJM).

That puts Fields in a position where if our young players don’t develop very quickly then we could be at risk of losing Trae because we put too many eggs in the “win later” basket.

If Trae walks that is a disaster.  If we trade Trae at a discount that is going to be pretty brutal.  The best path forward is winning more games. Has Fields done enough towards that as the priority?  I think that is where his seat could get very hot.

He is cool now but two years from now could be a radically different position.  TBD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, Wretch said:

With Schlenk and Landry, I don't know where to begin evaluating them because we've had so much gawdawful meddling...and apparently a lot of chefs in the kitchen.  Who is actually making our draft picks?  Did Schlenk really pick Trae?  Did Landry pick Risacher?  We overpaid guys and then shaved salary left and right.  We say we're going to spend to build the team, but then we don't.  We're overpaying on trades and making trades because of ownership veto...  

I'm of the firm opinion that you have to leave a GM alone and let them work, yet we have done everything BUT.  In light of that, I would say his seat heats up when we know definitively that he's making decisions and those decisions cripple us.  Until then, I don't think it even matters who the Hawks GM is or how we evaluate what we officially do.

ZR has to be a Landry/Korver/Quin pick. He doesn't have the flash that would make someone like Tony want him. I think he would have wanted Clingan cause of the national championship or Sarr cause of the eye test.

Korver's shooting was one of the backbones for the 60 win season when Quin was here and ZR has a similar skillset and more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 hours ago, sturt said:

To me, it's an overreach to say that APR is outright lying, that he's making basketball decisions. I really doubt that.

But he's doing everything but that... I will continue to use the analogy of how I would walk (aka, manipulate) my dog... I had a general idea of the route for the evening, but he had some leash to veer off this way or that way so he could feel like he was the one in control. All I had to do ordinarily was to give a gentle tug to the right or to the left on occasion, or if there seemed to be some dog off a leash up ahead, I might be a little more aggressive, but just for the moment to get us turned around.

Remember, this is how APR wants it, by virtue of what he has said verbatim, and now that we have 8 years of behavioral history that attest to that--including the firing of someone when that someone wasn't properly open to APR's (or Nicky's?) guidance. If it wasn't Landry, it would be someone else that APR could feel confidence would take well to his "gentle tugs"... would not protest being "challenged" and rather would be receptive to questions and responsive to whatever metacommunication APR intended in those meetings.

Landry's going nowhere soon. This is how APR wants it.

To be fair, that's also how it should be unless one actually swallows that Landry himself is the one who has so wanted to reduce the talent inventory for the sake of the payroll. You have to hope... I mean that literally, you have to hope... you have no other choice... that Landry is going to prove to be a genius, given enough time.

 

Good analogy and also very on point for Ressler.  I cannot imagine a situation where this wouldnt be the case, though.  Imagine owning a billion+ org and giving 100% autonomy to someone to make decisions that impact that orgs value.  No company does this which is why board of directors exist to keep the CEO steering the ship in the right direction.

I do think Ressler’s goal is to win a championship, though.  That would balloon the franchise value significantly.  I also worry he intervenes too much and I despise the nepotism hire of his son.  Other than that though, this is just the unfortunate reality of sports franchises as a whole— nothing particularly unique to the Hawks.  I dont see much of a difference between Ressler and other owners across the league, although I too would love to get a deep pocketed, passionate fan owner thats only goal is to win.  I just know theres a possibility to get materially worse ownership as well if Ressler were to sell.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some folks acting brand new as if we done forgot history.  Schlenk was let go because he wanted to build the roster into a championship team and that takes money.  He also opposed the Murray deal.  Landry favored it. End of story.  Landry is chilling.

 

 

Edited by Hawkmoor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
1 hour ago, JeffS17 said:

Good analogy and also very on point for Ressler.  I cannot imagine a situation where this wouldnt be the case, though.  Imagine owning a billion+ org and giving 100% autonomy to someone to make decisions that impact that orgs value.  No company does this which is why board of directors exist to keep the CEO steering the ship in the right direction.

I do think Ressler’s goal is to win a championship, though.  That would balloon the franchise value significantly.  I also worry he intervenes too much and I despise the nepotism hire of his son.  Other than that though, this is just the unfortunate reality of sports franchises as a whole— nothing particularly unique to the Hawks.  I dont see much of a difference between Ressler and other owners across the league, although I too would love to get a deep pocketed, passionate fan owner thats only goal is to win.  I just know theres a possibility to get materially worse ownership as well if Ressler were to sell.  

I can name a half dozen times that Ressler forced his GM to do something or prevented his GM from doing something.  That isn’t unique but it also isn’t normal.  It is a sign of a dysfunctional owner.  Being dysfunctional doesn’t mean he is the worse.  We’ve had worse owners for this very team.  But it sure isn’t good either.

Shooting down trades for Horford and Millsap left the team bankrupt of talent.  Overriding the trade of JC led us to give him away for less than nothing.  Forcing the trade of DJM led to worse performance in consecutive seasons and left us with no control over our pick for 3 years during which window we could easily end up in the lottery.  Etc.

Putting your son in charge is just an extension of this.  Neither father nor son are qualified to make basketball decisions.  Many owners don’t get involved like that.  They just don’t.  Ours does.

  • Thanks 2
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...